Start, Bahrain International Circuit, 2021

Official: Points-paying Sprint Qualifying races approved by F1 Commission

2021 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Sprint Qualifying races will be held at three rounds of this year’s world championship following approval by the F1 Commission.

The proposal requires the final approval of the World Motor Sport Council, which is expected to be a formality.

Teams will be allowed to choose two sets of tyres from their allocation for the Sprint Qualifying race, which will run over a distance of 100 kilometres.

A regular qualifying session will be held on Fridays during Sprint Qualifying weekends. The FIA confirmed teams will only be allowed to use soft tyres during qualifying at those events, and will have a maximum of five sets.

The parc ferme period, during which the changes teams can make to their cars are restricted, will be brought forward at Sprint Qualifying events, and begin after first practice. However teams will be allowed to make some alterations to their cars, including to their power unit cooling and weight distribution.

The Sprint Qualifying races are to be held at Silverstone and Monza, plus a third venue.

Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Red Bull Ring, 2020
Analysis: Why Formula 1 won’t give up on its Saturday sprint race plan
“I am pleased to see that Formula 1 is seeking new ways to engage with its fans and enlarge the spectacle of a race weekend through the concept of Sprint Qualifying,” said FIA president Jean Todt.

“It was made possible thanks to the continued collaboration between the FIA, Formula 1, and all of the teams. F1 is showing itself to be stronger than ever with all stakeholders working together in this way, and much has been done to ensure that the Sporting, Technical and Financial aspects of the format are fair.”

The proposal received the unanimous support of teams.

Revised race weekend format for Sprint Qualifying weekends

FridayFirst practice60 minutesTeams have free choice of two sets of tyres
FridayQualifyingQ1, Q2 and Q3Teams may use five sets of soft tyres only
SaturdaySecond practice60 minutesTeams have free choice of one set of tyres
SaturdaySprint Qualifying100 kilometre raceTeams have free choice of two sets of tyres
SaturdayGrand Prix305 kilometre race

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2021 F1 season

Browse all 2021 F1 season articles

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories 2021 F1 season articles, F1 news

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 73 comments on “Official: Points-paying Sprint Qualifying races approved by F1 Commission”

    1. I’m glad F1 is open to some form of change and adaptation – but clearly the teams are only into it because of the money.
      The big teams especially, as they get to maintain and stretch their advantage without reverse grids.

      1. Well given there’s been a worldwide pandemic in the last year or so that hsd badly affected revenues, I don’t blame them?

        Also, I would say the big teams have more risk in this give how its relatively easy for them to get better in normal QF with their better cars than the risk of crashing in a race.

      2. Yeah. It’s a half measure.
        I also hate the tyres option. It reduces middle team capability to exploring different strategies.

        1. My immediate reaction to the tyre news is that we’ve got rid of the Q2 tyre rule, which I think can only be a good thing in terms of differing strategies across the field. Because it feels like there is now no longer any point in that rule, and really it is just a carry-over rule from the refuelling days. However, I may be wrong here as it does not specify anywhere what is happening with the Q2 rule.

          1. Yeah, helpfully vague. Surely it has to be dropped, otherwise, you have to start the proper race on the soft tyres that you used in Q2, so zero strategy mix up, so less variety, which very much defeats the point if you’re gonna have a whole extra race to try mix it up!

            1. I really hope so. Although it can be interesting (70th Anniversary GP with RB comes to mind) I think it does less to make the races interesting than free tyre choice does (e.g. meaning Perez had to unsuccessfully gamble in Bahrain). Part of the reason the midfield fight is often so good is because you’ve got 2 or 3 different strategies at play, while at the front it’s pretty much all the same.

    2. I don’t like it – screams of higher ups trying to artificially improve the ‘show’ by hoping one of the front runners runs into trouble and has to start at the back for the ‘main event’.

      If everyone was to list their top 3 problems with F1 right now, I doubt many would say qualifying or the weekend format.

