How should WC be made?

[MacFeegle]

We have thing now where best driver is second although being 3x better win than team mate.

Bernie may have point with Gold medal. It reward win. I not like idea but possible mediocre is rewarded with points.

If Lewis win all remaining races but break down in last 2 so has 16 victories and Nico wins 1st, last and next last races, he can be WC.

Funny eh :)

[journeyman racer]

C'mon man! It's only a 1/5 into the season. What about when Massa won more races than Hamilton on 08? Now you're worried about it? How about When Nico wins, he gets 25pts, and when Hamilton wins, he gets 27pts?

[edv]

Huh?
The WDC does not go to the best driver...it goes to the driver who earns the most points...it's impossible to determine who the *best* driver is.

[anfield5]

As with any championship in any sport, the overall champion is the one who scored the most point during the season. It is not always the best team that wins football leagues, the best team didn't win the Americas Cup etc etc etc.

If the quite silly golden gong thing was ever adopted the season would be over by little over 1/2 distance in your scenario. Hamilton for example wins 9 races out of the first 10, with 8 races to go the season is dead.

[Big Ben]

me not understand. me think we talk about toilet. medal idea is $h1t but still not about toilet. me out of here.

[inimitablestoo]

The final F3000 season started in exactly the same way (except in reverse) - Liuzzi won the first three races and retired from the fourth, while Toccacelo finished second in the first three and won the fourth. Toccacelo led the points 34-30 as a result. Points system? F1's top eight system, as used prior to the current one.

Every points system will throw up its anomalies - about the only one I can think of that would give Hamilton the lead at this stage would be, funnily enough, the 1991-2002 F1 system of 10 for a win and 6 for second.

Time to lob in a grenade: how about a NASCAR Chase-style format? ;)

[MacFeegle]

I didnt realise no speculation allowed ;) Look at scenario where one driver wins 16 races and one 3 and wins Championship. I thought it funny looking at possibility, not that medals was a good idea but thanks for telling how points work. Always mystery :laugh: People too serious :)

[SGWilko]

me not understand. me think we talk about toilet. medal idea is $h1t but still not about toilet. me out of here.

WC Boggs would tell you WC should be made from porcelain, if the workforce not on strike.

Say 'hello Joey'.....

[journeyman racer]

I didnt realise no speculation allowed ;) Look at scenario where one driver wins 16 races and one 3 and wins Championship. As if that's going to happen.


I thought it funny looking at possibility, not that medals was a good idea but thanks for telling how points work. Always mystery :laugh: People too serious :)In principle, I like the "medals" system. However, F1 is far too imbalanced for it to be a serious proposition. It has been discussed on the Nascar board. My opinion of it was that the only professional motorsport series where it could work was in Nascar. They've sufficient amount of competitors and races for it to become a legitimate title win.

[Tazio]

Huh?
The WDC does not go to the best driver...it goes to the driver who earns the most points...it's impossible to determine who the *best* driver is.Well stated edv. Here is a novel concept Macdaddy-o; Why not watch all the races very intently and with a high degree of impartiality, and then formulate an opinion of who you think the best pilot is. Inevitably it will be somewhat subjective. Or you can drone on about how The Boss, or any other pilot is the best as though convincing others makes your opinion legitimate, if that's what flips your pancake. ;)

[MacFeegle]

Mr Tazio. It impossible to watch a race with impartiality. Do you?

2 best drivers on the grid Fernando and Lewis I think. Alonso driven well 2014 so far but Lewis back to previous best I see. No need convince others. My thoughts only but hard to argue different. Car very good but Lewis driven it without fault so far which all a driver can do.

[D-Type]

I'll probably get flamed for this: I like the medals system. The object of racing - be it a F1 race or a primary school egg & spoon race - is to win. so, the champion should be the one who is best at achieving the objective, ie the person with the most wins.
Alternatively, a points system that rewards winners, such as 32, 22, 16, 11, 8, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1.

For constructors it's different. Their objective is to provide both their drivers with the chance of winning. The difference is they should be rewarded for coming close and for providing a reliable car hence they need a smaller difference between 1st and 2nd etc, ie somethiong like the present points.

