Semi-confirmed:Points system to be scrapped -Medals to be introduced in time for 2009

[Giuseppe F1]

I hate, hate, hate this idea!

All the websites and magazines and forums will now be full of threads of the actual (medal) orders, and then what WOULD have been the situation had the points system remained unchanged - "Oh Massa is 1st but he would have been 4th etc, etc."

From Bernies latest quotes below, it seems this has now all but been confirmed by the FIA and teams and just needs to be officially confirmed at the FIAs December meeting -

So next year we have the but-ugliest looking F1 cars ever and tacky instead of points....will the drivers still get trophys in lieu of medals on the podium?

==============================








http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/081118091013.shtml

Points system to be scrapped
Medal system for the 2009 season
18/11/08 09:10

Bernie Ecclestone is confident his plan to replace the current points system with Olympic Games-style 'medals' will be introduced in time for the 2009 season opener.

The F1 Chief Executive revealed recently he wants the drivers on the podium to be presented gold, silver and bronze medals, rather than awarded ten, eight and six points respectively.

The change, he argues, will rid the sport of the situation of the 2008 series finale in Brazil, where Lewis Hamilton was able to finish just fifth and still be crowned world champion.

If Ecclestone's new system had been in place, the McLaren driver and Felipe Massa would have been tied on five gold medals apiece, setting up a dash to be first to the chequered flag and the title.

It is believed that points will still be awarded to the teams for the constructors' championship on the basis of the current system.

Drivers finishing races 'out of the medals', meanwhile, will not score points, but their finishing positions over the season will determine their championship ranking.


Ecclestone, 78, told The Times: "The FIA and all the teams are behind it and it will be done."

He insists that the system will ensure that the emphasis of the front-running drivers' approach to races will be on winning, rather than scoring good points.

"The whole point will be, when they get to Melbourne for the first race, the guys will want to leave there with a gold medal. They (will not) want to leave with ten, eight or six points," Ecclestone said.

The matter has been discussed by FIA President Max Mosley, but the details are yet to be worked out.

Ecclestone's system will require ratification by the World Motor Sport Council at its December meeting.

Source: GMM
© CAPSIS International

[Giuseppe F1]

Bernie says that this is to put emphasis on the top guys to win rather than settle for points.

Problem is, not everyone is a "top guy" or in a podium winning car so what is the motivation for drivers in the now very competitive F1 midfield?

To race for 'classification' rather than 'points' - just seems so unneccasary!

OK, Lewis won the title by only crossing the line in 5th but.....SO WHAT?!!!!!!!

This is a title which runs over a WHOLE SEASON and it was just a point that he finished 5th in that race, he still won others which put him in that position for the title in the first place.

Massa finished races lower than 1st and so if he won the title in Brazil by finished 1st, it just would have been the chance that the 1st occured at the final race to make it all the more dramatic.

A championship is one over a WHOLE SEASON and not a SINGLE RACE.

An F1 season is not a 'RACE OF CHAMPIONS' style shoot-out and never will be




LEAVE THINGS ALONE!!!

[Knock-on]

Perhaps they will have 8 medals per race?

Gold
Silver
Bronze
Steel
Aluminium
Cast Iron
Plastic
Paper Mache

[Ranger]

Idiocy. His senility has caught up to him.

If a championship being decided on the last lap is not good enough, then nothing will be.

He can change the points system if he must. Medals will add nothing. Only take away the tradition of the sport. But that's the way it seems to be these days.

[ArrowsFA1]

Bernie says that this is to put emphasis on the top guys to win rather than settle for points.
I can understand that. It's the Olympic argument isn't it. Hundreds, thousands, of athletes aim to win a gold medal but they and we know very few will reach that goal, but that doesn't stop them from trying.

Problem is, not everyone is a "top guy" or in a podium winning car so what is the motivation for drivers in the now very competitive F1 midfield?
The motivation is to improve and get into the top three.

I haven't decided what I think about this. It's still effectively a points system after all, but one which only rewards the top three.

[Ranger]

The 10-6-4-3-2-1 points scheme never seemed to promote cruising for points. I don't see why that can't just be reverted to instead of this medals rubbish.

[ShiftingGears]

How tacky. Oh how I yearn for him to go away.

[ChrisS]

So will a driver with 1 gold and no other medals finish the season higher that a driver with no golds but 10 silvers?

If this system was in place in 08 would DC with one 3rd finish higher than Webber?

[I am evil Homer]

God what a horrific idea...so you get a medal and a trophy in one ceremony?!?

[Knock-on]

So will a driver with 1 gold and no other medals finish the season higher that a driver with no golds but 10 silvers?

If this system was in place in 08 would DC with one 3rd finish higher than Webber?

Apparently :rolleyes:

[goodf1fun]

Bernie says that this is to put emphasis on the top guys to win rather than settle for points.

Problem is, not everyone is a "top guy" or in a podium winning car so what is the motivation for drivers in the now very competitive F1 midfield?

To race for 'classification' rather than 'points' - just seems so unneccasary!

OK, Lewis won the title by only crossing the line in 5th but.....SO WHAT?!!!!!!!

This is a title which runs over a WHOLE SEASON and it was just a point that he finished 5th in that race, he still won others which put him in that position for the title in the first place.

Massa finished races lower than 1st and so if he won the title in Brazil by finished 1st, it just would have been the chance that the 1st occured at the final race to make it all the more dramatic.

A championship is one over a WHOLE SEASON and not a SINGLE RACE.

An F1 season is not a 'RACE OF CHAMPIONS' style shoot-out and never will be




LEAVE THINGS ALONE!!!



calm down nothing is for sure

[BDunnell]

A horrible idea. I thought it was an April Fool, and am dead against it.

[ArrowsFA1]

I was watching a video about Damon Hill's championship season recently and during his commentary Murray Walker mentioned how rare it was that a WDC went down to the final race of the year.

It may have been rare then, but it has become increasingly common recently, and much of that is down to the points system, particulary the narrower points gap between 1st & 2nd which was introduced at the start of the 2003 season (IIRC). Of course there are those who argue that that change was purely aimed at negating MS's advantage, but it has undoubtedly close up the WDC.

Perhaps it has done that to the extent of encouraging consistent points finishes, not wins. A win, comparatively, is not as valued as it was in terms of the points race.

Bernie's idea attempts to address that, and place the emphasis on winning races being the deciding factor. I'm not sure that's wrong as such, but perhaps it is too radical an idea.

[ioan]

Another move to make F1 more of a show and less of a motorsport!
More show => more tv audience => more money for the mop head greedy little gnome.
Why is that I'm not at all surprised?

Tell you what, F1 is going to die if Bernie doesn't leave. Times are changing, people's view of thing are changing too, but Bernie is way to old and slowed by his senility and greed to see all this happening.

This crisis we are going through now is gonna change some things dramatically (let's hope it will be in the right direction).

Max has been taking some steps in the right direction by trying to paint a greener image of F1 and this might help, but not as long as the midget is pulling in the wrong direction.

[CNR]

did they not change to points with 8 points after michael won the title so early in the year. why not just go back to 10 6 4

[ioan]

why not just go back to 10 6 4

That would make to much logic! In today's world you need to "change" no matter if it's good or not cause some will still buy it because it's "new"!

[ArrowsFA1]

why not just go back to 10 6 4
Perhaps because WDC's could again be won "too soon". There no doubt that a last race title decider generates more interest than if the title is settled with a number of races to go, but awarding medals wouldn't necessarily solve that particular issue.

The 10-6-4-3-2-1 points scheme never seemed to promote cruising for points. I don't see why that can't just be reverted to instead of this medals rubbish.

I never understood why it had to be changed.

Oh, hold on....it was to stop Ferrari running away with the title.

And to think some people really believe that the FIA stands for Ferrari International Assistance.

[woody2goody]

This is a stupid idea. One of the more interesting things for me is the points battle.

This will just eliminate 17 drivers from caring in every race.

It's not A1 GP. However at least they get points as well as medals.

[Robinho]

so 17 race season, Hamilton wins the first 9 races, with Massa second in each, then Massa wins the remaining 8 and Hamilton fails to finish at all, but takes the title 9 golds to 8, although in points Massa would be streets ahead (152 - 90)? also the title would be dead at 9 wins, regardless of the races left, even if someone could theoretically take more points

very simplistic, but stranger things have happened (last lap in Brazil anyone)

[truefan72]

Idiocy. His senility has caught up to him.

If a championship being decided on the last lap is not good enough, then nothing will be.

He can change the points system if he must. Medals will add nothing. Only take away the tradition of the sport. But that's the way it seems to be these days.


:up:

I am shedding tears for what is becoming of my favorite sport
this downturn has been dramatic and swift.

And the saddest part of it all is that field of drivers is the strongest in a long time top to bottom. All these guys, Hamilton, Alonso, Massa, Kimi, Webber, Kubica, Vettel, Glock, Trulli and even heidfeld and Kovy, will have to endure a fading legacy of the sport and compete in an era where nonsensical rules and changes diminish their place in the history of the sport.

Hamilton may be the last champion in an era of great cars and traditional F1 rules.

Let's be clear about MM and Bernie’s intentions.

Bernie doesn't care a damn bit about the legacy, thee sport or the racing. He cares about money and how to maximize his profits. It matters not that he throw out tradition or common sense. to be replaced by sheer madness.

MM is motivated by power, the lust for it, the thrill of being the emperor along with resistance to any challenge of his decrees, using his position to exact revenge on long held perceived slights and clinging on to power even when his presence is more of a burden to the sport.

