Formula 1 season finale to be worth double points from 2014

[ShiftingGears]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111795

Already finalised. Another awful decision from the F1 brains trust.

[JasonPotato]

Not the first and won't be the last.

[Koz]

Madness.

[Eau Rouge]

what a farce F1 is becoming....

Its simple for me to award points.

1. point for pole
2. point for fastest lap
3. point for each person you overtake (maybe)
and back to the original points system of 10 for a win maybe 8 for second etc.

[Sage-sg]

I think that it's foolishly!

[Rollo]

There should be quintuple points for being 3rd on the 19th lap of the Grands Prix which fall either side of Michaelmas Day.

Is F1 becoming "Whose Line Is It Anyway?" where everything's made up and the points don't matter?

[Robinho]

I think it's safe (although not family friendly) to say that idea is ,****ing bull****, and that come from someone who doesn't mind the current tyres and quite likes DRS!

[N. Jones]

Stupid.

Why not change the point system to 12-10-7-5-4-3-2-1 or something similar? It was Bernie who cried that wins should be what constitutes a championship. Now that wins = world title that isn't good enough anymore?

[Whyzars]

Wow. The teams will really be trying to do well. Double points, Woo Hoo.

This is actually worse than the DRS, KERS and fuel starvation combined. Dumb, dumb, dumb...

If F1 want to influence the championship then for qualifying, all cars should carry a kilogram handicap for every championship point they have. This extra weight would be removed for the race. Should mix it up and make some cars bloody near undriveable which is what the brains trust craves.

Double points is trying to maintain interest until the final race and to be honest, I'm struggling to maintain interest until the first.

[Storm]

Stupidest decision in any major sport ever I think. A reverse grid like the BTCC used to have would be equally gimmicky but atleast see some good passing to the front. So Vettel/whoever is dominating wins with an even bigger margin at the end of the championship from next year..

Massa would be pissed...had this been in effect back in 2008? :p:

[journeyman racer]

Already finalised. Another awful decision from the F1 brains trust.Hmm. You're implying that brains are involved?

[odykas]

This has to be the stupidest rule in motorsports :s

[555-04Q2]

We're going to the circus, we're going to the circus, we're............................................. ................

[henners88]

My question is why?
If they are that desperate to liven it up with gimmicks like this, there are deeper problems. F1 has suffered massively in the last year in terms of interest and they think putting stupid bonus points at the end of the season is going to make more fans watch and make drivers race for a bigger prize? It may also award the championship to a less deserving driver so could make a total farce of the season. We don't need F1 to be more diluted and forced than it already is.

[Bezza]

I can see it now...

Vettel trails Alonso by 47 points going into the final race of the 2014 Championship at Abu Dhabi. Alonso has an engine failure, Vettel wins and therefore collects 50 points and becomes champion....AGAIN.

This is the worst rule change in the history of F1. Period.

A point for pole, and a point for fastest lap - would have been a much better idea.

[henners88]

I can see it now...

Vettel trails Alonso by 47 points going into the final race of the 2014 Championship at Abu Dhabi. Alonso has an engine failure, Vettel wins and therefore collects 50 points and becomes champion....AGAIN.

This is the worst rule change in the history of F1. Period.

A point for pole, and a point for fastest lap - would have been a much better idea.
I totally agree.
If that were to happen, many fans would switch off. They really are killing the sport further with rubbish like this. With the sport slowly disappearing onto pay TV and stupid rules being introduced, it'll be a miracle if F1 is even taken remotely seriously as a sport in 10 years time.

[AndyL]

Here's an idea for keeping people watching to the end of the season. Finish the season at a great historic circuit, so fans will want to watch the race whether it's the title decider or not. Bernie can have that one for free.

[Sage-sg]

I can see it now...

Vettel trails Alonso by 47 points going into the final race of the 2014 Championship at Abu Dhabi. Alonso has an engine failure, Vettel wins and therefore collects 50 points and becomes champion....AGAIN.

This is the worst rule change in the history of F1. Period.

A point for pole, and a point for fastest lap - would have been a much better idea.
Where can I give you "Like" here?

[acescribe]

What a great idea....










NOT!

[Bezza]

I presume the FIA have been playing Mario Kart for too long? The more I think about it, the more farcical a decision this is.

When will the FIA realize that there is not actually too much wrong with F1, just Red Bull are doing a much better job than anywhere else. Trying to falsely slow them down, or keep the championship "open" for longer, will just make the whole circus look stupid.

We already have new regulations for 2014 - why tamper with the points system? Red Bull could be the 3rd or 4th quickest team. If Vettel wins from there, fair and square, then so be it. Its tough - he'll have done the best job! Luck always plays a part, but generally over the course of a season the winner deserves it. 2012 was an anomaly - Alonso drove incredibly well, better than anyone in recent memory, to even have a chance of winning that title. But for him to have won it by some last race double points fiasco would have been wrong.

