To me, the new point system is quite strange, as I had just become used to the system from 2003 and on (although, it didn't change THAT much). Let me know what you guys think, I'd love to hear what you all have to say.
The gap is still the same first to second in terms of percentages which is annoying as my main fault with the system hasn't been addressed. However there is a large spread past the podium and points do go back further. The extension of the points is nice as it will increase the resolution of the latter places in the constructors championship. For the past while the final places have been determined based on one good strategy call in the wet etc. The new system should give us a more accurate representation of pace of the tail-enders relative to each other. All in all, could be worse, thankfully we didn't go with medals.
Well, it basically boils down to this. I want the driver with the most wins of the season to be the champion, not the one that's more consistent. Remember 2003? Schumi's 6 wins to Kimi's 1 win. Imagine if Kimi had indeed won the WDC that year. Won't it look stupid?
But what if Schumacher had won the first 6 GP's and then crashed out of every other race due to driver error. Meanwhile Kimi wins one race and finishes every other race in 2nd place, right behind the winner?. Would it be fair that a driver who failed to finish 12 races through his own fault should be rated above a driver who very nearly won every GP of the year?.
Well, thats something that never happened before If you replaced Schumi, in your analysis with say....Cold Heart, then i'd believe you
Everyone is being fooled by the FIA. The gap isn't really 5pts. You are comparing 25pts vs 10pts. When you do the math it's still less then 3pts gap with the current system. The system is still about being consistent then winning. No one will be pushing for wins the risk/reward isn't there. The old(billion times better) 10,6,4,3,2,1 system would mean that 2nd place would have to have at least a 10pt gap with the new system. Ahh well at least Max Mosley has finally retired but it will take a few years to fix the damage.
Thats my point. IIRC, that format was used since 1993(?), until MS came along and made F1 his playground, and hence the FIA changed it.
I liked this format so much better too. A bunch of us sat at an SCCA dinner a couple of years ago and came up with the idea (and sent it to the FIA, never to be heard from...) of starting with the old 10 point system then incrementing the points and the gaps with every race. Then at the end of the year one could conceivably make up more ground on front runners who wouldn't be able to rest on their laurels. It has its drawbacks - races at the end of the year are more important than those at the beginning being glowing one. But there is probably no real perfect way to score a championship season. The announcement yesterday of a possible points award for pole and fast lap seem interesting. More so than points... the regress on fuel stops and testing is just asinine IMHO... Rick
The most recent discussions of the Formula One Teams Association include a proposal to add extra World Championship points for pole position and for the fastest lap of the race. The idea will go to the FIA Formula 1 Sporting Working Group and then to the F1 Commission and will ultimately be accepted or rejected by the FIA World Council. This will be in addition to the recent change which has introduced a new 25-20-15-10-8-6-5-3-2-1 scale of points, rather than the 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 system that has been used in recent years. Sound ok to me.
The good thing with the new system is that more people can score points. That should provide more interest at the back of the field for drivers to try, right to the end, rather than witnessing a cohorte of resigned competitors in an orderly procession.
the 10-6-etc system is the best. i don't care about awarding points or motivating backmarkers. does it really matter that force india is fighting for that last point in 10th spot? not to me. the podium is the most important. i'd rather see motivation for front runners to win a race to gain the extra points rather than backmarkers battling it out to get one of the few points they will score that season.
I disagree. motivating the mid pack drivers makes a ton of sense. I like seeing close racing. If 1st place is running away, I don't really want the camera to follow them. If there is a great battle for 10th, I would prefer watch that. I think others would agree. if you have a usual front runner in the middle of the pack for a race, they've got more reason to continue to push instead of saving their engine for the next race...
+2 So Steve, it's confirmed now that the old points system will be scrapped, and the 25-20 points will come in?
Yes Brian, however in my view they should think about bringing back more practise and testing. Points for nice looking helmets. Points for overtaking. Only joking ...
25 - 20 - 15 is no different than 10 - 8 - 6. In both cases, second gets 80% of the winner's points and third takes 60%. In my opinion, this is too much reward for second and third and doesn't provide enough incentive to win races. The real changes are in 4th, (was 50%, now is 40%), 5th, (was 40%, now is 32%) and 6th (was 30%, now is 24%). Before 40% of the grid would be rewarded with some points, now 38% (fewer but about the same), but the difference is where in the past 8th place was well paid with 10% of the winner's points, now 10th place will win a measly and trivial 4% of the winner's points. My take on this is if you are not on the podium in 2010 you're in trouble. The payoff drops off significantly faster. Only three or four teams are capable of competing for a podium at any given time. To me, this is going to create an even bigger gap between the haves and the have nots. Call me a cynic, but this looks like a way to protect the status quo in F1 next year when the grid will be significantly larger. I don't care if the new teams scrore points, but midpack teams should be able to fight to differentiate themselves in a meaningful way. It does matter, in my opinion (and I'm sure theirs too). I'd prefer to see: 26 - 20 - 15 - 12 - 9 - 7 - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 with a bonus point (or two or maybe three) for pole (but not fastest lap). It's not substantially different, but the rewards for winning and 4th through 6th are a little better.
I like this better than the first proposal. Hopefully it sticks. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/81048
I definitely like the 25-18-12 for the top 3 positions. It has a lot of the same ratios of the old 9-6-4 podium pts (triple the numbers and then add more positions down to 10 behind them). Now a driver has a major incentive to push for a win, instead of just cruising in 2nd. With all of the pts being given down to 10th, a pt sure isn't what it used to be... I remember in the turbo era when one of the backmarkers would luck into 5 or 6th place, get a pt or 2, and then celebrate as if they'd won the championship. All of the pts changes of course obviously render obsolete any comparison with past drivers on a points basis...
So that means: Old Old Points System (2009): 1. 10 2. 8 3. 6 4. 5 5. 4 6. 3 7. 2 8. 1 Old Points System (for 2010, never implemented): 1. 25 2. 20 3. 15 4. 10 5. 8 6. 6 7. 5 8. 3 9. 2 10. 1 New Points System (2010): 1. 25 2. 18 3. 15 4. 12 5. 10 6. 8 7. 6 8. 4 9. 2 10. 1 I agree and think it's a great improvement! It rewards getting on the podium more so than finishing off it and now there's a greater emphasis on the victory. Also, the staggering of the points down through the finishes seem to make much more sense... none of that weird jump that there used to be between 7th and 8th place. All the best, Andrew.
