Jeff
--David
> In today's formula one racing the slowest car(s) to qualify
> must be within 107% of the leaders time or they cannot race. There's
> more to the idea of a percentage ranking, but that's why it's
> specifically 107.
Ricardo Rosset, 1998 Japanese GP?
Jason Pants
"Don't go throwin' no coupons on my grave"
> In today's formula one racing the slowest car(s) to qualify
> must be within 107% of the leaders time or they cannot race. There's
> more to the idea of a percentage ranking, but that's why it's
> specifically 107.
In modern F1 you must qualify within 107% of the pole sitter to qualify
forthe grid...
That's basically the significance, instead of trying to beat the leaders,
just stay within reach of them.
+Cinquo
This is proof that 107% is bad??????? Utter nonsense. Jacque
and BAR were and would be never anywhere near 107%. If they
sacrificed race performance for grid position it was a decision that
had _absolutely nothing_ to do with 107% and probably everything to do
with the fact that it is ridiculously hard to pass in F1.
I will grant you that this was an argument an ice skater
might use :-).
The fact is that Formula 1 racing for a long time has
been a "race" between 2 or 3 top teams, and the others don't stand
much of a chance. Any team that has to even worry about qualifying
because of 107% is simply irrelevant to the "racing". The rule just
doesn't matter, except that it keeps the big boys from having to lap a
backmarker 5 times or more. Might make them work for a living :-).
The 107% rule just gives the Minardi's and Prosts a kick in the arse if they
are struggling.They don't want cars that are 20+% slower on the track
without eh fast cars.
Not only that, but since the slower cars are weeded out, a lot of the fun
is gone. There's no using the rolling-roadblock of traffic to your
advantage.
Instead we get boring-to-watch races where nothing really happens.
