I say they should give the points like this. Pole - 1 1st - 10 2nd - 8 3rd - 6 4th - 5 5th - 4 6th - 3 7th - 2 8th - 1 You should be rewarded for qualifying on pole. If you qualified on the pole, but finished 2nd in the race you still would be behind the winner in points. But if you win the race and took the pole you get the bonus points, putting you that much more ahead of the 2nd place guy.
LEts not forget who invented the "current" system... This is another reason why Bernie and Max need to both retire, its taken them 4yrs to see that the current system doesn't work it was pretty obvious it wasn't working after 1 season. I agree a 3 or 4pt gap is needed minimum! There has to be a pts system, this is the qualifying dilemma all over again, don't make things complicated, 1+1=2. Simple!! I totally disagree that Pole should get 1pt, not with the current format in qualifying. As in the past few years the fastest in qualifying ISNT the REAL fastest car on the day. Schumie would of broken the qualifying record much eariler if they didnt change the qualifying format to that stupid 1 lap crap+parcferme. The current system needs a vast overhaul b4 even considering giving the poleman a pt for his troubles. Pole these days is academic, its whoever goes lightest(usually) for the race gets it. How is that possibly fair to give them an extra pt? I dont mind the parc ferme rule so they cant touch the engine overnight, but in the morning they should be able to refuel the cars.
They should probably throw in a bonus for the constructors only. Extra points for a one-two finish (Ferrari had 2), 2 people on podium(Ferrari had 5) and both cars in points(Ferrari had 14). The points would be addition to the drivers points and would only count for constructors champ and not drivers.
I agree they should give you at 1 or 2 points for making pole, it will give more of an incentive to the drivers/teams to try for the pole even more. It might even make for some interesting front rows. Maybe they could even reward those who make it in the Q2 or Q3 say 1 point for each segment you make it through in qualifying. then say give the pole person 2 more on top of that. so thats a total of 4 for pole and 2 for second, third... tenth. It would make for a more interesting scoring all over the WDC, the mid level teams i think will benefit the most from something like this. 12-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 ^that sounds like a good scoring system as well
Which is why a points scale inflated for the expanded season would work much better on initial implementation. Under the current scale, 2 points between 2nd and 1st would only amount to about 1.5% of your season total. With the bloated points scale I suggested, there'd be a whopping 10 points gain between 2nd and 1st. Mathematically, that would have been only 2.7% of the seaon total ferraridude calculated. But coming off a system where a win was only 10 points, the prospect of gaining 10 points just for passing that car in front of you would be a heck of an incentive ... for the first season, at least. I think a test of a points scale would be the question of how many wins would it take an unreliable car (wins and dnfs) to pass someone who finished 2nd every race? 2006: 18 events, 8 points for second = 144 points -- to beat that, you'd have to win 15 of the events (if you dnf'd the other 3). (Interesting that 144 points is more than anybody got in 2006.)
Back in the late 1980s, you got to count only your best 11 out of 16 races. Had they been able to use all 16, Prost would have won the 1988 WDC (IIRC). Thoughts on going back to a system like this?
I totally hated that. I remember 1979 was the season I really got hooked on F1. There was this young new team and this young new driver who started to win everything in the 2nd half of the season, yet the system wouldn't even allow him to become champion. Alan Jones on Williams got his revenge the next year by clinching the 1980's title.