F1 actually needs to go backwards a few steps. Back to before DRS and crappy Pirelli tyres. KERS is good, keep that in. And just let the guys race flat out. Drivers make mistakes when they are pushed hard. And when we get super-good races, they stand out and we look back and enjoy them. Over the last few seasons, only Canada 2011 stands out on its own to me. Overtaking is too easy now - it should be damned difficult, and then when overtakes happen - you can see the quality. Breezing past another car on a straight isn't really a fun thing to watch.

[Ranger]

If they wanted to stop the same driver winning so much, they should equip every driver with one of these.

http://www.mariowiki.com/images/thumb/f/f4/MK7-Spiny-Shell.png/180px-MK7-Spiny-Shell.png

It would be much less contrived.

[Mark]

Agreed; holding the race at a good track would be best idea. Abu Dhabi is one of the worst on the calendar, presumably has the season ending position because it paid for it.

Yes having the championship go down to the final race is good; but it's also nice having one or two 'non-championship' races at the end of the season. Just not like this year where the championship was over by the end of April.

[jens]

Good lord, what on earth is this. I literally feel sick. The same knee-jerk reaction that FIA had in 2002 after Schumi's domination. Domination is a natural part of a sport, which happens from time-to-time. You can take a look at any sport to see this is the case. You can't erase someone naturally rising above competition from time-to-time with artificial gimmicks.

[journeyman racer]

I wonder what prompted this? It wouldn't have made a difference this year. It may be a sign of things to come, there may be more ludicrous decisions made in the following few years, if the same people are making the decisions.

You know what they cold do? Offer 18 points for first, 25 for second! 15 for third. How do you think that'll turn out? ;) :erm: :colour: :crazy:

[Mark]

They should all do a race, then after the race pick numbers out of a hat to decide what points they're getting.

[odykas]

Exactly. There must be two races in the last weekend in order to allocate double points.

[truefan72]

madness, double points?
just reading this now. and I must say its a terrible idea.
It could basically nullify an entire season's hard work and make the WCC a lottery in the last race.

There was no need to mess with the points system at all.
So you could be 40 points behind the WDC leader and still win the championship in the final race?
FIA is losing the plot

[Firstgear]

The concept of double points for a race is not a bad one. They've just chosen the wrong place to apply this.

If they chose, say.......India for double points next year, I think we could all live with it.
The year after that, say Nigeria or Iceland for triple points. There are many places where this could work - it just has to be somewhere that's not on the F1 calendar.

[steveaki13]

Time to add my voice to this madness.


WTF are they thinking? This is Bull**** absolute crap. Why when F1 fans don't want any of this do they think this is a good idea.

For the first time I have to seriously consider sending an abusive letter to the FIA just to make myself feel better and then consider whether I actually want to follow F1 anymore.

Another in a long line of crap that is turning F1 from a top level motorsport to a freak sideshow.

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr so Angry right now.

[AndyL]

This is such a daft idea it might almost be a smokescreen to distract attention from some other bit of lunacy they're planning to announce tomorrow. If they backtrack on it in a couple of weeks, check what other rules they've changed in the meantime!

[journeyman racer]

They should all do a race, then after the race pick numbers out of a hat to decide what points they're getting.hehehe :D

[webberf1]

Overall, I'm happy with the rule changes, as the good definitely outweighs the bad.

Double points last race: Mostly a dumb idea, although sometimes it could work out well. The good side is that we'll see last-round championship deciders more often, which will undoubtedly add excitement - especially if the last round continues to be Interlagos.

Driver numbers: Good. It's annoying having to re-learn which drivers are which number at the start of every season. I hate when its like 'cars 11 and 15 were involved in a collision' and im thinking, who the f**k are they? Instead, it'll be 'car 69 has been black flagged' and I'll immediately be thinking 'What have you done now, Kimi?' :p

Cost cap: Sucks that it came to this. But it was necessary. Has to be implemented right though.

New minor penalties: Good. Drive-throughs for cutting a corner or bumping a guy is stupid.

More tyre testing: Best change of the lot. Although even more is needed.

[Bagwan]

Whew , you guys .
Upset at a different number of points for a race ?

Doesn't take much to upset the wee apple cart around here does it ?
You'd think Todt slept with all your girlfriends or something .

It's not as if they are announcing it on the eve of the race or anything like that .
That would be something to whine about .

They will know it all year , and , who knows , maybe it will keep the rabbit , if there is one , looking over his shoulder at the end .

[dj_bytedisaster]

Whew , you guys .
Upset at a different number of points for a race ?

