If drivers gained points for pole....

[Hazell B]

.... what difference would it have made this year so far?

Also, would a point for fastest lap have altered anything?

Expect this gets asked every year, but I was just wondering if it would have changed much this season. Frankly, can't be bothered working it out myself, so thought I'd ask.

How would we feel about extra points being awarded for pole, fastest lap and perhaps even leading a whole lap of the race, by the way?

[tinchote]

Pole positions: KR 2, FM 4, FA 1, LH 4

Fastest laps: KR 4, FM 4, FA 2, LH 1

If drivers had received one point for pole and one for fastest lap, the current standings would be

LH 85
FA 76
FM 67
KR 66

Of course, with the current ridiculous system of qualifying on race fuel (minus 10 laps :s ), it doesn't make any sense to award a point for pole: half the grid would be qualifying on fumes to fight for that point.

[leopard]

I think as of this stage Ferrari would gratefully agree on this idea.

If it had to preferably to be in effect after McLaren win at least a title or two as a loophole Ferrari to get closer to McLaren and make the competition tighter.

[wmcot]

I used to think this would be a good idea, but now I realize that that quickest cars are just going to get the point anyway and that would only widen the gap to the rest of the field. Sure, there might be an occasional surprise by a car running on fumes, but I still doubt that Spyker or TR or even Honda would be able to pull it off.

[janneppi]

Of course, with the current ridiculous system of qualifying on race fuel (minus 10 laps :s ), it doesn't make any sense to award a point for pole: half the grid would be qualifying on fumes to fight for that point.
Actually that might not be as bad as it sounds, with the current system there are 6 "sure" drivers for Q3, Ferraris, Macs and BMW's. If you add Renault, Williams and Toyota, you get pretty much the 12 drivers who can go to top ten.
Macs and Ferraris would stand to loose more points going with too little fuel loads. BMW would have a hard time justifying bad race strategy since they get what, 5-6 points on average per race?
Rest might just try and succeed, what would happen then?

You would have maybe three-four cars in font of the big boys who would go maybe slightly faster than the top teams for the first laps but would be caught after maybe five laps if the "pole cars" haven't pitted yet. :)
For the next few laps the top teams would bunch up and with any luck, try to pass the "pole cars" in front. those with low fuel would have to pit quie early since the current pit time for light front runners is about lap 18.

I don't think it would ruin races, might cause overtaking, but most likely a big Trulli tran. :)

Now, what about awarding for the pole lap in Q1 and Q2, that wouldn't change strategies and would give them more meaning for top teams who now run the first qualies as practice.

[ArrowsFA1]

Of course, with the current ridiculous system of qualifying on race fuel (minus 10 laps :s ), it doesn't make any sense to award a point for pole: half the grid would be qualifying on fumes to fight for that point.
:up: Pole position today isn't worthy of a point. Qualifying is all about raceday strategy, not outright pace.

Back in the days (old fart moment :p : ) when drivers screwed up the boost, stuck on a set of sticky tyres that just about lasted a lap, and headed out for a 'do or die' lap we all knew what we were watching and what the intention was. It was driver v circuit showing who was the fastest car/driver combination on the day. Thoughts about the race waited until Sunday. Qualifying was an event in itself, and the driver who put himself on pole deserved a point back then.

[Dave B]

As is so often the case, re-arrange the following words:

head, nail, Arrows, hit, has, the, on, the.

[Flat.tyres]

F1 is about a race. not how quick you qualify or if you are so far out of the points that you come into the pits, take on a capful of fuel, new tyres and create a hazard out on track by circleing slowly to get a window to blast the fastest lap.

next we have a point for the best turned out car, the prettiest pit babes (not a bad idea) and the best turned out motorhome.

a race is a race. you win and its champange and laurels. thats what its about.

[tinchote]

:up: Pole position today isn't worthy of a point. Qualifying is all about raceday strategy, not outright pace.

Back in the days (old fart moment :p : ) when drivers screwed up the boost, stuck on a set of sticky tyres that just about lasted a lap, and headed out for a 'do or die' lap we all knew what we were watching and what the intention was. It was driver v circuit showing who was the fastest car/driver combination on the day. Thoughts about the race waited until Sunday. Qualifying was an event in itself, and the driver who put himself on pole deserved a point back then.

:up:


F1 is about a race. not how quick you qualify or if you are so far out of the points that you come into the pits, take on a capful of fuel, new tyres and create a hazard out on track by circleing slowly to get a window to blast the fastest lap.

next we have a point for the best turned out car, the prettiest pit babes (not a bad idea) and the best turned out motorhome.

a race is a race. you win and its champange and laurels. thats what its about.

Could be. But your reasoning is based on the current rules of qualifying with fuel (and it that case I agree completely). A qualy "the old way" was a competition in itself, and I don't see why it couldn't have awarded a point. Although, as a general consideration, a point-for-polo is probably a good idea in a more levelled field than F1's.