The only antidote for this madness may be the current economic crisis that will smack a dose of reality into both of them and the eventual departure of all the teams to form their own sane racing league.

I'll watch that and they can keep their F1 name

[ArrowsFA1]

I never understood why it had to be changed.

Oh, hold on....it was to stop Ferrari running away with the title.
If that was the aim, given that there were suggestions that audiences were declining as a result of one team dominating over a number of years was that such a bad thing? 2003 saw a much closer title battle which resulted in the same winner, but 2004 was perhaps the most dominant Ferrari year of the MS era so ultimately changing the points system made little difference.

The best team/driver combination will always rise to the top whether they're given points or medals.

[Whyzars]

It may have been rare then, but it has become increasingly common recently, and much of that is down to the points system, particulary the narrower points gap between 1st & 2nd which was introduced at the start of the 2003 season (IIRC). Of course there are those who argue that that change was purely aimed at negating MS's advantage, but it has undoubtedly close up the WDC.



There was no doubt in my mind, at the time, that it was done to neuter MS. When they bought the change in I think it was Mark Webber who said something like "You finished 8th - Big Deal". :)




Perhaps it has done that to the extent of encouraging consistent points finishes, not wins. A win, comparatively, is not as valued as it was in terms of the points race.

Bernie's idea attempts to address that, and place the emphasis on winning races being the deciding factor. I'm not sure that's wrong as such, but perhaps it is too radical an idea.


Bernie could be reading this forum and just likes messing with our minds. :eek:


I think there may be a link between the current points system and the perception that there is no passing in F1 as it doesn't differentiate the positions enough.

The points could start at 100 for the winner and progressively award reduced points down to every car that finishes on the same lap as the winner. Improving position must be the primary objective of every driver on the track right up to the last lap and one way to influence the racing attitude is to make each improvement in position worthy of taking a risk or changing race tactics. This scoring approach would also heavily penalise DNF's.

Having medals is stoopid but if they insist on it then the medals should be about 40cms in diameter and made of chocolate. There is a definite need for sweet confectionery in F1 and maybe Nestle could sponsor a team.

[BeansBeansBeans]

I think people are being a touch over-dramatic.

If you forget the medals for a second, it's basically just a countback system, which I think is the right thing for F1.

[Knock-on]

Worth bearing in mind that this is from F1 live and just conjecture.

[Knock-on]

would also heavily penalise DNF's.

Having medals is stoopid but if they insist on it then the medals should be about 40cms in diameter and made of chocolate. There is a definite need for sweet confectionery in F1 and maybe Nestle could sponsor a team.

Naw, they will be Iron Crosses if Mosely has his way :devil:

BTW

I've just gone back to year 2000 and the only change to the results was last year.

Yet again, this is a knee jerk policy to address something that isn't even a problem.

If the medal system was in use last year, it would reward the best car, not driver and we would also see a lot more tactical 1 - 2 driving. With 2 teams at a similar performance level, it would be almost impossible to operate a Mclaren type policy of letting the drivers sort it out themselves.

[woody2goody]

I don't want the situation with someone winning 8 races, getting 10 second places and losing the title to someone who won 9 races and DNF'd 9 times.

Points would have been 160-90 and the guy with 90 would win the title. Bizarre. I think it's dumbing down for the News of the World reading public of Great Britain lol. After all it's too much for a lot of eejits to add points together.

Grrr...

[BeansBeansBeans]

I don't want the situation with someone winning 8 races, getting 10 second places and losing the title to someone who won 9 races and DNF'd 9 times.

What would be wrong with that? To the victor the spoils I say.

[Knock-on]

What would be wrong with that? To the victor the spoils I say.

Fair point I suppose.

However, the victor would not be the best performing driver but merely the driver that the team chooses at the beginning of the season.

Massa wouldn't have been in with a shout this year if the medals table was in operation.

For a start, Ferrari would have preferred the reigning WDC, Kimi. Even if they gave it 4 races to see how it shakes out then it would have been 2 wins to Kimi and 1 to Massa. When you can have the season tied up after the 10th race, you can't afford to let drivers race until they haven't got a chance of winning. You have to do it at the start.

We would have had FA as WDC last year and Kimi as champ this year instead of what have got.

[gloomyDAY]

Another gimmick? What a laugh!

[TMorel]

oooh decisions decisions.
Does a driver go for the gold and risk getting a post race 25second penalty if the gods aren't happy with him - and don't forget, those post race penalties would be a lot harsher under these rules!

[N. Jones]

QUOTE: "The change, he argues, will rid the sport of the situation of the 2008 series finale in Brazil, where Lewis Hamilton was able to finish just fifth and still be crowned world champion."

What situation, the exciting finish to the season? This is idiotic and if implemented would leave me as a former fan.

[Bagwan]

Rather than change F1 to an Olympic system of scoring medals , I propose we change the Olympics to an F1 system of scoring points .

I think that's what Bernie must have meant .

In fact every sport should adopt the same system as F1 . Then Bernie could put his diminutive Napoleonic stamp on the entire world of sport .

That must have been what he meant , because if he meant what everyone is saying he meant , then , well , that's just stupid .
The fan will not put up with "just stupid" .

[Nikki Katz]

Maybe there have been worse suggestions in the past but I'm struggling to think of one. I really really hope that this doesn't happen, it makes cars other than championship contenders pointless. Surely teams would quickly pull out, but according to Bernie the teams are all for it.

[ioan]

With 2 teams at a similar performance level, it would be almost impossible to operate a Mclaren type policy of letting the drivers sort it out themselves.

You mean Ferrari system where the drivers sort it out on track, as far as I remember McLaren looked to have only one driver last season. :p :

[ioan]

Rather than change F1 to an Olympic system of scoring medals , I propose we change the Olympics to an F1 system of scoring points .

I think that's what Bernie must have meant .

In fact every sport should adopt the same system as F1 . Then Bernie could put his diminutive Napoleonic stamp on the entire world of sport .

That must have been what he meant , because if he meant what everyone is saying he meant , then , well , that's just stupid .
The fan will not put up with "just stupid" .

Nah, what do fans know that greedy mop head doesn't know better?! :mad:

[ioan]

Surely teams would quickly pull out, but according to Bernie the teams are all for it.

Yeah, the same way that teams are all for a standard engine built by Lada!

[Areez2006]

Maybe there have been worse suggestions in the past but I'm struggling to think of one. I really really hope that this doesn't happen, it makes cars other than championship contenders pointless. Surely teams would quickly pull out, but according to Bernie the teams are all for it.

standard engines :eek:

[vintage]

Someone needs to muzzle him. He comes up with some of the stupidest ideas. I am wondering what the initial idea is trying to accomplish - sort of like how a standard motor accomplished getting the teams to agree to supply motors at a bargain price to other teams.

[Nikki Katz]

I guess that this does still have to be agreed by the FIA, but would Max actually stand up against such a suggestion from Bernie? After all, Max suggested drivers swapping cars every race a few years ago.

[Easy Drifter]

Remember the FIA has said they listen to the fans.
On this and other forums I read the vast majority are against the idea.
Therefore the FIA paying attention to what the fans want will go ahead and implement it! :vader:

If that was the aim, given that there were suggestions that audiences were declining as a result of one team dominating over a number of years was that such a bad thing?

Absolutely it was a bad thing.

I'm surprised somebody with your supposed level of knowledge could even suggest such a bxstxrdisation of the competitive ethos as being anything other than abhorrent.

F1 is about winning, it is not a non-competitive school sports day at Greenpeace Liberal College for the Chronically Wet.

[BDunnell]

Absolutely it was a bad thing.

I'm surprised somebody with your supposed level of knowledge could even suggest such a bxstxrdisation of the competitive ethos as being anything other than abhorrent.

F1 is about winning, it is not a non-competitive school sports day at Greenpeace Liberal College for the Chronically Wet.

I agree with your sentiments, for F1 should be a true meritocracy in which it is up to those who fall behind to do better in order to increase the level of competition, but is there a need to style your view in quite such a Daily Mail fashion?

but is there a need to style your view in quite such a Daily Mail fashion?

I apologise to those amongst us with a more hippy-vibe.

What I should have said is this...

"F1 is about winning, it is not a love-in for whacked out long-haired karma-obsessed layabouts who are repressed by 'the man'"

[CNR]

kill the sport before his ex wife ends up with it.

but would this just be the one that win the more times in the year wins WDC


take this year MASSA 6 WINS LEWIS 5 WINS

MASSA world drivers champion how many of you would be happy about that

[BDunnell]

I apologise to those amongst us with a more hippy-vibe.

What I should have said is this...

"F1 is about winning, it is not a love-in for whacked out long-haired karma-obsessed layabouts who are repressed by 'the man'"

That's more like it. Though I am jealous of those who are able to have long hair.

[DazzlaF1]

I've never seen such a ridiculous and daft idea ever, if Max agrees to this the watch the beginning of the total demise of the sport, utter stupidity.

Bernie, just do us all a big favour and get lost NOW!!!

[D28]

The F1 points system has changed 5 times since 1950, but the basic principle has remained fairly constant; a win is worth 8-10 points, with 2nd worth 60-80% of that value. As ArrowsFA1 mentioned the biggest change occurred in 2003 when 2nd place was revalued from 60% to 80% of 1st spot. I feel that 9, 6 points for 1st and 2nd is about correct, a 66% differential, the system in place from 1961-90. The 1-10 scoring system is easy to understand, and makes historical comparisons relatively feasible, as it is simple to convert different eras to the same values. It also has the benefit of tradition, a concept that leaves Bernie cold, but which others cling to blindly. I could go along with changes like awarding points for pole and fastest lap, both of these were used in the past.