      1. @davef1 They have been addressing all the main issues that badly needed addressing, and those we will see as the budget caps and the better money distribution take hold over the coming seasons, and with the new cars next year. All this is is a way to trial if there might be a more exciting way to qualify for Sunday’s race. They are not ‘hoping one of the front runners runs into trouble and has to start at the back for the main event,’ they are hoping that it is more exciting than the flying lap method, which we will still get to see on those race weekends too, just on Friday.

        1. Then why not wait until the new cars come in next year? For all we know there will be a massive shake up in the running order, as there was in 2009 and 2014. It’s entirely possible that we’ll get enough change from the new cars, why not wait to see what they bring before messing around with qualifying.

          I also think that F1 really is “hoping one of the front runners runs into trouble and has to start at the back for the main event” – it’s the main thing that made the latter parts of Monza last year and Imola last week interesting, seeing how far up the order Lewis could get. I doubt either race would be as highly rated if there wasn’t a faster car working through the field.

          1. Then why not wait until the new cars come in next year? For all we know there will be a massive shake up in the running order, as there was in 2009 and 2014. It’s entirely possible that we’ll get enough change from the new cars, why not wait to see what they bring before messing around with qualifying.

            Amen @skydiverian

            The sport’s overhaul next year is supposed to make cars more raceable and help to close up the field more easily. If it works as planned then there’s no need to change anything else, especially qualifying which works so well.

            I think that people’s main issue with qualifying is that the front running cars have such a pace advantage that you expect them to be at the front, so it’s perceived to be too predictable (although we sometimes do still get surprises).

            Imagine a scenario where the field is so close that a couple of tenths could mean the difference between several rows on the grid. The driver could really make the difference, grid mix ups more frequently, so potentially more exciting racing, and all without any shallow gimmicks. I’m prepared to wait for that

            1. @skydiverian @3dom I’m not so sure we’ll see a massive shakeup of the running order because with the current pus it is still going to be the works factory teams that will have the upper hand at integrating their chassis to their own pu. But of course yes what is anticipated is closer racing between drivers and their cars without being hampered by dirty air, and teams closer to each other as budgets caps and better money distribution take effect. As I say though the top teams should remain the top teams at least initially anyway, imho.

              As to waiting to see what the new cars bring before changing qualifying? Yeah that makes good sense too, however, if qualifying is left as it is, which it may well be, or certainly for many races, it won’t matter that the cars can race more closely, fairly unaffected in dirty air, for the drivers strive for clean air with flying lap runs. The new cars will only show their effect on Sundays when they are racing in anger together in a pack, or during Sprint Qualifying.

        2. @robbie not to sound like a broken record because you an I have had this ongoing argument but why not then wait until we see what impact the new cars and budget caps have?

          There is no pressing need to “make qualifying more exciting” and I believe that now they’ve added points in your argument is somewhat blunted as its now “more” than qualifying.

          1. @dbradock Sure I’d be game for that too, but it is moot for this is the route they have taken. The horses have left the barn. Let’s keep in mind we were to have the new cars by now. I agree there is no pressing need to make qualifying more exciting, but they obviously have a desire to experiment and see if there might be a more exciting way.

            As to points I would have preferred they not offer them, but they have and I have to assume it is as an incentive to race it out even moreso for pole, but I would have thought the desire to start as high up on the grid as possible would be enough. Perhaps since there is a qualifying on Friday to determine the order for the Sprint Qualifier, they don’t want drivers just standing pat, but again, I would have thought they’d still be self-motivated enough to try to start even higher, that they wouldn’t need the incentive of points. I look forward to hearing more about that from Brawn and/or Domenicali.

        3. Coventry Climax
          27th April 2021, 15:14

          “I am pleased to see that Formula 1 is seeking new ways to engage with its fans and enlarge the spectacle of a race weekend through the concept of Sprint Qualifying,” said FIA president Jean Todt.

