New points system!

But my post shows you that new teams have LESS chance of "clawing their way up the tables" under the new system than under the old.

I know - but that still isn't the point. It isn't about clawing your way up the table. It is about scoring a single point, which is what defines the TV money for the next season, which could make or break teams. And the new system is going to help smaller teams get that point they need.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com

I would have suggested an "Independents Cup" in much the same way the Jim Clark cup awarded the best normally aspirated car in the late 80's. However with most of the manufacturers limping away from F1 with their tails between the legs most of the teams are now independents or as good as.

Therefore this modified points system is probably the best way forward. The maintained ratios ensure that main essence of the championship will be maintained. And lets face it... it's this or have Bernie's medals system... which actually has more chance of seeing the championships wrapped up early.

Your last point is great, Jim. I don't think anyone could reasonably argue that the medals system was a good idea. I was so happy when that was shelved.

I definitely think that having more points-scoring positions is better. Not just for the money the new teams can get by scoring points, but just to help separate them in our own perceptions.
Looking at a leaderboard with 3-4 teams on zero: there would be no way to tell whether (for example) one of those teams was consistently finishing 10 laps down, while another was regularly challenging for points.

Since the new system is drastically increasing the winners' points anyway, I'd actually go the whole hog and award points all the way down (starting from 50pts or something).

But that's not going to happen.

They really should sort out that 7th-place-gap issue though.

As a German webpage reported today, the points system could apparently be changed again, introducing points for fastest lap and pole position as well as change the points distribution to

25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1

Sounds more sensible in my opinion, what do you think?

Link to article (in German): [www.motorsport-total.com]

Points for fastest lap and pole position are the worst point inventions ever.

The new distribution looks nice though.

Sounds a lot better to me. More emphasis on the win, and recognising the achievements of pole position and fastest lap would be a good idea as well.

---

I've no problem with points for pole & fastest lap, so long as they don't decide a championship themselves (well, not the pole anyway, I don't mind fastest lap... that might leave a bit of tension in a championship, even if the race result itself looks settled).

My only problem with the point for fastest lap is that at certain points, we'll have drivers dropping back a couple of seconds and making a mini surge, which is only going to confuse Mr. Joe Public and make some of us go "WTF" on occasion.

The new points system seems sensible, but I disagree with points for pole and fastest lap.

As an article on F1Fanatic argued the other day, pole already has the advantage of starting from the front (which is even more important in 2010). As for a point for fastest lap, this can be easily abused by drivers going out for one lap stints, and can also become complicated, such as if there is a yellow flag on track (as happened to Hamilton in GP2)

---

X (@ed24f1)

That new distribution looks miles better IMHO. I don't really have an opinion on the points for pole & fastest lap (if indeed they are being considered), because those are the sorts of things that are averaged out over the course of a season anyway.

As Patrick Head once said, everyone sets their strategy for the weekend to put themselves in the best possible position at the end of Sunday afternoon. Nobody with any credibility would go for the glory run on Saturday just to get an extra point, if it means compromising a potentially big points haul on Sunday.

---

K*bots UK, specialist providers of 'fun science' Curriculum Enhancement days for Primary and Secondary schools in Britain.
Please find us on [en.wikipedia.org] for more information.

The point for pole position is actually quite a good idea now that low-fuel qualifying will be reintroduced. Also with the re-fuelling ban, the top 10 session will be ran on fumes and whoever is the fastest will truly deserve it. Ive always said that the fastest lap point should make the end of the race more interesting. Normally, drivers cruise and collect but here we will be seeing everyone on worn tyres but low fuel trying to snatch an extra point in the final laps. Think of how exciting the finish to Monza 09 was, seeing Hamilton push it to the final lap (granted, it didnt end well for him, but isnt that what we all want to see? the drivers at least giving it a go?).

I like the 7 point gap too. More emphasis on the winner. I dont like the fact it the immediately goes to a 3 point gap, that seems a bit too much to me. I would do this:

25-18-14-10-8-6-4-3-2-1

---

Circuit Thermalito

Liverpool Waterfront Circuit (WIP)




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/08/2010 11:56AM by Fincent.