[maximilian]

Let's not forget that the ONLY reason Massa had 6 wins and Hamilton 5 was because Hamilton got that unjustified penalty, else the whole heartbeat finale would have never really happened! (and by the way, my statement much earlier in the season that McLaren would surely get a lot more questionable penalties than Ferrari did come true, as I expected).

That said... I chime in that the medals idea the STUPIDEST thing I have heard in a long time.

We have already lost so much... classic race tracks, classic NATIONS on the race calendar (what?? possibly no FRANCE, no UK? No Canada? No USA? No San Marino? Soon no Australia?), classic racing teams... now, even the classic system of determining the World Driving Champion? The irony is that the manufacturers would still be getting points...

Formula 1 is about winning? Maybe so, but... really only to the teams and drivers who CAN win... 5 or 6 guys, or in a more boring season, maybe 4. To me, one of the great joys is to see the underdogs celebrating a points finish, the little reward that keeps them going against often impossible odds of budget and technology where they may DREAM of winning, but... let's face it... it ain't gonna happen - with this past season being a welcome exception, but under "normal" circumstances, it just doesn't happen for 15 out of 20 car/driver combinations.

[Valve Bounce]

I can understand that. It's the Olympic argument isn't it. Hundreds, thousands, of athletes aim to win a gold medal but they and we know very few will reach that goal, but that doesn't stop them from trying.

The motivation is to improve and get into the top three.

I haven't decided what I think about this. It's still effectively a points system after all, but one which only rewards the top three.

One seems to forget that the Olympics only comes around every four years, and many competitors only have one event to aim for Olympic Gold. In fact, sailors can only compete in the one event. I suppose this might also hold true for pole vaulters. For many athletes, a chance to win an Olympic medal only comes around once in a lifetime.

Grand Prix races are run on average once every two weeks during the season (with few exceptions to facilitate travel arrangements and other commitments).

Having said all this, does this mean that the WDC will be decided on a 3, 2, 1 basis with a winner getting 3 points, second 2 and third 1 point? That means there is no merit in coming between fourth and eighth. Poor bunsen - he may as well retire now. He ain't going to get another point for like ever.

[tinchote]

Even though for the last 10 years F1 has surprised me with more and more rule stupidity, this is beyond belief :s

[Tazio]

Let's see! Rectify a stupid point scoring change in 2003,
by making even a stupider one in 2009!
Yea' that's it! :confused:

[Areez2006]

The point of medals is to emphasize winning right? Ok fine, but when you hear about drivers like Kimi coming from 17th to win in Japan (2005)...I don't understand the point. Let's look at 2008, for instance: (1) Massa didn't overtake at the start in Hungary to try and win? (2) Lewis didn't try his hardest despite a three stop strategy in Turkey? (3) Kimi didn't try and defend P1 at SPA? A lot of times this year there was a team that just ran away with the Grand Prix anyway. The last time Lewis tried to win in Brazil...well, everyone knows how that story ended. I guess people like Robert Kubica shouldn't have deserved the title because of his consistent races (and despite his car not being as competitive as the McLaren or Ferrari). It's okay guys, Michael Schumacher retired two seasons ago and there are several talented drivers now. No more need for silly gimmicks to make the racing closer ;)

[Easy Drifter]

The 'Demented Midget' said all the teams were in favour of this idea.
Has anybody heard a word about it from any team or any driver? I have seen nothing.
I expect they are afraid to cross Bernie. :vader:

[Tazio]

The 'Demented Midget' said all the teams were in favour of this idea.
Has anybody heard a word about it from any team or any driver? I have seen nothing.
I expect they are afraid to cross Bernie. :vader:

“Everybody is happy with the idea, they are all very supportive,” the 78-year-old Briton responded when asked whether the teams supported his suggestion.

“I’m absolutely 100 percent sure it’s the right way to go, it’ll get them (the drivers) overtaking,” he added.

The idea has yet to be presented to the governing International Automobile Federation (FIA)'s world motor sport council however, with the next meeting scheduled for Monaco on Dec. 12.

The Formula One Teams Association (FOTA), representing all 10 teams, is also expected to discuss the plan at their next gathering.
http://www.dawn.com/2008/11/19/spt16.htm
Bernie is talking out of his @$$ once again :down:
I've read nothing in the form of support from anyone else in F1

[CNR]

http://media.monstersandcritics.com/galleries/1114398/0128712950085.jpg
will they cut the trophy

http://www.geekologie.com/2007/05/23/beinjing-olympic-medals-2.jpg

weekend at Bernie's 3

lewis the winner of the first medal

[ArrowsFA1]

F1 is about winning, it is not a love-in for whacked out long-haired karma-obsessed layabouts who are repressed by 'the man'
So what does it matter whether you get 10 points, 9 points or a gold medal if it's all about winning?

So what does it matter whether you get 10 points, 9 points or a gold medal if it's all about winning?

That's the whole point...2 extra points for actually winning is totally inadequate.

I have nothing against a points system or a medal system that rewards winners. The 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 system does not do this. It rewards consistency and a 'safety first' attitude, which is not the point of F1.

If people want rewards for consistency, they have a famous event in the Sarthe region of France every June that caters for their needs.

The current system does not make winning the be-all-and-end-all that it should be in F1.

Look at the Brazilian GP for all the evidence you need.

Whilst I've yet to determine if the proposed medal system is the answer, anything that makes more of actually fulfilling the purpose of Formula One Grand Prix's than is currently the case is to be welcome.

[Valve Bounce]

So what does it matter whether you get 10 points, 9 points or a gold medal if it's all about winning?

Of course there is a hole in the plot - it is so obvious that Bernie hasn't thought about it.

Just think back to one of those years where SchM and Ferrari dominated the races. If that were to happen again, one driver would be so far ahead of all others by half season that the championship would virtually be decided and interest in F1's championship would cease.

The chances of the championship still being alive by year's end would be unlikely and Bernie would lose heaps as TV ratings fall.

[Mark]

Great. Lets just throw half a centuries worth of Formula 1 history in the bin and have something completely different on a whim.

[ArrowsFA1]

Here's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_World_Championship_pointscorin g_systems) a list of all 24 variations of F1 points scoring systems over the years :)

[AndyRAC]

Is this for F1 only, or will it affect other FIA Championships?

[Mark]

Just F1 for the moment, but remember that when the 10-8-6-4-5-3-2-1 was introduced it then rallying was also changed to that system. So I wouldn't be too surprised to see WRC adopting it, or rather, having it forced upon them!

I'd presume that GP2 would go the same way too.

[CNR]

http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/168310/f1-considers-medal-system


Ecclestone believes that the medal system will reward drivers for going for a win rather than settling for the minor places. “The need for it was highlighted at the Brazilian Grand Prix at the end of this season when Hamilton only had to finish in the top five to win the title, not win. So this will encourage overtaking,” he said.


i think you will see a few crashes as car try to get in to the to 3

[Mark]

His idea is to get drivers going for the win rather than minor placings, but for the majority of teams minor placings is all they have! If a tail end team was to finish 8th and score a world championship point then that is a big deal.. but if it doesn't matter if they finish 4th or 14th, why should they bother?

[ArrowsFA1]

His idea is to get drivers going for the win rather than minor placings, but for the majority of teams minor placings is all they have! If a tail end team was to finish 8th and score a world championship point then that is a big deal.. but if it doesn't matter if they finish 4th or 14th, why should they bother?
I thought I'd read that the WCC would retain the current points system.

[F1boat]

If this happens, I quit. It is the worst idea ever. The Chase in NASCAR is a better idea. I despise Bernard.

[Nikki Katz]

Is there anything we can actually do about this? Is there any way of actually contacting the FIA? They're supposed to listen aren't they? I just think that if 2009 is a season like 2007 and the majority of the podiums go to just 2 teams (hardly unimaginable) then the amount of teams that would pull out at the end of the season could effectively end the sport.

[DazzlaF1]

“Everybody is happy with the idea, they are all very supportive,” the 78-year-old Briton responded when asked whether the teams supported his suggestion.

“I’m absolutely 100 percent sure it’s the right way to go, it’ll get them (the drivers) overtaking,” he added.

The idea has yet to be presented to the governing International Automobile Federation (FIA)'s world motor sport council however, with the next meeting scheduled for Monaco on Dec. 12.

The Formula One Teams Association (FOTA), representing all 10 teams, is also expected to discuss the plan at their next gathering.
http://www.dawn.com/2008/11/19/spt16.htm
Bernie is talking out of his @$$ once again :down:
I've read nothing in the form of support from anyone else in F1

I've heard nowt about the teams accepting this idea, because i for one would imagine that the likes of Toro Rosso, Williams and Force India would be dead against this concept, yes Bernie wants to reward race winners more but isnt F1 also all about wanting to see the underdogs do well. Surely they have to have reward for punching above their weight, hence why most of us would have been delighted to see Minardi get a top 6 finish when they did.

[Blancvino]

did they not change to points with 8 points after michael won the title so early in the year. why not just go back to 10 6 4

I'm for this system:
---------------------------
1 - 20
2 - 17
3 - 15

4 - 10
5 - 8
6 - 6
7 - 4
8 - 3
9 - 2
10 -1

Reward the podium but pay points to 10th place.

[racer69]

His idea is to get drivers going for the win rather than minor placings, but for the majority of teams minor placings is all they have! If a tail end team was to finish 8th and score a world championship point then that is a big deal.. but if it doesn't matter if they finish 4th or 14th, why should they bother?

4th or 14th would matter for the minor teams, as the constructors points would still be allocated in points of 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1

I reckon its a great idea, hopefully it will get up

[Cozzie]

I like:
25 win
20 2nd
15 3rd
12 4th
10 5th
8 6th
6 7th
4 8th
2 9th
1 10th

1 POLE
1 FASTEST LAP

[Knock-on]

OK, what are the facts.

Fact 1. Bernie has a stupid idea.

Fact 2. He makes claims that are unsubstantiated.

Fact 3. Everyone runs around like headless chickens.

End of facts.

Bernie and Max love doing this. They might really be considering this medal system but how often have they made some ludicrous proposal (single make engines anyone) in order to barter it off against some other proposal they really do want to push through and are having trouble with.

One of these days, they will have their bluff called and have to adopt one of these stupid policies but I wouldn't bet money it's this one.

Game of poker anyone. What shall we play for? Part of the concord agreement? Fixed price customer engines? Take your pick.

[AndyRAC]

Why not have a NASCAR style race for the Cup? That's just as idiotic.

[Mark]

The proposal is not without merit. My main concerns are thus:
Throwing decades of F1 history in the bin.
Recognition for lower placings.

Now you can't do anything about the first. But the second will be fine as long as, all the placings count, not just the top 3. Therefore a driver who has finished 5th will be ranked in the championship ahead of a driver who has finished 6th, that way every finishing position counts, not just the top 8 or top 3.

If they are going to use this system then why not for the constructors too, having two entirely different systems is just going to confuse matters.

[PolePosition_1]

Just F1 for the moment, but remember that when the 10-8-6-4-5-3-2-1 was introduced it then rallying was also changed to that system. So I wouldn't be too surprised to see WRC adopting it, or rather, having it forced upon them!

I'd presume that GP2 would go the same way too.


Dunno, I'm under the understanding that GP2 isn't part of the FIA, so would not automatically be changed if F1 does go that way.

[Knock-on]

Dunno, I'm under the understanding that GP2 isn't part of the FIA, so would not automatically be changed if F1 does go that way.

GP2 is subject to FIA sporting regulations and must be sanctioned by the FIA but is not an official FIA event.

Therefore, it is self regulating as far as points awards and championship structure goes.

[Somebody]

I think people are being a touch over-dramatic.

If you forget the medals for a second, it's basically just a countback system

Indeed.


The F1 points system has changed 5 times since 1950, but the basic principle has remained fairly constant; a win is worth 8-10 points, with 2nd worth 60-80% of that value. As ArrowsFA1 mentioned the biggest change occurred in 2003 when 2nd place was revalued from 60% to 80% of 1st spot. I feel that 9, 6 points for 1st and 2nd is about correct, a 66% differential, the system in place from 1961-90. The 1-10 scoring system is easy to understand, and makes historical comparisons relatively feasible, as it is simple to convert different eras to the same values. It also has the benefit of tradition, a concept that leaves Bernie cold, but which others cling to blindly. I could go along with changes like awarding points for pole and fastest lap, both of these were used in the past.
One big, BIG thing you miss - for most of F1's life (from the 1950s to the late 1980s), only SOME of your results counted - you picked your best (e.g.) five from eight (the exact numbers varied with the number of races), and all your other points didn't count.


Of course there is a hole in the plot - it is so obvious that Bernie hasn't thought about it.

Just think back to one of those years where SchM and Ferrari dominated the races. If that were to happen again, one driver would be so far ahead of all others by half season that the championship would virtually be decided and interest in F1's championship would cease.

The chances of the championship still being alive by year's end would be unlikely and Bernie would lose heaps as TV ratings fall.
Oh yes.


His idea is to get drivers going for the win rather than minor placings, but for the majority of teams minor placings is all they have! If a tail end team was to finish 8th and score a world championship point then that is a big deal.. but if it doesn't matter if they finish 4th or 14th, why should they bother?
WCC aside, they'll still get more credit for an eighth than an eighteenth, since a countbacks system means the highest place is most important. If a Force India finished fourth in Monaco, as Sutil so nearly did this year, then their driver would leapfrog anyone whose best position was fifth or worse.

[Mark]

WCC aside, they'll still get more credit for an eighth than an eighteenth, since a countbacks system means the highest place is most important. If a Force India finished fourth in Monaco, as Sutil so nearly did this year, then their driver would leapfrog anyone whose best position was fifth or worse.

If that is indeed the case, then I have no particular objection to this system, sounds perfectly sensible to me!

[woody2goody]

But that's still terrible because someone who finishes 4th once and DNF's 17 or 18 times would finish above someone who finished 5th in every race. Whereas under the current system, the second driver would (rightly) destroy the first by something like 70 points to 5. That would be an injustice.

This system would give drivers undeserved championship positions. At least if Sutil had've finished 4th at Monaco, he would have 5 points and everyone would have known how he got them. This way nobody will remember, nor care who finished 4th-20th. If you come 4th you may as well come last. A countback system or manufacturers points wouldn't give me incentive to race for those positions.

Likewise you would see a driver who wins 1 race and DNF's or doesn't finish in the top 10 for the rest of the season finish above a guy who is second in every race which would give him a chance for the title under the points system. Again, about 140-150 points to 10. That would be ridiculous.

I'm not saying these are likely scenarios but they could happen. For example this year Vettel would have finished above Heidfeld who had twice as many points as him, or Coulthard above Webber, who had 4 times as many points as him.

This system would ruin F1 and would make me (and I'm sure many others too) not care about it any more. I don't think I'll bother with it at all if medals are introduced.

I love F1 so much but this proposal would kill my favourite sport. It's an absolute disgrace, but there's nothing I can do about it.

These drivers are risking their lives every lap, and now there is no reason for the tail-enders to do so. At least the prospect of a point and their score on the leaderboard would spur them on.

Bernie, get out of F1 before the fans get out first.

[BeansBeansBeans]

If that is indeed the case, then I have no particular objection to this system, sounds perfectly sensible to me!

It is indeed the case.

A lot of people have been concerned that this system would rob the lower-placed teams of an incentive, but it actually gives them more of an incentive than ever.

[Mark]

It is indeed the case.

A lot of people have been concerned that this system would rob the lower-placed teams of an incentive, but it actually gives them more of an incentive than ever.

As ever when a story is reported in the media you get the 'headline' but the important detail is completely lost!

So, yes, there is every reason for a lowly team to celebrate, especially as if they have one good result which gives them say, 6th, that will be enough to beat their rivals who finish 7th in every single race. Puts an interesting spin on things!

It would be interesting to see how this years championship would have shaken out if it were based on countback alone, we know that Massa would have been champ, but what of the lower placings.

[Firstgear]

For example this year Vettel would have finished above Heidfeld who had twice as many points as him...

This example suggests to me that this new system might have some merit. In my opinion, Vettel did better than Heidfeld, so should be placed higher. The manufacturers scoring isn't supposed to be affected, so BMW would remain ahead in the constructors. Also correct in my opinion.

What stood out to me, was the results I got when I tried converting the medals system back to a numerical one.

In a 17 race season:

Let Bronze medal = 1 point.

Then Silver medal = 17 Bronze's + 1 to make it worth more than a seasons worth of Bronzes.
= (17 x 1) + 1 = 18

And Gold medal = 17 Silver's + 1 to make it worth more than a seasons worth of Silvers.
= (17 x 18) + 1 = 307

So...for the drivers

1st = 307 points
2nd = 18 points
3rd = 1 point

For me, the change to "an emphasis on winning" is even easier to see when I look at these numbers.

[F1boat]

If they introduce this system, I'll stop watching F1. To me consistency is as important as winning.
So I wouldn't watch this championship with medals. This wouldn't be F1 IMO. I will focus on Indy Car and NASCAR.

[D28]

Indeed.


One big, BIG thing you miss - for most of F1's life (from the 1950s to the late 1980s), only SOME of your results counted - you picked your best (e.g.) five from eight (the exact numbers varied with the number of races), and all your other points didn't count.

Correct. I didn't miss it but rather left it out to simplify things. I believe the system of dropped points was there to ensure that some of the teams competed in all of the races. From 1991 onward all races count which is a fair system. In 1988 the old systen cost A. Prost another WC as only 11 of 16 races counted, he actually had 105 points to Senna's 94 but Senna won
90 to 87. Perhaps this is one reason the system changed in 91; the teams are committed to do all races now anyway.

[woody2goody]

Revised 2008 championship based on the medals system:

1.(2nd in 08) Massa (6 wins, 2 seconds, 2 thirds)
2. (1) Hamilton (5, 2, 3)
3. (3) Raikkonen (2, 2, 5)
4. (5) Alonso (2, 1, 0)
5. (4) Kubica (1, 3, 3)
6. (7) Kovalainen (1, 1, 1)
7. (8) Vettel (1, 0, 0)
8. (6) Heidfeld (0, 4, 0)
9. (13) Rosberg (0, 1, 1)
10.(10) Glock (0, 1, 0) - 2 4th places
11.(12) Piquet (0, 1, 0) - 1 4th place
12.(9) Trulli (0, 0, 1) - 1 4th place
13.(14) Barrichello (0, 0, 1) - 1 6th place
14.(16) Coulthard (0, 0, 1) - 1 7th place
15.(11) Webber - 1 4th place
16.(15) Nakajima - 1 6th place, 2 7th places
17.(18) Button - 1 6th place
18.(17) Bourdais - 2 7th places
19.(19) Fisichella - 1 10th place
20.(20) Sutil - 1 13th place, 1 15th place
21.(21) Sato - 1 13th place, 1 16th place
22.(22) Davidson - 1 15th place

Actually when you look at the final standings it doesn't make too much difference to the championship, but it's how the races play out that will probably generate a lot of apathy.

The biggest winner is Nico Rosberg (up 4 places), while the biggest loser is Mark Webber, who drops 4 places.

[Valve Bounce]

So, yes, there is every reason for a lowly team to celebrate, especially as if they have one good result which gives them say, 6th, that will be enough to beat their rivals who finish 7th in every single race. Puts an interesting spin on things!



Unfortunately, this system rewards a driver who scores well in a rain affected race because of the deployment of the safety car at a time which disadvantaged the front runners.

I think this would be an unfair advantage, especially over a driver who drives his heart out race after race to come in 6th or 7th.

We must consider the whole scenario and not just one aspect. A driver who flukes a third or fourth in such conditions should not be placed over another driver who races as hard as he possibly can race after race to get into the points.

[Nikki Katz]

I still really don't like it. Rosberg had two flukey podiums but was nowhere for most of the rest of the year, he shouldn't be that high up. And Webber behind Barrichello and Coulthard???
It'll just make the average race not matter at all for the majority of the teams, as their championship positions will be decided totally by high attrition or rain affected races.
In 2007 Wurz and Webber would've finished 7th & 8th in the championship, ahead of Kubica and Fisichella.

[jso1985]

It is indeed the case.

A lot of people have been concerned that this system would rob the lower-placed teams of an incentive, but it actually gives them more of an incentive than ever.

How it gives more incentive? as most of all it takes all the incentive for the drivers! I remember Glock at the start of the season set his goal at scoring more than 25 points while he didn't expect any podium.
with that system... well he could set his goal at... finishing races in places that doesn't matter... :rolleyes:

It's a f*cking stupid idea, you can't just leave the whole 10-12 field of drivers on middle-of-the-pack teams with little prize to be won

And this another case of short memory... why the argument of Hamilton finishing 5th in Brazil is used? if Brazil would have been the only race of the season... of course would have won nothing besides 4 points and putting McLaren 4th on the WCC standings... but! the season was 18 races-long and on those 18 races it was were Hamilton was a bit "better" than Massa. and take out the Belgium penalty and Hamilton would have won the championship in China... oh yeah that makes for better spectacle on the final race of the season, right? :rolleyes:

[Valve Bounce]

It is indeed the case.

A lot of people have been concerned that this system would rob the lower-placed teams of an incentive, but it actually gives them more of an incentive than ever.

I just wonder whether bunsen would have agreed with you. :rolleyes:
I mean the only chance he had of getting a medal this year was from the pawn shop.

[Whyzars]

A lot of people have been concerned that this system would rob the lower-placed teams of an incentive, but it actually gives them more of an incentive than ever.


For the lowest placed teams I think the only thing that would give them true incentive is a chance in heck of winning.

:)

[BeansBeansBeans]

How it gives more incentive? as most of all it takes all the incentive for the drivers! I remember Glock at the start of the season set his goal at scoring more than 25 points while he didn't expect any podium.
with that system... well he could set his goal at... finishing races in places that doesn't matter... :rolleyes:

I think, like many on here, you've failed to understand the system.

The 'points' places would matter as much as ever.

For instance, if Sutil had finished 4th in Monaco this year, he would've scored 5 points. Under the new system, his 4th place would've meant he finished higher in the championship than any rivals who failed to score a 4th or better. Therefore, the incentive to finish in the top 8 is just as strong, or even stronger than it is under the current system.

[BeansBeansBeans]

I just wonder whether bunsen would have agreed with you. :rolleyes:
I mean the only chance he had of getting a medal this year was from the pawn shop.

Button would've had a poor season under either system.

Barrichello, on the other hand, would've benefitted hugely. As his 3rd place at Silverstone would've put him higher in the championship than anyone who failed to score a 3rd place or higher.

[BDunnell]

I think, like many on here, you've failed to understand the system.

The 'points' places would matter as much as ever.

For instance, if Sutil had finished 4th in Monaco this year, he would've scored 5 points. Under the new system, his 4th place would've meant he finished higher in the championship than any rivals who failed to score a 4th or better.

And therein lies one of the big problems with this idea. It requires too much explanation.

[BeansBeansBeans]

And therein lies one of the big problems with this idea. It requires too much explanation.

Really? It's surely not that difficult to grasp. I'm sure the teams & drivers would have no problem grasping it.

[BDunnell]

Really? It's surely not that difficult to grasp. I'm sure the teams & drivers would have no problem grasping it.

I'm thinking of the casual TV viewer. A points system as we have now is surely simpler. Still, at least it's not dropped scores being considered.

[ArrowsFA1]

How about this for a little conumdrum: "where are points kept"? :p :

[ioan]

but! the season was 18 races-long and on those 18 races it was were Hamilton was a bit "better" than Massa. and take out the Belgium penalty and Hamilton would have won the championship in China...

Don't be so eager to talk about who was the best driver.
Winning the WDC was up to McLaren making less mistakes than Ferrari, not about Hamilton being better than Massa. Would the Ferrari have held together in Hungary for 3 more laps, Massa would have got 10 more points and Hamilton 1 less and he would have lost no matter what happened in Belgium. I'm not even going to calculate the losses due to the Singapore blunder. None of them was Massa's fault.

[ioan]

Still, at least it's not dropped scores being considered.

Is this the system where only the best X finishes were considered for the final standings? If yes than I'm all for it being brought back for the drivers championship.
It would mean that the driver is less affected by the team's mistakes, while the team would still lose out because of them.

[BeansBeansBeans]

Don't be so eager to talk about who was the best driver.

Agreed.

It's always the best driver & team package that wins the title, not just the best driver.

[ioan]

Agreed.

It's always the best driver & team package that wins the title, not just the best driver.

Couldn't have put it any better!

[MrJan]

I'm not even going to calculate the losses due to the Singapore blunder. None of them was Massa's fault.

AFAIR Felipe took off while the red light was still on.....or was that the other numpty in Valencia??

[BDunnell]

Is this the system where only the best X finishes were considered for the final standings? If yes than I'm all for it being brought back for the drivers championship.
It would mean that the driver is less affected by the team's mistakes, while the team would still lose out because of them.

I wonder why you've reached that view after 2008... ;)

[BeansBeansBeans]

AFAIR Felipe took off while the red light was still on.....or was that the other numpty in Valencia??

The traffic lights were manually operated in Singapore and the trigger-happy mechanic switched them to green whilst the hose was still attached.

Massa was completely blameless.

[D28]

Is this the system where only the best X finishes were considered for the final standings? If yes than I'm all for it being brought back for the drivers championship.

I'm a bit puzzled by this. Pro hockey, football, etc, do not exclude games from the final standings. Besides 1988, the 1964 Championships were affected by dropped points. Graham Hill scored 41 points to Surtees 40, but had to exclude 2 giving the title to Surtees. BRM also outscored Ferrari for the Contructors title 51-49, but lost 45-42. This system is hard for casual fans to compute, I can see no advantage to it.

Why not just scrap the notion of winning all together?

The experience of helping and contributing to a common goal of non-pressurised enjoyment through a non-competitive pastime and enhancing sociability amongst the participants is surely a more rewarding objective?

It is thoroughly unfair that so many of the drivers don't have anything to show for their efforts, yet nobody seems to be concerned about how this would affect them in later life, in relationships and in regards to their self-esteem.

Those frightful people at the FIA & Ferrari should be ashamed for perpetuating the notion that being faster than somebody else is beneficial to the individual within the greater group.

Hopefully Ron 'Integrity' Dennis will sort it out. He is our only hope.

[BDunnell]

Why not just scrap the notion of winning all together?

The experience of helping and contributing to a common goal of non-pressurised enjoyment through a non-competitive pastime and enhancing sociability amongst the participants is surely a more rewarding objective?

It is thoroughly unfair that so many of the drivers don't have anything to show for their efforts, yet nobody seems to be concerned about how this would affect them in later life, in relationships and in regards to their self-esteem.

Those frightful people at the FIA & Ferrari should be ashamed for perpetuating the notion that being faster than somebody else is beneficial to the individual within the greater group.

Hopefully Ron 'Integrity' Dennis will sort it out. He is our only hope.

By far the best option is for only one car to take part in each event. This would sort the problem out.

[ioan]

I wonder why you've reached that view after 2008... ;)

:D
I fully understand why you say that.
But I thought about it often in the past, since the 10 grid position penalty came around and I'll promise to stand by it.
A driver can do nothing when the engine has a design or a manufacturing default. Being able to discard let's say 2 or 3 of the worse results would be fair IMO.

[BDunnell]

:D
I fully understand why you say that.
But I thought about it often in the past, since the 10 grid position penalty came around and I'll promise to stand by it.
A driver can do nothing when the engine has a design or a manufacturing default. Being able to discard let's say 2 or 3 of the worse results would be fair IMO.

Sorry, I was only teasing!

