Bernie seeks point system changes

[ioan]

He would like a bigger gap between winner and 2nd placed.
He also believes, or at least thats what he says, that the one ho wins more races should win the championship.

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=30705

I would say that it took to long before he realized what a bull$hit they did back in 2003.

Maybe one day he will wake up and realize that the qualifying system is a mess too, maybe not (he won't realize).

[Shifter]

I've said it before I like that the winner gets a nice round 10pts and I think at least the top 8 should get points so I think it should be 7pts for 2nd, 6 for 3rd and so on. That 1 point shift would change alot.

[Nikki Katz]

I prefer the current points system to the old one. Most races the top 6 is made up of the Ferraris, McLarens and Renaults anyway, I think it's good that at least a couple more drivers get awarded. If a new system is thought up to reduce championship contenders cruising for points I hope they don't just revert to the old one again.

[ioan]

I prefer the current points system to the old one. Most races the top 6 is made up of the Ferraris, McLarens and Renaults anyway, I think it's good that at least a couple more drivers get awarded. If a new system is thought up to reduce championship contenders cruising for points I hope they don't just revert to the old one again.

No one said that less drivers will get points, but I agree with Bernie that we should get some fight for that 1st position and awarding more points is what will make them fight for it, again, now that MS is gone!

[truefan72]

I've said it before I like that the winner gets a nice round 10pts and I think at least the top 8 should get points so I think it should be 7pts for 2nd, 6 for 3rd and so on. That 1 point shift would change alot.

That's probably the best option, agreed

[Firstgear]

Leave the points as they are now, but award an extra point for things like pole and most laps lead. That way if you dominate a race, you'll have a spread of 3 or 4 points to the second place finisher. If you happen to win because the car that lead most of the race retires, well then a two point spread to second place is probably fair.

[ioan]

Leave the points as they are now, but award an extra point for things like pole and most laps lead. That way if you dominate a race, you'll have a spread of 3 or 4 points to the second place finisher. If you happen to win because the car that lead most of the race retires, well then a two point spread to second place is probably fair.

A very good and fair option indeed. :up:

[Mihai]

Leave the points as they are now, but award an extra point for things like pole and most laps lead. That way if you dominate a race, you'll have a spread of 3 or 4 points to the second place finisher. If you happen to win because the car that lead most of the race retires, well then a two point spread to second place is probably fair.

You can have a spread of 3 or 4 points to the second place finisher like you said, but you realise of course that you could get a situation in which the winner and the second place finisher both cash in 10 points ?

I'm quite happy with the current points system, but I would like to see an extra point awarded for the fastest lap of the race (like they did in the 50s).

Personally, I think they should award points in the same way that they give out the TV revenue.

So that's a lot for coming first, a bit less for coming second, a little bit less again for third and so on.






And then a great big wad of extra points for Ferrari because of their historical significance.

Yep, seems reasonable enough to me.

[jens]

I'd prefer the following points system: 12-8-6-5-4-3-2-1. At today's reliability level at least top eight finishers should get points that lesser teams would have a chance to score something as well. But also winner gets nicely awarded. Don't prefer any extra points for fastest lap or whatever - overall race result should be the ultimate decider, not just one flier!

[Mihai]

And then a great big wad of extra points for Ferrari because of their historical significance.


:laugh: :up:

[futuretiger9]

It sounds fair to me to increase the differential between first and second places, whilst leaving the lower places largely unchanged, to reflect today's improved reliability statistics.

[tinchote]

He also believes, or at least thats what he says, that the one ho wins more races should win the championship.


If they implement that, it would be really really interesting, because sooner or later there would be another "1982" season.

[coldawg]

I just in shock that Bernie and I agree on something!!!!! Scary????

[Hawkmoon]

I don't like the idea of points for fastest lap or pole. Neither of those achievements are that important to when it comes to deciding the outcome of a race.

Schumi scored 90-odd wins from 60-odd poles. When you take into account the number of times he didn't win from pole you see that pole position was not the deciding factor in the race result.

Senna was the opposite. He scored 41 wins and 65 poles. Factor in the times he didn't win from pole and it shows that pole position was not the deciding factor in the race.

I don't know if anybody has the stat but I would like to know how many races have been won from pole. I have a feeling that it's a pretty low number.

I would hate to think that a world championship was decided by what happened on a Saturday rather than a Sunday.

