Too Many Points Awarded?

RasputinLives

Leave me alone I'm on Smoko
Contributor
Just stumbled across a stat I thought was worth sharing. Out of the 22 drivers confirmed for the 2012 grid 8 of them scored points in their debut Grand Prix:

Vettel
Hamilton
Webber
Rosberg
Raikkonen
Di Resta
Glock
De La Rosa

Now if Liuzzi keeps his seat at HRT that number goes up to 9 and if part way through the season they Toro Rosso call on Buemi to be back in the race seat again the number is up to 10 and then chuck in the fact that the only reason Perez is not on the list is due to a car technicallity that led to a DQ and you can pretty much say half the grid scored points on their debut.

In Formula One history only 60 drivers have scored points on their debut so with 8 on the gird and 2 sitting in the pitlane trying to negociate a drive basically a sixth of the entire drivers in F1 history to score points on their debuts are from the current era. This leave me with a question. Are we, like Fernando Alonso says, living in a golden age of F1 talent or is it far too easy to score points?

Now I will admit I have a bias leaning in this because I've always favoured the 10, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1 system of scoring but it seems to me this is evidence that were rewarding drivers and teams too easily in the modern era and glorifying what used to be considered average. For instance can you really compare Paul Di Resta decent drive to a 10th place finish (after 2 drivers were disqualified) on his debut with the amazing 4th place drive Jean Alesi pulled off in a Tyrell at the 1989 French Grand Prix? I don't think they're even close.

I'm not going to do the stats because I've seen others do(and if you'd like to post them up here please do) but I think its been proved that the changing in the scoring system has made no difference to who has become WDC or WCC so why the need for the change? I know some will argue that due to the bullet-proof nature of the F1 cars these days that extending the points down to 10th is the only way to ensure the little teams get a piece of the pie. I see where you're coming from but I actually think the industructable nature of the cars came afterwards. I think the decision was soley made to please the sponsors and teams who were pumping too much money into the sport to be seen to be coming away with nothing. I also think the decision was made due to the current nature of how sportsman are paid and represented that they also can't be seen to be coming away with nothing.

Lets look at the situation this season if only the top 6 had been scoring points - that would have left a big car company like Mercedes with a massive reputation to protect in the car industry running a team that more often and not were not scoring any points in Grand Prixs or if they were they were only scraping the odd point over Felipe Massa. The Proton Group owned team Lotus would also have looked pretty poor having only scored 3 points finishes all season. The celebrated rookies of Di Resta and Perez would have 1 point scoring finish between them. Only 7 of the 12 teams would have scored points.

Well that makes it more boring and predicatable I hear you say and the points going down to 10th it means the drivers for the smaller teams get more focus and thats a good thing right? Well in some ways I guess it is but unfourtunatly I also think the giving of points willy nilly takes away the importance of it. For instance under the top six ruling Kobi's 5th place at Monaco would have been his and Sauber's only point finish of the season and it would have been hearelded as one of the drives of the season and remembered for a long time by most of us. As it is it was just another good points finish for Sauber and people are talking about Kobi having a poor season and being less exciting than he was.

So what do the people on here think? We've gone from less that a quarter of the grid scoring points to just under half scoring points. Like me do you think its a ploy to keep the sponsors and the big names happy and is glorifying the average drivers whilst taking away the glory from individual drives? Or do you think that the current system shares the points between the teams more equally and gives the drivers their fair dues?
 

sportsman

Sidecar racers have the biggest cojones
Contributor
I prefer this system.Due to the teams receiving prize money for points the present system gives the minnows a chance of winning a few dollars.
 

Galahad

Not a Moderator
Valued Member
With all the changes to the scoring over the years, any comparisons based on points between drivers of different eras are pretty redundant anyway. Add in the fact that there are more races in a season now, and car reliability has improved drastically, and the whole exercise is rendered 'pointless' (excusing the pun). I mean, Barrichello and Webber have now outscored Ayrton Senna!

I absolutely agree that points going down to 10th is linked to teams wanting to have more to show off to sponsors. I'm not particularly worried about that - if it helps Peter Sauber or Frank Williams to pay the bills then extend the points down as far as you want. Having cars on the grid matters more to me than the mathematical purity of the scoring system- in a number of other categories of motorsport, you score points just by making it off the grid.

