Printable View
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
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.
I say we hold a Eurovision style televoting at the end of each race :p :
Why? F1 is about winning or loosing? Maybe first and last driver will get 10 pts. Second and last but one 8 pts, etc.? :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7
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.
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!
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
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 = (Quote:
Originally Posted by fousto
If the objective was simply to determine who is champion this is ideal, but..Quote:
Originally Posted by wmcot
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.