Admittedly, there is the chance that with a medals system, the Championship could be tied up early. So what! Will that make the drivers any less competitive? They will want to beat the new champion and all the other drivers just as much as they wanted to beat the championship leader and all the other drivers earlier in the season.

The same goes for double points - why must the championship have to go down to the last race?

[Tazio]

Mr Tazio. It impossible to watch a race with impartiality. Do you?
Not if you watch a recording of it after your emotional viewing of it live. I find it quite easy to dissect it impartially the second time through.



2 best drivers on the grid Fernando and Lewis I think. Alonso driven well 2014 so far but Lewis back to previous best I see. No need convince others. My thoughts only but hard to argue different. Car very good but Lewis driven it without fault so far which all a driver can do.Listen, I think "The Boss" and Fred may be the best pilots of the current field. However I also think Kettle, and Hulk may be as good, I really can't say with 100% conviction, and I sure as hell don't to care if anyone agrees with me.

[Knocker69]

Four races does not a season make....hmmmmm?

[COD]

It is championship with many races, because it is supposed to award not only speed but also reliability.

If you want to measure just outright speed, it could be just 1 race to decide who is "fastest"

[anfield5]

The final F3000 season started in exactly the same way (except in reverse) - Liuzzi won the first three races and retired from the fourth, while Toccacelo finished second in the first three and won the fourth. Toccacelo led the points 34-30 as a result. Points system? F1's top eight system, as used prior to the current one.

Every points system will throw up its anomalies - about the only one I can think of that would give Hamilton the lead at this stage would be, funnily enough, the 1991-2002 F1 system of 10 for a win and 6 for second.

Time to lob in a grenade: how about a NASCAR Chase-style format? ;)

Ooh don't go there even in jest. :)

[rjbetty]

The final F3000 season started in exactly the same way (except in reverse) - Liuzzi won the first three races and retired from the fourth, while Toccacelo finished second in the first three and won the fourth. Toccacelo led the points 34-30 as a result.

OMGosh I was just going to bring that up, then saw you'd beaten me to it!


Time to lob in a grenade: how about a NASCAR Chase-style format? ;)

Noooooooooooooooooooo. Have Mercy!

[airshifter]

Well stated edv. Here is a novel concept Macdaddy-o; Why not watch all the races very intently and with a high degree of impartiality, and then formulate an opinion of who you think the best pilot is. Inevitably it will be somewhat subjective. Or you can drone on about how The Boss, or any other pilot is the best as though convincing others makes your opinion legitimate, if that's what flips your pancake. ;)

That's the trick... remaining impartial. I rag on my favorite drivers as much as anyone else, and also try to be just as forgiving of drivers that I don't care for much. In my case I don't really have a "favorite" driver in a fanboy sense, though I do tend to lean towards the guys who will race hard for a position vs the type that will play it safe to finish every time.

And really even if you remain impartial, there is the car factor. You can take two excellent cars and if the pilots don't like the balance of the car or whatever suits their style, then it might not be an excellent car for them. Case in point is drivers that prefer oversteer to understeer and visa versa.

There are really just too many factors through the season to unsure the best driver always wins, even if they all drove the same cars. At some point luck comes into the picture, and pit support alone has robbed many drivers of higher finishes.

[Doc Austin]

I think it's ridiculous that three wins in a row can't overcome the points lost in a DNF.

The double points is a farce too. It's simply a means for dragging out the championship to the last race. If they wanted double points to really mean something, pay them at the classic venues that also mean something: Monoco, Silverstone and Monza, and maybe even Spa. It's sad that any event has become more important than those true jewels.

[journeyman racer]

I think it's ridiculous that three wins in a row can't overcome the points lost in a DNF. Does it really bother you that much? After all, Rosberg has finished 2nd 3 times. That's still pretty good. It's damage limitation for him, and he done it well so far. Do you want 2nd place to get 12 points?


The double points is a farce too. It's simply a means for dragging out the championship to the last race. .Or it could mean a bigger margin of victory of the title winner?

[Doc Austin]

Does it really bother you that much? ?

Not really. I do think if you win three of the first four races you should be leading the points.

I'de like to put my twist on the double points thing, though. I'de like to see Monoco, Silverstone and Monza pay double points because they are so historically significant. I mean, is really Abu Dabi more important than Monoco?

