No quick fix by Maurice Hamilton
F1 requires more than simply a change to its current qualifying setup in order to regain its waning popularity
LEWIS Hamilton sparked yet another debate about the state of F1 when the Mercedes driver said he would not be averse to a rethink in various areas of the Grand Prix format. He was not using his status as world champion to demand change but merely putting the idea out there.
Reaction was predictably varied, ranging from ”don’t change a thing” to suggestions remarkable in their complexity. One website correspondent took nearly 900 words (that’s longer than this column) to explain a three-tier qualifying system so convoluted that readers – and, presumably, spectators – will have lost the will to live before the first car has turned a wheel. Although presented in meticulous detail, the idea was actually a perfect advert for keeping things straightforward.
As discussed before, apart from the questionable business of the fastest 10 having to start the race on tyres used to set their fastest times in the second part (of three) during qualifying, the system works on several counts, not least its relative simplicity. We have cars on track for the best part of an hour; an easily understood elimination process (and accompanying desperate laps for drivers in each drop zone), culminating in what is invariably a tense shootout for pole position.
But, please: no single-lap qualifying. It’s been tried before and somehow failed to provide the expected drama. For some reason, a car on its own – particularly if, with the greatest of respect, it’s a candidate for the back of the grid – just doesn’t create the same pulseraising dynamic as several cars out at once. The only plus is the threat of varying track conditions – the advent of rain, for example – putting a spin on the predicted order.
As for a recent idea of splitting qualifying into four sections instead of three: this smacked of tinkering just for the sake of it. Qualifying is one of the few things that works well right now; don’t mess with it.
Hamilton also talked about some circuits not being exciting to race on and mentioned, heaven forbid, reversing the grid for, say, the top 10. Apart from devaluing laps of such brilliance when he took pole in Singapore, it misses the point.
Yes, the racing is indeed dull at times. But that has very little to do with the tracks or the grid order. F1’s various subcommittees would be better focused on reducing the effect of downforce, getting rid of complex front wings (beyond what is planned for next year), finding an alternative to grid penalties for drivers affected by power-unit and gearbox changes, and specifying tyres allowing the drivers to constantly push to the limit rather than purely on the in-lap before a pit stop. In short; give us cars that can race. Is that too much to ask?
There also seems to be a belief Formula One should have more than two teams dominating. It would certainly be a nice thought to have, say, Force India and Renault threating to push Ferrari and Mercedes off the front row on a regular basis. But F1 isn’t like that.
Ever since the advent of the world championship in 1950, there has always been just one or two teams consistently getting their sums right each season. It’s the nature of the beast. The only thing that works against us with the advent of remarkable reliability is the absence of mechanical failures to shake up the predicted results. Gone are the days when half of the field would be eliminated by blown engines, wrecked gearboxes and broken suspension.
The situation could be ameliorated by a reduction in cost to help the smaller teams, and a closing of the performance gap that always comes when the technical regulations remain untouched. But that shortcoming is part of a recent ongoing contradiction. The existing engine manufacturers (Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault and Honda) have voted against getting rid of the expensive MGU-H (motor generating unit harvesting energy from the exhaust via the turbocharger) because, they say, the subsequent revamp would bring unnecessary cost. Then, at the end of October, Renault had the audacity to complain Honda is hiking up the budgets as it switches to Red Bull next year and does everything in its power to win.
Looking at the bigger picture and going back to Hamilton’s comments: F1 is indeed broken in several places but it needs extensive surgery rather than a couple of sticking plasters. Nice try. Back to the day job, Lewis.