Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: 107% rule

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    848

    107% rule

    isnt it time they bought back the 107% rule back in f1??

    it was totally unexaptable what happen to Alonso not once but THREE times he got held up by cars 7 seconds slower than him!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,464
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrari_Fanatic View Post
    isnt it time they bought back the 107% rule back in f1??

    it was totally unexaptable what happen to Alonso not once but THREE times he got held up by cars 7 seconds slower than him!
    woudnt that mean Alonso would not have been able to race in monaco since he was not able to qualify?
    we're number one

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NUNEATON .UK
    Posts
    36
    I agree totally Ferrari_Fanatic and you made a very good point ferrari4life,which is why I think spare cars should also be reintroduced!!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,193
    I agree...

    Bring back 107% rule
    Bring back T-car
    Bring back Refuelling
    Bring back V10's
    Bring back 3 element rear wings
    Bring back Marlboro
    Bring back rainy races
    Bring back warm-up sessions
    Bring back Testing
    Bring back Raikkonen
    Die Perd se naam is pegasus abdel kader schrikt der woestijnen van bagdad tot dakar, seun van benedictus ernius quintus magnus van nassay en irma vor schimmelpernning von appeldoorn van tahiti in die heilige eg verbind kragtens die ewige edik uitgevaardig deur keiser tertius tillius theorodus en biskop merkenzein de mont saint allegonde van die vatikan.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Belfast, UK
    Posts
    8,498
    Can't take credit for this, it's taken from another F1 board. This is who wouldn't have qualified this season if the 107% rule was put in place:

    Bahrain: Senna (108.01%) Chandhok (199.468%)
    Australia: di Grassi (107.467%) Senna (107.873%) Chandhok (107.977%)
    Malaysia: Senna (107.264%) di Grassi (109.741%)*
    China: All drivers within 107%
    Spain: Chandhok (108.444%)
    Monaco: Chandhok (107.766%) Alonso (No time)**
    Turkey: All drivers within 107%
    Canada: Chandok (116.846%)

    So really it's mainly HRT - not Lotus, and Virgin only twice.
    Forza Jules

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Reality
    Posts
    6,932
    They are kind of stuck though. They wanted new teams, they cocked it up and now they have slow new teams. They can't stop them from racing or they will disappear again and it's back to square 1.

    F1 really is dumb about itself isn't it?

    "Luna faccia schiaffo testa"

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Stowmarket. U.K
    Posts
    18,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Suzie View Post
    Can't take credit for this, it's taken from another F1 board. This is who wouldn't have qualified this season if the 107% rule was put in place:

    Bahrain: Senna (108.01%) Chandhok (199.468%)
    Australia: di Grassi (107.467%) Senna (107.873%) Chandhok (107.977%)
    Malaysia: Senna (107.264%) di Grassi (109.741%)*
    China: All drivers within 107%
    Spain: Chandhok (108.444%)
    Monaco: Chandhok (107.766%) Alonso (No time)**
    Turkey: All drivers within 107%
    Canada: Chandok (116.846%)

    So really it's mainly HRT - not Lotus, and Virgin only twice.
    i think they need to bring it back. Plus the t-car rule and testing. Its too dangerous to have these SLOW runners trundling around the back. They will (may) course a accident with the front runners. Give them the rest season to test and get care package, plus budget togther.
    CAVALLINO RAMPANTE PER SEMPRE

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Kasterlee, Belgio
    Posts
    174
    I agree something has to happen, but I've never been a fan of these pre-qualifying formats or 107% rules. It might be hard to imagine but some of these "monkeys at the back" actually have fans and
    how hearth-breaking would it be if you bought tickets, booked hotels, took several days off, made the journey and finally get to attend a Grand Prix only to see your favorite driver stuck in the pitbox for the entire weekend. In this aspect these would be very fan-unfriendly rules, plus they would only put struggling teams in a vicious circle (not fast enough = no entry = no sponsors = no money = no development)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,464
    And this was Max's great plan...I would have so loved to see a breakaway series.
    we're number one

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Reality
    Posts
    6,932
    The 107% rule was fine when there were lots of teams to go round. The issue is that there aren't at the moment due to the economic climate so get used to it dudes - they cant wipe out the teams they are simultaneously trying to ensure stay in the competition.

    (Bernie is helping HRT remember!)