          This effectively means that mr. Todt himself is pleased with the concept of SQ, otherwise his -the above- sentence would have ended AFTER the word ‘weekend’, possibly then adding something like ‘And SQ is the way we’re gonna try doing this’.

          I have no doubt that it was what they (FIA and LM) wanted right from the start, and have tried everything they can to get it approved, including shutting up drivers and teams, as well as shutting their ears to what the fans have to say about it.
          I also have no doubt, even if it utterly fails, that they will call it a ‘huge’ succes, Trump style, and carry on with it and expand it to all races anyway. From there its just a little step to introducing another ‘fix’ for something the FIA first broke themselves: Reverse grids.

          One example of what is now broken, is the new concept of the ‘Parc partly Fermé’. Yeah, another thousand pages needed in the regulation book. New possible secret deals in the make, as these rules will surely be incomplete, vague and open to any kinds of interpretation. I’m sure that will attract millions of new fans, all super interested in the small print under the regulations.

          In the mean time Robbies hit song ‘Next years cars’ has hit the charts.

    3. I am looking forward to this. Permanent replacement for QF? Probably not but I want to see it trialed.

    4. Awarding points to just the top 3 is ridiculous; it’s only going to extend the top teams’ advantage in theory. I don’t see how this is going to improve the show.

    5. *xzibit meme*

      Yo dawg, we heard you like to qualify so you’re going to have to qualify for qualifying so you can qualify….

    6. I love how one comment so far says this will stretch the big teams advantage more while the other says this is done to artificially bring them down in a race by them unluckily crashing.

      It”s like they need to do like, I dunno, a trial or something to see what its like…..(even if its a small sample)

      1. People like to complain @yaru. Especially in this website, you will always find people in the comment section who know better or just likes to complain for the sake of it. I agree, its great that F1 is trying new things and they are absolutely doing the right thing by trying it out first. Who knows, it might just be great.
        F1 shouldn’t be unduly concerned by what fans think of changes. Otherwise nothing ever changes.

        1. @pmccarthy_is_a_legend The issue is they are ‘trailing’ them as part of the world championship and awarding points so they could & likely will have a direct impact on the championship.

          We seem to have a close/competitive title fight this year & the prospect of it been decided by them trailing a gimmick race format simply doesn’t sit well with a majority of the fans.

          If they are so adamant to run this silly gimmick format then make them non championship or something.

          1. I think running it in the way they are is probably for the best. It gives the fairest test of how teams/drivers will react if there is something to play for. Those 3 points could mean a lot in the grand scheme of things for the top teams, while the midfield is so close I reckon they’ll still fight for 1 or 2 if they can get up there (I mean if the first 18 laps at Monza last year were used for example McLaren would have got 2 points for Sainz and 1 for Norris).

            Alternatively, I might have preferred a separate sprint race championship. Maybe points for top 8 pre-2010 style, offering some kind of prize money (but not detracting too much from the main championship), while not setting the grid for the main race (that can still be quali). Then you can get more on track racing, as they claim they intend, more money from sponsors, as they know they want, and not having it detract too much from the main event.

          2. @roger-ayles thank you for proving the point I made.
            If they don’t award any points there’s no incentive for the teams. Carrot and stick my friend.

            But clearly you know it better.

        2. +1 Time trial addicts find it hard to comprehend wheel to wheel competition.

      2. @yaru a case can be made for both of those comments though, and there is the potential that they can both be correct at the same time.

        The awarding of additional points to the top 3 drivers does have the potential to stretch the advantage of the top two teams, since they will tend to monopolise those positions and thus tend to be the ones mostly picking up those points. It might not be a massive advantage – potentially 9 points, the equivalent of an extra 6th place and an extra 10th place finish – but it will potentially stretch the advantage of those top teams.

        The other suggestion – that Liberty Media might be hoping for one of the big name drivers to hit trouble and have to start the main race from the back of the grid – does have an air of plausibility about it.

