107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: IanSmithISA (IP Logged)
Date: 23 June, 2019 06:52

Good morning,

I was bored and decide to read the rules and I have come to the conclusion that the 107% qualification rules are not as clear as I thought.

Are the rules?

107% of Q1

Or

107% of the fastest lap in Q1,Q2 or Q3?

Most web sites I have read say that it 107% of Q1, even the official F1 site
[www.formula1.com]
has Hartley failed to meet 107% Q1 requirement - races at stewards' discretion.

If you go to

[www.formula1.com]
Q1: Lasts for 18 minutes, at the end of which time the five slowest drivers are eliminated from qualifying and 15 advance to Q2. Any driver whose best Q1 lap time exceeds 107 percent of the fastest time set during that session fails to qualify and may only race at the stewards' discretion.

So what is a session?

From the same page we have
Saturday's qualifying session, designed to take about an hour, is split into three distinct segments - Q1, Q2 and Q3.
Each qualifying segment sees multiple drivers on track simultaneously, with each allowed to run as many laps as they want.


Note that the qualifying session is divided into segments and Saturday’s qualifying session, singular.

If you go into the sporting regs
file:///C:/Users/ISA-192-0-0-14/Downloads/formula_one_-_sporting_regulations_-_2019.pdf
33) QUALIFYING PRACTICE
33.1 The qualifying practice session will take place on the day before the race and will start no less
than two hours after the end of P3.
The session will be run as follows :
a) For the first eighteen minutes of the session (Q1) all cars will be permitted on the track
and at the end of this period the slowest five cars will be prohibited from taking any
further part in the session.
Lap times achieved by the fifteen remaining cars will then be deleted.
b) After a seven-minute break the session will resume for fifteen minutes (Q2) and the
fifteen remaining cars will be permitted on the track. At the end of this period the
slowest five cars will be prohibited from taking any further part in the session.
Lap times achieved by the ten remaining cars will then be deleted.
c) After an eight-minute break the session will resume for twelve minutes (Q3) and the ten
remaining cars will be permitted on the track.


Note the phrase the “session will resume” and "from taking any further part in the session."

Does anyone know of a clarification to these rules otherwise they seem to be quite clear to me, that the 107% rule applies to fastest lap in any of the segments, Q1/Q2/Q3 of the one and only qualifying session.

I appreciate that however you interpret the rules the stewards can grant permission to race anyway, but if a car is outside the 107% and takes part anyway without consent because everyone thought that the rules were 107% of Q1, what then?

Bye

Ian



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 23/06/2019 06:56 by IanSmithISA.

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: Andrew Hooper (IP Logged)
Date: 23 June, 2019 07:34

My understanding is that it is 107% of the Q1 time.

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: IanSmithISA (IP Logged)
Date: 23 June, 2019 08:51

Good morning,

I certainly agree with you in the sense that everywhere I have seen it discussed the answer is 107% of Q1.

However the 107% rule is given force by section 35 which says

Unless the track was declared wet by the race director, any driver eliminated during Q1 whose best qualifying lap exceeds 107% of the fastest time set during that session, or who fails to set a time, will not be allowed to take part in the race

As noted earlier the rules as defined in section 33 are quite clear that there is only one qualifying session and that is broken into 3 segments.

Given section 33 "that session" can not to my mind be interpreted as Q1 of the qualifying session, it has to mean all three segments of that qualifying session.

So it would seem that the 107% rule would need to be changed to specify "Segment Q1 of that session" rather than "that session" to give the rule the commonly held meaning?

I would also readily accept that the intention was to give the rule the commonly held meaning, but without a clarification it seems to me that the rules say 107% of the best time in Q1, Q2 or Q3.

Interestingly the Sporting Regs and the consumer web site linked to in the original post define the rules in a different way. The web site uses the word session to define a segment whereas the sporting regs never do.


Bye

Ian



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 23/06/2019 09:05 by IanSmithISA.

