Teams agree new Qualifying format

Recent blog posts:

Hi!
Hi! I am Kate from Ukraine! I don't now, everything about this website. Also I dodn't know english very…

...
http://gyxu.com/p/login.cgi?r=http://www.winxclub.com/

ONOTOLE NEGODUE
Blin, nu zaipali trabli s ssilkami.Zaxozu kuda to - BAZ! i ja snova gostj.Vxozu i vse norma,no…

Sri Lanka Vs West Indies
Sri Lanka won the first match by more than 100 runs…this is first in West Indies. .unfortunately after…

Blog Feed
http://feeds.feedburner.com/TumbleweedRealtyMaui

:-)
:-)

...

...

…

Forums:

topic feeds

• GYXU all topics, blogs and comments

• General

• F1, Indy, Nascar, Rally

• Baseball

• Basketball

• Boxing

• Football

• Soccer

• Hockey

• Rugby

• Tennis

• Pro Wrestling

• Billiard

• Cycling

• Boats

• Kites, widsurfing, waterski

• Diving

• Skiing

• Cricket

• Golf

• Skating

• Buy / Sell

• Anonymous

Discuss:

Woohoo!
The best there ever was and the best there ever will be. Jeff Gordon

Re: ExcuseFest 2009
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:15:28 -0800 (PST), sterling <sterlingla@aol.com> wrote: There is…

Recent forum topics:

Hoffman's High Hemologin Values
Does any of our Scandinavian friends know about Christian Hoffman being recently banned from racing for…

Jay Turberville defends Berndt…
Rational poster >> That is clearly the intended NEGATIVE interpretation of of Jihad…

Steel bolts and nuts for Ultima…
The now discontinued Jackson Ultima Matrix mounts (for removable figure skating blade runners) held the…

Recent forum comments:

RE: Season opener?
On Mar 19, 7:07pm, garystanislaw...@gmail.com wrote: Hey thats great! hope to see you out…

RE: Season opener?
On Mar 20, 8:24am, Zephyr <davedejo...@hotmail.com> wrote:

RE: Season opener?
I sail Cass sometimes before jet ski season, but not sure if it's open yet. Maybe I'll see you there…

RE: Hoffman's High Hemologin Values
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:49:37 -0700 (PDT), ADK Skier <lgsumr@yahoo.com> wrote: Kikkan Randall…

RE: Hoffman's High Hemologin Values
I'll stay out of that one. Some February lab test results - in the midst of races - showed my…

RE: Hoffman's High Hemologin Values
ADK Skier wrote: The real problem wasn't a high hemo value, but the wrong ratio between what I…

RE: Hoffman's High Hemologin Values
On Mar 23, 3:11pm, Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> wrote: Thanks Terje…

RE: Worn Rotefella Boots
Neil wrote: Yes indeed! Normally it was sufficient to press the binding further down, i.e. tighten…

RE: Worn Rotefella Boots
Thanks for the suggestion. Looking at the boot tip in the cold light of day, the rubber is worn and the…

RE: OT: Ordnance Survey wallpaper
"Robert Treharne Jones" <tjwizard@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message…

Модератор:

Administrator


Teams agree new Qualifying format
Emma 20 May 2005 14:49:12
	From Autosport:- Formula One teams reached a unanimous agreement on Friday to scrap the unpopular aggregate qualifying system and run just one session on Saturday to decide the grid, Autosport-Atlas can exclusively reveal. The International Automobile Federation (FIA) said on Friday that the 10 teams had already "agreed unanimously to a proposal to change the qualifying procedure for Formula One with immediate effect". The proposal is now in the hands of the Formula One Commission and the World Council and the FIA said the results of a fax vote should be through in time to change for the next race at the Nurburgring. The change is yet another in a long list of modifications to qualifying which began with the introduction of one-lap qualifying two-and-a-half years ago. The first solution saw two sessions run over Friday and Saturday then they were put back to back on a Saturday before moving the second to Sunday this year. The new system will see just one single qualifying session, which will be run on Saturday starting at one o'clock, with cars in full race set-up. Teams would be unable to refuel the cars or modify them between qualifying and the race. The running order would be the same as it is at the moment on Saturday, with the winner of the previous race having the advantage of going out last. The Sunday session has found little favour with broadcasters, some of whom have declined to show it live, while other influential figures have been scathing. Since the old free-for-all Saturday session was abolished at the end of 2002 for a single lap format, there have been experiments with qualifying on Friday and Saturday as well as running two sessions together on Saturday. Many still hanker after the old days, before varying fuel levels made qualifying a strategic mystery, when fans could be sure that the fastest driver was on pole. Fiat and Ferrari head Luca di Montezemolo, speaking at the San Marino Grand Prix last month, derided a system that left fans in the dark about who was on pole position when they picked up their Sunday morning newspapers. World Champion Michael Schumacher on Thursday backed a change to the current system. "I think that is reasonable but it would be nice to stick with that qualifying for once," said Schumacher. "When we change it hopefully we won't change it again and again." The move means there will be no F1 action on Sunday mornings. -- Emma - The Chocolate Monster http://www.chocmonster.rules.it http://www.altgallery.shows.it
		Add comment


