Shhhhh! you might have given them the exact idea they've been looking for. Run all the races and then at the season's end reveal how the scoring system works.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
Printable View
Shhhhh! you might have given them the exact idea they've been looking for. Run all the races and then at the season's end reveal how the scoring system works.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Shifter
Better hide that one quick!
I love the irony that under Bernie's own medal system his Brabham team would never have won a single title under his stewardship! Also ironic that the driver most associated with Bernie - Nelson "clock up a safe 2nd place" Piquet would never have won the championship as opposed to the 3 titles he claimed in the 80s, not that he didnt deserve them, he was definately one of the finest drivers of the era, he just worked the points system of the time to his advantage.
Also 1982 would have been an interesting case in point, Pironi would have won the championship despite having his career ended mid-season in a massive shunt at Hockenheim that smashed his legs. Had he been crowned World Champ there may have been a chance he would have chosen to come back after his recuperation rather than going powerboat racing which was to end his life prematurely.
In my opinion, the proposed medal systems falters at most when you consider that it completely handicaps the consistant driver. Just as philipbain mentioned the 1982 season, I'm reminded that Keke Rosberg only won a single race that year. Alain Prost, Didier Pironi, Gilles Villeneave, John Watson, Niki Lauda, Rene Arnoux and Nelson Piquet all had the ability to take the title at some point in the year. It was definitely a year where consistancy counted and fair play to Rosberg for coming out tops, even if he wasn't (arguably) the quickest out there. Imagine how a medal system would do an injustice to an (arguably again) deserved champion like Rosberg and put a huge twist on Pironi's case, amongst others!
The way I see it, the FIA have mucked about with F1 for too long. The more they change, the worse it seems to get, in one way or another. I can't see the logic in the medal system for a number of reasons (some already mentioned.)
1) It rewards outright winners at the expense of consistant drivers. Consistancy is a learned skill in itself.
2) Looking at the statistical changes, without counting 2008, nothing would have been different since 1989. Therefore, it leads me to believe that the FIA are working on whims and not putting proper thought into it. Spur of the moment desicions are very unprofessional at this level yet we see them too often! :mark:
3) Its contradictory to Ecclestone's success as a Brabham team manager. He's willing to admit that, under this system, he would have no titles to his name, all in the name of money. Greedy little elf he is! :mad:
*deep breath*
Forgot to add a simple fact that most drivers will try to win anyway, if the opportunity is there. I don't think it would change a driver's attitude when the race gets into a settled groove, common these days. It just might make the fight for pole position a bit closer. The opening stint may see a few pushing slightly harder. But face it, this era of F1 is a shadow of its former self.
Reluctantly I find myself in agreement with Mr Ecclestone on this.
The objective of racing, whether a GP or a primary school egg-and-spoon race is simply to win.
A champion driver must therefore logically be the one who is best at winning.
How do you measure this?
Count the number of wins.
QED
If you are trying to evaluate the ranking of drivers or teams, rather than the champion, it's a different issue and a points system isthe only way. Incidentally, this first mattered in the early days of FOCA when places on the FOCA chartered air freighter were limited so they were awarded on the basis of highest placing in the manufacturers' championship. Similarly, Goodyear allocated the best tyres on a similar basis.
But it is meaningless to apply different criteria retrospectively because, as Valve Bounce said, if the rules were different than drivers would drive differently.
Thuinderbolt's point is also valid: a driver racking up wins in the first few races could mean the championship being wound up early in the season. I believe this was one of the original reasons for the "best * races only to count" rule.
A difficult issue.