    "Luna faccia schiaffo testa"

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Belfast, UK
    Posts
    8,498
    Maybe the problem lies not with the slower teams but with inexperienced drivers? Just a thought.
    Forza Jules

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    848
    some intresting reads there

    i deffo aggree with bringing back the t-car but only if the team can afford it make it optional instead of complsory

    someone made an intresting point about teams not making it into the race with the 107% rule because of the fans... no one was complaining when minardi kept failing to making it did they loose sponsors NO i remember them being backed by telephonica

    they also need to bring back season testing this will help teams with dogs for cars or to make it intresting teams outside of the top 5 can test to make there cars better to try and catch up.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Reality
    Posts
    6,932
    Quote Originally Posted by Suzie View Post
    Maybe the problem lies not with the slower teams but with inexperienced drivers? Just a thought.
    What's Michael's excuse then? oh yeah, I remember - blunt weapons

    "Luna faccia schiaffo testa"

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    2,871
    I just say bring back (be it limited) in season testing. So may be the new teams will then have a bit more chance to try and get up to speed a bit more quickly? The testing ban is THE single most ridiculous rule F1 has brought upon itself in decades IMO.

    You try telling Premier League footballers, that from now on, to cut costs, they can't train with their clubs at all during the season. See what kind of reaction you get!

    The future is RED

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    848
    Quote Originally Posted by ek583 View Post
    I just say bring back (be it limited) in season testing. So may be the new teams will then have a bit more chance to try and get up to speed a bit more quickly? The testing ban is THE single most ridiculous rule F1 has brought upon itself in decades IMO.

    You try telling Premier League footballers, that from now on, to cut costs, they can't train with their clubs at all during the season. See what kind of reaction you get!
    totally aggree whoever said the testing ban should be in place needs shooting! maybe todd could reverse it and especially if they want to make f1 more greener shouldnt the lift the ban for teams to test new things

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by ferrari4life View Post
    woudnt that mean Alonso would not have been able to race in monaco since he was not able to qualify?
    Not sure if I remember this correctly, but wasnt it the case that IF a car didnt qualify for a race but would normally have been comfortably on the race pace - such as Alonso in Monaco - teams could get special dispensation to race?

    Have to agree that re-introducing this rule would be a good thing - but with limited testing it would make it harder for those teams affected to develop the car and get in the time bracket.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Apeldoorn, Hollan
    Posts
    1,529
    Quote Originally Posted by DonXabi View Post
    Not sure if I remember this correctly, but wasnt it the case that IF a car didnt qualify for a race but would normally have been comfortably on the race pace - such as Alonso in Monaco - teams could get special dispensation to race?
    true, if your car is fast like the Ferrari and you can't qualify because of problems then the FIA gave you approval to start.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Stowmarket. U.K
    Posts
    18,334
    107 per cent rule returns for 2011

    By Steven English Wednesday, June 23rd 2010, 13:22 GMT www.autosport.com


    The 107 per cent rule will return to Formula 1 qualifying sessions in 2011, the FIA World Motor Sport Council announced on Wednesday.

    The regulation was first introduced in 1996 to ensure that no cars would be able to start a race if they were deemed too much slower than the leaders. It was scrapped at the end of the 2002 season, with the introduction of single-lap qualifying for '03.

    But now that qualfying has resumed to free-running sessions and there are three new teams on the grid - with another likely for 2011 - the FIA has brought back the ruling.

    A statement released by the World Motor Sport Council said: "From 2011, any driver whose best qualifying lap exceeds 107 per cent of the fastest Q1 qualifying time will not be allowed to take part in the race.

    "Under exceptional circumstances, however, which may include setting a suitable laptime in a free practice session, the stewards may permit the car to start the race. Should there be more than one driver accepted in this manner, the grid order will be determined by the stewards."

    The World Council also moved to eradicate slow-moving cars during qualifying sessions ruining the laps of their rivals. From 2011, a maximum time will be introduced, within which all cars will have to circulate under - even on in and out-laps.

    "With immediate effect, any car being driven unnecessarily slowly, erratically, or which is deemed potentially dangerous to other drivers, will be reported to the stewards," the statement said. "This will apply whether any such car is being driven on the track, the pit entry or the pit lane.

    "In order to ensure cars are not driven unnecessarily slowly on in-laps during qualifying or reconnaissance laps when the pit exit is opened for the race, drivers must stay below the maximum time set by the FIA between the safety car line after the pit exit and safety car line before the pit entry.

    "The maximum time will be determined by the race director at each event prior to the first day of practice, but may be amended during the event if necessary."
    CAVALLINO RAMPANTE PER SEMPRE

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    848

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by scuderia rob View Post
    107 per cent rule returns for 2011

    By Steven English Wednesday, June 23rd 2010, 13:22 GMT www.autosport.com


    The 107 per cent rule will return to Formula 1 qualifying sessions in 2011, the FIA World Motor Sport Council announced on Wednesday.

    The regulation was first introduced in 1996 to ensure that no cars would be able to start a race if they were deemed too much slower than the leaders. It was scrapped at the end of the 2002 season, with the introduction of single-lap qualifying for '03.