So you find it acceptable that a fourth place on a god-forsaken Tilkedrome pays just a single point less than a win at Monaco?
You find it acceptable that someone could enter the last race with hard-earned 49 points gap on his nearest rivaland could still lose the title by having the only DNF of the season? Why don't we just decide the chapionship by throwing dice? :hmph:

[webberf1]

Whew , you guys .
Upset at a different number of points for a race ?

So you find it acceptable that a fourth place on a god-forsaken Tilkedrome pays just a single point less than a win at Monaco?
You find it acceptable that someone could enter the last race with hard-earned 49 points gap on his nearest rivaland could still lose the title by having the only DNF of the season? Why don't we just decide the chapionship by throwing dice? :hmph:
If the driver DNFs on the last race: stop crashing and/or team needs to build a more reliable car.

[Storm]

so if someone crashes into the leading driver and he loses the title because of the stupid double points rule, it is okay?

[pino]

The dumbest rule I have heard in any Motorsport discipline. The people who took this decision must be on drugs :down:

[zako85]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111795

Already finalised. Another awful decision from the F1 brains trust.


Guys, don't worry! It looks like autosport.com probably got hacked! Give it a day for the web site to return to its normal form.

[henners88]

Even the World Champion hates the idea!!


"This is absurd and punishes those who have worked hard for a whole season," said the 26-year-old, who won the final nine races in 2013. "Drivers, fans and experts are horrified."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/25324100

[Mark]

Double points last race: Mostly a dumb idea, although sometimes it could work out well. The good side is that we'll see last-round championship deciders more often, which will undoubtedly add excitement - especially if the last round continues to be Interlagos.


Interlagos is a fantastic track to host the final race - unfortunately it's not there, it's Abu Dhabi :(

[webberf1]

so if someone crashes into the leading driver and he loses the title because of the stupid double points rule, it is okay?
If someone crashes into the leading driver without the new points rule and loses the title is that ok? Yes, both are ok. It's called racing.

[AndyL]

The dumbest rule I have heard in any Motorsport discipline.

I wouldn't go that far. The British Touring Cars pole position wheel of fortune takes some beating on that front.

Maybe we'll get that in F1 for the 2015 season.

[dj_bytedisaster]

so if someone crashes into the leading driver and he loses the title because of the stupid double points rule, it is okay?
If someone crashes into the leading driver without the new points rule and loses the title is that ok? Yes, both are ok. It's called racing.

No, it's not called racing. It's called arbitrary interference. A DNF in the last race is doubly punished. Also, it wreaks havoc on the midfield. A team like Force India could easily jump 2 or 3 positions up the standings by Hulk having a good day again, when the results of the preceeding 18 races do not merit that position. Racing it is called if every race pays the same or there is something that warrants double points for a certain race, like for instance a double distance.

This whole malarkey is not about hobbling Red Bull or 'keeping it tight'. The sole reason for that rule is to 'upgrade' one race in importance, so that the toad from Suffolk and his klepotomaniac posse can extort more money in hosting fees from a willing victim.

[henners88]

. Moved comment to a relevant thread :)

[SGWilko]

Back when I first got interested in F1 ('85) the points system was awarded for 1st to sixth place. There were so many entrants they had pre-qualifying. In order to equalize a runaway team/car, only a certain number of wins in the season would count towards the points tally at the end.

If they want to make F1 more appealing/road relevant, allow diesel entrants and non turbo entrants, and have a trophy for each category.

Does that not make more sense?

[Eunos]

You know

Sometimes Formula 1 feels more scripted than WWE.

I'm sorry but this double points is just ridiculous, and I certainly hope they change their minds and scrap this idea before the season starts.

Or maybe it's just the FIA trolling just to get some attention ¬.¬

[SGWilko]

You know

Sometimes Formula 1 feels more scripted than WWE.

I'm sorry but this double points is just ridiculous, and I certainly hope they change their minds and scrap this idea before the season starts.

Or maybe it's just the FIA trolling just to get some attention ¬.¬

They will ditch this idea, in exchange for something else the FIA/Bernie always originally wanted in the first place, but knew the teams would not agree to.....

Divide and conquer!!

[Bagwan]

This would be different if , say , the double points offer came in if the rabbit out front was over a certain number of points ahead .
That would be contrived .

But , it is known by all that the final race is doubled .
It should simply mean that Mr. Rabbit will need to be much farther ahead to be able to claim the title early .

Is that so bad ?

Your favourite racer may still be in with a chance at the final race because of this rule .
Why be so cruel to him by denying him his chance at it ?
I thought you liked him .

[JasonPotato]

The dumbest rule I have heard in any Motorsport discipline.

The British Touring Cars pole position wheel of fortune takes some beating on that front.