[leopard]

If Iam not mistaken, the current points system was prompted by the fact of unstopable Ferrari and Schumi collecting points, there were only two categories of the group in every race i.e Ferrari and non-Ferrari, their domination has left all the rest teams by far distance at the race and collecting points.

In this current F1 which the power of teams aren't different by far, i think the right time to modify the points system, the race winner should have higher points than current system, top-10 or top-12 finishers also deserve for the points.

[Tazio]

go back to the old system............period

[truefan72]

how about this

pole = 1 point
most laps leade = 1 point

then 12, 9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 points awarded for the top 10 places

this will give us some real racing from 6-10 and open the door for teams to be more aggresive in both qualifying and during the race.
Smaller teams might score some points
mistakes like spinoffs or poor pit stops get a chance for redemption
IMO it will make the whole race weekend more interesting. and give the fans of the lesser known drivers something to root for

[Cozzie]

I quite like the most positions gained point in Champ Car!

[Dazz9908]

truefan72 sounds good but
too many point scoring positions
How's 15,10,7,5,4,3,2,1 points awarded for the top 8 places as now

I quite like the qualifying system,
Just needs tweaking, Teams must disclose what fuel level they will be running before the start of Qualifying ,so a low fuel level can be for all, so the out-right fastest gets pole.
A minimum lap count per session (Q1,Q2 and Q3)say 10 to 12 laps each per session.

[leopard]

8 places didn't give opportunity to midfields scoring points, why would push too hard to finish 9 if there is no different with finish 15?

I think the ideal points system for 10 places:
15,12,10,8,6,5,4,3,2,1

or in more extreme gap:
20,15,11,8,6,5,4,3,2,1

I hope Bernie read my post :)

[ShiftingGears]

Yes! More of a gap between 1st and second is definitely a good idea. Also as mentioned, the 1 point for fastest lap will certainly make outcomes a lot more interesting. I hope we see it!

[truefan72]

[quote="Dazz9908"]

I just wish they would do away with the fuel requirement. let's just see flying laps in all 3 sessions. There is enough intruige with fuel strategy on race day...man I miss the good old days before all this tweaking

[ArrowsFA1]

I don't like the idea of points for fastest lap or pole. Neither of those achievements are that important to when it comes to deciding the outcome of a race.
It would reward good performances by the driver and team though.

Pole position used to really mean something in days gone by, in the sense that it really did show who the fastest was on that day. Fumes in the tank, sticky tyres and driver skill & balls determined the outcome. Now, the pole position man might be the fastest, then again he might just have less fuel than the others depending on what race strategy they're all running. If there was a point available for pole position then certain teams might compromise their race strategy to get that point, and so mix up the race.

I certainly think there should be a point for fastest lap, because again it rewards a driver for his work to achieve this. It might be a midfielder putting on a great performance, with little chance of a championship point otherwise, or it might be a frontrunner fighting back through the field. Either way, their effort should be recognised.

If these extra 2 points were available, then I think we can have at 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1. The likelyhood is that the front runners will get most of the P & FL points so giving the gap Bernie is looking for, but they'll have to work for it.

[Dazz9908]

I just wish they would do away with the fuel requirement. let's just see flying laps in all 3 sessions. There is enough intruige with fuel strategy on race day...man I miss the good old days before all this tweaking


I Agree totally truefan72,
Take back to the system that ruled when Senna was king!!
No holds barred flying laps, open for the full hour and over two days Friday and Saturday, Bring it back! I'll have it over this new system any day.
Light fuel loads.
That old system served for a many a decade.

[Hawkmoon]

I Agree totally truefan72,
Take back to the system that ruled when Senna was king!!
No holds barred flying laps, open for the full hour and over two days Friday and Saturday, Bring it back! I'll have it over this new system any day.
Light fuel loads.
That old system served for a many a decade.

Amen! :up:

[Mikeall]

I don't think changing the points system for the winners really changes that much because race winners usually collect points over most races so overall the best performer at all races generally wins the championship. As prize money and TV money is determined by championship positions it seems a bit wrong that 9th or 10th in the constructors can be decided by one flukey result when half the field failed to finish. If the points went further down (as in MotoGP, ChampCar, IndyCar, BTCC etc) championship positions would be decided more fairly over more races.

[Dzeidzei]

And then a great big wad of extra points for Ferrari because of their historical significance.


How about extra 5 points for drinking most beer at the after race party? Or the night before?