[Tazio]

They are and should be equally important, that is where our objections lie : street pizza: :lightbulb: http://i46.tinypic.com/hv9ul3.gif

[airshifter]

Not really. I do think if you win three of the first four races you should be leading the points.

I'de like to put my twist on the double points thing, though. I'de like to see Monoco, Silverstone and Monza pay double points because they are so historically significant. I mean, is really Abu Dabi more important than Monoco?

I think the points system works, but it imperfect. Being that the "system" can't determine if Lewis took himself and/or another driver out due to driver error, as as in the reality of this car just had a car failure, they points system can only do so much to correct for failures.

And in the case of F1, if a sound system was made that compensated drivers for issues beyond their control, a lot of teams would produce "grenades" that could lead a race but likely fail before the end. It's really next to impossible to come up with a system that rates drivers IMO, and that is where all our subjective variations come into the picture.

[inimitablestoo]

Double points should only be used if - as per the Le Mans 24 Hours and the 500-mile IndyCar races - the event is longer than the normal races. It makes no sense to me for one 200-mile event to be worth twice as much as another 200-mile event. (Give or take about 10 miles; in fact, Monaco is quite a bit shorter if anything)

[D28]

For me the important thing is historical continuity, set the point system and leave it alone.

By luck or design the FIA got the podium differentials about right with the 1961-90 values 9 6 4
The drop between each is about 33%. I would count all races which has been done since 1991.

If one wishes to make a win more valuable, I have no problem with a 10, 6 4 drop used 1991-2002

If points must be awarded to 10th, then simply doubling those values would keep the proportions, 20 12 and 8
The remaining points could be filled in 7 on down; I would only go as far as 8, but, it is the podium values that matter they will determine the title in most years.

The present system does not reward a win enough. 18 is 72% of 25 too much, similarly 15 is 83% of 18.
If you must start with 25, the podium should be 25, 15 10 and so on.

I would not entertain extra points for certain races, this rule is almost certain to come back to haunt F1
I would be open to awarding a point for fastest lap, done until 1959. It could prove interesting and rewarding the fastest driver doesn't seem a bad idea. It goes without saying I am completely indifferent as to when the title is decided.
F1 should be too.

[anfield5]

If they must do a double points thingy (which THEY SHOULDN'T!!) why not allow each driver to pick which 1 race is worth double points?

Each car would be allowed 1 double points race per season. So for example if Maldonado chooses Spain for his double points race, then later in the season is dumped, the new driver doesn't get to choose because the second car from 'the black team formerly known as Renault' has already had its double points race.

[inimitablestoo]

If points must be awarded to 10th, then simply doubling those values would keep the proportions
Or indeed, use the top 10 system that was in place for many years in the WRC and other championships (British F3 adopted it from 1994): 20-15-12-10-8-6-4-3-2-1. I've banged this drum many a time, but this system worked well in those championships, so it seems surprising* F1 forgot about it and went down its own route when it switched to a top 10 system in 2010.

*OK, not that surprising. This is F1 we're talking about :rolleyes:

[journeyman racer]

If the points allocation above was used, and Hamilton/Rosberg scored another 1-2 in Spain, in that order. Hamilton would only be level with Rosberg in the points, as opposed to leading outright with the current points. This, after four races! I reckon a bit of a stink would be caused about that points allocation.

[Tazio]

For me the important thing is historical continuity, set the point system and leave it alone.

By luck or design the FIA got the podium differentials about right with the 1961-90 values 9 6 4
The drop between each is about 33%. I would count all races which has been done since 1991.

If one wishes to make a win more valuable, I have no problem with a 10, 6 4 drop used 1991-2002

If points must be awarded to 10th, then simply doubling those values would keep the proportions, 20 12 and 8
The remaining points could be filled in 7 on down; I would only go as far as 8, but, it is the podium values that matter they will determine the title in most years.

The present system does not reward a win enough. 18 is 72% of 25 too much, similarly 15 is 83% of 18.
If you must start with 25, the podium should be 25, 15 10 and so on.