Pete Fenelon 20 May 2005 15:10:53 [ permanent link ]
	Emma <Emma@excalvehs.demon.co.uk> wrote:> From Autosport:-> Formula One teams reached a unanimous agreement on Friday to scrap the > unpopular aggregate qualifying system and run just one session on > Saturday to decide the grid, Autosport-Atlas can exclusively reveal. Sensible. I think all but the worst anoraks stopped giving a toss about the new qualifying system. Teams would be unable to refuel the cars or modify them between > qualifying and the race. The running order would be the same as it is at > the moment on Saturday, with the winner of the previous race having the > advantage of going out last. Since the old free-for-all Saturday session was abolished at the end of > 2002 for a single lap format, there have been experiments with > qualifying on Friday and Saturday as well as running two sessions > together on Saturday. Let's get back to this. Please ;) pete -- pete@fenelon.com "We ask ourselves 'what will become of Evil Gazebo?'"
		Add comment


Bigbird 20 May 2005 15:25:17 [ permanent link ]
	Emma wrote:> The new system will see just one single qualifying session, which will> be run on Saturday starting at one o'clock, with cars in full race> set-up.> Teams would be unable to refuel the cars or modify them between> qualifying and the race. The running order would be the same as it is> at the moment on Saturday, with the winner of the previous race> having the advantage of going out last.> Rather a large penalty to pay for a poor performance or problem in previous race.
		Add comment


John Briggs 21 May 2005 02:52:05 [ permanent link ]
	Bigbird wrote:> Emma wrote:>> The new system will see just one single qualifying session, which>> will be run on Saturday starting at one o'clock, with cars in full>> race set-up.>> Teams would be unable to refuel the cars or modify them between>> qualifying and the race. The running order would be the same as it is>> at the moment on Saturday, with the winner of the previous race>> having the advantage of going out last.>> Rather a large penalty to pay for a poor performance or problem in> previous race. Yes, but it's fairer than using championship order, which would hand too much of an advantage to the championship leader. Conversely, reverse orders would be too much of a penalty. There is a certain irony that probably the fairest system was the two-stage system of 2003. -- John Briggs
		Add comment


Tim@Nocomment.Com 21 May 2005 03:00:57 [ permanent link ]
	John Briggs wrote:> Bigbird wrote:> Emma wrote:>> The new system will see just one single qualifying session, which>>>will be run on Saturday starting at one o'clock, with cars in full>>>race set-up.>>> Teams would be unable to refuel the cars or modify them between>>>qualifying and the race. The running order would be the same as it is>>>at the moment on Saturday, with the winner of the previous race>>>having the advantage of going out last.>>> Rather a large penalty to pay for a poor performance or problem in>>previous race.> Yes, but it's fairer than using championship order, which would hand too > much of an advantage to the championship leader. Conversely, reverse orders > would be too much of a penalty. There is a certain irony that probably the > fairest system was the two-stage system of 2003. How about a lottery draw.
		Add comment


F2005: 0 of 3 21 May 2005 04:17:27 [ permanent link ]
	On Fri, 20 May 2005 19:00:57 -0400, "tim@nocomment.com" <tim@nocomment.com> wrote:>John Briggs wrote:>> Bigbird wrote:>> Emma wrote:>>> The new system will see just one single qualifying session, which>>>>will be run on Saturday starting at one o'clock, with cars in full>>>>race set-up.>>>> Teams would be unable to refuel the cars or modify them between>>>>qualifying and the race. The running order would be the same as it is>>>>at the moment on Saturday, with the winner of the previous race>>>>having the advantage of going out last.>>>> Rather a large penalty to pay for a poor performance or problem in>>>previous race.>> Yes, but it's fairer than using championship order, which would hand too >> much of an advantage to the championship leader. Conversely, reverse orders >> would be too much of a penalty. There is a certain irony that probably the >> fairest system was the two-stage system of 2003.> How about a lottery draw. ...Failed Probability as well, did you, Fuckwit?
		Add comment