And 10 points for getting a lap dance?

And 20 points for whining about the broken Merc?

:)

[ClarkFan]

go back to the old system............period

:up:

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

[Sleeper]

The only change Bernie needs to make is 12 instead of 10 points.

As for those that say go back to the old qualy format clearly have forgotten how boreing it was to watch an empty track for half an hour before anything ever happened.

[Mikeall]

:up:

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 :D

[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 :D

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

[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! :p :

[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?

[ArrowsFA1]

Not too different from current standings, isn't it? So that's why I quite don't understand the fuss around the current system.
The current system was largely designed to reward reliability and consistency, at a time when mechanical retirements were fairly common. That often led to big points gaps being built up and maintained over the course of a season.

Now, F1 cars are more reliable than they have ever been so perhaps there is an argument for reflecting this in a revised points system.

While wins should be rewarded, the minor placings can be significant for a driver chasing the title (i.e. Alonso's 2pts in France).

[ShiftingGears]

The easiest thing to do is to go back to the 10-6-4-3-2-1 system- it was a proven winner. I'd definitely return to it. Although I suppose the lower teams would want more points availiable so theyre in some way rewarded for their efforts. If the point system was changed to something other than the 10 6 4 system, then I would opt for the motoGP points system.

[Tomi]

I'd prefer the following points system: 12-8-6-5-4-3-2-1. At today's reliability level at least top eight finishers should get points that lesser teams would have a chance to score something as well. But also winner gets nicely awarded. Don't prefer any extra points for fastest lap or whatever - overall race result should be the ultimate decider, not just one flier!

This system would be good, they should take it to WRC too, now the drivers settle too easy for second place.

[jso1985]

The easiest thing to do is to go back to the 10-6-4-3-2-1 system- it was a proven winner. I'd definitely return to it. Although I suppose the lower teams would want more points availiable so theyre in some way rewarded for their efforts. If the point system was changed to something other than the 10 6 4 system, then I would opt for the motoGP points system.

I always thought the old system was unfair to the "mid" teams as it took too much luck involved to score rugularly.

I agree the gap between first and second is to close, so I propose 12-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 or 15-12-10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1

[Hawkmoon]

The new system works well enough I suppose, and they will never go back to the old one so I think we should focus more on another of 2003's stupid rule changes - qualifying.

Fuel-in qualifying is the single worst rule ever introduced into F1 in it's entire 50 plus years. It has done nothing to improve the racing. Let's get rid of it now. And if Ron Dennis says anything about the cars being designed with fuel-in qualifying in mind I'm going wedge my foot so far up his arse he'll be able to polish my boot with his tonsils!

Keep the knock-out system. It's entertaining and focuses attention on the smaller teams and their efforts to advance to the next stage. But the only effect that the fuel-in in Q3 has is to relegate the non-Ferrari/McLaren drivers to spectators. When Red Bull or Williams make it into Q3 they fill the cars up and doddle around burning fuel. They know they aren't a match for the big guys so there is no point in screwing up the race by trying to qualify light and maybe get amoungst the leaders.

Without race fuel, the likes of Webber, Rosberg and Trulli would be able to put in one of their 1 lap specials and stick the thing in 4th or 5th. Throw in a good start and you have the unpredictable races that this new qualifying system was supposed to produce but has failed miserably to deliver.

Let the teams fill the cars with whatever load of fuel they want just before the cars leave for the grid formation lap. That would mean unrpedictable strategies. As it is now, everybody knows when everybody else is going to pit and plans accordingly.

Come on Bernie, leave the points system alone and focus on the real boil on F1's collective backside - get rid of race-fuel qualifying!

[wmcot]

Here's a radical idea:

The WDC is the driver with the most wins. In case of a tie, the one with the most second places, third places...

Wait...too simple...it would never work! ;)

[Crypt]

I was just discussing this this weekend after contemplating why Kimi has won 3 races and isn't in the lead. I spun it out as far as I could with the current points system and a system that rewards most races won.

Eventually the "most races one" scenario ran into major complications, so hearing this solution brings me hope.

[V12]

I think they should leave the points as they are for 2nd-8th and give 12 for a win - the only downside would be skewing the all time points statistics but given that drivers used to compete in fewer races and used to only get 9 for a win in the 1950s, they are pretty meaningless anyway!

[Bezza]

10-6-4-3-2-1 is F1. I think they should go back to this system - I don't like the idea of giving more than the Top 8 points, finishing 9th is not an achievement in my opinion, indeed finishing 7th isn't an achievement either.