My personal gripe is the way the points system now proportionally benefits the drivers who consistently finish 2nd - 5th, in comparison to race winners, set against the old 10-6-4 system.
 

jez101

Bookies drive nice cars because of people like me
Contributor
When they had the 10 (or even 9 points) for a win system, the cars were so unreliable that drivers would score sometimes even though they were a couple of laps down.

These days you would have two Red Bulls scoring, two McLarens, Alonso and one of Massa, Rosberg and Schumacher and that would be it. It would make life pretty boring for the midfield, no to mention the backmarkers.

I agree that Alesi's 4th deserves so much more credit that di Resta's 10th, but I don't think you need to compare points to see that? 4th vs 10th tells that story, right :)
 

Slyboogy

World Champion
Contributor
4 of those drivers that you mentioned at the top have scored on their debut with the 10-6-4-3-2-1 system (I think, not too sure about Glock think he finished 5th in his debut?)

Yes the points is a bit out of hand, but what can we do? If we kept to the 10-6-4-3-2-1 in the currently, then most of the midfielders would have gone bust, giving points out to 10th place even 8th place makes the midfield more competitive.

With 4 power houses and one team lingering around near the points (Lotus-Renault) wouldn't have done F1 any good at all, Toro Rosso would have survived due to Red Bull backing, but I think Sauber, Force India and Williams would have been goners.


Then there's the reliability issue, due to cost cutting reliability has become key, the teams have done ever so well with all the reliability restrictions, again this would not help the privateers one bit due to the top teams hogging the points positions.

There's so much consistency with the top teams today, that it's just way too competitive for the little guys to compete against.

I am not a fan of it at all, but it has to be done for the good of our sport, we are missing great drives through the field from midfielders an top drivers when they have to make their through the field. But because of the new points system, F1 is surviving, with manufacturers coming and going F1 couldn't afford the risk with the old points system either, as the manufacturers being in their for a few seasons would push the privateers out and then the manufacturers leaving. We need both, right now we have a healthy balance.

Points down to 10th might be a bit much, but in the current situation it's needed.
 

Vortex

Race Winner
I think the points change to tenth place and the reasoning, to give the lower teams a chance is like treating the symptoms not the cause. I’m talking about reliability. The rules dictating engines last 4 races, gear boxes more etc, cars never break down anymore! the lower teams had no chance of a 6th position and a point, so they lowered the points threshold.

Reliability has numbed the sport a little, the cost savings are to blame for this and this is unavoidable I guess.

I dunno, maybe I’m turning into one of those guys who says it was better in my day! lol
 

RasputinLives

Leave me alone I'm on Smoko
Contributor
I prefer this system.Due to the teams receiving prize money for points the present system gives the minnows a chance of winning a few dollars.

With all the changes to the scoring over the years, any comparisons based on points between drivers of different eras are pretty redundant anyway. Add in the fact that there are more races in a season now, and car reliability has improved drastically, and the whole exercise is rendered 'pointless' (excusing the pun). I mean, Barrichello and Webber have now outscored Ayrton Senna!

I absolutely agree that points going down to 10th is linked to teams wanting to have more to show off to sponsors. I'm not particularly worried about that - if it helps Peter Sauber or Frank Williams to pay the bills then extend the points down as far as you want. Having cars on the grid matters more to me than the mathematical purity of the scoring system- in a number of other categories of motorsport, you score points just by making it off the grid.

My personal gripe is the way the points system now proportionally benefits the drivers who consistently finish 2nd - 5th, in comparison to race winners, set against the old 10-6-4 system.

When they had the 10 (or even 9 points) for a win system, the cars were so unreliable that drivers would score sometimes even though they were a couple of laps down.

These days you would have two Red Bulls scoring, two McLarens, Alonso and one of Massa, Rosberg and Schumacher and that would be it. It would make life pretty boring for the midfield, no to mention the backmarkers.

I agree that Alesi's 4th deserves so much more credit that di Resta's 10th, but I don't think you need to compare points to see that? 4th vs 10th tells that story, right :)

I take all your points(boom boom) on board espcially G's bit about pandering to the sponsors doesn't matter as long as it keeps cars on the grid - I'd love to see a 26 car grid back and i'd love to see there being more teams than grid spots again. I will state that only the points scoring teams getting a share of the spoils is something I massively disagree with and was a deal set up by the rich to get richer. All 12 teams contribute to the F1 show and whilst obviously the higher up the more spoils you should get all teams should access a share no matter what points scored. end of.

Also I'll throw in the idea that maybe the car's are so relaible because the teams aren't pushing their cars to the limit anymore and the reason their not pushing their cars to the limit anymore is because if they do they have a chance of retiring and with the points strectching back to 10th their rivals would benifit from this and they can't afford to do that in case they lose out. In the old days a 7th or and 8th was no better than a DNF so it would give the smaller teams more incentive to go all or nothing and if they were doing that the bigger teams would have to push their designs and cars a bit more in order to counter that. I know its simplistic but it does make sense.

If your Sauber why push your car so it retires from 15 races but scores you a couple of 4ths in another when you can happily pootle round and get a hatful of 9ths and 10ths and score higher?
 

jez101

Bookies drive nice cars because of people like me
Contributor
I don't see how you could make cars less reliable now, even if you wanted to. Teams and drivers have figured out that you are better off settling for second or third instead of breaking the car every other race trying to win it.
 

Road of Bones

MTC Mole
Contributor
Points make little difference to what we remember about the racing - we tend to focus on the top 3, or someone who made some impressive overtaking moves, or who defended resolutely against faster competition, rather than whether a faintly anonymous midfielder made it into the top 10 or not.

How many of us remember a sterling drive to 8th before 2009 anyway? Or 7th prior to that? With forums like CTA and everyone having access to the internet these days, we can analyse and dissect every aspect of a race weekend from the front of the grid to the back, so if you get fed up talking about Vettel, Hamilton et al you can always choose to discuss the relative merits of your Torro Rosso-vs-Sauber battles or Caterham's progess instead.

If having more points available to the midfield keeps sponsors on board and allows teams to stay in business, then I'm all for it - it makes little difference to the Championship if the midfield teams can keep themselves in the public eye, and allows new drivers to have somewhere to lay down their credentials for future success (or not, as the case may be).
 

Vortex

Race Winner
I don't see how you could make cars less reliable now, even if you wanted to. Teams and drivers have figured out that you are better off settling for second or third instead of breaking the car every other race trying to win it.

Lift engine development restrictions and unlimited rev limits and engine only has to do one race.

Never happen tho.
 

Galahad

Not a Moderator
Valued Member
I will state that only the points scoring teams getting a share of the spoils is something I massively disagree with and was a deal set up by the rich to get richer. All 12 teams contribute to the F1 show and whilst obviously the higher up the more spoils you should get all teams should access a share no matter what points scored. end of.

The biggest part of the FOM prize money is divided amongst the top ten teams in the championship irrespective of points scored. This is the money that Caterham are now entitled to (so-called 'Column One') despite them obviously not having yet troubled the scorers.

I believe there is additional money awarded on a sliding scale according to points scored, but this is less important than the championship position money.

I agree with you that it should be divided among all twelve (or thirteen) though, rather than ten as currently.
 

jez101

Bookies drive nice cars because of people like me
Contributor
Lift engine development restrictions and unlimited rev limits and engine only has to do one race.

Never happen tho.
I think you would still have reliable cars. I think teams have figured that reliability is just as important as speed, so no matter what you did to make them more fragile, the teams would find the limit and stay on it.
 

RasputinLives

Leave me alone I'm on Smoko
Contributor
I don't see how you could make cars less reliable now, even if you wanted to. Teams and drivers have figured out that you are better off settling for second or third instead of breaking the car every other race trying to win it.

That thought depresses me the most. I'd much rather watch a driver hit the front out of nowhere in a car that could collapse at any min and be rooting for him to hang on to a shock victory than watch someone come 8th every race!
 

Vortex

Race Winner
I think you would still have reliable cars. I think teams have figured that reliability is just as important as speed, so no matter what you did to make them more fragile, the teams would find the limit and stay on it.
I dunno, I think Ferrari and Mercedes may have risked reliability this season if hey were allowed to push the engines to 110% to try and end Red Bulls dominance.
 

Greenlantern101

Super Hero And All Round Good Guy
Contributor
I know I'm in the minority here but I would award points all the way down the field. It would keep even the guys running around at the back fighting all the way to the flag.
 

Wombcat

Podium Finisher
It sure would be interesting to see in the last few laps to see the 2nd and 3rd place try to drop a place, while 4th would be wanting to keep his (also slowing down) and thus being caught by 5th place, and all trying to figure out how to cross the finish in 4th place. While in the meantime nr 1 is running away.
Could be hilarious comedy.
 
Top Bottom