If you think that's the dumbest then you shouldn't be watching touring cars. It works perfectly for the series, considering there is 3 races in 1 day. It gives everyone a chance to aim for a top 10 position and potentially be on pole and win a race! It's great to see one of the lesser teams leading and trying to hold his own. Which would never happen in F1. Maybe they could just reverse the top 10 everytime but it's great the fact there's a little mystery as to who will start pole last race. Plus watching the leaders come through the pack!

Granted this wouldn't work in F1.

[dj_bytedisaster]

This would be different if , say , the double points offer came in if the rabbit out front was over a certain number of points ahead .
That would be contrived .

But , it is known by all that the final race is doubled .
It should simply mean that Mr. Rabbit will need to be much farther ahead to be able to claim the title early .

Is that so bad ?

Your favourite racer may still be in with a chance at the final race because of this rule .
Why be so cruel to him by denying him his chance at it ?
I thought you liked him .

Very simple. The rival of your favourite driver needed at least three races to build up a 49 points lead over your favourite driver, who now suddenly get's the chance to erase such a big gap with a single race win, if the rival DNF's just once. It's a big honking DRS for points. Overtaking with no chance for the opponent to fight back. Why don't we just install guns on the cars? :hmph:

[AndyL]

If you think that's the dumbest then you shouldn't be watching touring cars. It works perfectly for the series, considering there is 3 races in 1 day. It gives everyone a chance to aim for a top 10 position and potentially be on pole and win a race! It's great to see one of the lesser teams leading and trying to hold his own. Which would never happen in F1. Maybe they could just reverse the top 10 everytime but it's great the fact there's a little mystery as to who will start pole last race. Plus watching the leaders come through the pack!

Surely you must admit the wheel of fortune with the drivers' faces on it was an utterly ridiculous spectacle.

[Bagwan]

This would be different if , say , the double points offer came in if the rabbit out front was over a certain number of points ahead .
That would be contrived .

But , it is known by all that the final race is doubled .
It should simply mean that Mr. Rabbit will need to be much farther ahead to be able to claim the title early .

Is that so bad ?

Your favourite racer may still be in with a chance at the final race because of this rule .
Why be so cruel to him by denying him his chance at it ?
I thought you liked him .

Very simple. The rival of your favourite driver needed at least three races to build up a 49 points lead over your favourite driver, who now suddenly get's the chance to erase such a big gap with a single race win, if the rival DNF's just once. It's a big honking DRS for points. Overtaking with no chance for the opponent to fight back. Why don't we just install guns on the cars? :hmph:

The rival driver may have built up the 50 point lead over your favourite because of two DNFs .

And he has the same chance at the final 50 as your favourite .

How is that like DRS ?

[JasonPotato]

Surely you must admit the wheel of fortune with the drivers' faces on it was an utterly ridiculous spectacle.

A bag of balls numbered 6-10 is enough. Same outcome. Certainly wouldn't like it a fixed position otherwise you'll have people fighting or deliberately slowing down to get pole in the last race. Like we had a few years ago!

For me i wish they would go back to the late 90's format, 1 sprint race and 1 feature race with pitstops but that's a debate for another time.

[all-rally]

In December 2014, after a year that ended in a run-away victory for Sebastian Vettel,
The FIA decided that a change in rules was in order as the previous change to the points
system, awarding double points for the final race, created huge controversy in an unjust world
champion who nicked it at the last race having been 46 points behind before the final race.

To rectify this in the 2015 season, The FIA has announced, all drivers will therefore be awarded a multiplier
on their points based on the first letter of their last name. This multiplier will work on
the same number of points awarded to a letter in Scrabble, thus awarding the more uncommon
letters. V- for Vettel would give a 4x multiplier while K- Kovalainen would get a 5x multiplier.
The true excitement would lie in the high influx of drivers with last names starting with Z and Q
for a whopping 10x multiplier.

[dj_bytedisaster]

The rival driver may have built up the 50 point lead over your favourite because of two DNFs .

And he has the same chance at the final 50 as your favourite .

How is that like DRS ?

Which driver do you hope to luck into an undeserved title because of this rubbish? :confused:
We have 19 races a year and each of them counts the same. Making one of them count double is patently unfair. someone can be ultra-reliable all year and be Pastor'ed in the last race and could lose everything because someone said : 'Y'know this race counts double for no reason.'

If they want to have double points they should adapt the challenge accordingly, i.e. make the race double length on a track that justifies such raise in importance. Do you think, just because Alonso would have lucked to the 2012 title that way, it'll gonna happen again? What if it is your favourite man, who is miles ahead, but get's T-boned by Maldonado and loses all season's work in a single race. Are you going to be as enthusiastic about this FIA/FOM brain fart, too?