        Liberty Media started out pushing for reverse grid races, and it is probably fairly safe to assume that, if one of the big names did have to start at the back of the grid due to an incident in the sprint race, there would both the the initial media speculation about ‘who was to blame’ for the first incident, and then speculation over how strong a recovery drive that driver could make – increased media coverage that might be rather appealing to Liberty Media.

        The idea of mixing up the format with the hope that they might indirectly achieve a partial reverse grid through some misfortune falling to a big name driver thus does not seem implausible.

    7. And after all our efforts to reject it, here we go…

      1. I think ‘our’ is slightly assumptive here. F1 run a service called F1 Fan Voice where they regularly run surveys on proposed changes and other things. They ran one on sprint races a couple of months back and the response was not what this site would make you think. While there was not a majority either way, the response was much more positive than negative (I think it was about 45% in favour, 25% against and 30% indifferent). I’m happy to see them trialling the new format and not go all in (ala 2016 or 2005), and can completely understand the motives behind it; considering F1 made a near $400 loss in 2020 and did not turn a profit pre-covid, they need some more revenue from somewhere.

        1. Given how horribly skewed the polling on that site is I wouldn’t trust anything that comes out of it.

          Most of the surveys & stuff on it lead you towards the answer they want rather than the one you want to give. That is why I stopped taking part in them.

          1. I seem to remember the question being ‘What are your thoughts on the Sprint Races that are being considered for trial in 2021?’ or something to that effect, with answers of ‘Very positive’, ‘slightly positive’, ‘neither positive or negative’, ‘slightly negative’ or ‘very negative’, and there seemed to be a fairly equal spread across most of the answers, although some skew slightly towards positive. I don’t thing that’s a particularly leading question (I say as I’m revising for my Statistics exam).

            I wouldn’t necessarily say this site has a perfect representation of all F1 fans either, considering the general viewership being pretty close to the hardcore side of the fanbase. Not saying that that’s a bad thing, as a lot of the time it means people can have intelligent discussions about interesting F1 topics. However, the majority of F1’s fanbase is probably a bit more casual, and that is where I expect a large proportion of F1’s revenue comes from.

            I think we’ve got to wait and see with these. If it works, then cool we can keep it. If it doesn’t then I might get a little bit more critical if the powers-that-be try to keep pushing it through.

          2. @roger-ayles And again then, as I suggest to you below, the ultimate go-to is for viewers to boycott, and I’m not being sarcastic. If the polls are not to be trusted, and obviously in this case the trial sounds like it will be going forward, the next step is we will be seeing (or deciding not to) what the trial is like, and then it’s all going to hit the fan again with reaction either way from the actual event, not the theoretical one. And then if the response is actually negative but F1 figures out a way to call it positive and worthy of going forward with, there is still the option, if one disagrees, to boycott, and if enough people do that then they will change course. They are not doing this to disappoint and turn people off. They are trying to see if this helps grow the sport. We shall see.

            I personally think this is going to be exciting and fascinating to see, but I also think the cars from next year onward will be better suited to a Spring Qualifying.

            1. Lol ‘Sprint’ not ‘Spring’ obviously.

            2. Made me think of Spring Racing Carnival, @robbie.
              Nothing to do with horse racing, just young people dressing up and getting drunk.

              It’s been a commercial success though ;)

    8. A pretty big risk for it to decide the championship – not because of the points (in theory they could same as FLAP but are really small, max 9 points over 3 sprint races in 2021) – bur because of risk of crashes during sprint races.

      Imagine Lewis/Max being hit by someone else and are the first to retire in sprint race it would automatically mean start at the back without the driver or team having any influence.

      FIA seems to more interested or only able to invent new bandages to spice up the competition rather than fixing some of the root cause problems.