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: phatjack (IP Logged)
Date: 23 June, 2019 12:52

From the 2019 FIA F1 Sporting Regulations

35.1 Unless the track was declared wet by the race director, any driver eliminated during Q1 whose best qualifying lap exceeds 107% of the fastest time set during that session, or who fails to set a time, will not be allowed to take part in the race. Under exceptional circumstances however, which may include setting a suitable lap time in a free practice session, the stewards may permit the car to start the race.

Any driver accepted in this manner will be placed at the back of the starting grid after any other penalties have been applied, and behind any driver penalised under Article 23.3(b). Should there be more than one driver accepted in this manner they will be arranged on the grid in the order they were classified in P3.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 23/06/2019 13:09 by phatjack.

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: IanSmithISA (IP Logged)
Date: 23 June, 2019 13:43

Good afternoon.

I am not sure that you have picked up my point. :-)

You have quoted the rule but have avoided answering the key question, what do the words"that session" mean?

The consensus is that the "that session" means Q1.

The sporting regs in section 33 specifically and in multiple places define Q1, Q2 and Q3 as all being within one session.

Nowhere within the sporting regs are Q1, Q2 and Q3 defined as sessions they are always defined as being withing a single session.

Given this "that session" can only be interpreted to mean Q1, Q2 and Q3, so in the case of France Robert Kubica is about 5.5% of the fastest lap which was Lewis's lap in Q3.

I did reference the steward's right to allow a car to enter in my original post but that is a decision that has to be taken, it is not a default position.

Imagine the following;

1) Kubica qualifies at 105% of the best Q1 time and at 108% of the best Q3 time.

2) Under my interpretation he needs permission to race, the consensus is that he does not.

3) Kubica does not request permission to race.

4) Kubica scores some points.

5) The teams behind Kubica get the rule book out and appeal Kubica's position because he didn't have the stewards's permission to race.

6) He may be excluded because the definition of session is clearly Q1, Q2 and Q3, had he sought the steward's permission, and it was granted, the results would not be challenge-able.

It appears eminently possible to me that this is a rule that nobody thought would ever apply to them and so never really read it, just assumed that it says what they thought the rules was.

Bye

Ian



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 23/06/2019 13:54 by IanSmithISA.

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: phatjack (IP Logged)
Date: 23 June, 2019 15:44

Q1 session! I don't think that needs explanation. You're reading something into the rule that is not there and there are 3 qualifying session(s).



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 23/06/2019 15:46 by phatjack.

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: IanSmithISA (IP Logged)
Date: 23 June, 2019 18:43

Good afternon,

Quote:
phatjack
Q1 session! I don't think that needs explanation. You're reading something
into the rule that is not there and there are 3 qualifying session(s).

I can't see anything within the rules that creates any such thing as such thing as a "Q1 session" and a lot that says that such a thing does not exist.

The rules are very clear to me that there is only one qualifying session, if you think that there are 3 qualifying sessions can you show me where it says there are, considering section 33?

Section 33 describes qualification and has

For the first eighteen minutes of the session (Q1) all cars will be permitted on the track and at the end of this period the slowest five cars will be prohibited from taking any further part in the session.

See how it says For the first eighteen minutes of the session (Q1) which defines Q1 as part of the session.

It goes on to say slowest five cars will be prohibited from taking any further part in the session which is very clear that the session continues after Q1.

Long ago there was a one hour qualifying session, the best time at the end of the hour was the one that counted. The rules as written look like a cut and paste from that era.

Bye

Ian

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: phatjack (IP Logged)
Date: 23 June, 2019 19:30

I'll humour you, from the rule page

35.1 Unless the track was declared wet by the race director, any driver eliminated during Q1 whose best qualifying lap exceeds 107% of the fastest time set during that session.

Q1 is that session unless in Afrikana it means something else to the non-Afrikana speaking world.

