Revised Points System

[soccerman17]

Points for overtakes non-team order loophole: Pass slow cars. Pit for fresh tires. Pass slow cars. Pit again. Repeat until race is over and you have passed Chilton, Bianchi 8 times and Ericsson and Kobayashi 6 and 3 respectively (would me more but they would both inevitably retire from the race) and made somewhere between 7 and 9 pit stops.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Not that I'm in favour of points for overtakes anyway, as mentioned already, I presume (or at least hope) that the intention of such an idea would be that you wouldn't get points every time you lapped people after you'd already lapped them the first time.

 

[FB]

I would have no problem in there being separate championships and titles for qualifying, overtaking, fastest pit stop, fastest lap etc, just like they have one for sprinters, king of the mountains, points scorer etc. in the Tour de France. But the drivers championship should not be affected or influenced by anything other than the position they finish on the race track at the end of the Grand Prix.

Call me small minded if you like, if prefer to think that it's an opinion (which all of us are entitled to BTW) and a bit of a traditionalist. F1 has never given points for anything other than race finishes since the point for fastest lap was dropped in 1960 and there doesn't seem to me to be a reasonable argument for any major change. The ratio of points for places could be reconsidered but there has always been a premium for drivers who finish more often and the current system doesn't change that.

 

[marksawatsky]

marksawatsky
I originally wrote a comment that was very negative and perhaps a tad flippant so I deleted my initial thoughts as I fear my style of humour would have gone down like a sack of spuds if you're not yet familiar with my material.

So, taking your OP seriously - i.e. treating it with respect and ditching my usual flippancy - I'll share this much and I apologise for the fact that it isn't positive and I hope at least that you're not offended. I say this because you may well have been really pissed off about the original version :

Finally, marksawatsky , don't be dispirited if we can't do your first thread justice. Welcome aboard Clip and keep on posting.

Fenders.

I wasn't offended and am impressed that you even considered my feelings, there are plenty of trolls out there but you're not one of them. Back to my suggestion. I just think that at the end of the year, the World Drivers Championship points are not a true reflection of which driver did it best. If a driver gets Pole and fastest lap of the race, but gets crashed out by a backmarker, shouldn't he get some points towards WDC? According to the points, he's just as bad a driver as the guy who qualifies and finishes last. Maybe my breakdown of points wasn't good, but the idea of points for driver performance other than finishing position is pretty reasonable, no?

 

[mjo]

I think the quote goes: 'To finish first, first you must finish'. To be honest, I think that driver performance is meaningless if you cannot finish a race, so to have the only points available in the entire weekend be awarded for the race is correct, imo. To me, how to tell the difference between a good driver and a great driver is down to their race performances. It's al well and good having 40+ pole positions but if they can't be translated into a decent race performance then those pole positions don't deserve anything. Another point: imagine how anti-climatic it would be if a WDC was decided by a point scored in qualifying? The majority of races you won't get taken out or have a mechanical failure, and after all, it's worked pretty well for decades, so why change it?

 

[sushifiesta]

To add another point, I've played with other points systems in the past (including ones that gave points for qualifying and fastest lap) and you'll find that any reasonably sensible points system will almost always give you the same champion and pretty much the same WDC standings overall bar a few moves up/down a couple of places. You have to try really hard to make a system that changes things much because generally the fastest driver/car qualifies first and finishes first!

Based on that arguments there's a lot to be said for keeping the points system as simple as possible because by making it more complex you make things harder to understand without really gaining anything.

 

[Il_leone]

a couple of daft ideas for points system that have been done in the past


Best scores from

5 of 8
6 of 10 or 11


the worst one was 8 out of 15 races which cost Gilles Villeneuve the title and rightly dropped


-------------------------------

Dropping the worst scores apparently made drivers gamble for wins

 

[Wombcat]

Il_leone Scheckter had more dropped points than Villeneuve (he had 9 dropped points, Villeneuve had 6). Difference was that Scheckters' dropped points were evenly divided over the two halves. They also had 3 wins. Villeneuve had one 2nd places more, but Scheckter had more 4th and 5th places. So, looking at point finishes, Scheckter was the most deserving anyway. Unless you would propose the medal system that Bernie once suggested. But that would actually make Jones WDC (with 4 wins).

Also, no dropped points would ofcourse have cost Senna the 1988 title.

 

[soccerman17]

Regardless of who would have won titles compared to who did, the whole dropped points thing was a stupid system.

 

[Wombcat]

I kinda agree and hit "Like" and then thought "but in those days with unreliability it actually kinda made some sense". But today it would be totally stupid.
And if it wasn't there in 1988, maybe at a certain point in the season Senna would have opted for different strategies and it wouoldn;t have mattered. Although in 1989 he didn't really change strategies and got beaten anyway.

 

[soccerman17]

Making a reliable car is part of the challenge.

 

[ExtremeNinja]

2 dropped rounds, 1 point for pole and 1 point for fastest lap. That would do it for me.

 

[Bill Boddy]

I'm with FB. A separate competition for qualifying would not take anything away from race performance but it would give even more interest to qualifying.

It has been noticeable that this season there are very few drivers who get into the top ten and then do not go out in Q3. Adding the extra tyre has been one of the few FIA successes in the recent past.

The reason that there were dropped points in the past was that the cars were very much more unreliable than the modern computer generated ones so it was fairer to those drivers who did not finish in races due to mechanical failures (look at the results on F1.com for the early years).

 

[Il_leone]

For those who are not aware there is a pole position trophy for the guy who gets most poles this season... so a quali competition not going to add that much value

 

[teabagyokel]

As FB says, different competitions happen in the Tour de France. They make it obvious that something is happening by the jersey situation though. How about a gold camera-mount for the leader of the championship, a red one for the pole leader etc...?

 

[ATL11]

Would increase the win to 30, leave all other positions the same. Would have an extra point for Pole Position, I do like the idea of a extras point for the fastest Pitstop and giving this to the Contructor point total only.

But then again I could see also being fudged, with Alonso in his 2015 McLaren having a 0.2 Pitstop as he has his Visor cleaned with a squeegee. Assume we could have something were it is changing all 4 wheels, that remain on the car as it exits the Pit Lane?

Think that's about the limits, in areas of points development, or we could see the Williams team getting points for their Pit Crew being the best "Well Dressed" team in the Pit Lane, beating Force India with some killer Pleats on the trousers and shirt arms.

 

[FB]

I think it was L'Equipe who awarded the Prix Lemon and Orange to the mots unfriendly and friendly team in the pit lane. Strangely, for a French publication, back in the 80's Williams always got the lemons and Renault the oranges.

 

[Il_leone]

One year 1988 they ran the Jim Clark cup because it was for teams who were using non turbos against the lead cars which were turbos.

No one cared about a tier 2 championship going

 

[FB]

Also, no one cared about who won the Jim Clark cup for drivers (Jonathan Palmer) or the Colin Chapman Trophy for constructors (Tyrrell). BTW - it was 1987 (before someone else points it out)

 

[teabagyokel]

I think I've come up with a system so stupid unique, that we haven't seen it on Clip the Apex so far.

The rules are thus. The winner gets 60 points, and the rest get one tenth of a point deducted for each second that they are out from the lead. More than a minute out and you get nowt.

My sales pitch on this one is directed to Kewee and any Max Chilton fans we have out there!

Yes it is stupid, but an alternative way of thinking about the Championship at any rate.