[schmenke]

...If F1 want to influence the championship then for qualifying, all cars should carry a kilogram handicap for every championship point they have. This extra weight would be removed for the race. ...

As a long time fan of the sport I used to adamantly oppose the idea of penalizing faster cars with ballast, but now, with all the recent gimmicks and regulations introduced, I’m beginning to think it’s perhaps the better option :mark: .

[Bagwan]

The rival driver may have built up the 50 point lead over your favourite because of two DNFs .

And he has the same chance at the final 50 as your favourite .

How is that like DRS ?

Which driver do you hope to luck into an undeserved title because of this rubbish? :confused:
We have 19 races a year and each of them counts the same. Making one of them count double is patently unfair. someone can be ultra-reliable all year and be Pastor'ed in the last race and could lose everything

If they want to have double points they should adapt the challenge accordingly, i.e. make the race double length on a track that justifies such raise in importance. Do you think, just because Alonso would have lucked to the 2012 title that way, it'll gonna happen again? What if it is your favourite man, who is miles ahead, but get's T-boned by Maldonado and loses all season's work in a single race. Are you going to be as enthusiastic about this FIA/FOM brain fart, too?

Gosh dj , you do have a way with words .
"because someone said : 'Y'know this race counts double for no reason.' is not at all accurate , is it ?
The reason is to try to disadvantage a rabbit from getting the crown too early .
I think that's pretty clear .

I can agree that an extra challenge would be nice , to further justify the extra points , but I don't feel it's essential .

Whereas you would condone the same situation , with a Maldonado T-bone and all , if the race was simply longer ?

Would you have as much hatred for the idea if the race that was worth double points was the first race of the season ?

[AndyL]

In December 2014, after a year that ended in a run-away victory for Sebastian Vettel,
The FIA decided that a change in rules was in order as the previous change to the points
system, awarding double points for the final race, created huge controversy in an unjust world
champion who nicked it at the last race having been 46 points behind before the final race.

To rectify this in the 2015 season, The FIA has announced, all drivers will therefore be awarded a multiplier
on their points based on the first letter of their last name. This multiplier will work on
the same number of points awarded to a letter in Scrabble, thus awarding the more uncommon
letters. V- for Vettel would give a 4x multiplier while K- Kovalainen would get a 5x multiplier.
The true excitement would lie in the high influx of drivers with last names starting with Z and Q
for a whopping 10x multiplier.

:D
While that is a highly credible idea by current F1 standards, unfortunately it makes Vettel even more dominant - he would have finished this season with more points than Webber and Hamilton (2nd and 3rd respectively) combined. I'd suggest using the scrabble score of the driver's entire last name as the multiplier. It would have been a close finish between Vettel (9 points) and Raikkonen (17 points). Plus this system would surely see 20-pointer Hulkenberg finally getting the top drive that he deserves.

[Firstgear]

In December 2014, after a year that ended in a run-away victory for Sebastian Vettel,
The FIA decided that a change in rules was in order as the previous change to the points
system, awarding double points for the final race, created huge controversy in an unjust world
champion who nicked it at the last race having been 46 points behind before the final race.

To rectify this in the 2015 season, The FIA has announced, all drivers will therefore be awarded a multiplier
on their points based on the first letter of their last name. This multiplier will work on
the same number of points awarded to a letter in Scrabble, thus awarding the more uncommon
letters. V- for Vettel would give a 4x multiplier while K- Kovalainen would get a 5x multiplier.
The true excitement would lie in the high influx of drivers with last names starting with Z and Q
for a whopping 10x multiplier.

:D
While that is a highly credible idea by current F1 standards, unfortunately it makes Vettel even more dominant - he would have finished this season with more points than Webber and Hamilton (2nd and 3rd respectively) combined. I'd suggest using the scrabble score of the driver's entire last name as the multiplier. It would have been a close finish between Vettel (9 points) and Raikkonen (17 points). Plus this system would surely see 20-pointer Hulkenberg finally getting the top drive that he deserves.
My bolding & underling.

Having Abu as double may advantage Vettel as well - he's won 3 of the 5 races held there.
I imagine the FIA have come up with this scheme because fans are losing interest towards the end of the season (you only need to check posts on this forum to confirm this). Teams also are putting less effort into development towards the end if their positions as constructors are pretty much assured, and that's understandable.

If they really feel they need to do something like this - maybe they could reward the more difficult races as double. For example, the races known as "drivers circuit" like Monaco, and put them at the end of the calendar. Or perhaps "wet" races are double - with Brazil at the end of the calendar making it a 50/50 as to whether it might be double or not.

Just kind of brainstorming there - but I don't think either of my suggestions is any worse than what the FIA has gone with.