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: AlanJones (IP Logged)
Date: 24 June, 2019 07:15

Well it would be logical to me that they fail to meet the 107% of the Q1 time, as the drivers who will have to face the issue will never be able to battle the pole time in Q3 as they are eliminated in Q1.




http://oi60.tinypic.com/24eyh6f.jpg

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: IanSmithISA (IP Logged)
Date: 24 June, 2019 16:42

Good afternoon,

It is probably time to give up on this as we are going around in circles. :-)

In the UK defining words within an agreement nearly always gives the defined word a meaning that overrides a normal use of that word and that is what rule 33 does in my mind to the word Session, it clearly makes Session mean Q1, Q2 and Q3.

You don't agree and unless the issue goes to the powers that be we will never know.:-)

Quote:
AlanJones
Well it would be logical to me that they fail to meet the 107% of the Q1 time, as the drivers who will have to face the issue will never be able to battle the pole time in Q3 as they are eliminated in Q1.

I see what you are saying but looking at most Q3s Merc/Ferrari/Red Bull will be a second or more faster in Q3 than Q1.

As the point of the 107% rule was to remove cars that are perceived to be so slow that they were a danger then it would make sense to use the fastest lap, not the Q1 fastest lap where the top 3 teams go for a Sunday afternoon cruise as that is all they need to do. :-)

Yes it would be unfair for the cars in Q3 to have more laps to set a fast time than the cars eliminated in Q1, but in practice Williams etc will go into Q1 knowing that they are in trouble so are more likely to use highest engine power setting available to them.

Whereas Merc/Ferrari/Red Bull are likely to use a lower power setting in Q1, keeping the higher settings for Q3 when they are needed.

Remember quite a few years ago when the rules said only the best 10 (or some other number) results counted and everyone forgot about that rule?

Bye

Ian

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: j-s (IP Logged)
Date: 24 June, 2019 17:45

Q1 is the session/segment, and 107% applies to that. And stewards have the discretion to allow a car that didn't make it. I think it's quite simple.

Can't use Q3 time as circumstances change.

107% has existed for a long time, right? Longer than the current qualifying format. Maybe that's why they don't fit together so comfortably.

I believe 107% rule was more about culling the laggards when the grid had 24+ cars. Who knows. I'm just guessing.

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: j-s (IP Logged)
Date: 24 June, 2019 17:55

Also, packaging the 107% as a tool for safety is just BS.

The real reason behind 107 rule is that having slower cars will typically affect the leading teams more than the others. Leading teams have more at stake; they spend and win more $ from F1. They are more important. A lapped car could have an effect on WDC and WCC standings. That's why you try to limit a horde of backmarkers clogging the track. They add little but can theoretically have a big impact on a season.

While there is a safety aspect to it, it isn't the reason for the rule. Look ad endurance racing. Protoypes, GT cars, whatever... all racing together and having fun.

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: phatjack (IP Logged)
Date: 24 June, 2019 19:34

Azerbaijan 2018 - Qualifying

[www.formula1.com]

Note at the bottom of the link

Q1 107% time - 1:49.715

Note - Hulkenberg and Grosjean penalised five grid places for unscheduled gearbox changes. Grosjean and Hartley failed to set a Q1 time within the 107% requirement - race at stewards' discretion.




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 24/06/2019 19:35 by phatjack.

Re: 107% Rule Seems Unclear.
Posted by: andy si (IP Logged)
Date: 01 July, 2019 21:13

Quote:
IanSmithISA
Good morning,
I was bored and decide to read the rules and I have come to the conclusion that the 107% qualification rules are not as clear as I thought.

Are the rules?

107% of Q1

Or

107% of the fastest lap in Q1, Q2 or Q3?

Bye

Ian

I find it funny how there are loopholes written all over F1 regulations.
If written would be applied to the letter... everyone qualifying outside of 107% during ''complete Q session'' would race at stewards discretion.

But since the complete F1 community accepts that session is meant as the Q1 part of it... everybody gets to race.

I wonder if that interpretation would stay the same if there were still 26 or more cars up for a race every weekend?

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net