      1. Jelle I guess you have missed it, but Liberty and Brawn’s main priority as soon as they took over from BE was to fix all the root problems in F1. They have already done that, and this Sprint Qualifying trial has only been suggested well after they got all the teams on board to tackle the real and urgent problems F1 had under BE. It is completely and wholly unfair to claim they (you say FIA but it is also F1) are only able to invent new bandages rather than fix things, because indeed all they have been doing is fixing things.

        1. Jelle van der Meer (@)
          26th April 2021, 17:56

          Well Robbie that is your opinion but mine is that non of the root causes are fixed.
          * Mercedes and Red Bull are still far too dominant compared to the rest of the teams
          * Williams, Haas, Alfa Romeo are still only filling the field no realistic chance of podium
          * Ferrari still has too much power and gets too much money
          * The secret agreement with Ferrari end of 2019 is another major farse allowed by FIA & Liberty
          * The FIA rulebook is still far too complex, not even talking about technical rule book, just the race/qualifying rules
          * DRS is still needed for most passes on track and at same time as shown last race DRS made a mockery of Hamilton overtakes on 5 cars after the restart
          * and the list goes on

          What in your opinion has Liberty & Brawn fixed of above list? Or what other not named problems have they fixed – Liberty can’t even get their own online App to working properly and consistently.

          Liberty’s main priority is to make money – no different than BE they so far just have been less successful at it. Do I believe Liberty is beter for F1 than BE since the new century – absolutely however BE during his 4 decades running the sport still had a greater positive impact on F1 than Liberty has so far.

        2. @robbie

          Liberty and Brawn’s main priority… was to fix all the root problems in F1. They have already done that

          I would beg to differ. They have brought in some changes which may fix some of the root problems. The jury is still out on how much they will help. I agree that it’s an unfair comment about the bandages, but you have taken it too far the other way.

          As for the sprint qually, I can’t see it helping anything very much. We will still see the cars line up in order of how fast they are, and be surprised that the cars continue in that order for most of the race most of the time. If anything, I would expect it to become even worse, because any cars which qualify out of position on Friday will have 20 laps to correct that on Saturday before the real race…

          Still, it does mean I will get to see more competitive F1 action on my visit to Silverstone this year (assuming it goes ahead), so that’s a bonus for me.

          1. @drmouse I think it safe to say F1 had become unsustainable and my goodness if the changes they have brought in since they took over, with a lot of work and negotiations hand in hand with the teams too, don’t fix things, then I don’t know what would have. The long needed budget caps to rein in the excess spenders, the fairer money distribution for the lesser teams, and cars able to race more closely, with the teams more close to each other, all meaning that the lesser teams and new entrants can eventually feel like they actually have a fighting chance of growing and competing. I don’t know what more Liberty and Brawn could have done, and of course it will not be perfect as nothing ever will be, and of course there will be tweaking along the way…but what a much better jumping off point, no? Particularly starting next year.

            For sprint quali on the one hand you are saying you predict little change in the running order for the sprint, but you also will get to see more competitive F1 action on your visit to Silverstone (I hope you get there). It is only one scenario that out of place cars from Friday will get to correct that on Saturday, to suit one argument. I could also happen that Friday is fairly predictable as it can be with that format, and then the Saturday sprint brings a few surprises, and as you say ‘more competitive F1 action’ along the way. I envision a fuller hour of action than we get with the flying lap format that really brings the excitement down to the final few minutes of the hour. And sometimes that’s really exciting, and sometimes that’s quite predictable.

            1. Apologies if I wasn’t clear. When I said “competitive F1 action”, I meant F1 cars on track as part of the competition. Practice is great in and of itself, but it is not part of the competition and has no direct consequences on the race or results. What effect Sprint Qualifying has on the “competitiveness”/closeness of the racing, if any, remains to be seen.

              I agree that both the budget cap and prize money changes should have a great, positive impact on the sport. However, we have not yet seen whether they have got the details right, or whether the teams will find a way around them.