[ojciec dyrektor]

10-6-4-3-2-1 is F1. I think they should go back to this system - I don't like the idea of giving more than the Top 8 points, finishing 9th is not an achievement in my opinion, indeed finishing 7th isn't an achievement either.

I agree. Any other system is bad.
8 points for second place should be changed back to 6. There's no Michael Schumacher on the grid so there's no need to give a bonus for second place. :)

[donKey jote]

how about some sad git (go on, you know you want to :p ) working out the effect (if any) of all these combinations on the actual standings at the end of each season ? :)

After we can all say it's pointless (no pun in 10 did), as the better off would have adjusted their drives to make the most of the prevailing system at the time anyway :p
http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/16/16_3_166.gif

[Hondo]

1st 13 points
2nd 8 points
3rd 6 points
4th 5 points
5th 4 points
6th 3 points
7th 2 points
8th 1 point
14th 1 point, can only be claimed by car and driver still running at race end.

It's not as crazy as it looks. Might even liven things up a little.

[donKey jote]

I say we hold a Eurovision style televoting at the end of each race :p :

[ojciec dyrektor]

14th 1 point, can only be claimed by car and driver still running at race end.

Why? F1 is about winning or loosing? Maybe first and last driver will get 10 pts. Second and last but one 8 pts, etc.? :p

[RaikkonenRules]

Have the Moto GP Points system. It rewards reliabilty as well as speed and it gives us an accurate analysis on how good each and every team and driver is.

[jso1985]

I think giving points down to 15th place wouldn't work also, as the slower teams can easily finish 14th on any race due retirements so no achievement there.
That's why I like giving points down to 8th or 10th place, mid pack teams don't need luck to get points constantly and slower teams get a reward for a good race.
But I agree also with Hawkmoon :up: qualy fuel is a bigger problem!

[Nikki Katz]

I'm pretty sure that reverting to the old points system would result in a lot of gaps on the grid. Looking at the way this season's going, it's currently hard enough for a driver not driving for one of the top 4 teams to score a point, imagine how much harder that would be if only the top 6 got points. Plus it would reward fluke results more, like Wurz in Canada, rather than consistency.

Personally I think if anything the number of drivers awarded points should be extended. But really it's probably ok as it is, just give another point to the winner if they wish. Though 11 points for a win doesn't have such a nice ring to it.

[Roamy]

He would like a bigger gap between winner and 2nd placed.
He also believes, or at least thats what he says, that the one ho wins more races should win the championship.

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=30705

I would say that it took to long before he realized what a bull$hit they did back in 2003.

Maybe one day he will wake up and realize that the qualifying system is a mess too, maybe not (he won't realize).


Well no sh!t Bernie why did it take your mop head ass 5 years to figure this one out !!

[ShiftingGears]

Well no sh!t Bernie why did it take your mop head ass 5 years to figure this one out !!

Because it doesnt make him money = (

[D-Type]

Here's a radical idea:

The WDC is the driver with the most wins. In case of a tie, the one with the most second places, third places...

Wait...too simple...it would never work! ;) If the objective was simply to determine who is champion this is ideal, but..

1. It means that the championship can be determined quite early in the season. from a commercial point of view this matters as people will argue that there will be less interest in end of season races, hence less advertising revenue to the TV companies, less TV revenue to FOCA, less money for the teams, less money for the race organisers, less people through the gate - assuming this is still of interest to race organisers and they don't get all their income from TV and government grants.

2. The fact that historically the points system has been used to produce a ranking, which is not the same as a champion. The ranking has then been used for various purposes: determination of who are FIA graded drivers, determining which teams get to ride in the FOCA charter aircraft, split of TV revenues, [I think] how much a driver has to pay for his superlicence, allowing lower ranking teams to avoid the "Schumacher/Ferrari first, All the rest - nowhere!" perception, etc.


With any points system you have to ask a whole series of questions like "How many fith places is equivalent to a win?", "How many seconds are worth how many fists?".

If you must have points how about 64, 32, 16, 8, 4, 2, 1? It will encourage competitiveness at the front and maybe even at the back and eliminate cruising to a place. The odd 32 points will matter to Ferrari and McLaren and Super Aguri and Toro Rosso will be equally concerned about fighting over single points and hoping for retirements up the way to bolster their scores.