| Author | Message | ||
| Jack (Gilles27)
Intermediate Member Username: Gilles27 Post Number: 1448 Registered: 3-2002 |
I don't mind the points allocation so much. After all, the order was unaffected. What I would like to see them do is change qualifying again. I was thinking they should run Friday in the old format, either with 12 laps or unrestricted, and then let that set the order for Saturday. On top of that, qualifying order should then be an aggregate of the two sessions, making Friday's session actually worth something. | ||
| Thomas I (Wax)
Member Username: Wax Post Number: 565 Registered: 7-2003 |
OK - Made a table - it outlines what the individual driver's results would be under each historical scoring system in the following manner: 2003-???? | 1991-2002 | 1961-1990 | 1960 | 1950-1959 '50-'59 is of particular interest, as fastest qualifying times were counted as additional single points. Once you see it, Captain Obvious will whisper sweet nothings to you. Some of the results may surprise you - particularly, well... I'm not going to say. What's going to be *really* fun is figuring out the Constructor's Championships - there were a bizarre number of choices throughout the years as to what, when, where and why as far as points. That will be explained in detail on the page it will be on. For the time being, this table is presented for consumption sans additional footnotes explaining the changes on this page: wax's table o'results | ||
| rich stephens (Dino2400)
Member Username: Dino2400 Post Number: 633 Registered: 10-2001 |
The sad thing for Jordan is that the new scoring system was his idea! And it ended up costing his team millions (which he could really use right about now...) I prefer the old method. Racing should be about winning, with no rewards for being consistent close losers. AMA motorcyle racing has the same stupid scoring and there have been champions with a few wins in years others have won six or more races. It's a joke. | ||
| Jim Avery (Boxer12)
Member Username: Boxer12 Post Number: 387 Registered: 6-2003 |
I think most folks are ok with the present system because MS and Ferrari won, but imagine the uproar if KR won the Driver's C'ship and McLaren or Williams the Constructors. I saw two McLaren drivers on the podium, now imagine JPM there instead of RB, but in 3rd, and that MS was taken out of the race by his brother, and that RB was taken out by JPM. How many would be happy with the present system?  | ||
| DGS (Dgs)
Member Username: Dgs Post Number: 390 Registered: 5-2003 |
"it will just take a little longer" Very little. I ran off the same old v. new comparison. With last year's points systems, the constructors' title would still have come down to the wire, and the drivers' championship would only have been clinched at Indy. As mentioned, the big losers were Jordan and Fisichella, while Jag gained a bit. But the really old point system used to have nine points for winning. It was changed to ten, because only gaining three points for winning wasn't thought to be enough. Now it's down to two. Yuck. | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Advanced Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 2566 Registered: 10-2002 |
Tillman, thanks for that statistic. That kinda says it all: It doesn't matter, the good guys will always come to the front, it will just take a little longer and make the journey more interesting. | ||
| Tillman Strahan (Tillman)
Member Username: Tillman Post Number: 989 Registered: 11-2001 |
This was posted on usenet by "M S"
| ||
| Byron Faber (Adrenln328)
Junior Member Username: Adrenln328 Post Number: 58 Registered: 9-2003 |
I agree that this season was filled with more tension (some would call that excitement), but I actually prefer it when I'm comfortable with a larger Ferrari lead. It just seems logical for race wins to mean more in the points standings. I'd vote for a greater gap between 1st & 2nd. I'd also vote for more overtaking possibilities, but that is a dead horse that has been beaten here too much, I understand. | ||
| rob guess (Beast)
Member Username: Beast Post Number: 414 Registered: 5-2003 |
Jim; How about this for a revised points system. Score the drivers one point for each position that they finish running in at the end of the race. I.E. 1 pt = 1 st, 2 pts = 2nd, 3 pts = 3rd, Etc. If a driver DNF's the race give him 20 pts or how ever many cars are on the grid at the start. If the driver DNS's the race he recevies 25 Pts. This way all drivers get points for racing and the driver with the least amount of points wins the championship. Lets look at this season and see how it would look like. MS 74 Points KR 95 Points JPM 107 Points RS 132 Points RB 140 Points constructors standings Ferrari 214 McLaren 237 Williams 239 End results are almost the same but with a bigger gap between Micheal and Kimi with a couple of places moved around. This system makes it important to finish the race and finish high every weekend. Rob Guess "The Other Rob" | ||
| Jim Avery (Boxer12)
Member Username: Boxer12 Post Number: 343 Registered: 6-2003 |
IMHO-Even if Raikkenan or Montoya got second all year long, I would take the guy who wins 6 and give him the trophy if it was up to me. Trophies are for WINNERS!!!!! | ||
| Mike B (Srt_mike)
Member Username: Srt_mike Post Number: 356 Registered: 12-2002 |
From a pragmatic standpoing, the WC is supposed to go to the driver who gave the best performance. And by best performance I mean went out there and did the best overall job, meaning combination of driver, car, luck, and race strategy. So let's say driver A wins half the races, but is stubborn and bad-tempered, so has DNF's in all other races. Driver B, meanwhile, is patient and pensive and comes in 2nd in every race. He doesn't take the risks A does but he always finishes on the podium. Who gave the overall better performance? Who "deserves" to be champ? I would guess B does. And B would be the one that wins. | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Intermediate Member Username: Psk Post Number: 1006 Registered: 11-2002 |
Jim and Andreas,