Tussock 21 May 2005 11:22:48 [ permanent link ]
	tim@nocomment.com wrote: <Re: qualifying>> How about a lottery draw. Yes. Then make the bastards run across the track to their cars at the start (which should be all parked in the pits), and make the on-board mechanic hand-crank them to start. You all know the old system was the best .... 8] -- tussock Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
		Add comment


Bigbird 21 May 2005 13:21:09 [ permanent link ]
	tussock wrote:> tim@nocomment.com wrote:> <Re: qualifying>> > How about a lottery draw.> Yes. Then make the bastards run across the track to their cars at> the start (which should be all parked in the pits), and make the> on-board mechanic hand-crank them to start.> You all know the old system was the best .... 8] ...but when they shouted "gentlemen start your engines" what would Ferrari do?
		Add comment


Tim@Nocomment.Com 21 May 2005 14:57:43 [ permanent link ]
	F2005: 0 of 3 wrote: On Fri, 20 May 2005 19:00:57 -0400, "tim@nocomment.com"> <tim@nocomment.com> wrote:> John Briggs wrote:>> Bigbird wrote:>>> Emma wrote:>>>> The new system will see just one single qualifying session, which>>>>>will be run on Saturday starting at one o'clock, with cars in full>>>>>race set-up.>>>>> Teams would be unable to refuel the cars or modify them between>>>>>qualifying and the race. The running order would be the same as it is>>>>>at the moment on Saturday, with the winner of the previous race>>>>>having the advantage of going out last.>>>>> Rather a large penalty to pay for a poor performance or problem in>>>>previous race.>>> Yes, but it's fairer than using championship order, which would hand too >>>much of an advantage to the championship leader. Conversely, reverse orders >>>would be too much of a penalty. There is a certain irony that probably the >>>fairest system was the two-stage system of 2003.>> How about a lottery draw.> ...Failed Probability as well, did you, Fuckwit? What does my comment have to do with probability, oh stunned one?
		Add comment


Tim@Nocomment.Com 21 May 2005 14:59:36 [ permanent link ]
	Bigbird wrote: tussock wrote:> tim@nocomment.com wrote:>><Re: qualifying>>> How about a lottery draw.>> Yes. Then make the bastards run across the track to their cars at>>the start (which should be all parked in the pits), and make the>>on-board mechanic hand-crank them to start.>> You all know the old system was the best .... 8]> ...but when they shouted "gentlemen start your engines" what would Ferrari > do? > Well, if you want to make each race interesting and shake things up just a little, you can change the order in which they qualify. It's not that big a deal, anyway.
		Add comment


Bigbird 21 May 2005 16:29:04 [ permanent link ]
	tim@nocomment.com wrote:> Bigbird wrote:> tussock wrote:> > tim@nocomment.com wrote:> > > <Re: qualifying>> > > How about a lottery draw.> > > Yes. Then make the bastards run across the track to their cars> > > at the start (which should be all parked in the pits), and make> > > the on-board mechanic hand-crank them to start.> > > You all know the old system was the best .... 8]> > ...but when they shouted "gentlemen start your engines" what would> > Ferrari do?> > Well, if you want to make each race interesting and shake things up> just a little, you can change the order in which they qualify. It's> not that big a deal, anyway. What isn't? Qualifying? Qualifying format? I'd say both are a very big deal.
		Add comment


Tim@Nocomment.Com 21 May 2005 17:17:02 [ permanent link ]
	Bigbird wrote: tim@nocomment.com wrote:> Bigbird wrote:>> tussock wrote:>>> tim@nocomment.com wrote:>>>><Re: qualifying>>>>> How about a lottery draw.>>>> Yes. Then make the bastards run across the track to their cars>>>>at the start (which should be all parked in the pits), and make>>>>the on-board mechanic hand-crank them to start.>>>> You all know the old system was the best .... 8]>>> ...but when they shouted "gentlemen start your engines" what would>>>Ferrari do?>>> Well, if you want to make each race interesting and shake things up>>just a little, you can change the order in which they qualify. It's>>not that big a deal, anyway.> What isn't? Qualifying? Qualifying format?> I'd say both are a very big deal.> I think they should have each race completely separate from all of the others. Each team has the exact same chances as the others. So each driver can, depending on a draw, start the qualifying first or last. Why should previous finishes enter into it? They should each get the same chance to qualify on pole. For the most part, the top teams will start near the top of the grid anyway.
		Add comment


