XPost: rec.autos.sport.f1
On 10/19/2019 7:45 PM, a425couple wrote:
On 10/16/2019 12:45 AM, larkim wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 October 2019 21:33:06 UTC+1, Out Cider wrote:
larkim <matthew.larkin@gmail.com> writes:
If we can't find a "better" way of doing quali, why bother?
Because it's already really good?
They question is both loaded and really, _really_ incorrect!
If something that is already good cannot be made better, why toss it?
A stupider question than that of the topic, "Do we really need it
(qualifying)?", I have rarely seen.
--
OutCider
OK, let me rephrase.
What other sporting event does the actual points scoring activity of the
"race" rely on distributing a starting advantage throughout the field of
competitors before the race starts?
There are small advantages given in foot races, where typically middle
lanes
are allocated for sprinters. Ditto with swimming, the fastest qualifiers >> for a final are given central lanes - though that might be about
spectacle
rather than performance.
But the race of a motorsport event starts with some form of earned
advantage
to cars starting towards the front.
Of course, it's inherent in track racing that whoever starts at the front
does have an advantage, so then motorsport comes up with ways of
allocating
that advantage.
Is putting the fastest car on the front the right way to do it?
Is having qualifying a necessary precondition to having good racing.
Hypothetically, why not just allocate a random grid for race 1, and then
just start in the finishing position of the last race? It still
accomodates
the fact that there is an advantage to be dished out, it still allocates
that advantage on merit (i.e. doesn't penalise poor performance). What
point does having a separate session at that race track for qualifying
actually serve?
I don't think it is the most stupid question raised, it is asking whether
one of the components that are blithely accepted as being part of F1 is
really needed.
Happy for lots of disagreement!!
Back to your key,
"Is putting the fastest car on the front the right way to do it?"
Is reducing accidents, with their attendant property damage,
and occasional injury and potential deaths something
desirable?
Is reducing accidents that cause safety cars and full
course yellows desirable?
Most racing organizations feel so.
I have been in plenty of races. Without any doubt
in my experience when the grid is improperly formed
(meaning any way, where the fastest are not at the front)
the chance and likelihood of accidents goes way up.
I did not think I could find this youtube video again,
but I did.
It illustrates the point of how a improper grid
creates BAD THINGS!!!
There had been a schedule change and improper
notification, so many of us missed the 5 minute
warning.
I thought I was taking my time and being careful,
but not careful enough! I do regret being in a
hurry to move forward through the pack.
I was the fastest car, and should have been patient.
By the way, this video shows both I and Alan Baker.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEWy1fmWjes
IRDC car tender Group 6 race June 14 2014
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)