New point system, or no point system

New point system, or no point system

Post by lepto » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 02:05:25


Current point system is a crap, actually the point system itself is a
crap.

WDC and WCC should be decided soley by comparing the number of 1st, if
equal, then, the 2nd, and so on. It is pretty simple that even a driver
gets all the 2nd places from all the circuits, he still doesn't deserve
to be a champion.

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by Nick » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 08:07:44

Quote:

> Current point system is a crap, actually the point system itself is a
> crap.

Ironically, it could well turn out that the championship is decided
this year in Brazil, when under the old 10-6-4-3-2-1 points system, it
would still be alive beyond that... stay tuned for my 'F1 Points'
posting next week to see if that's the case, or search for my 'F1
Points' posting after Spa which outlines the current possibilities for
the run-in.

Quote:
> WDC and WCC should be decided soley by comparing the number of 1st, if
> equal, then, the 2nd, and so on. It is pretty simple that even a driver
> gets all the 2nd places from all the circuits, he still doesn't deserve
> to be a champion.

So what happens if one driver stands in for one race at McLaren and
finishes fifth, yet another driver races for the whole season for Red
Bull and has a couple of sixths, a few sevenths, a handful of eighths
and the rest are finishes but out of the points?

Which do you think should be higher up the drivers' championship at the
end of the season?  The guy who stood in for one race in the best car,
or the guy who worked his ass off driving a mediocre car all season and
picking up great results under the circumstances?

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by Da Fra » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 08:29:57



Quote:
>Current point system is a crap, actually the point system itself is a
>crap.

>WDC and WCC should be decided soley by comparing the number of 1st, if
>equal, then, the 2nd, and so on. It is pretty simple that even a driver
>gets all the 2nd places from all the circuits, he still doesn't deserve
>to be a champion.

Depends on how you look at the series.
If you look at it as 18 singular units, then yes, you are right, the
person with the most wins is the one who had the um.. most wins.

If you look at it as 18 rounds, which make up a championship then you
are slightly off base, since that implies that the best "average" will
win. If a driver can win 6 races and DNF the rest, then that driver
does not deserve to be a champion, even if the next best guy only wins
3 races and pulls 12 second places.

This is not easy, it's been argued over and over and over around
here...

--

Regards, Frank

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by CatharticF » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 11:32:16

Quote:



>>Current point system is a crap, actually the point system itself is a
>>crap.

<snip>

Quote:
> This is not easy, it's been argued over and over and over around
> here...

The only thing certain is that the current system is wrong. And now
Ferrari aren't dominating can we change it back please?

--
CatharticF1

"What you thought was freedom is just greed."

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by 440.. » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 13:24:06

Quote:
> WDC and WCC should be decided soley by comparing the number of 1st, if
> equal, then, the 2nd, and so on. It is pretty simple that even a driver
> gets all the 2nd places from all the circuits, he still doesn't deserve
> to be a champion.

Oooh, I like that! Makes so much sense because drivers must focus on
shooting for the highest possible spot every race versus consistency.
Just like the Olympics where you count golds, then silvers, then
bronzes (except dumb Americans who count medals equally regardless of
color). Let's see what the top of the driver table would look like so
far in this season. The leading numbers are 1st-2nd-3rd totals:

6-1-2 Raikkonen   (+1 places)
5-5-1 Alonso      (-1)
2-1-1 Montoya     (+1)
1-3-1 Schumacher  (-1)
1-0-1 Fisichella  (+1)
0-2-2 Barrichello (+2)
0-2-1 Trulli      (-2)
0-2-1 Heidfeld    (+3)

Raikkonen goes to the top, but barely as just one win by Alonso would
tilt it back in his favor. Heidfeld picks up 3 places. Biggest loser is
Ralfie because he has never finished above 3rd.