I would not entertain extra points for certain races, this rule is almost certain to come back to haunt F1
I would be open to awarding a point for fastest lap, done until 1959. It could prove interesting and rewarding the fastest driver doesn't seem a bad idea. It goes without saying I am completely indifferent as to when the title is decided.
F1 should be too.
Very good post! I also believe that there should be historical continuity in scoring. Personally I like the system employed from 1991-2002 as it rewards the winner equitably. I would begrudgingly accept amending it by adding fractional points down to p8, making the scoring 10 6 4 3 2 1 .50 .25

[journeyman racer]

Very good post! I also believe that there should be historical continuity in scoring. Personally I like the system employed from 1991-2002 as it rewards the winner equitably. I would begrudgingly accept amending it by adding fractional points down to p8, making the scoring 10 6 4 3 2 1 .50 .25How about offering 7th and 8th one point as well?

[Tazio]

I think that might deprive us of battles for 6th and 7th.

[journeyman racer]

I don't think we'd be deprived of much tbh.

[Tazio]

I thought that the battles for sixth, and seventh in Bahrain were worth watching. It also could have brought Fred, and Kimi who were in a good fight for miniscule points into play for that position if Seb, FM, and or VB had come together. It sure seemed like it mattered to those pilots.

[D-Type]

As logical as offering 20 points for any podium position!

[journeyman racer]

As logical as offering 20 points for any podium position!
No it isn't. Podium positions are significant results. 6th -8th are weak positions, a closer level of competitiveness, and merely an afterthought. Are you saying it's better to offer fractions of points?

My idea came from the comp that I compete in. Where the class points awarded are 6 down to 2 for the first 5 places, then 1 for each place from 6th. Either way, worrying about the spectacle and significance of the battle for 6th is highly unusual imo.

If you did offer 20pts for a podium positions, it would eliminate the use of team orders. 99% of the time anyway.

[Tazio]

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. However the positions that teams end up down the field has consequences directly influencing prize money, and until that aspect of F1 is changed those positions are germane. This isn't your club race bro!

[MacFeegle]

Yes Mr Tazio. It is that way and that why we get fight way down grid. Single point can be worth big $$$ at end of season.

Brits like irony but irony is F1 ideal is about race to win but driver who winning most race may not be champ. :confused:

More I think about it more like Medal idea but no call it medals. Instead, have table for championship based on race wins but still have points for driver and team position. That way, driver with most success / victory win championship. Make sure champ is rewarded for victory and not just doing well. Points sort out level of losers :)

[journeyman racer]

Is there any problems with the points allocation now?


Yes Mr Tazio. It is that way and that why we get fight way down grid. Single point can be worth big $$$ at end of season.

Brits like irony but irony is F1 ideal is about race to win but driver who winning most race may not be champ. :confused:

More I think about it more like Medal idea but no call it medals. Instead, have table for championship based on race wins but still have points for driver and team position. That way, driver with most success / victory win championship. Make sure champ is rewarded for victory and not just doing well. Points sort out level of losers :)Hamilton fans won't like the idea of a medals system. It means Hamilton still wouldn't have won a title!

[journeyman racer]

Well. With Rosberg conceding the title lead, and all the comparisons with 88 to this season. What about using the 88 point rules? Only the best 11 results count?

[Tazio]

The same goes for double points - why must the championship have to go down to the last race?
I was reading this article:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/formulaone/article-2700080/Toto-Wolff-speaks-against-double-points-Mercedes-boss-claims-one-driver-require-psychological-treatment.html
and I'm sure Wolff was being facetious, but as messed up as it would be, I hope it happens (not the 'psychological treatment') just to shame the FIA. This was a bad idea from the start, and I think it will ruin more than one drivers final standing position in the end, then maybe they will ax it.



Toto Wolff speaks out against double-points system as Mercedes boss claims one of his drivers will require 'psychological treatment' should they lose

[N. Jones]

We have thing now where best driver is second although being 3x better win than team mate.

Bernie may have point with Gold medal. It reward win. I not like idea but possible mediocre is rewarded with points.

If Lewis win all remaining races but break down in last 2 so has 16 victories and Nico wins 1st, last and next last races, he can be WC.

Funny eh :)

It should be determined like it always has - most points wins. Even with Hamilton being on the losing end of the win count he is still one win and a tenth place behind Nico.
I have no problem with that.