    But now that qualfying has resumed to free-running sessions and there are three new teams on the grid - with another likely for 2011 - the FIA has brought back the ruling.

    A statement released by the World Motor Sport Council said: "From 2011, any driver whose best qualifying lap exceeds 107 per cent of the fastest Q1 qualifying time will not be allowed to take part in the race.

    "Under exceptional circumstances, however, which may include setting a suitable laptime in a free practice session, the stewards may permit the car to start the race. Should there be more than one driver accepted in this manner, the grid order will be determined by the stewards."

    The World Council also moved to eradicate slow-moving cars during qualifying sessions ruining the laps of their rivals. From 2011, a maximum time will be introduced, within which all cars will have to circulate under - even on in and out-laps.

    "With immediate effect, any car being driven unnecessarily slowly, erratically, or which is deemed potentially dangerous to other drivers, will be reported to the stewards," the statement said. "This will apply whether any such car is being driven on the track, the pit entry or the pit lane.

    "In order to ensure cars are not driven unnecessarily slowly on in-laps during qualifying or reconnaissance laps when the pit exit is opened for the race, drivers must stay below the maximum time set by the FIA between the safety car line after the pit exit and safety car line before the pit entry.

    "The maximum time will be determined by the race director at each event prior to the first day of practice, but may be amended during the event if necessary."
    OMG! they was listening hahaha

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by scuderia rob View Post
    107 per cent rule returns for 2011

    By Steven English Wednesday, June 23rd 2010, 13:22 GMT www.autosport.com


    The 107 per cent rule will return to Formula 1 qualifying sessions in 2011, the FIA World Motor Sport Council announced on Wednesday.

    The regulation was first introduced in 1996 to ensure that no cars would be able to start a race if they were deemed too much slower than the leaders. It was scrapped at the end of the 2002 season, with the introduction of single-lap qualifying for '03.

    But now that qualfying has resumed to free-running sessions and there are three new teams on the grid - with another likely for 2011 - the FIA has brought back the ruling.

    A statement released by the World Motor Sport Council said: "From 2011, any driver whose best qualifying lap exceeds 107 per cent of the fastest Q1 qualifying time will not be allowed to take part in the race.

    "Under exceptional circumstances, however, which may include setting a suitable laptime in a free practice session, the stewards may permit the car to start the race. Should there be more than one driver accepted in this manner, the grid order will be determined by the stewards."

    The World Council also moved to eradicate slow-moving cars during qualifying sessions ruining the laps of their rivals. From 2011, a maximum time will be introduced, within which all cars will have to circulate under - even on in and out-laps.

    "With immediate effect, any car being driven unnecessarily slowly, erratically, or which is deemed potentially dangerous to other drivers, will be reported to the stewards," the statement said. "This will apply whether any such car is being driven on the track, the pit entry or the pit lane.

    "In order to ensure cars are not driven unnecessarily slowly on in-laps during qualifying or reconnaissance laps when the pit exit is opened for the race, drivers must stay below the maximum time set by the FIA between the safety car line after the pit exit and safety car line before the pit entry.

    "The maximum time will be determined by the race director at each event prior to the first day of practice, but may be amended during the event if necessary."
    I think this maybe a bit of a double-edged sword - even though it will be great to see the slow cars gone and not interfering with the race leaders etc, I would be a little concerned over the fact that with such limited testing, how are those teams going to get above the 107%? HRT for example.......would there be a time when the team could view it as a waste of time trying and withdraw from F1? OK, you could argue, so what and you could argue that it would mean new teams would be of better quality from the start.............?

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Yarm
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by DonXabi View Post
    I think this maybe a bit of a double-edged sword - even though it will be great to see the slow cars gone and not interfering with the race leaders etc, I would be a little concerned over the fact that with such limited testing, how are those teams going to get above the 107%? HRT for example.......would there be a time when the team could view it as a waste of time trying and withdraw from F1? OK, you could argue, so what and you could argue that it would mean new teams would be of better quality from the start.............?
    I have a solution for this... if you fail to qualify for a race then you should be given one day of in season testing, this will allow the back markers to get up to speed a bit quicker.
    Lord of the Pigeons no more - oh, how the tables have turned!!!

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    India/New Zealand
    Posts
    533
    well...i guess some prayers with regard to the 107% rule has been answered (it will be back from the next season)....but I pity the new teams .........they will be caught in the vicious circle.....less time on track due to no testing and then if they fall outside of the 107% time zone they wont be able to race (reducing their time spent on track even further) and since they have less track time they get less sponsors (even established teams seem to be finding it difficult to get sponsors eg. Sauber) and due to less sponsor less funds and hence less development and so on and so forth.........and keep in mind we might be having one more new team next year who will play catch up with the new teams of this year......oh god.....help these poor ones

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •