Bernie seeks point system changes

[Mikeall]

I always liked 9-6-4-3-2-1. Make it 10 for winning - the 1990's structure if you want to give a winner more of an edge.

The authorities over-reacted to Schumacher's 2002 season. It's not like the championship hadn't been locked up early before. Ascari in 1952-53, Fangio in 1954-55, Brabham in 1960, Clark in 1963 and 1965, Stewart in 1969 and 1971, Lauda in 1975 - they all clinched the title early and the World Championship was still held the next season.

ClarkFan

However in those days drivers dropped their worst results from either the whole season or from each half of the season. With the high level of reliability these days it is conceivably possible that a driver second in the championship going in to the last race could finish behind the leader, yet still end up the champion...

[VresiBerba]

I don't understand why people complain about point scoring systems, as long as the winner recieves more than anyone else. In this thread, which obviously is the annual point-system-complaint-thread, yet again there exists propositions of completely haywire systems, where a second placed driver can score equal to the winner in some circumstances, and where a third placed driver actually can score MORE points than the second placed driver. This is ridiculus.

The scoring system works just fine as long as any driver placed better scores more points than a driver placed worse.

[Tazio]

However in those days drivers dropped their worst results from either the whole season or from each half of the season. With the high level of reliability these days it is conceivably possible that a driver second in the championship going in to the last race could finish behind the leader, yet still end up the champion...

That rule (dropping times) was changed before Ferrari's domination with Mike piloting! The cars were reliable for some time before this abomination of a rule. The rule change was as much a way of placating advertisers, and keeping fans interested, than an equitable resolution of the championships! It was a quick fix! One that is no longer needed IMHO!

[ArrowsFA1]

Luca di Montezemolo is moaning about the points system now.

"There's some bitterness for a rule book no other sport has: Ferrari are awarded victory but we're still behind in both championships. This is unsporting, it's wrong: F1 shouldn't be a sport for calculators, it should be for winners."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/60667

It's simple Luca. Score more points and you'll lead both championships

[pino]

Luca di Montezemolo is moaning about the points system now.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/60667

It's simple Luca. Score more points and you'll lead both championships

I think he's right, the reward between the winner and the runner-up should be bigger than just 2 points

[jens]

The point standings with the old system:
1 Hamilton - 56
2 Alonso - 44
3 Räikkönen - 43
4 Massa - 39
5 Heidfeld - 19
6 Kubica - 12
7 Fisichella - 7
8 Kovalainen - 5
9 Wurz - 4
10 Coulthard - 2
11 Trulli - 1
= Rosberg - 1
= Sato - 1

Not too different from current standings, isn't it? So that's why I quite don't understand the fuss around the current system.

Maybe even TOp10 should be given points considering the reliability level at the moment - minor and even midfield teams are still in trouble to score any points race after race.

[janneppi]

Luca di Montezemolo is moaning about the points system now.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/60667

It's simple Luca. Score more points and you'll lead both championships

Perhaps Von Montezemolo should build a more reliable car first and then complain.

[Mark]

I think a point for pole wouldn't be a bad idea, it would make Saturday even more exciting than it is now. At the moment you get pole, but then in the race you lose everything in the first corner, so what was it all for?!

[ioan]

The point standings with the old system:
1 Hamilton - 56
2 Alonso - 44
3 Räikkönen - 43
4 Massa - 39
5 Heidfeld - 19
6 Kubica - 12
7 Fisichella - 7
8 Kovalainen - 5
9 Wurz - 4
10 Coulthard - 2
11 Trulli - 1
= Rosberg - 1
= Sato - 1

Not too different from current standings, isn't it? So that's why I quite don't understand the fuss around the current system.

Maybe even TOp10 should be given points considering the reliability level at the moment - minor and even midfield teams are still in trouble to score any points race after race.

You might have noticed however that the point differences would be smaller and also easier to overcome with the old system!
I think LdM got a point, and now that MS is gone and not threatening to win the WDC by half way through the season they can go back to the old system! :

[ioan]

I think a point for pole wouldn't be a bad idea, it would make Saturday even more exciting than it is now. At the moment you get pole, but then in the race you lose everything in the first corner, so what was it all for?!

Not untill they have to qualify on race fuel loads, no way. It would mean to give points for the lighter car, where's the competitive spirit in this?