F2005: 0 of 3 21 May 2005 18:31:15 [ permanent link ]
	On Sat, 21 May 2005 06:57:43 -0400, "tim@nocomment.com" <tim@nocomment.com> wrote:>F2005: 0 of 3 wrote:>> On Fri, 20 May 2005 19:00:57 -0400, "tim@nocomment.com">> <tim@nocomment.com> wrote:>>>John Briggs wrote:>>>>Bigbird wrote:>>>>>Emma wrote:>>>>>>The new system will see just one single qualifying session, which>>>>>>will be run on Saturday starting at one o'clock, with cars in full>>>>>>race set-up.>>>>>> Teams would be unable to refuel the cars or modify them between>>>>>>qualifying and the race. The running order would be the same as it is>>>>>>at the moment on Saturday, with the winner of the previous race>>>>>>having the advantage of going out last.>>>>>> Rather a large penalty to pay for a poor performance or problem in>>>>>previous race.>>>> Yes, but it's fairer than using championship order, which would hand too >>>>much of an advantage to the championship leader. Conversely, reverse orders >>>>would be too much of a penalty. There is a certain irony that probably the >>>>fairest system was the two-stage system of 2003.>>> How about a lottery draw.>> ...Failed Probability as well, did you, Fuckwit?> What does my comment have to do with probability, oh stunned one? Oh dear... Let's start simple, as usual... Do you know what "lottery" means? Can you ask mommy to explain? ...She's that big woman there, over on the couch, wriggling under "uncle Cleveland".
		Add comment


Tim@Nocomment.Com 21 May 2005 19:26:03 [ permanent link ]
	F2005: 0 of 3 wrote: On Sat, 21 May 2005 06:57:43 -0400, "tim@nocomment.com"> <tim@nocomment.com> wrote:> F2005: 0 of 3 wrote:>> On Fri, 20 May 2005 19:00:57 -0400, "tim@nocomment.com">>><tim@nocomment.com> wrote:>>> John Briggs wrote:>>>> Bigbird wrote:>>>>> Emma wrote:>>>>>> The new system will see just one single qualifying session, which>>>>>>>will be run on Saturday starting at one o'clock, with cars in full>>>>>>>race set-up.>>>>>>> Teams would be unable to refuel the cars or modify them between>>>>>>>qualifying and the race. The running order would be the same as it is>>>>>>>at the moment on Saturday, with the winner of the previous race>>>>>>>having the advantage of going out last.>>>>>>> Rather a large penalty to pay for a poor performance or problem in>>>>>>previous race.>>>>> Yes, but it's fairer than using championship order, which would hand too >>>>>much of an advantage to the championship leader. Conversely, reverse orders >>>>>would be too much of a penalty. There is a certain irony that probably the >>>>>fairest system was the two-stage system of 2003.>>>> How about a lottery draw.>>> ...Failed Probability as well, did you, Fuckwit?>> What does my comment have to do with probability, oh stunned one?> Oh dear... Let's start simple, as usual...> Do you know what "lottery" means? Can you ask mommy to explain?> ...She's that big woman there, over on the couch, wriggling under> "uncle Cleveland".> I know what it means, titmouse. Your comment is so stupid, I can't fathom how it makes any sense in relation to what I said. Er, Fuckwit!
		Add comment


Bigbird 21 May 2005 19:26:48 [ permanent link ]
	tim@nocomment.com wrote:> Bigbird wrote:> tim@nocomment.com wrote:> > Bigbird wrote:> > > tussock wrote:> > > > tim@nocomment.com wrote:> > > > > <Re: qualifying>> > > > > How about a lottery draw.> > > > > Yes. Then make the bastards run across the track to their> > > > > cars at the start (which should be all parked in the pits),> > > > > and make the on-board mechanic hand-crank them to start.> > > > > You all know the old system was the best .... 8]> > > > ...but when they shouted "gentlemen start your engines" what> > > > would Ferrari do?> > > > Well, if you want to make each race interesting and shake things> > > up just a little, you can change the order in which they qualify.> > > It's not that big a deal, anyway.> > What isn't? Qualifying? Qualifying format?> > I'd say both are a very big deal.> > I think they should have each race completely separate from all of the> others. Each team has the exact same chances as the others. So each> driver can, depending on a draw, start the qualifying first or last.> Why should previous finishes enter into it? They should each get the> same chance to qualify on pole. For once you say something Inot only understand but agree with. Each race should be independent.
		Add comment