              As for “cars able to race more closely”, I don’t think we have any evidence that current changes have done this, and the regs which are supposed to aren’t scheduled to come in until 2022 now. I expect they will, but the teams are full of amazing engineers who want only for their own cars to be as fast as possible. We will not know what effect these regulations have on the ability of the cars to race more closely until we see those cars on track next year.

              So, I am optimistic, but saying Brawn and Liberty have “fixed the problems” is premature.

    9. An idea even worse than the European Super League.

      1. Should’ve been tested as a non-championship race.

        1. The problem is that nobody will take it seriously as a non-championship event. The only way to get even a semi-accurate picture of how it works work is to do what they are doing and make it part of a live event. That way, the teams have to try their best to win.

      2. Agree, guess it will be abandoned soon enough. Give them the choice, square or oval wheels . It is a joke anyway.

    10. Having the REAL qualifying session which many fans see as the most exciting part of the weekend on a Friday when most are at Work/School and will therefore not be able to watch it is a slap in the face to the fans who overwhelmingly love the current format & are strongly against this awful gimmick race idea.

      Hopefully this fails so badly that the whole sprint race idea can finally be put to bed for good. But I guarantee that even when this gimmick race idea does prove a failure they will simply try to repackage it & push it through some other way.

      We should all just boycott the gimmick races to send a message!

      1. @roger-ayles You’re absolutely free to do that. I won’t be joining you, but by all means it is a fact that the customer is the boss. That is basically what Sam Walton has said of his Walmart stores, the customer is the boss as they can fire us in a heartbeat (obviously by not shopping there).

      2. @roger-ayles

        I’m trying to figure out how to watch it without watching it.

        I assume they know immediately how

        1. How many people watched or recorded. At least for digital cable here in the states.

    11. Is the 305 KM Grand Prix race not going to be on Sunday?

      1. @pmelton Of course. Just a typo.

    12. Teams will be allowed to choose two sets of tyres from their allocation for the Sprint Qualifying race, which will run over a distance of 100 kilometres.

      That suggests a pit stop? Surely that would only be for punctures?

      1. The Formula 1 Youtube channel there are no mandatory pitstops / no compulsion to use both sets.

    13. I would have got rid of Q2 and Q3 to set the grid for the qualifying race. I would also move Q1 to the Saturday morning and put FP2 in its normal place on Friday afternoon.

      1. I would have preffered keeping Quali on Saturday in the morning as well. I’m not so sure about removing Q2/3, but I would get rid of the Q2 tyre rule (for all races, not just Sprint Race rounds).

        When they tried with Aggregate Qualifying to put Quali in a morning (albeit on the Sunday), one of the problems was that no TV networks would show it. With the shift to dedicated TV channels for sports like F1 (and the rise of online platforms, for example FE is broadcast almost exclusively on BBC iPlayer in the UK), I don’t see this being as much of a problem anymore. If anything, it may be a help to some networks that show highlight packages such as C4 as they can broadcast Quali and SQ highlights on the same evening (I’m not sure what they’ll do about Quali highlights potentially on Friday, that’s for Sky and C4 to work out, although one round is at Silverstone where C4 have live rights anyway). I can see it creating more problems than would be solved by forcing people to wait over 24 hours for some Quali highlights on a Saturday.

    14. The FIA confirmed teams will only be allowed to use soft tyres during qualifying at those events, and will have a maximum of five sets.

      I actually like this, never been a fan of Q2-tyre rule. Reminds me the old 12-lap format, when you basically had just 4 tries to set the fastest lap and that’s all. The rest of that thing is rubbish of course with the points for top-3 finishers especially.

    15. Meh….. I don’t like the idea of sprint races in any form but they are going to do whatever they want to do so, Whatever.

      To be honest i’m really not expecting the sprint race to be all that exciting partly as with only the top 3 getting points there isn’t much of a reason for those further back to fight too hard & risk unnecessary damage or potentially falling to the back. But also because without any strategy I imaging these sprint races will be more like the opening stint of a GP which usually tends to be fairly static until you start to see cars pitting & strategy begins to play a role.

