My New Trial Ranking System - Finishing Positions

[RasputinLives]

Ok guys as I mentioned on the rookie thread I was trying to come up with a way of ranking drivers where every race counts and I came up with the idea that instead of awarding points you could just add all the drivers official finishing positions together and the driver with the smallest total would obviously be at the top of the table.

For example:

Hamilton
Aus = 2 Mal = 8 Chi = 1 Tur = 4 Spa = 2 Mon = 6 Total = 23

The driver with the smallest total would obviously be at the top of the table. Rather than stick to the rookies I thought I'd try it with the whole field and see what difference it made.

This way of ranking you pay a much higher price for a non-finish(although this was lessened slightly for Maldonado by the amount that had gone out before him at Monoco) and a I guess it awards consistancy. Big winners in this converstion are Mark Webber who is up to second and consistant quick Nick who is up to 6th (are you watching Mr Boullier?). Big losers are Massa with his 2 DNF's putting him 12th!

Buemi is putting Alguersuari to the sword. Trulli is having a lot better season than we thought and d'Ambrosio should be well pleased with himself. I found it interesting that despite claims by some that the WC standings are mis-leading when it comes to Di Resta/Sutil and Heidfeld/Petrov they still come out the same way round if the ranking was done this way.

I was hoping it would actually make the title race closer but Vettel still leads by a country mile - only this way we'd only need 1 DNF for everyone to be right back in it.

1 - Vettel - 7
2 - Webber - 22
3 - Hamilton - 23
4 - Button - 24
5 - Alonso - 27
6 - Heidfeld - 50
7 - Rosberg - 57
8 - Kobayashi - 64
9 - Petrov - 67
10 - Buemi - 68
11 - Sutil - 68
12 - Massa - 72
13 - Schumacher - 75
14 - Di Resta - 78
15 - Barrichello - 92
16 - Alguersuari - 101
17 - Trulli - 101
18 - Perez - 106
19 - Kovalainen - 106
20 - d'Ambrosio - 108
21 - Maldonado - 112
22 - Glock - 118
23 - Liuzzi - 125
24 - Karthikeyan - 135

If you think they're interesting I shall carry on doing them for the rest of the season - if not we'll put it down to an experiment and move on.

*** I didn't know what to do about Perez in Monoco - officially he was 24th as he did not start but as this was due to an injury it seems harsh to award him a 24. I did but if anyone can think of a fairer way to rank him in Monoco then let me know and I'll edit it.

 

[The Enforcer]

I like the idea behind this, but the problem I see with it is when a driver is putting in a stunning performance and has a DNF through no fault of their own......reliability issue / someone hitting them etc. Those in the mid/back of the starting grid are much more likely to have an accident through no fault of their own and would be more heavily penalised for it.

 

[RasputinLives]

I like the idea behind this, but the problem I see with it is when a driver is putting in a stunning performance and has a DNF through no fault of their own......reliability issue / someone hitting them etc. Those in the mid/back of the starting grid are much more likely to have an accident through no fault of their own and would be more heavily penalised for it.

I see what your saying but couldn't you say exaclty the same thing about the points ranking system too?

I like it for the fact that people like Trulli and d'Ambrosio have benifited far more from the 13th and 14th places they've scored which in the points system count for nothing. However the system puts Webber at number 2 and there is no way I could possible mount an argument for him being second best driver this season. Its interesting to see how it'd work though.

 

[Galahad]

Is there already a thread with these standings somewhere? Teabagyokel perhaps?

I'm pretty sure that the pre-WW2 European Championship used exactly this scoring system.

 

[RasputinLives]

Is there already a thread with these standings somewhere? Teabagyokel perhaps?

I'm pretty sure that the pre-WW2 European Championship used exactly this scoring system.