Locke Cole Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As Patrick Head once said, everyone sets their
> strategy for the weekend to put themselves in the
> best possible position at the end of Sunday
> afternoon. Nobody with any credibility would go
> for the glory run on Saturday just to get an extra
> point, if it means compromising a potentially big
> points haul on Sunday.

Says it all for me. Fastest lap I can see problems with it, but I think it'll work out IMO.

---

Order a giffgaff SIM from my link and get £5 credit, free!
Season 1 and Season 3 GPGSL World Champion!
Member of CTDP - Cars Tracks Development Program - 3D Carshaper

I think Gav raised a good point... it would be conceivable for a championship to be decided during qualifying. Which would make a down to the wire championship decider a bit of a anti climax.

That doesn't bother me.

I suppose the solution, though, is to give an extra point only if the driver achieves pole AND fastest lap. That would make the late-race tension even better!

---

K*bots UK, specialist providers of 'fun science' Curriculum Enhancement days for Primary and Secondary schools in Britain.
Please find us on [en.wikipedia.org] for more information.

Funny this should come up because I was only thinking yesterday that they could make the Constructors Championship more interesting by awarding a point for fastest pit stop. Now that re-fueling is banned again (thank god!) the pit stops should take a similar ammount of time and as people are always banging on about F1 being a 'Team sport' it would be good to really recognise that in a more tangible way. I'd much rather see that than a point for pole as the same drivers will get that time after time and it's usually down to the car having good balance and able to get it's tyres up to tempreture over one lap.

Gav's point point about the pole deciding the championship is a very good one, it could detract rather than give to the sport

A point for the fastest pitstop shouldn't be awarded to the driver, but perhaps the constructors. Not a bad idea that one.

Sorry, as Gav's pointed out I was not clear on my point, but I actually meant to imply that a point should be awarded to the Constuctor for fastest pit stop

At least I now know it's not just my crazy idea if someone actually agrees with me, lol. Cheers

Update: The points system has been revised! It is now the MUCH more sensible 25-18-etc. system mentioned earlier in this thread.

Well done F1 Commission, a very sensible decision IMHO.

---

K*bots UK, specialist providers of 'fun science' Curriculum Enhancement days for Primary and Secondary schools in Britain.
Please find us on [en.wikipedia.org] for more information.

It isn't much more sensible. You do the maths and again, nothing worth noting has changed.

90s system: 10-6
00s system: 10-8
Old Proposal: 25-20 (x2.5)
New Proposal 25-18 (x2.5-2)

If you divide the new proposal by the 2.5 multiplier than you end up with 10-7.2. The only difference here is 2nd place losing the equivalent of 0.8 of a point in 'old money'. That means we're still 1.2 points away from the 90s system. So we don't really have a significant gap between 1st and 2nd in points, it just looks like it because "7 points" sounds significant since most people are still thinking in old money terms.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com

Yes but we no longer have the weird 2-point gap between 8th and 9th that we had in the last system, that was out of sequence. I don't give two hoots whether it's 'equivalent to old money' or not, so long as it's a logical distribution. IMHO the previous proposal wasn't at all logical, whereas this one seems much more so.

---

K*bots UK, specialist providers of 'fun science' Curriculum Enhancement days for Primary and Secondary schools in Britain.
Please find us on [en.wikipedia.org] for more information.

I don't really see that having any point at all?

If you do the maths this change is nothing what so ever. And I know you don't care about it in old money, but I translated it to old money because as we witnessed when we first seen the new proposal, too many people are too stupid to do the maths themselves and actually thought the lead gap was significantly larger than before.

All they have done is adjusted an odd points gap to satisfying peoples OCD, and extended the lead gap giving the illusion of it actually having an effect, but not. They have managed to keep the same points system which rewards consistency, not winning, and shut up the people who were complaining about it in 1 move.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com