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by Da Fra » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 13:47:29


Quote:
>> WDC and WCC should be decided soley by comparing the number of 1st, if
>> equal, then, the 2nd, and so on. It is pretty simple that even a driver
>> gets all the 2nd places from all the circuits, he still doesn't deserve
>> to be a champion.

>Oooh, I like that! Makes so much sense because drivers must focus on
>shooting for the highest possible spot every race versus consistency.
>Just like the Olympics where you count golds, then silvers, then

You mean like they do in pentathlon ? ;-)

--

Regards, Frank

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by Paul- » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 14:42:46

Quote:




> > > Current point system is a crap, actually the point system itself
> > > is a crap.

> <snip>

> > This is not easy, it's been argued over and over and over around
> > here...

> The only thing certain is that the current system is wrong. And now
> Ferrari aren't dominating can we change it back please?

Now, now, Brendan. That's ***... ;-)

--
Paul-B... the original and the best!

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by Noon » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 15:05:16



Quote:
> > WDC and WCC should be decided soley by comparing the number of 1st, if
> > equal, then, the 2nd, and so on. It is pretty simple that even a driver
> > gets all the 2nd places from all the circuits, he still doesn't deserve
> > to be a champion.

> Oooh, I like that! Makes so much sense because drivers must focus on
> shooting for the highest possible spot every race versus consistency.
> Just like the Olympics where you count golds, then silvers, then
> bronzes (except dumb Americans who count medals equally regardless of
> color). Let's see what the top of the driver table would look like so
> far in this season. The leading numbers are 1st-2nd-3rd totals:

> 6-1-2 Raikkonen   (+1 places)
> 5-5-1 Alonso      (-1)
> 2-1-1 Montoya     (+1)
> 1-3-1 Schumacher  (-1)
> 1-0-1 Fisichella  (+1)
> 0-2-2 Barrichello (+2)
> 0-2-1 Trulli      (-2)
> 0-2-1 Heidfeld    (+3)

> Raikkonen goes to the top, but barely as just one win by Alonso would
> tilt it back in his favor. Heidfeld picks up 3 places. Biggest loser is
> Ralfie because he has never finished above 3rd.

Alonso has 6 wins.
 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by CatharticF » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 15:07:50

Quote:

> Current point system is a crap, actually the point system itself is a
> crap.

> WDC and WCC should be decided soley by comparing the number of 1st, if
> equal, then, the 2nd, and so on. It is pretty simple that even a driver
> gets all the 2nd places from all the circuits, he still doesn't deserve
> to be a champion.

Winning is overrated.
Winning is its own reward - we don't need to give winners anything else.
So we should reward the rest of the field as compensation.

And I *do* like points - we should have more of them. Points for pole,
points for fastest lap, points for best looking pit babe, points for
avoiding JPM brake testing you as you're lapped.

It occurs to me that we should also overhaul the points systems of
football around the world. The old simple one is plainly not generating
enough e***ment and clearly just allowing the better teams to win
titles without unnecessary complication and contrivance to extend the
suspense. So - here's my F1 (C) based proposal - itself inspired by NASCAR.

win:    10 points
draw:   9 points
loss:   8 points
bye:    15 points
goal:   1 point

That way the lower teams (just like Minardi and Jordan in F1) who don't
usually get many points can have some and the championship will look
much closer as the season draws towards an end. And remember what Uncle
Max said:

"..that's the price you pay for a system that makes it interesting."

Let's have a big cheer for Max, nothing worse than the points system
ending the season early just because one driver is winning all of the races.

--
CatharticF1

"What you thought was freedom is just greed."

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by Pete Fenelo » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 17:29:00

Quote:

>> WDC and WCC should be decided soley by comparing the number of 1st, if
>> equal, then, the 2nd, and so on. It is pretty simple that even a driver
>> gets all the 2nd places from all the circuits, he still doesn't deserve
>> to be a champion.