[Bagwan]

Even though Vettel , the current rabbit might still win it , the whole point seems to be to keep him from winning it all until the end of the season .

I like that idea about the wet race , Firstgear , but moving races to the rainy season in any given place is maybe going a little too far .

Having said that , though , I do love the rain that Brazil drops into the mix , too .

[Storm]

This would be different if , say , the double points offer came in if the rabbit out front was over a certain number of points ahead .
That would be contrived .

Just because something is known before hand does not make it more appealing if the idea itself is completely farcical to begin with.

[Mark]

It's the same issue as messing with points in the first place to top Schumacher from dominating. It wasn't the points system that changed that, it was the other teams getting their acts together and providing us with a few years of good racing, until Vettel hoved into view that is.

[dj_bytedisaster]

Gosh dj , you do have a way with words .
"because someone said : 'Y'know this race counts double for no reason.' is not at all accurate , is it ?
The reason is to try to disadvantage a rabbit from getting the crown too early .
I think that's pretty clear .

I can agree that an extra challenge would be nice , to further justify the extra points , but I don't feel it's essential .

Whereas you would condone the same situation , with a Maldonado T-bone and all , if the race was simply longer ?

Would you have as much hatred for the idea if the race that was worth double points was the first race of the season ?

Yes I would. All 19 races are the same. So they should all pay the same amount of points. Arbitrarily 'modifying' one of them is American Wrestling, not Formula 1.

[Mark]

In order to justify the double points the final race should be twice as long ;)

[zako85]

In order to justify the double points the final race should be twice as long ;)

This would have been acceptable to me. Even 3-hours long would be enough. However, I am afraid this is not possible without refueling.

[Firstgear]

Sure it's possible. The cars get about double the fuel mileage when running behind the safety car. So as long as the cars stay below about 80kph they should be able to make it. Then we'll really have the eco-runs that dj has been posting about all year. :p

[schmenke]

Sure it's possible. The cars get about double the fuel mileage when running behind the safety car. So as long as the cars stay below about 80kph they should be able to make it. Then we'll really have the eco-runs that dj has been posting about all year. :p

I have always maintained that F1 should seriously consider an unrestricted format – engine, chassis, tires, aero… whatever – but mandate a serious maximum limit of available fuel per team per race weekend; perhaps half of what is consumed today.

[Dave B]

I have always maintained that F1 should seriously consider an unrestricted format – engine, chassis, tires, aero… whatever – but mandate a serious maximum limit of available fuel per team per race weekend; perhaps half of what is consumed today.
I've said the same thing many times: present the teams with a box into which their car must fit, and a set of rigorous crash tests and safety measures which they must pass. Give them a fixed amount of fuel (which would reduce by a few % each season), and which they can supplement with any means they see fit such as energy recovery, solar cells, turbochargers - hell, even mount a fan the size of a dustbin lid on the back of the car, or fit six wheels, you never know, it might catch on!

[AndyL]

In order to justify the double points the final race should be twice as long ;)

Given where it's to be held, half as long might be better :)

[Zico]

This ridiculous idea will be ditched for something else ... surely!?! We can't just let them ruin this 'sport' but what can we do to stop them?

[webberf1]

I have always maintained that F1 should seriously consider an unrestricted format – engine, chassis, tires, aero… whatever – but mandate a serious maximum limit of available fuel per team per race weekend; perhaps half of what is consumed today.
I've said the same thing many times: present the teams with a box into which their car must fit, and a set of rigorous crash tests and safety measures which they must pass. Give them a fixed amount of fuel (which would reduce by a few % each season), and which they can supplement with any means they see fit such as energy recovery, solar cells, turbochargers - hell, even mount a fan the size of a dustbin lid on the back of the car, or fit six wheels, you never know, it might catch on!
The problem is that the virtually unrestricted designs you describe would be literally beyond what drivers could physically endure over a grand prix distance. With fans, ground effect, sliding skirts, big tyres etc, modern cars would be pulling 7-8 g's in cornering and 8-9 g's under braking.

[anfield5]

Does this mean that the host of the final race has to pay 'Greedy Smurf' twice as much to host the race :evil: ?

[Mark]

Does this mean that the host of the final race has to pay 'Greedy Smurf' twice as much to host the race :evil: ?

They already pay a premium to be the final race.

[schmenke]

Does this mean that the host of the final race has to pay 'Greedy Smurf' twice as much to host the race :evil: ?

They already pay a premium to be the final race.

Well, that explains Abu Dhabi :mark:

[JasonPotato]

I'll just quote Kimi, 'The first few turns are quite good but the rest of it is sh**.'

[Mark]

Coming from Kimi that's almost a compliment.