      We’ll see but right now I can’t say i’m a fan of it as I see more potential negatives than positives.

    16. I am looking forward to the bit where Mickey Mouse comes out and everybody cheers … followed by sprinklers on-track … and MICKEY MOUSE will be interviewing the drivers on the podium …. yay!!

    17. I don’t like this idea, I especially hate I won’t see qualifying anymore. but nothing wrong with trying out something new I guess.
      I really don’t get the tyre allowances. Are the teams really supposed to complete FP2 with 1 set of tyres? Are they supposed to race with only 2 sets, so one stop races are the norm?
      Or can they save tyre sets in qualifying and still use them in the race?

    18. This is not entertaining enough for me to drop Tweeter, Instagram and video chat with myself so I can watch the race. It’d be far more fun if the 7th place would’ve been awarded with pole position. I want to see them forming 5-wide formation before the finish line, braking and accelerating, trying to take the best position.

    19. ”plus a third venue” – So this means they will decide it later based on Brazil’s situation?
      I’ve posted the following before, but what’s the point of a practice session post-QLF when practice sessions are for QLF and race preparations, both? Weird to have one once QLF’s over. FP1 should be enough.
      Anyway, here are the number of laps for each sprint race, the lowest needed for reaching 100 km:
      Silverstone: 17 laps, 100.147 km
      Monza: 18 laps, 104.274 km
      Interlagos: 24 laps, 103.416 km
      (I included some alternatives unless none can go ahead)
      COTA: 19 laps, 104.747 km
      AHR: 24 laps, 103.296 km
      I didn’t expect revised tyre usage rules for QLF, though.

      1. Assuming AHR means Mexico/Mexico City, that race will not happen this year

    20. I am happy they are using it at Monza. Q3 in Monza anyways had started become a farce. I know that Q3 will still be there on Friday. But at least it pales is significance compared to current format.

      1. This is a good point actually that I didn’t think of. It also has the effect of devaluing the (Friday Qualifying) pole in Monza because you can always get that tow in the SQ instead, meaning that it might become less farcical. Because as you say Monza can get stupid very quickly (I think they even had to red flag an F3 Quali there a couple of years back because they felt they were all waiting for the tow had become too dangerous, and with 30 car grids I can see why)

    21. Don’t like the idea & therefore won’t be watching any weekend where this format is used.

      I’ve not missed a single race in over 30 years but I refuse to support a format like this so will simply skip those races even though Silverstone & Monza are 2 of my favourite circuits.

      This to me is even worse than that horrible double points gimmicks or even that elimination qualifying thing they tried a few years ago.
      It’s a terrible format which will just devalue the main race, Make the real qualifying session mean less as well as ensure less people can watch it & worse of all it’s going to detract from the gp.

      Liberty really have no idea what they are doing do they. They know nothing about the sport and rather than Ross, Stefano & co helping Liberty understand it is clear they are simply pawns to push Liberty’s Americanisation of F1 agenda.

      Wrong direction for the wrong reasons. Simply awful decision!

    22. Given that no one is going to want to take too big a risk to gain one starting position, I can only assume that the start of the race is going to be the only time there may be some action. After that they will have all done the same calculations, come up with the same strategies and since the cars can’t follow closely, they’ll all just sit in their positions and wait for it to end. At minimum they should have removed the parc ferme conditions after the qualifying race so teams can apply what they learned in the sprint race and possibly be faster/better in the main event. That might help to mix things up a little.

