Aston Martin team boss Otmar Szafnauer says Formula 1 must listen to fans’ feedback regarding Sprint but that a reverse grid would be “a slippery slope to Formula 2.”
Sprint was introduced on a trial basis for 2021 at Silverstone and Monza while a third experiment is scheduled to take place at Interlagos.
Formula 1 chiefs introduced Sprint after several years of discussions over potential shake-ups of the format. The concept of a reverse grid was twice rejected.
A full evaluation will take place after the last trial, with changes likely for 2022, but Szafnauer has asserted that reverse grids should not be on the agenda.
“I will support what the fans deem to be entertaining, however, I think reverse grid in Formula 1 is a big, big departure from what this sport was always about,” he said.
“And I personally wouldn’t want us to have this sprint race on Saturday turn into a slippery slope to becoming Formula 2.
“If that’s what the fans want, I’m wrong, let’s do what the fans want. But I don’t think Formula 1, the pinnacle of motorsport, should start entertaining weight penalties, reverse grid, all that kind of stuff.”
Szafnauer outlined that Formula 1 has to view Friday and Saturday as a whole in order to assess the relative merits of the revised schedule.
“I think Fridays are definitely better,” he said. “Then you’ve got to ask yourself is Saturday is also better? Then if that’s yes, we’ve got a better show.
“What you gain on Friday do you also gain on Saturday or do you lose a little bit and where are you total-total?
“I think the right thing is stay the course, do Brazil, then analyse the three. The second one doesn’t have the novelty [factor], neither will the third, so [we need to] look back at all three of them and then decide.”
Reverse grid is great fun. Just make it wisely. As a trained race organizer I would say: do not try things in Formula 1. Try them in F3 and F2. If it works, then apply to F1 in next season.
Starting grid positions were used to be drawn, then they realized that it’s safer to set the order by the speed, so fastest drivers start from the top. Back then the slowest drivers were way slower then the top runners. Nowadays we have all drivers below 102% or even 101% of pole lap.
OK. So we have fast drivers at the top! Except when they are penalized? 🙂 See, we already broke the Holy Grail of the Grid…
I support reverse grid in the following method.
I would reward qualifying results. (No sprint qual race nonsense, please!)
20-15-12-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1-…-1 pt/s for all drivers below 102%
Then flip the order and start the race.
At 1/3 of race distance: P1 – 5 pts, P2 – 3 pts, P3 – 1 pt.
At 2/3 of race distance: P1 – 5 pts, P2 – 3 pts, P3 – 1 pt.
Final results:
20-15-12-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1-…-1 pt/s for all classified drivers.
Fastest lap: 1pt
Fan vote: 1pt
Fun! Fun! Fun!
Thanks for your time. : )
ps: never ever apply weight penalties!
The problem, which is strange as Brawns management/engineering background, is that he/F1 seem to think changing the pure reason of racing as metrocracy into a competition based on entertainment not best performance.
He also says this a trial, but after each of the 2 so far they were ruled a success. Why?
The real marketing evaluation will have devised several metrics and the ‘scores’ of those will be compared, like for like. Not a popularity competition.
Strange that a technical business is not more honest about the real reason, how much value can be recovered, and profits made.
Reverse grids belittle the challenge of being the best – the best driver in the best machinery. If it happens then I’m out, it will no longer be competitive sport and I’m not interested in following a meaningless circus. It’s already on a slippery slope with DRS overtaking, Formula E is even worse with Fan Boost.