[denkimi]

I have always maintained that F1 should seriously consider an unrestricted format – engine, chassis, tires, aero… whatever – but mandate a serious maximum limit of available fuel per team per race weekend; perhaps half of what is consumed today.
I've said the same thing many times: present the teams with a box into which their car must fit, and a set of rigorous crash tests and safety measures which they must pass. Give them a fixed amount of fuel (which would reduce by a few % each season), and which they can supplement with any means they see fit such as energy recovery, solar cells, turbochargers - hell, even mount a fan the size of a dustbin lid on the back of the car, or fit six wheels, you never know, it might catch on!
The problem is that the virtually unrestricted designs you describe would be literally beyond what drivers could physically endure over a grand prix distance. With fans, ground effect, sliding skirts, big tyres etc, modern cars would be pulling 7-8 g's in cornering and 8-9 g's under braking.
then just limit the width of the tyres. it's as simple as that.

[anfield5]

Someone may have mentioned this already, if so my apologies.

The teams have possibly brought this fiasco on themselves, if the teams (RBR excluded) had decided to race until the end of the championship, instead of giving up 2/3 of the way through the season, there would be no need to manufacture a grandstand finish to the season. Having said that 2013 has been the first season for a while that has been decided so early, so is this a knee-jerk reaction to a one-off blip in what has been a series of hotly contested championships

[Mark]

It does seem to be standard practice these days, ever since Brawn fluke win in 2009 because they sacked off 2008. That if half way through the season you've got no chance, stop development entirely, move onto next year.

[D-Type]

Why not go to the old European rally Championship system where each event carried a tariff (think diving's 'Degree of Difficulty'). eg any Tilke track counts 0.5, Spa counts 1.5 etc

Or have a secret agreement. Whoever is the points leader after 16 events is the champion. Then stage manage the last 5 races to get a grandstand finish.

Or follow NASCAR (again!). The champion is the driver with the highests points score, excluding those who have scored a race win. That would keep things open to the end of the season. Wouldn't drivers throwing away a race by spinning on the last lap etc make good theatre?

And has anybody thought about how to handle a situation where a team combine Suzuka 1990 and Singapore 2009 tactics.

F1 is coming even more of circus, which I suppose is inevitable since the animal rights brigade have got real circuses banned.

[schmenke]

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3752/11436867454_42fcbdba2d.jpg

[janneppi]

Is that Bernie's this year's Christmas card?

[Doc Austin]

I like what Vettel had to say about it.


"This is absurd and punishes those who have worked hard during a whole season," he said. "I respect the old traditions in F1 and do not understand this new rule."

[Tazio]

Bernie told Autosport

It may well be that the rule is cancelled altogether at the next [Strategy Group] meeting in January. I think it should be the final three races or nothing. Like the medal idea I predict this abomination will "die in the dirt of Hollywood", metaphorically speaking of course. ;)

[Mark]

That would end up being like the much hated Chase in NASCAR.

[Koz]

They will ditch this idea, in exchange for something else the FIA/Bernie always originally wanted in the first place, but knew the teams would not agree to.....

Divide and conquer!!

Absolutely.

[zako85]

I think this is potentially bad news for underfunded teams. Every once in a while a mid-field team comes up with a brilliant technical idea, scores good points in the beginning of season, but then falls by the wayside in the second half of season due to the lack of funds for improving the chassis. Doubling the points at the end of season will only amplify this effect. With double points in the last three races of season, Brawn GPs double title wins may not have happened for example.

[steveaki13]

Is it correct that despite the uproar they are still going ahead with this farce.

I cant bare whats happening to F1.

[dj_bytedisaster]

Sadly yes. Ecclestone more or less blackmailed them into it. Deal went like : 'give me the double points and you lot will get your cost cap'.

A consequent boycot is the only thing left. Problem is, too many people will be too chicken to do it. Some people will pay money to see cars running about with ghastly penises having off their fronts (and we haven't even seen the 'bollock nose' that people like Scarbs and TJ13 expect to see on some designs, see picture)

http://thejudge13.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/2014-nose1.jpg

If the TV ratings went crashing in a great ball of fire, maybe some people in FIA la-la-land understand that they can't just ignore us indefinitely. After all, it's us viewers, who fork over the dough that the toad from Suffolk milks out of F1.

[minardi]

With the news this morning that the little man wants to make the last THREE races double points, I decided to investigate what a difference (if any) it'd have made in comparison to the right way (no double points), the wrong way (double points for last race), and his new idea of trying to appease the fans but not backing down.