[jens]

Hard to say. Maybe a team - who qualifies into Top10, but realizes that it would be hard to challenge good points in the race - will try to go very light and fight for that point. But I doubt, because as there is only one point available in the quali and only for the win, then I think it won't be that much to make significant changes in strategies - it means race strategy remains primary and more important over achieving a top result in qualifying.

But in some way it would be interesting to see, how would top teams choose strategies for their drivers. I think drivers would prefer to have one lap lighther fuel load than their team-mate...

[Eki]

Pole positions: KR 2, FM 4, FA 1, LH 4

Fastest laps: KR 4, FM 4, FA 2, LH 1

That's quite interesting. LH has 4 poles and FA just 1, but FA has 2 fastest laps and LH just 1. Could it be that LH has started with lighter fuel load more often than FA? Actually, the trend looks similar for FM and KR too. Maybe those starting with a lighter load have an advantage for the whole race in average?

[leopard]

:up: Pole position today isn't worthy of a point. Qualifying is all about raceday strategy, not outright pace.

yeah nail/head

Point for fastest lap we cannot judge the winner by ourself in plain view, very qualitative wise and not fun.

Qualifying is not the race but only to determine grid position for the driver.
The idea of giving point for pole actually F1 can simply adopt race system of A1 compressing sprint and feature race. This doesn't seem everyone is happy to implement A1 stuff in F1 ;)

[tinchote]

That's quite interesting. LH has 4 poles and FA just 1, but FA has 2 fastest laps and LH just 1. Could it be that LH has started with lighter fuel load more often than FA? Actually, the trend looks similar for FM and KR too. Maybe those starting with a lighter load have an advantage for the whole race in average?


I don't have the time right now to check the stats, but my feeling is the opposite, the driver with the heavier load tends to be the quickets. The problem with this (and probably the reason why the stats are not that clear) is that sometimes the heavier driver is overtaken at the start and this ruins his race.

[Flat.tyres]

That's quite interesting. LH has 4 poles and FA just 1, but FA has 2 fastest laps and LH just 1. Could it be that LH has started with lighter fuel load more often than FA? Actually, the trend looks similar for FM and KR too. Maybe those starting with a lighter load have an advantage for the whole race in average?

not the case.

think it was Gary Walker or Hendersen that claimed the only reason Lewis was getting so many poles was that McLaren were favouring him in qualifying all the time. It actually transpired that Lewis was noticibly stopping later on average in his first stop.

Tinchote

sorry mate but I struggleing to understand this one? I think that a lighter fuel load = less wear on the tyres so when the fuel is low, the tyres are in a better state to do quicker laps + they havent done as many miles?

[leopard]

The heavier (fueled) car may go faster at the sloping downward track by a significant gradient, while at the flat and the sloping upward track it must go otherwise.
Generally, the heavier fueled car running slower.

[Storm]

.... what difference would it have made this year so far?

...
...
How would we feel about extra points being awarded for pole, fastest lap and perhaps even leading a whole lap of the race, by the way?

A point for pole would be a good addition but only if we go to single lap quallies or old system of low fuel qualifying.

Fastest lap I am not so sure since the guys capable of putting in one don't really do it at the end if they are cruising, but actually maybe that would be another incentive to push on as well.

Leading a whole lap makes no sense at all as any sundry driver can lead a race if the Safety Car is out or he is on a 1-stopper and all others on 2 and he has no realistic chance of holding on to that position.

[tinchote]

Tinchote

sorry mate but I struggleing to understand this one? I think that a lighter fuel load = less wear on the tyres so when the fuel is low, the tyres are in a better state to do quicker laps + they havent done as many miles?

We are not talking about a 50kg weight difference here. Most often than not, the driver stopping later ends up ahead: so it doesn't seem like tyre degradation plays a big role.

[leopard]

It's just because the lighter car running faster, as long as the degradation of the tire is within the limit they are still usable and workable for braking, I think the less grip may support the car going faster.

[ioan]

... I think the less grip may support the car going faster.

Completely wrong.

[leopard]

Completely wrong.
I guess so :D

[Flat.tyres]

We are not talking about a 50kg weight difference here. Most often than not, the driver stopping later ends up ahead: so it doesn't seem like tyre degradation plays a big role.

Sorry to bring this up again Tin but I really have to clarify this.

You are correct when you claim that if a driver qualifies and starts well, then a heavier fuel load is preferable. Obviously, the longer you can run IF you can keep with the cars in front, then you have a chance to leap frog them at the pits.

The big problem is that you have to balance the weight of the fuel with qualifying position.

Say you have 4 laps of fuel extra but this compromises you to 5th on the grid and because of the additional fuel load, you end up 6th from the start. The cars spread out and you end up 3 seconds behind the car in front who is 3 seconds behind the.... you get my point and that is a closely packed field!!

You still have the problem that you are using your tyres more with that weight so in fact and run longer on them thus wearing them further so when you have optimum fuel for your fastest laps, your tyres have done more work than someone who started with 5 laps less fuel.

Otherwise we would see everyone starting with a full tank.

Of course, other things come into play such as condition of the track, temp, traffic but generally, the less tyres have to do, the better they run.