Chatters Veteran



Join Date: Jul 2006 Radelaide, South Australia Posts: 5,387

The 107% rule - analysis



I thought I'd do a little calculating, and see who would be eliminated from the GPs so far if this rule were in place now. Don't know why...



GP Q1 TIME 107% TIME DRIVERS ELIMINATED (TIME) Bahrain 1:54.612 2:02.635 SEN (2:03:204) CHA (2:04.904) Australia 1:24.774 1:30.708 N/A Malaysia 1:46.283 1:53.723 CHA (1:56.299) SEN (1:57.269) DIG (1:59.997) China 1:35.641 1:42.336 N/A Spain 1:21.412 1:27.111 SEN (1:27.122) Monaco 1:14.757 1:19.990 N/A Turkey 1:27.067 1:33.162 N/A Canada 1:15.889 1:21.201 CHA (1:27.757)

Interesting. Excluding Malaysia, which featured variable weather, there were only 4 occasions where a driver/s were slower then 107% of the fastest Q1 time. Excluding Chandhok's problem in Canada, that leaves only 3.



Obviously (if HRT continue next year), the only logical prediction is that HRT, like Virgin and Lotus, will close the gap slightly more.



So I ask the question: Will this rule make any real difference? And if not, why is it being brought back? So, the FIA has re-introduced the 107% rule for 2011, meaning any cars outside the 107% bracket of the fastest Q1 time will not be allowed to compete.I thought I'd do a little calculating, and see who would be eliminated from the GPs so far if this rule were in place now. Don't know why...Interesting. Excluding Malaysia, which featured variable weather, there were only 4 occasions where a driver/s were slower then 107% of the fastest Q1 time. Excluding Chandhok's problem in Canada, that leaves only 3.Obviously (if HRT continue next year), the only logical prediction is that HRT, like Virgin and Lotus, will close the gap slightly more.So I ask the question: Will this rule make any real difference? And if not, why is it being brought back?