Key:
A - no double points
B - double points for last race
C - double points for last three races

2013
A - Vettel wins title at race 16 of 19
B - Vettel wins title at race 16 of 19
C - Vettel wins title at race 17 of 19

2012
A - Vettel wins title at race 20 of 20
B - Alonso wins title at race 20 of 20
C - Alonso wins title at race 20 of 20

2011
A - Vettel wins title at race 15 of 19
B - Vettel wins title at race 16 of 19
C - Vettel wins title at race 17 of 19

2010
A - Vettel wins title at race 19 of 19
B - Vettel wins title at race 19 of 19
C - Vettel wins title at race 19 of 19

2009
A - Button wins title at race 16 of 17
B - Button wins title at race 17 of 17
C - Vettel wins title at race 17 of 17

2008
A - Hamilton wins title at race 18 of 18
B - Massa wins title at race 18 of 18
C - Massa wins title at race 18 of 18

2007
A - Kimi wins title at race 17 of 17
B - Kimi wins title at race 17 of 17
C - Kimi wins title at race 17 of 17

2006
A - Alonso wins title at race 18 of 18
B - Alonso wins title at race 18 of 18
C - Alonso wins title at race 18 of 18

2005
A - Alonso wins title at race 17 of 19
B - Alonso wins title at race 19 of 19 (Kimi would have been 19 behind with one race to go, with 20 up for grabs)
C - Alonso wins title at race 19 of 19 (Kimi would have been 13 behind with one race to go, with 20 up for grabs)

2004
A - Schumacher wins title at race 14 of 18
B - Schumacher wins title at race 16 of 18
C - Schumacher wins title at race 17 of 18

2003
A - Schumacher wins title at race 16 of 16
B - Kimi wins title at race 16 of 16
C - Schumacher wins title at race 16 of 16

I might consider doing more but we'll see…

[Tazio]

Those are some interesting figure thank you very much. There is one factor that is less tangible that I think needs to be taken into consideration. With the prior knowledge that the last race is worth double points, teams in the fight for the title, and ones that are just looking to gain places in the final standings would most likely institute an engine use strategy that will change the typical strategy, like teams generally using new engines for Monza, and Spa, that can not be applied in retrospect. However, now teams may risk using a tired engine at a race that they would normally use a fresher one in order to ensure that the double points race has a lower use engine. I think it would be rather amusing if it came down to the last race with three pilots in the hunt for the WDC (or three teams for the WCC) and all three took the penalty to have a fresh lump for Interlagos. Perhaps the rules should stipulate that the teams all get a new lump for that double points race.That is one reason I object to this rule. Of course it will be the same for everyone. Just a thought :crazy: .

[steveaki13]

I think to make it fair they should offer double points for every race of the season. ;)

[AndyL]

With the news this morning that the little man wants to make the last THREE races double points, I decided to investigate what a difference (if any) it'd have made in comparison to the right way (no double points), the wrong way (double points for last race), and his new idea of trying to appease the fans but not backing down.

Nice work Minardi, interesting to see the effect.


I think to make it fair they should offer double points for every race of the season. ;)

That's a good idea, but you're not thinking like Bernie. The logical conclusion is that the points for each race should be awarded in proportion to their sanctioning fee.

[minardi]

Brain seems a little fried today after this, so think these are right.

2002
A - Schumacher wins title at race 11 of 17
B - Schumacher wins title at race 12 of 17 (in Germany)
C - Schumacher wins title at race 15 of 17 (in Italy)

2001
A - Schumacher wins title at race 13 of 17
B - Schumacher wins title at race 14 of 17
C - Schumacher wins title at race 15 of 17

2000
A - Schumacher wins title at race 16 of 17
B - Schumacher wins title at race 17 of 17
C - Schumacher wins title at race 16 of 17
Note: Interesting to note that with double points in last three races, would have allowed MS to wrap title sooner than if it was double points for just the last race.

1999
A - Hakkinen wins title at race 16 of 16
B - Hakkinen wins title at race 16 of 16
C - Hakkinen wins title at race 16 of 16

1998
A - Hakkinen wins title at race 16 of 16
B - Hakkinen wins title at race 16 of 16
C - Hakkinen wins title at race 16 of 16

1997
A - Villeneuve wins title at race 17 of 17
B - Villeneuve wins title at race 17 of 17
C - Villeneuve wins title at race 17 of 17
Note: MS would have had the 1 point advantage over JV going into the last race in all three scenarios, so likely same incident during the final race.

1996
A - Hill wins title at race 16 of 16
B - Hill wins title at race 16 of 16
C - Hill wins title at race 16 of 16

1995
A - Schumacher wins title at race 15 of 17
B - Schumacher wins title at race 15 of 17
C - Schumacher wins title at race 16 of 17

1994
A - Schumacher wins title at race 16 of 16
B - Schumacher wins title at race 16 of 16
C - Schumacher wins title at race 16 of 16

1993
A - Prost wins title at race 14 of 16
B - Prost wins title at race 15 of 16
C - Prost wins title at race 15 of 16