F2005: 0 of 3 21 May 2005 20:09:13 [ permanent link ]
	On Sat, 21 May 2005 11:26:03 -0400, "tim@nocomment.com" <tim@nocomment.com> wrote:>F2005: 0 of 3 wrote:>> On Sat, 21 May 2005 06:57:43 -0400, "tim@nocomment.com">> <tim@nocomment.com> wrote:>>>F2005: 0 of 3 wrote:>>>>On Fri, 20 May 2005 19:00:57 -0400, "tim@nocomment.com">>>><tim@nocomment.com> wrote:>>>>>How about a lottery draw.>>>> ...Failed Probability as well, did you, Fuckwit?>>> What does my comment have to do with probability, oh stunned one?>> Oh dear... Let's start simple, as usual...>> Do you know what "lottery" means? Can you ask mommy to explain?>> ...She's that big woman there, over on the couch, wriggling under>> "uncle Cleveland".>> I know what it means, titmouse. Your comment is so stupid, I can't >fathom how it makes any sense in relation to what I said.>Er, Fuckwit! ...Mandy Ray-Davies.
		Add comment


Ric Zito 21 May 2005 22:09:12 [ permanent link ]
	F2005: 0 of 3 <Ron.Dennis@LyingCheatingSwine.com> wrote: ...Mandy Ray-Davies. Nice. -- ric ric at pixelligence dot com
		Add comment


Helicon_One 22 May 2005 00:56:08 [ permanent link ]
	"John Briggs" <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote in message newsStje.11469$f5.2869@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...> Bigbird wrote:>> Emma wrote:>>> The new system will see just one single qualifying session, which>>> will be run on Saturday starting at one o'clock, with cars in full>>> race set-up. Teams would be unable to refuel the cars or modify them between>>> qualifying and the race. The running order would be the same as it is>>> at the moment on Saturday, with the winner of the previous race>>> having the advantage of going out last. Rather a large penalty to pay for a poor performance or problem in>> previous race. Yes, but it's fairer than using championship order, which would hand too > much of an advantage to the championship leader. Conversely, reverse > orders would be too much of a penalty. There is a certain irony that > probably the fairest system was the two-stage system of 2003. Why not just base the running order off the fastest lap times during Friday practise? That might have the bonus effect of encouraging drivers to actually do something on Friday (IIRC, some drivers aren't driving at all, or are just doing shakedowns during the Friday practise sessions to save their engines). Tim -- ---------------- you've got to admire Austria, a country that convinced the world that Hitler was a German, and Mozart, Austrian Jim Richardson - Usenet out-take If you want to reply by email, replace the asterisks with underscores. Currently listening to: 'Just One Name' - Astrid
		Add comment


John Briggs 22 May 2005 01:54:22 [ permanent link ]
	ric zito wrote:> F2005: 0 of 3 <Ron.Dennis@LyingCheatingSwine.com> wrote:> ...Mandy Ray-Davies.> Nice. Mandy Nice-Davies? -- John Briggs
		Add comment


F2005: 0 of 3 22 May 2005 06:00:39 [ permanent link ]
	On Sat, 21 May 2005 21:54:22 GMT, "John Briggs" <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote:>ric zito wrote:>> F2005: 0 of 3 <Ron.Dennis@LyingCheatingSwine.com> wrote:>> ...Mandy Ray-Davies.>> Nice.> Mandy Nice-Davies? "Nice-Davies! ...Are they real?"
		Add comment




Get comments by e-mail Add to favourites

respect your talk pals, avoid using obscene language, typing entire messages in CAPS, posting buy/sell ads or violating netiquette or the RF Criminal Code..

	see also: LEMANS: Darren Turner interview MOTOGP: Honda LCR Barcelona test NASCAR-M: Woody Pitkat joins Hillbilly…		pass tests:		see also: ...

Teams agree new Qualifying format

Add new comment