    23. Great. Now a blunder in qualifying is almost impossible. Keep introducing measures that take risk and merit out of the equation. help the top teams even further

    24. 100 kilometers is very long for 3 points. No surprise that they not intend to test it in Monaco, that 100km for 3 points is a very bad ROI, when they can score much more at the main race. These points will be taken by the top2 teams most often, if the field will not become more level. I expected more points, or shorter sprint race. If sprint race has to be a thing, I am ok with something about 1/3 distance, at least. But this is long enough to factor out the gains which will be made by some weaker teams’ drivers with a good start. 100 km is long enough for the stronger competitor to regain those lost places most often. Nimble cars can race well even at Monaco. I have been ok with the much less overtakes when it was no DRS, without DRS it was not less exciting. Maybe they will still need DRS, but they could rethink the concept of it, reduce or adapt its efficiency per track, or even allow the overtakee or the driver who is defending his position to occasionally use it.

      And then: they have mentioned, that they can select two set of tyres, but from their allocation, so no extra tyre sets?
      They not have mentioned whether it will be a mandatory to pit stop for tyres, or they will be allowed to complete the distance on a set of hards, which could be likely done. And if it is about 1stop or 2stops, or 0stop vs 1 stop strategies, the time spent in the pits favours the less pitstops, if the sustained pace of the softer compounds is not makeing up for their lower durability especially. And at the current compounds seemingly the softer ones are not makeing up for that.

      I am on also on the side of : “sprint races should be part of a distinct sprint race championship, with sufficient but somewhat different rewards (financial and ceremonial as well), instead of mixing its results and stats with the GPs and the original championship”.

      Ross Brawn is a great engineer, and would likely change F1 towards better racing, but likely his hands are tied to some extent by the will of the rich competitors and their factories.

    25. Lets be honest here – its not about whether its more exciting or not, its a straight out experiment to see if they can get more viewers to watch if the races are shorter. They won’t be comparing numbers with those who watch qualifying, they’ll be comparing numbers with those who watch the actual Sunday race and checking to see if they watched the whole race and not just highlights.

      Other things that bother me about this.
      1) Parc Ferme after 1 practice session – how is that going to help, particularly for the lower ranked teams?
      2) Why bother with Practice 2 – all they’ll be doing is tooling around gathering tyre data with no hot laps
      3) There is no mention of what tyres are to be used at the start of the main race – are they still going to make them start on the tyres that they use in Q3 on the Friday?

    26. Here’s my idea for better race day,

      Day Session
      Friday Qualifying Q1, Q2 and Q3
      Friday First practice
      Saturday Second practice
      Saturday Third practice
      Sunday Grand Prix race

    27. Because the sprint races will be held at two of the best tracks on the calendar the reaction to the sprint races will be artificially positive. F1 is stacking the deck to ensure sprint races become part of the championship. Where will the third race be? Austin

    28. Why are they limiting the tires allocation? This is just too much experimentation and limitation for something which is being tried for the first time.

      Saturday practice with just one set of tire? That is ridiculous.

    29. Good they are giving it a shot. Hopefully Its only for a few races though. Wouldn’t want it to become the norm (Even though we haven’t seen it yet)

    30. Can anyone please explain why there is still a second practice? I mean for what….
      Also why haven’t they already tested these changes at a Young Drivers Test(!) or at preseason Testing(yeah, okay it was already limited).
      Finally I just want to mention that racing on Monza isn’t that great right now imho, and from what we have seen in lower formulas the sprint race could be either complete carnage or the good old procession we all know and love ;)

    31. It is not a trial if they have are already booking in 5 more for next year!

    32. For some reason I never realised there would be a regular qualifying session at all. I thought the grid would be made based on championship position or something. So we still get the usual quali, but on a Friday. Then a sprint race with some points on offer that also determines the grid for the main event.

      It certainly makes Saturday far more exciting now. The front runners have it all to lose so might try to just finish near the front, but someone taking risks from the midfield could upset things. Really interested to see how it plays out to be honest and it’s exciting for that as much as anything else.

      Let’s see how it goes.

    33. I am excited becauae it is a new idea. I cant say if I will like it until I watch all three of them though.

    Comments are closed.