Bernie seeks point system changes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jens

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).

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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!

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theugsquirrel

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

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!

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! ;)

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.

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!

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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. :)