I'm afraid I really don't think the driver's fortunes should be detached from those of the team, and that's what dropping scores does. And I don't understand why it only applies in motorsport — as stated earlier, it would be ridiculous in football. Far better to go back to the old 'points down to sixth' rule, which worked absolutely fine while maybe not rewarding the winner quite as much as it ought.

[MrJan]

Out of interest how many people still think of 6th as 'a point'? I quite often forget that we have a top eight these days :uhoh:

I think that most of us just want F1 to head back from whence it came. Slick tyres, old qualy format, old points, older tracks etc. I know that we can't expect all these points as sport has to progress in some way but I get the general feeling these days that motorsport (including Touring Cars and rallying) is a shadow of its former self.

[CNR]

I think this all comes down to the fact that bernie did not want lewis to win the chaminship this year
(Peter Windsor interview with bernie on RPM before the last race)
http://ten.com.au/rpm-crew-peter-windsor.html

This year Peter will continue his role as Network Tens Formula One correspondent in Europe.

Born in Surrey, England and educated in Sydney, Peter and his wife now split their time between the UK and Australia, putting him in a perfect position to bring the excitement and hype of F1 to Network Ten.

[BDunnell]

Out of interest how many people still think of 6th as 'a point'? I quite often forget that we have a top eight these days :uhoh:

Not as odd as it seems to me for WRC points to be awarded down to eighth instead of tenth, but that's not one for here!

[ioan]

I'm a bit puzzled by this. Pro hockey, football, etc, do not exclude games from the final standings.

But they do not use machinery that can explode while on top of their game!

[BDunnell]

But they do not use machinery that can explode while on top of their game!

But players can get injured or sold, there may be disputes in the dressing room, a new signing might turn out to be a mistake — all sorts of variables, just like in F1. Whether there's machinery involved is neither here nor there, surely?

[ioan]

But players can get injured or sold, there may be disputes in the dressing room, a new signing might turn out to be a mistake — all sorts of variables, just like in F1. Whether there's machinery involved is neither here nor there, surely?

But an injured player can be changed as well as a F1 driver can be changed too, no difference.

Think about it, if a soccer player has a problem with is boots he changes them. If the ball is faulty they change it. If the keeper has a problem with his gloves he can change them.
If one is injured than the medical team tries to get him back in shape very fast.

Why should a driver get a penalty because someone did a faulty work back at the factory? Or what about when some idiot runs them of the track, or runs into their car during the race?

If he could discard 2 or 3 of his worse results than the luck factor wouldn't be part of the show, only the real skills. And I'm sure that each of them have their fair share of bad luck every season.

[BDunnell]

Why should a driver get a penalty because someone did a faulty work back at the factory? Or what about when some idiot runs them of the track, or runs into their car during the race?

The efforts of driver and team go hand in hand. This is, after all, a team sport.



If he could discard 2 or 3 of his worse results than the luck factor wouldn't be part of the show, only the real skills. And I'm sure that each of them have their fair share of bad luck every season.

But sometimes luck has to come into motor racing. It can't be perfect 100 per cent of the time, no matter how much some people would seemingly like to think that anything that's not achieved through being stunningly perfect in a race is somehow worthless. This seems like a very joyless enthusiasm for F1 in my book.

[ioan]

Let's agree to disagree. I don't think we will find a common denominator.

[BDunnell]

Let's agree to disagree. I don't think we will find a common denominator.

Me neither.

[hmmm - donuts]

Am I being thick here? How come Bernie has a say on points / medals etc? As far as I am aware, he is the commercial rights holder only - not part of the rule making process.

Regards

[Valve Bounce]

Button would've had a poor season under either system.

Barrichello, on the other hand, would've benefitted hugely. As his 3rd place at Silverstone would've put him higher in the championship than anyone who failed to score a 3rd place or higher.

Tell me Rubens didn't fluke that third place - and therein lies the rub. !! Especially if it hinged on when the safety car comes out, and the refuel strategy of the cars affected.

Any system that rewards teh drivers who have performed best throughout the year is the one I like.

[BeansBeansBeans]

Why should a driver get a penalty because someone did a faulty work back at the factory?

Why should a constructor be penalised because the driver puts it in the gravel? I'll tell you why. Because you win and lose as a team.

[AndyRAC]

Surely the only points system change points should be between 1st and 2nd. 2 points is never enough. In the WRC this year we had the ridiculous scenario of a driver winning 10 of the 12 events run and still not clinched the Title. Winning should mean something - and the victor suitably rewarded.
As for another point raised about Bernie and his influence - agree, the FIA SHOULD make the rules/regs - then Bernie gets involved and Promotes. Personally, he should have no influence on the point scoring/rules/regs.

[BDunnell]

As for another point raised about Bernie and his influence - agree, the FIA SHOULD make the rules/regs - then Bernie gets involved and Promotes. Personally, he should have no influence on the point scoring/rules/regs.

I'm not sure I agree with this. Surely they should work as a team in order for the promotion to be effective, just as the promoters and organisers of other championships do? The distinction between Bernie and the FIA in relation to F1 matters has become blurred in the eyes of many, it is true, but whose fault is that?

The distinction between Bernie and the FIA in relation to F1 matters has become blurred in the eyes of many, it is true, but whose fault is that?

Jackie Stewart?

Well, it was worth a try.

[BDunnell]

Jackie Stewart?

Well, it was worth a try.

:laugh:

I genuinely thought about putting a note saying 'By the way, it's not Jackie Stewart' at the bottom of my previous comment!

[markabilly]

How about this for a little conumdrum: "where are points kept"? :p :


As is well known, much to the pain of Lewis, they are kept in a glass gallery at mac house ......
besides you know that the "gold" will not be any more pure than the six grams used as plating on olympic medals and probably 12 karat rather than 24 karat, but they will look nicer hanging in the house that mac built, instead of all those messy points.........

Jackie Stewart?

Well, it was worth a try.


:laugh:

I genuinely thought about putting a note saying 'By the way, it's not Jackie Stewart' at the bottom of my previous comment!

Ok, so if it isn't Jackie Stewart I'll have to go into Daily Mail mode.....so, it's either Immigrants, gays, lesbians, travellers or the BBC?

[Valve Bounce]

Ok, so if it isn't Jackie Stewart I'll have to go into Daily Mail mode.....so, it's either Immigrants, gays, lesbians, travellers or the BBC?

.............or Max's whipping cohorts. :D

[BDunnell]

Ok, so if it isn't Jackie Stewart I'll have to go into Daily Mail mode.....so, it's either Immigrants, gays, lesbians, travellers or the BBC?

If you visit the BRDC headquarters, it is well known that you will find an office containing Jackie Stewart, my Polish cleaner, me, Sandi Toksvig, a Romany family and John Simpson plotting against Bernie. Fact.

[markabilly]

If you visit the BRDC headquarters, it is well known that you will find an office containing Jackie Stewart, my Polish cleaner, me, Sandi Toksvig, a Romany family and John Simpson plotting against Bernie. Fact.

Speaking of strange, As I told you in chit chat, leave those mind expanding drugs alone and stick to the good stuff...and then you can come out the closet or office or whatever....

If you visit the BRDC headquarters, it is well known that you will find an office containing Jackie Stewart, my Polish cleaner, me, Sandi Toksvig, a Romany family and John Simpson plotting against Bernie. Fact.

I would have expected nothing less!

However, in an unexpected and out-of-character moment of generosity, I would like to give you an early xmas present...

http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/

My particular favourite being...

"WILL SINGLE MOTHERS GIVE THE MEMORY OF DIANA CANCER?"

[Tallgeese]

I prefer the old systems 10-6-4-3-2-1 as it gave the winner the cushion needed. On the other hand, one could argue why not make it 20-10-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 that way a winner gets 20 points. Some may say 12-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 instead. I personally favour the 'top-six' system as I feel this will narrow the scope for points & promote victory over just points. The Gold medal system does have its merits, but how do you award constructors? If we go by that logic then Renault (despite a poorer showing) would have come third, & BMW Sauber fourth, while Toro Rosso 5th.

[Robinho]

just a thought - before we completley condemn the proposed system, can anyone be bothered to run through the past few years and see what changes that would make to the outcomes of the title?

[Somebody]

just a thought - before we completley condemn the proposed system, can anyone be bothered to run through the past few years and see what changes that would make to the outcomes of the title?
Someone did this year's earlier in the thread.

I'm not sure the comparison holds, however, because it wouldn't allow for changes to team behaviour in the event of a countbacks-only system - right now, if you're expecting to challenge for the title, but you end up back in fourth, it's not worth ending up in the wall and losing your four points. In this system, a fourth place would be meaningless, and you'd be as well trying to play stupid...

[Garry Walker]

As someone said already in this thread about stopping watching f1 if this takes place, I will do the same. I have enough things to do on a saturday and sunday afternoons.

[Somebody]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/nov/26/ecclestone-formula-one-medals-championship

Ecclescake's now claiming that "It's going to happen, all the teams are happy."

Eddie Jordan's called it a "nonsense".

[Somebody]

BBC now have a video: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7749751.stm

I'm sure people here will find this funny:

"The reason there is no overtaking is nothing to do with the circuits or the cars"

[woody2goody]

I'm sorry guys but I've just lost it completely.

Ecclestone is a stupid, delusional, senile b*****d who should have nothing to do with the running or a world class sport.

I'm going to watch proper motorsport like Touring Cars. Even the current shambles of a WRC is better than this proposed rubbish.