I think the difference is that we only have 6 cars that can possibly make it to the podium now. Thus even if I drove the McLaren or Williams I have a chance of scoring points ... lets face it most of the other cars don't even make it to the finish and if they do their race pace is a joke. I think this is the problem nowadays ... or the persieved (sp?) problem? When Rosberg won the championship the whole season was a battle and to make it into the top 6 and score points was something ... What we have now is 6 drivers that can serious challenge for the title ... thus if you are the worst of that bunch (ie. Coulthard) you can actually score points and if the others suffer some bad luck you might even challenge for the WC!!! ... just crazy! Or is this just some sort of strategy to make 1 year actually Coulthard's year Pete | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Intermediate Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 2464 Registered: 10-2002 |
Almost correct Jim, two caveats: It doesn't matter for either championship, which Ferrari gets what place (points are the same and MS only needs 1 point anyway). Second Raikkoenen drives the McLaren and Mc Laren has NO chance anymore to clinch the constructor's title. So it only gets as thight as you describe it, if Montoya (or RS) wins. | ||
| Jim Avery (Boxer12)
Member Username: Boxer12 Post Number: 323 Registered: 6-2003 |
Then if Raikkenon or RS wins the race at Suzuka, F#1 would have to take at least 3rd and F#2 has to beat Williams #2 for Ferrari to take the Constructors, right? | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Intermediate Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 2463 Registered: 10-2002 |
Constructor's points are simply the sum of the drivers' points. Ferrari leads currently with 3 points. So your scenario would be true, but the possibilities are endless with 10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 points for the drivers. | ||
| Jim Avery (Boxer12)
Member Username: Boxer12 Post Number: 321 Registered: 6-2003 |
Speaking of points. What about the Constructor's C'ship? If Williams wins at Suzuka, is it true then they take it unless F#1 finishes at least 3rd and F#2 beats Williams #2? | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Intermediate Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 2462 Registered: 10-2002 |
What do we call Keke Rosberg? A world champion. Coincidentally another fin. I agree that it would leave a sour taste. It doesn't seem right, but neither does Rosberg's title. | ||
| Jim Avery (Boxer12)
Member Username: Boxer12 Post Number: 319 Registered: 6-2003 |
OK, so let's say MS gets a "DNF" in Japan, and Raikkenon gets the win and the C'ship. How can a guy with 3 wins take the prize over a guy with six and call himself Drivers Champion? It just wouldn't be right. It would be a joke. I agree with Pete that a point or two for pole should be worth something and would make it interesting. It would get more teams taking chances on qualifying anyway. | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Intermediate Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 2459 Registered: 10-2002 |
I rather have the WC going to the wire than last year's decision in France with a third of the season left for "gentlemen races". It doesn't have to go to the last race, but last year was ridiculous and a shame for the championship. I agree with you, that we only have seen a few good races this year. But that's got little to do with the point system. Last year it was a lot more boring IMHO (and again I'm a Ferrari fan, but I don't want to see processions, but racing). As I said many times before, getting better races and passing can be easily done by...you know what. | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Intermediate Member Username: Psk Post Number: 1004 Registered: 11-2002 |
The main problem I have with the points system that we have currently ... is that there is not enough incentive to push harder for that win. Much easier and safer to just cruise and take the 2nd place ... hardly good for spectators, etc. We have enough problems about 'supposedly' lack of passing without making it less attractive ... In the end ... so the WC comes down to the last race. What some are forgetting is that I have not seen more than a couple of decent races this year ... just follow the leaders with the finishing order sorted out in the first corner (barring mechanical failures). Pete | ||
| Mr. Doody (Doody)
Intermediate Member Username: Doody Post Number: 1879 Registered: 11-2001 |
i think it's sub-optimal to have the WC tied up so early in the season like it was last year. i hear the point of "6 wins should damn well mean something serious" but on the other hand, this is a spectator sport, so they need a structure that keeps the spectators around. last year's setup was not such a good structure in that regard. just as everybody wants best-of-N playoffs and series to go to the Nth game, this worked out optimally this year since it's down to suzuka. doody. | ||
| Andreas Forrer (Tifosi12)
Intermediate Member Username: Tifosi12 Post Number: 2457 Registered: 10-2002 |
Each to his own. I like the new system, has made this year more interesting. I like the fact, that the WC hasn't been decided, even if that means, that we're hurting. So be it. In another year, it could be in our favor. With many races now fought very closely I don't think a victory deserves that much extra points. | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Intermediate Member Username: Psk Post Number: 1001 Registered: 11-2002 |
Agree I would like to see the points return to how they were (er, maybe a 3 point gap like you say) BUT a single point for pole, and a single point for the races fastest lap. Pete | ||
| Jim Avery (Boxer12)
Member Username: Boxer12 Post Number: 311 Registered: 6-2003 |
It seems inconceivable that MS could win 6 races and still not win the driver's title. Maybe there should be a 3 pt diff between first and second. I agree the current system rewards consistancy, and creates fan interest, but this is rediculous that someone with half the wins could win the title. |