If there is a thread about this already then I apologise and Mods please merge it. I knew the I'd seen the idea in action somewhere but was convinced it was used in Speedway for some reason.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Rasputin, my friend, this isn't much different than the official WDC table at the FIA - other than your system keeps all gaps constant (as opposed to gaps in the official table being bigger between a Win and 2nd in relation to say, a 9th and 10th). The Official WDC table actually already accounts for drivers finishing 11th or 17th or 22nd. In fact, in the Official FIA F1 WDC Table, the bottom of the pack is also KAR - LIU - GLO - MAL - DAM - KOV - TRU

As The Enforcer says, it doesn't take into account other subjective variables like "rankings" normally do. AUTOSPORT's compilated bottom six, for instance, are KAR - ALG - BAR - MAS - TRU - HEI. There is a difference between "rankings" and "positionings".

IMO, your system is a "positioning" system, not a "ranking" system. Cheers.

 

[RasputinLives]

Rasputin, my friend, this isn't much different than the official WDC table at the FIA - other than your system keeps all gaps constant (as opposed to gap in the official table being bigger between a Win and 2nd in relation to say, a 9th and 10th). The Official WDC table actually already accounts for drivers finishing 11th or 17th or 22nd. In fact, in the Official FIA F1 WDC Table, the bottom of the pack is also KAR - LIU - GLO - MAL - DAM - KOV - TRU

As The Enforcer says, it doesn't take into account other variables like "rankings" normally do. There is a difference between "rankings" and "positionings". Your system is a "positioning" system, not a "ranking" system. Cheers.

The official system ranks a driver for the highest position he's finished - for instance. If Glock scored one 11th place and five 24th places whilse Trulli scored three 12ths a 13th and two 14ths then Glock would be ranked above him because he'd finished higher. with my system a driver finishing outside of the points benifits from every result and doesn't fly up the table due to one finish.

As for ranking and positioning - potato tomato. Better than some journalist giving a random rating at any rate.

*edit* - just noticed you need to take a look at the WC championship again its Glo - Kar - Liu - Mal - d'am - Kov

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Re your edit, I did take a look again: http://www.formula1.com/results/driver/

Regardless, you're right about the difference between your system and the the FIA WDC table...and I think yours makes more sense to me...although in the WDC table a driver who finishes 10th once and 24th in every other race will always be ranked ahead of a guy who finishes 11th every single time.

In the end, your's still doesn't take into account a stunning drive which ends in a DNF through no fault of the driver. So, if it doesn't, then is that a 'true' measure of a driver's performance relative to others? Perhaps you intentionally wanted to get rid of the subjectivity of it all anyway...so, in that case, it might be an improvement on the current table with the only short-coming being that your system, IMO, penalizes a driver for wnning since his points gap isn't any wider than anyone else's. Cheers

 

[Galahad]

How about if you took a driver's average position at the end of every lap? That would remove the problem of DNFs (though some DNFs certainly are the driver's fault, of course). And the Constructors Championship should definitely have a DNF penalty, IMO.

 

[RasputinLives]

I think the problem with a whole 'driver' ranking system is that you have to take into accountt he car they are driving. They are a team in that way. A stunning drive with a DNF is still a DNF because they've not gone the whole distance. You can always say oh he deserved this and he deserved that but at the end of the day you have no way of knowing if the car had kept going whether the said driver might have thrown it off the track.

I can see what your saying but at the end of the day you have to work on facts

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Fair enough. What do you think of there being the "winner's gap" between 1st and 2nd in relation to, say, 5th and 6th or 9th and 10th?

 

[Mryzyz]

What I like to do, is subjectively determine the order of the speed of cars, then say 'par' is beating everyone in a slower car.
So with an order of:

Red Bull
McLaren
Ferrari
Merc
Renault
Sauber
Force India
Toro Rosso
Williams
Lotus
Virgin
HRT

We get:

Heidfeld -4
Barrichello -4
Buemi -3
Hamilton -2
Kobayashi -2
Sutil -2
Trulli -2
D'Ambrosio -2
Liuzzi -2
Vettel -1
Alonso -1
Rosberg -1
Petrov -1
Kovalainen -1
Karthikeyan -1
Button PAR
Webber +1
Alguersuari +1
Massa +2
Di Resta +2
Glock +2
Schumacher +3
Perez +3
Maldonado +4


Of course this is daft for a number of reasons.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Speed of the cars...At which circuit? At which point in the season? In Qually or race pace? Clearly subjectively ranking the speed of the cars at one point doesn't take into account development rates,upgrades, what tyre they're on.

