Qualifying changes

The system, which will see drivers run simultaneously in two aggregated 20-minute sessions, on low fuel levels, with cars fuelled for the race after the qualifying hour and before parc ferme, will not seemingly address one of the fundamental issues in terms of improving the F1 show. Simply, that is that if you have the fastest driver starting from the front, and so on all the way down the grid, then how can anyone be surprised when there is no overtaking? The current system, where drivers qualify with race levels of fuel at least offers a degree of unpredictability.

McLaren boss Ron Dennis disagreed, however. "The discussion and debate is that everybody had now mastered the strategy game and everybody was starting the race with similar levels of fuel," he said. "The grid outcome is partially artificial due to the weight differential and while I don't think that the racing is dramatically improved by the regulations, it's been to the significant detriment of qualifying. One of the nicer points of changing it from Silverstone on, is that it will give us the opportunity to make changes for next year."

McLaren's team manager, Dave Ryan, has been involved in the evolution process of the qualifying suggestions but Dennis denied that this was in any way to McLaren's advantage.

"When the document was first put out that suggested these changes, Dave wrote a very good paper which was part of our response to Bernie," he explained. "From his work, it was suggested - and agreed - that Dave should contribute to the process. He's not writing regulations, he's giving Charlie (Whiting) the benefit of having given it some thought."

David Coulthard is very much in favour of a return to low-fuel qualifying. "It's very difficult to get an agreement between so many parties but having the opportunity to qualify on low fuel and letting the drivers get out there and build on their first qualifying lap is going to be more exciting for us and for the spectators," he said.

The new proposal is not yet set in stone, however, even if most expect it to be implemented.

"What was agreed yesterday were the principles," Dennis explained. "Everybody was mindful of the fact that when we make a change it isn't thought through and we have to provide for additional elements of a regulation to cover the 'what ifs'.

"What if your car stops in the first session - if it's the back end of Spa or the last corner before the pits, for example. Where you are on the circuit will dramatically influence whether you can get out in the second session. So we all agreed that if you stopped anywhere in the first session, irrespective of where, you are not in the second session and that will almost certainly push you to the back of the grid.

"Those are the kind of things we wanted to think through and provide for, but the concept of two sessions, 20 minutes, six laps maximum with a timed gap of 20 minutes was unanimously supported by the teams. There are people making sacrifices to their competitiveness so the show has definitely been put first."

Others have also questioned the 20-minute gap in the middle and expressed concerns that F1 might be about to get it wrong again. Part of the problem with the original qualifying was that nobody ventured out in the first 20 minutes until the track rubbered in, producing dead TV time. The scheduled interval in the new system will be filled with advertising breaks, quick interviews and pundit analysis.

Part of the reason for the current single-lap qualifying system was to guarantee more TV coverage for the smaller teams and Minardi boss Paul Stoddart, predictably, was against the new proposal even though he has reluctantly agreed to it.

"It's not a done deal," he said. "We're supposed to be thinking about what it is we might get wrong and with a bit of luck we'll chuck the whole lot out. The biggest losers out of this will be Jordan and Minardi..."