> Oooh, I like that! Makes so much sense because drivers must focus on
> shooting for the highest possible spot every race versus consistency.
> Just like the Olympics where you count golds, then silvers, then
> bronzes (except dumb Americans who count medals equally regardless of
> color). Let's see what the top of the driver table would look like so
> far in this season. The leading numbers are 1st-2nd-3rd totals:

> 6-1-2 Raikkonen   (+1 places)
> 5-5-1 Alonso      (-1)
> 2-1-1 Montoya     (+1)
> 1-3-1 Schumacher  (-1)
> 1-0-1 Fisichella  (+1)
> 0-2-2 Barrichello (+2)
> 0-2-1 Trulli      (-2)
> 0-2-1 Heidfeld    (+3)

I've been advocating this system for ages. The plus point is that it's
*pure* - winning is everything, and the imperative isn't to tootle
around nursing the car but to go out and get ahead of people.

The downside is that it's not likely to lead to a championship that goes
'down to the wire'.

6-1 vs 5-5.... hey, life's hard, but motorsport's about winning, not
coming second. Let's get Darwinian ;)

I can see the merit of a points system in endurance racing, where to
finish is an achievement, but in hard, short sprints like F1, I think
the "medal" system has a lot of merit.

pete
--

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by ric zi » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 17:45:47

Quote:




> >>Current point system is a crap, actually the point system itself is a
> >>crap.

> <snip>

> > This is not easy, it's been argued over and over and over around
> > here...

> The only thing certain is that the current system is wrong. And now
> Ferrari aren't dominating can we change it back please?

No. :-P
--
ric

ric at pixelligence dot com

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by David Bett » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 17:49:20



Quote:

>>> WDC and WCC should be decided soley by comparing the number of 1st, if
>>> equal, then, the 2nd, and so on. It is pretty simple that even a driver
>>> gets all the 2nd places from all the circuits, he still doesn't deserve
>>> to be a champion.

>> Oooh, I like that! Makes so much sense because drivers must focus on
>> shooting for the highest possible spot every race versus consistency.
>> Just like the Olympics where you count golds, then silvers, then
>> bronzes (except dumb Americans who count medals equally regardless of
>> color). Let's see what the top of the driver table would look like so
>> far in this season. The leading numbers are 1st-2nd-3rd totals:

>> 6-1-2 Raikkonen   (+1 places)
>> 5-5-1 Alonso      (-1)
>> 2-1-1 Montoya     (+1)
>> 1-3-1 Schumacher  (-1)
>> 1-0-1 Fisichella  (+1)
>> 0-2-2 Barrichello (+2)
>> 0-2-1 Trulli      (-2)
>> 0-2-1 Heidfeld    (+3)

>I've been advocating this system for ages. The plus point is that it's
>*pure* - winning is everything, and the imperative isn't to tootle
>around nursing the car but to go out and get ahead of people.

As have I, with the caveat that I'd rather not have a championship
atall.  Stuck with it, of course, but it's a shame that it takes
precedence over the individual races. Winning GPs is what it should be
all about. I believe McLaren's corporate mission statement is
something along the lines of 'to compete in and win every world
championship GP'. Can't argue with that.

Quote:
>The downside is that it's not likely to lead to a championship that goes
>'down to the wire'.

And as the championship is only there to add extra interest for the
mass audience, that becomes a significant factor. Hard to believe, but
there are actually people who lose interest in the remaining races
once the championship is settled.

Personally, I can't take seriously a championship which Stirling and
Gilles never won, yet MS has won however many times. Just goes to show
how little it proves.

David Betts

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by Da Fra » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 18:25:29



Quote:
>>I've been advocating this system for ages. The plus point is that it's
>>*pure* - winning is everything, and the imperative isn't to tootle
>>around nursing the car but to go out and get ahead of people.

>As have I, with the caveat that I'd rather not have a championship
>atall.  Stuck with it, of course, but it's a shame that it takes
>precedence over the individual races. Winning GPs is what it should be
>all about. I believe McLaren's corporate mission statement is
>something along the lines of 'to compete in and win every world
>championship GP'. Can't argue with that.

