qualifying is 80% of the race

[lebesset]

according to mark webber qualifying used to be 75-80% the decider of the race result , but it isn't any more ...because of the tyres

personally , I am delighted that this should be so , in fact I would be happy to take steps to reduce it's importance eg side by side on the grid , the car that qualified best of a pair normally gets the best side , let the pole sitter choose and the rest follow

am I alone in feeling like this ? I feel it can only improve the race

[Pup]

Depends on the alternative. I don't want to watch a race that's 90% determined by tire wear either.

[GrizzleBoy]

Well quail still is technically 80% of the race.

Its just that quail is now about going fast, as slow as possible.

[Pup]

Well quail still is technically 80% of the race.

A bold use of the word.

[GrizzleBoy]

Only because you emboldened it :p

[Richard]

To be contrary, wasn't qualifying 90% of the race in the Bridgestone era?

[lebesset]

To be contrary, wasn't qualifying 90% of the race in the Bridgestone era?

inclined to agree with you , but I suppose webber was deliberately understating a little
it's amazing to me how many people want to go back to that era ..I had a couple of friends who never went to the races , just on saturday for qually

[NowyszRacing6]

Personally I like to have a race that doesn't depend way too heavily on qualifying, but when tire wear and strategy starts to overtake the importance of actually driving the car the fastest it can be driven, it stops being as interesting to me. i don't like watching cars drive around at 80% of their maximum, they don't corner in the same exciting way. you won't have much risk of sliding off track or making a mistake if you're below the limits of the car like that. i guess some people are more excited by cars just changing position with each other, but i want to see a direct relationship between how hard you can push the car, and how successful you are in the race. i'm not a big fan of DRS/kers, but i'd even vote to keep those if it meant we had some tires where drivers can really push. then i think we'd have a pretty good compromise between an unpredictable race, and pure speed being important.

[ringo]

Bridgestone era race was 100m sprint final after qualifying rounds, mano y mano.
Pirelli is a 100m lime and spoon potato sack race as the grand finale, after the qualifying rounds of running.

Pirelli era is entertaining only in a wacky races kind of way, the speed isn't so much important, rather who you encounter staggering on a flat or worn out tyres around the next corner is the entertainment.

[Pierce89]

Well quail still is technically 80% of the race.

.

I had no idea tasty birds were so important to F1.
Sorry I couldn't help myself

[Pierce89]

To be contrary, wasn't qualifying 90% of the race in the Bridgestone era?

inclined to agree with you , but I suppose webber was deliberately understating a little
it's amazing to me how many people want to go back to that era ..I had a couple of friends who never went to the races , just on saturday for qually

I totally agree.

[Roland Ehnström]

Here's a wild thought:

Those cars which are fast in qualifying, will generally (not always, but generally) be fast in the race as well. If so, it's only natural that the qualifying order will be similar to the race finishing order. This doesn't necessarily mean that qualifying is all that important to the outcome of the race, even though the results from qual and race will be similar.

As a thought experiment, put the Marussias and Caterhams on the two first rows on the grid, with all the usual suspects behind them. Do you think that there is an 80% chance that they will win? Will they even finish in the points? Probably not.

One exception to this rule is of course Monaco, where qualifying (still) is pretty important. But even there I cannot see a Caterham winning from pole - but it would be quite interesting to watch it unfold!

[lebesset]

interesting interview with pedro de la rosa on the subject
in agreement with webber , said that the emphasis is swinging to the race because of the tyres , and that , in races which are straightforward , it might be possible to win from the first 3 rows in a car with good race pace

the interview was at barcelona where 20 of 22 races have been won from the front row !!!

let's hope he is correct !

[mnmracer]

Have to disagree.

Ferrari and Lotus are now showing for the second consecutive year (though last year the gap was bigger) that a good starting car (both Alonso and Massa made up an average of 4-6 or so places at the start) and having great race pace, can make up a lot for qualifying.

Mercedes and Red Bull show the exact opossite. Beasts in qualifying, but by no means an indication of race pace.

[Maelstrom]

Since when does Red Bull lack race pace? Vettel won two races this year...