I love F1 to the bottom of my soul but I can't watch something be ruined like this. It's possible for someone to win the first two races, not even compete in the rest, and win the title.

This is complete bull**** and just throws 58 years of F1 into the bin.

[V12]

When will Bernie leave us alone?

As woody says...58 years of tradition in the bin - shouldn't be surprised really. No, the points system aint perfect, but either give 12 to the winner or return to 10-6-4-3-2-1, or alternatively, sod off and leave F1 to people who....enjoy it? (what's left of it that is)

[Easy Drifter]

And I still have not seen a single comment from a team or driver on this moronic proposal.

[woody2goody]

And I still have not seen a single comment from a team or driver on this moronic proposal.

Maybe they aren't allowed to. Because after all some of them might have an opinion different to that of their teams <gasp>.

the only reason I might watch the first race next year is to see the difference between BBC and ITV. Yes, I might enjoy the race, but even enjoying the races won't matter when half the action is for nothing.

Bernie says it will encourage overtaking, and drivers could overtake all the time if they wanted to. Well someone tell me one reason why it would be worth risking your life (after all, that's what they are doing) trying to overtake someone for 8th place, when you don't even get a reward for it. And there will be chaos at the start with some people trying to win the race at the first corner causing crashes and dangerous situations.

Add all that to the fascistic stewardship dishing out penalties left, right and centre, ugly cars and idiotic ownership, and we potentially have a disasterous season instead of what could have been a classic. A classic with points. It's not the Olympics for goodness sake.

[Big Ben]

So how about giving medals to the rest of them... 4th place - iron medal, 5th place - wood medal, 6th place - chocolate medal, 7th place - rubber medal, 8th place - plastic medal? and the rest of them a bag of candies...

maybe it´s not the correct order... I think I´d rather finish 6 th rather than 5th.

[El Sween]

Yawn!

[yodasarmpit]

I'm not so sure about medals or points for just the top 3, anyone outside the top 3 would have no reason to continue a race, so may as well stop and save the engine.

More emphasis does need to be placed on winning.
Under the current system, finishing forth in two races is the equivalent to winning in one, now that's just wrong.

More points for the winner with a bigger gap in points to second place. Make winning paramount.

[ShiftingGears]

So, apparently theres no overtaking not because aerodynamics prevent it, or the circuits do not have enough overtaking areas, but because the drivers just aren't trying.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72254

F1 according to Ecclestone.

[Ranger]

Thankyou Eddie Jordan for saying what everyone is thinking about this: "nonsense".

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72256

[Ranger]

just a thought - before we completley condemn the proposed system, can anyone be bothered to run through the past few years and see what changes that would make to the outcomes of the title?
It would've made virtually no difference from the 1980s onwards. Bernie is 20 years too late as this will show...

With medals:

2008 - Massa wins title (Champion: Hamilton)
1989 - Senna wins title (Champion: Prost)
1987 - Mansell wins title (Champion: Piquet)
1986 - Mansell wins title (Champion: Prost)
1984 - Prost wins title (Champion: Lauda)
1983 - Prost wins title (Champion: Piquet)
1982 - Pironi wins title (Champion: Rosberg)
1981 - Prost wins title (Champion: Piquet)
1979 - Jones wins title (Champion: Scheckter)
1977 - Andretti wins title (Champion: Lauda)
1967 - Clark wins title (Champion: Hulme)
1964 - Clark wins title (Champion: Surtees)
1958 - Moss wins title (Champion: Hwathorn)

and so hypothetically (accounting for their other titles),

Prost wins 5 titles (he won 4)
Senna wins 4 titles (he won 3)
Clark wins 4 titles (he won 2)
Mansell wins 3 titles (he won 1)
Jones wins 2 titles (he won 1)
Andretti wins 2 titles (he won 1)
Pironi wins 1 title (he won 0)
Moss wins 1 title (he won 0)
Lauda wins 1 title (he won 3)
Massa wins 1 title (he won 0)
Piquet wins 0 titles (he won 3)
Rosberg wins 0 titles (he won 1)
Hulme wins 0 titles (he won 1)
Scheckter wins 0 titles (he won 1)

So 1 title won with less wins than the other guy since the 1980s means a point system change is in order? wierd.

Enjoy. :up:

[D28]

I believe the consensus from this forum is a no to Bernie's proposed scheme, while realizing the current system gives too much value to 2nd through 4th positions. Tinkering with present system while maintaining some comparability with the past 58 years, seems to be desirable. If we accept a 100%, 66% and 44% ratio for the podium spots, this works out to 20 13 and 8 on a 20 point total. The remaining positions would score 6, 4, 3, 2, 1. Blancvino suggested awarding points down to 10th spot, as is common in some US series. However, since their were only 20 starters this year, I don't think automatic points for half the field is warranted. The values for the podium positions seem consistent with an Olympic gold, silver, bronze system; third place is really devalued (less than half of a 1st spot). A system such as this allows the tail enders to fight for the last coveted championship point.

[Mark]

In fact I think it is the Olympics that should change to a points system!

[AndyRAC]

Dear me, I really wonder what direction Bernie/FIA are taking F1. Medals,....were did that idea come from??
Why not follow the Nascar example and have a 'Chase for the Title' in the last 5 races. It surely couldn't be any worse.
In an extreme case, somebody(Driver A) could win 3/4/5 races - retire from the rest, while somebody(Driver B) wins 2 races but has consistent podiums. Guess who's Champion?? If anything, change to 15 - 10 - 8 - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1, that would surely work better.
Utter madness, what's in it for the lower teams - with no hope of getting a podium?
Control tyres, possible control engines, silly points systems, inconsistent stewarding, rubbish modern tracks, it's surely all a bad dream, isn't it??

Somebody needs to thank Bernie for his efforts - and put him out to grass, and quickly.

[woody2goody]

It would've made virtually no difference from the 1980s onwards. Bernie is 20 years too late as this will show...

With medals:

2008 - Massa wins title (Champion: Hamilton)
1989 - Senna wins title (Champion: Prost)
1987 - Mansell wins title (Champion: Piquet)
1986 - Mansell wins title (Champion: Prost)
1984 - Prost wins title (Champion: Lauda)
1983 - Prost wins title (Champion: Piquet)
1982 - Pironi wins title (Champion: Rosberg)
1981 - Prost wins title (Champion: Piquet)
1979 - Jones wins title (Champion: Scheckter)
1977 - Andretti wins title (Champion: Lauda)
1967 - Clark wins title (Champion: Hulme)
1964 - Clark wins title (Champion: Surtees)
1958 - Moss wins title (Champion: Hwathorn)

and so hypothetically (accounting for their other titles),

Prost wins 5 titles (he won 4)
Senna wins 4 titles (he won 3)
Clark wins 4 titles (he won 2)
Mansell wins 3 titles (he won 1)
Jones wins 2 titles (he won 1)
Andretti wins 2 titles (he won 1)
Pironi wins 1 title (he won 0)
Moss wins 1 title (he won 0)
Lauda wins 1 title (he won 3)
Massa wins 1 title (he won 0)
Piquet wins 0 titles (he won 3)
Rosberg wins 0 titles (he won 1)
Hulme wins 0 titles (he won 1)
Scheckter wins 0 titles (he won 1)

So 1 title won with less wins than the other guy since the 1980s means a point system change is in order? wierd.

Enjoy. :up:

You need to send that to the FIA. That proves evryone's point who is against this rubbish.

[Ranger]

You need to send that to the FIA. That proves evryone's point who is against this rubbish.

And mind you, Massa would've only won in theory because of one of the stupidest decisions in recent years at Spa.

IMO that makes the whole premise for this proposed rule change flawed.

[F1boat]

I quit F1, sorry. To me Nelson deserves his three titles. Rosberg deserves his as well. To me consistency is more important than boneheaded moves all the time.
Bye, bye, F1. You die in 2009 with the medals. May Bernard rot in hell for his greediness and stupidity.

[I am evil Homer]

Thankyou Eddie Jordan for saying what everyone is thinking about this: "nonsense".

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72256

Something is very wrong in F1 when I find myself agreeing with EJ!!!!

[ArrowsFA1]

Thankyou Eddie Jordan for saying what everyone is thinking about this: "nonsense".

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/72256
The cynic in me says Eddie has just become the BBC's pundit so is just warming up for more of his outspoken comments next season, but the consensus seems to be this is a barmy idea.

Still, I wouldn't walk away from the sport I've followed over a few medals :p : Fact is, the sport is about winning, not consistency (as I think tamburello said earlier there's Le Mans for that). It has become more about consistency because of the way points are awarded, particularly in recent years.

For that reason alone I think Bernie's idea has some merit. It shifts the emphasis to winning races being the deciding factor in the WDC. Finishing positions below the top three will still be as significant for the WDC & WCC as they are now with the exception that points will not be awarded.

[Knock-on]

The cynic in me says Eddie has just become the BBC's pundit so is just warming up for more of his outspoken comments next season, but the consensus seems to be this is a barmy idea.

Still, I wouldn't walk away from the sport I've followed over a few medals :p : Fact is, the sport is about winning, not consistency (as I think tamburello said earlier there's Le Mans for that). It has become more about consistency because of the way points are awarded, particularly in recent years.

For that reason alone I think Bernie's idea has some merit. It shifts the emphasis to winning races being the deciding factor in the WDC. Finishing positions below the top three will still be as significant for the WDC & WCC as they are now with the exception that points will not be awarded.