IMO, the way the whole thing should be looked at is, as 18 individual
races, which happen to also go towards a championship.
F1 is different to competitions like soccer. MU does not get a medal
or a cup every time they beat Liverpool, F1 drivers do.
So each race is it's own entity, while the result goes towards the end
of season tally. For further references, see : ATP tour, golf, etc...

Quote:
>And as the championship is only there to add extra interest for the
>mass audience, that becomes a significant factor. Hard to believe, but
>there are actually people who lose interest in the remaining races
>once the championship is settled.

As i know, since day one the championship was there. Had it been only
brought in in the current commercial world of F1, then fair enough,
but it's been around for at least the "new era" and some of that was
spent with "sport" as it's main incentive.

Quote:
>Personally, I can't take seriously a championship which Stirling and
>Gilles never won, yet MS has won however many times. Just goes to show
>how little it proves.

Shame on you. That's not a nice thing to say about Brabham and
Hill(P), or Jones and Scheckter. Now is it ? :-)
Giles was in the wrong car at the wrong time and when he could have
won it, his team mate got him.

--

Regards, Frank

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by Pete Fenelo » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 18:56:34

Quote:

> As have I, with the caveat that I'd rather not have a championship
> atall.  Stuck with it, of course, but it's a shame that it takes
> precedence over the individual races. Winning GPs is what it should be
> all about. I believe McLaren's corporate mission statement is
> something along the lines of 'to compete in and win every world
> championship GP'. Can't argue with that.

Of the current teams...

McLaren are 'proper' racers, so are Williams, so are Ferrari. I can't
determine the motivation of some of the other teams.

A cynic's view of the rest of the grid:

Are Renault there to win every race or get the most column inches for
Flav? Are BAR a training scheme for Honda and a tax-loss for BAT? Jordan
was simple, it won some races but it was really there so Eddie could
hang out with the big boys and buy impressive yachts and hairpieces. Now
it's something for businessmen to buy and sell because, hey, it's
impressive to be in F1.

Sauber existed in F1 because Merc and then Ford wanted to dip their toes into
the water on a low-risk basis and then because Petronas and finally
Mateschitz liked being associated with F1. Stewart existed because JYS
fancied the idea of going racing properly and Ford wanted to back it;
Jaguar existed so every Ford executive who listed 'motorsport' as a hobby
on his CV could have a go in charge; RBR now exists because Mateschitz
still wants to be associated with F1 (it'll never win with customer
Ferrari engines, so it's clearly not a 'winner'). Minardi were proper
racers because just getting a car to the grid was a race for them,
but continued to exist because Stoddart wanted to be seen around the
paddocks...

Quote:

>>The downside is that it's not likely to lead to a championship that goes
>>'down to the wire'.

> And as the championship is only there to add extra interest for the
> mass audience, that becomes a significant factor. Hard to believe, but
> there are actually people who lose interest in the remaining races
> once the championship is settled.

I can well believe it, I don't take the championship terribly seriously
because there's nothing 'outside' it. The whole "Grand Prix == F1 ==
championship == all important" and the constant wailing from Max that
it's all strategic just sound like retrospective justification for F1
tending towards dullness on track a lot of the time.

Quote:

> Personally, I can't take seriously a championship which Stirling and
> Gilles never won, yet MS has won however many times. Just goes to show
> how little it proves.

It's about who can best interpret the rules. Winning a race is usually
about who's quickest ;)

pete
--

 
 
 

New point system, or no point system

Post by Pete Fenelo » Thu, 22 Sep 2005 18:58:03

Quote:

> Giles was in the wrong car at the wrong time and when he could have
> won it, his team mate got him.

Wrong. Gilles could've won the championship if he'd gone balls-out for
himself, but obeyed team orders!  (Rather similar to Ronnie and Mario
the year before; Mario knew Ronnie was faster. They also knew what their
contracts said...).

pete
--