As an example, McLaren started 2010 on the back foot but right now - after umpteen upgrades - McLaren have "race winning pace". It was clear to see from Hamilton being stuck behind Vettel in Spain and Button similarly behind Vettel/Alonso in Monaco and...and that doesn't even take into account tyres.

Mercedes ate up Super-Softs and hate them....Ferrari love them but are useless on the new Hards.

See?

You also have Williams behind STR, FI and Sauber...but how do you account for Maldonado's Williams being in the Top 10 in Q3 at Monaco and running, legitimately, in 6th before Hamilton tangled with him after the McLaren had it's rear wing fixed on the Red Flag Grid?

 

[RasputinLives]

What I like to do, is subjectively determine the order of the speed of cars, then say 'par' is beating everyone in a slower car..

I like it! Mryzyz I see that like me you enjoy fun with maths - interesting system but a bit tough to be at the front if you're a Red Bull driver.

What I find interesting is that in my system, Mryzyz's system and the official WC system Heidfeld and Sutil, 2 drivers coming under fire of late, are both at the top end - where as Di Resta and Perez who are getting all the praise are in the bottom half of all 3.

Fair enough. What do you think of there being the "winner's gap" between 1st and 2nd in relation to, say, 5th and 6th or 9th and 10th?

of course there should be a winners gap - I was just trying something - didn't think it was going to be the definative answer to anything. The WC points system is ultimately the only fair way of doing things.

 

[Mryzyz]

Ray, I did admit it wasn't 100% scientific

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Mryzyz, I was just playing Devil's Advocate, mate. No offence intended.

Rasputin, there must be a way of subjectively ranking drivers, no? I'm sure the team managers must do that. What do you make of Kubica, for instance, always being rated very highly by managers and pundits in relation to the lowly-rated Heidfeld eventhough the German finished ahead of the Pole in the 2007 and 2009 WDC standings?

'Know what i'm saying? Cheers guys. Have a good Friday night over there in England.

 

[RasputinLives]

Rasputin, there must be a way of subjectively ranking drivers, no? I'm sure the team managers must do that.

Yes its called the WDC table.

I don't think anyone can claim to know what any team manager thinks of any driver because everything is reported through the media who like to put their own spin on it or the quote is being released by the team manager for some PR reason. Kubica is highly rated by media and fans alike - we don't know what the team managers think of him and if they really rated him as high as you said then why is he not driving for one of the top teams? Don't believe everything you read.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

He was in a top team. BMW was regarded as a top team (they officially finished 2nd in the 2007 WCC and he was joint tied for 1st in the 2008 WDC at mid season) before they packed up and left F1 at the end of 2009. Renault was a works team when he signed to replace Alonso. Renault were not a low tier team and Alonso was their Number 1 in 2009 before Kubica became their Number 1. RBR may be a top team now but they were not at the start of 2009. Ferrari are a top and when Massa got injured in the summer of 2009, Kubica was offered the seat apparently but he didn't want to move there mid season and had a BMW contract.

Lastly, with all due respect to your first sentence above, the WDC table is not a subjective table. It's a factual table based on finishing order. There's nothing subjective about it.

 

[Slyboogy]

I am totally confused by this system, and Ray confuses it even more

 

[RasputinLives]

lol Sly. Like a DJ I'll break it down.

the system - basically add all a drivers finishing positions together and the lowest number wins - thought it'd be interesting to try.

Ray - he doesn't like the WC table and thinks its not a true reflection on a drivers skills (I think because it meant that Kimi only won one WC ) - with all due respect of course.