I understand your point Arrows but respectfully disagree.

If you are looking for a endurance trial, there's Le Mans.

If you want bashing and overtaking all the time, there's banger racing or it's posh uncle, Touring Cars.

Looking for outright speed then Drag.

If you want the pinnacle of motorsport where the best drivers dice it out in the extremes that machinery and body can withstand for a couple of hours and over a season, then it's F1.

Sure, the points weighting may be slightly wrong but that's because the FIA messed with it and made it that way.

All that is needed is a bit of tinkering to reward the top 3 more and put the emphasis back on winning above all else.

[Tallgeese]

The medal system may push top-contending drivers to win & certainly that's what people want to see. Suppose it was 'Top-6' points for teams, & drivers acquire points but win/lose the championship on the basis of medals.

Personally I don't like either scheme. I say 'top-six' points.

[Robinho]

all this will mean is the driver in 3rd winning a lot of races when the top 2 tangle!

[BDunnell]

What I can't understand is why Bernie and others suddenly feel that there is some great injustice in the current system. Some have called for a win to be worth more, and I go along with that, but there's hardly been a great clamour for a change along the lines of that being proposed.

[ioan]

What I can't understand is why Bernie and others suddenly feel that there is some great injustice in the current system.

Because all they care about is to have the best show to sell.
The 10,6,4,3,2,1 system was very good IMO, but MS was around and the show had to be improved to last till the end of the season, so they went with the new system: 10,8,6,5,4,3,2,1 arguing that it was better because it awarded points for lower grid positions too, we all know that wasn't the real reason.

Now that the performance levels are about the same we get such situations like last year and this year when having suspense at the last race is down to exterior factors (electrical glitch last season and rain this season), so all of a sudden they need to change the system again to make it even more likely to produce show.

This is only my opinion.

[Tazio]

In fact I think it is the Olympics that should change to a points system]!Way to think outside the box! I like that Mark!
The athletes that participate in the Olympics in individual sports for the most part know where the finished! The reason they don't change is because of tradition. A tradition that is actually obsolete, since these things could be calculated to give each country and athlete their exact finishing position so easily with basic CPU functions!

Sure, the points weighting may be slightly wrong but that's because the FIA messed with it and made it that way.
F1 is the only sport (with the possible exception of Boxing) that goes out of its way too convolute the competition process. It has gotten downright silly and freaking annoying :confused:

[Nikki Katz]

In fact I think it is the Olympics that should change to a points system!
I agree with that actually. I don't really follow athletics etc but I recall being very annoyed 8 years ago when the UK finished about 50th, with hundreds of silvers but just the one gold. Though this year it played into our hands a bit more. Well, that and specialising in sports that nobody else cares about.

[Easy Drifter]

Although refusing to be named one team insider has said that all the teams do not agree with the 'Demented Midget's' idea. Hint was several do not but no one is going to come out and disagree openly yet.
Probably waiting for the FIA meeting. They do not want to cross swords with Bernie but their silence speaks volumnes.
Same goes for the drivers.

[BDunnell]

Because all they care about is to have the best show to sell.
The 10,6,4,3,2,1 system was very good IMO, but MS was around and the show had to be improved to last till the end of the season, so they went with the new system: 10,8,6,5,4,3,2,1 arguing that it was better because it awarded points for lower grid positions too, we all know that wasn't the real reason.

Now that the performance levels are about the same we get such situations like last year and this year when having suspense at the last race is down to exterior factors (electrical glitch last season and rain this season), so all of a sudden they need to change the system again to make it even more likely to produce show.

This is only my opinion.

As far as I was concerned, the 'show' was more than exciting enough in the last two seasons. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. All it needs is a bit of weather and the odd (inevitable) mechanical problem to step in, and you have the excitement everybody craves. This is one reason why I find the proposed change utterly unnecessary.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

The problem i have with the medal system is that we could have the champion crowned by mid-season if he wins the first 10 races (in a 19race season).

I reckon we would be more likely to get a last race showdown with the current points system rather than medal.

[patnicholls]

The problem i have with the medal system is that we could have the champion crowned by mid-season if he wins the first 10 races (in a 19race season).

I reckon we would be more likely to get a last race showdown with the current points system rather than medal.

Spot on - I posted a nice demonstration of this on crash.net:

"How about a simple practical demonstration of why the idea is a load of rubbish?

Wiki: '2002 World Superbike Season'. A year dominated by two riders - Troy Bayliss and Colin Edwards who took 25 of the 26 wins on offer, and the title went down to the final race at the end of the season.

HOWEVER, checking the points table on the Wiki page, if we'd have been using a 'medals' system the title would have been over by June at Misano as Troy B took 13 wins by then, an unassailable amount. (Colin finished right behind him in virtually every race of first half, then dominated the second half to nab the title) Changing the points system would completely ruin the season and end it very early."

[Mark]

Spot on - I posted a nice demonstration of this on crash.net:

"How about a simple practical demonstration of why the idea is a load of rubbish?

Wiki: '2002 World Superbike Season'. A year dominated by two riders - Troy Bayliss and Colin Edwards who took 25 of the 26 wins on offer, and the title went down to the final race at the end of the season.

HOWEVER, checking the points table on the Wiki page, if we'd have been using a 'medals' system the title would have been over by June at Misano as Troy B took 13 wins by then, an unassailable amount. (Colin finished right behind him in virtually every race of first half, then dominated the second half to nab the title) Changing the points system would completely ruin the season and end it very early."

You make an excellent point. How many times over the years have we seen one team dominate the first half of the season, only for another team to catch up in their development and be challenging for the title before the end of the season.

[Tazio]

http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/081128132928.shtml
This article is ambiguous as hell. He is the closest thing to a current f1 driver
to comment on the subject that I know of!

"There are a lot of people who have ridiculed this suggestion, and honestly I have to admit at first that I thought the stress of divorce had got to him," Verstappen, 36, wrote in his column in the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf.

"But I think he actually has a point. Like him, I think the winner of the most races in a season should automatically be the world champion."

This is really just a non story as Verstappen is said to believe that a point system that rewards the race winner more than the current scoring system
would be sufficient, although it doesn't quote him as saying that. This is very poor Journalism IMO. I have lost a little respect for F1 live due to the way they convoluted this story, and I am only posting it because the f1 community is waiting to hear an f1 driver’s opinion. So take it for whatever you think its worth!

[jens]

Just when you think the rule proposals can't get any worse, then a stunning idea comes out, which creates belief that the limits of human abilities in terms of useless ideas is still unfounded...
So Bernie watched Olympics in 2008 and got his ideas from there? I don't dare to think, what will he watch in 2009...

With medals idea we won't see surprising challenges by midfield drivers or teams, like Kubica or BMW in 2008, who managed to stay in title fight for almost until the end of the season by superbly consistent performing. The medal system will help only one-two top teams to run away from others, hence it will decrease competition, not increase like BE dreams.

The ironic thing is that fighting for the win - something BE so much wants - was exactly, what Hamilton did at Spa, and got penalized for it.
Oh wait, I can see FIA's new strategy, how to create a close championship finale. More fighting for the win -> more penalties -> better possibilities to arrange a title showdown for the last race. :rolleyes:

Although actually, to be fair, medals or any point system won't generally change the fighting for the win at all, because on most occasions race winner is just quicker than others and capable of opening a clear gap in the lead - if the chasers aren't able to keep his pace, then how are they supposed to fight?

Also this system would create a new level in fanboyism. :p : We have had discussions whether points are a genuine relfection of drivers' performance or not, but with medals it will get worse. One guy may get a lucky podium and finishes higher in the WDC than his team-mate, although the latter has been hammering him all year. Surely there will be someone, who says that the former is a superior driver because he finished higher in the WDC standings. Imagine someone saying DC was a better driver than Webber in 2008, because he - after all - managed a podium.

If this medals' idea becomes a reality, I actually hope that someone will dominate the 2009 season so badly that after having clinched the title by mid-season with consistent winning, FIA and BE will be so annoyed that they will rechange the system...

So Bernie watched Olympics in 2008 and got his ideas from there? I don't dare to think, what will he watch in 2009....

Pro-Celebrity Badger Baiting?

I've heard it rumoured that it's Ron Dennis's favourite pastime.

[BDunnell]

So Bernie watched Olympics in 2008 and got his ideas from there?

I thought the future of F1 lay in giving races to undemocratic countries with poor human rights records even before this year's Games?

[Knock-on]

I thought the future of F1 lay in giving races to undemocratic countries with poor human rights records even before this year's Games?

Actually, there's as much integrity in the IOC as there is in the FIA :laugh:

[f1kid1987]

This meadal system is absoluty rubbuish, there should bring by the old system 10-6-4-3-2-1 were the top six get points, for one it'll make for competetive racing casue 2009 is gonna be one the tightly contested champinship for years casue at least 4 team is going both titiles. If they go ahead with this medal system you might aswell re-vamp the quli system were who ever wins the race goes to the back of the grid like reverse grid system who ever comes last gets pole, becasue the system in this sport will never, dont change what is good.

[Somebody]

Looking at Autosport today, an interesting table - apparently, Massa would have won the world title this year on every other points system that's been used since the beginning of the World Championship, as well as Bernie's "medals" system, with the sole exception of 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1

[woody2goody]

I wouldn't dare say Coulthard was better than Webber last year.

You can imagine worse conficts between hardcore fans of Massa, Hamilton, Alonso and Raikkonen next year especially if the standings come out in a strange order next year.