Jump to content


Photo

Bernie wants wins to decide WDC


  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#51 angst

angst
  • Member

  • 7,135 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 19 March 2008 - 02:37

Originally posted by StefanV

Heh... F1 is a team sport, remember? The drivers are payed to drive for the team and I do not think any team boss would be partcularly pleased with their drivers doing kamikaze moves with their high performance mechanical conveyances. With Bernies suggestion you would need to change F1 in it's core. Coincidently, Max seem to be on the same track with the swap drivers idea.


If the team bosses considered that their drivers were stupid enough to make kamikaze moves then they would either a) not employ those drivers or b) have a screw or two loose for employing those drivers...

Advertisement

#52 Cenotaph

Cenotaph
  • Member

  • 2,317 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 19 March 2008 - 03:26

Just last year I was wishing the system was like this, so I think Bernie's proposal makes sense. However, it might be too extreme for now, they should just change the points system to something closer to the 10-6-4-3-2-1 or 9-6-4-3-2-1 system. A points system that actually makes winning worth it.

#53 angst

angst
  • Member

  • 7,135 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 19 March 2008 - 03:38

Originally posted by Jhope
What if, for example, uhm, season is over by the British GP? Then what do we do for the next 6 races? And what if there is a tie? Do we count points?


Yes, I mean, imagine a season like 2004... Now a season like that wouldn't have ended early, with the drivers having nothing to fight for in a points competition.... oh, hang on....

#54 former champ

former champ
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 19 March 2008 - 08:35

go back to 10 points for the winner, 6 points for 2nd...... and STFU Bernie.

That's all that needs to happen, simple as that. Having only 2 points between a win and 2nd place was ridiculous to start with and I'm surprised its still the case today. It needs to be changed.

#55 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,985 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 19 March 2008 - 08:42

Originally posted by former champ
go back to 10 points for the winner, 6 points for 2nd...... and STFU Bernie.

That's all that needs to happen, simple as that. Having only 2 points between a win and 2nd place was ridiculous to start with and I'm surprised its still the case today. It needs to be changed.


Well, I said it then and I say it now - the rule changes that happened "because of" Ferrari domination in 2002 and afterwards were hasty, not thought through and simply wrong - every one of them.

#56 marcus123

marcus123
  • Member

  • 260 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 19 March 2008 - 09:07

They should abandon completely the WDC, it makes no sense. In this day and age it is a team sport. If you have driver B supporting driver A then they are not competing against each other but with each other, potentially taking points of each other. Its like saying Ronaldo won the players Premiership as he scored the most goals and Manu the team premiership.
Having a WDC implies that the winner is the best driver of the year which is clearly nonsense, it is the best driver/car/team combination of the year that wins the WDC, i.e. Team.

#57 SeanValen

SeanValen
  • Member

  • 16,967 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 19 March 2008 - 11:37

Originally posted by Tigershark
I don't like this idea because it diminishes the efforts of people like Michael Schumacher who went from 22nd to 5th in Monaco to score some points. Apart from the extremely unlikely scenario that he ends up finishing the season tied on 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th places this would mean nothing under Bernie's new system. However, I'm all for making wins more important than they are now. The fact that the reward for a win is only two more championship points than second, and only four more than third is terrible and makes for seemingly impossible catch-up math games like Schumacher had to do in 2006, and Raikkonen did in 2007.

So keep the points system, but change it to make winning far more rewarding.


:up:
The sport has changed the wrong way since the 2003 rules, even qualifying until this day is still effected by changes then, what happened was, it became fashion to change the rules often, and some where never really thought out well, some well just pulluting the purity of the sport.

#58 Lioncasa

Lioncasa
  • New Member

  • 15 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 19 March 2008 - 12:10

While I think that the WDC should be won by the driver with the most wins, completely abolishing the points system is not the way to go.

In a 18-race season, if you win the first 6 races, you're most likely the winner.
What do you do the rest of the season? Cruise along? Stay home until someone comes close?
Deliberately drive your competitors of the road?

The correct way is a points system which places a lot more emphasis on wins, i.e. 20 points for first, 13 for second, 10 for third, 8 for fourth, 6, 4, 2, 1 and a bonus point for leading the most laps.
Therefore, 2 wins beats 3 second places.

Then the danger is that we have a champion before the end of the season.
But I think most (if not all) supporters watch the race for a race winner, and the WDC as a side (bonus) thing.

Well, at least I do!

#59 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,744 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 19 March 2008 - 12:32

Originally posted by Lioncasa
In a 18-race season, if you win the first 6 races, you're most likely the winner.
What do you do the rest of the season? Cruise along? Stay home until someone comes close?
Deliberately drive your competitors of the road?

Enjoy the races as races, rather than part of a championship. The existence of points downgrades the achievement of winning a race to a mere tick on a scorecard.

Advertisement

#60 Frank Booth

Frank Booth
  • Member

  • 796 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 19 March 2008 - 12:36

Originally posted by Lioncasa
But I think most (if not all) supporters watch the race for a race winner, and the WDC as a side (bonus) thing.


Call me silly but I watch it for the team wins and to see how the team over comes the engineering obstacles throughout the weekend and year. Drivers are just one part of the team, since we all know even the best drivers look bad if the team doesn't give them a good car to ride around in. I could go on and on but lets get real if there weren't the constructors there wouldn't be F1 period end of story.

#61 mclarensmps

mclarensmps
  • Member

  • 3,898 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 19 March 2008 - 13:15

Bernie's concern is correct, yet his proposed solution is dumb. Race wins + consistency both should be accountable for championships, not just one or the other. In light of that, handing more points to a winner and/or handing out points for qualifying (and maybe fastest lap) would be a better solution.

#62 angst

angst
  • Member

  • 7,135 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 19 March 2008 - 14:24

Originally posted by ensign14

Enjoy the races as races, rather than part of a championship. The existence of points downgrades the achievement of winning a race to a mere tick on a scorecard.


:up:

A simple idea, that seems markedly lost on many.

#63 GrzegorzChyla

GrzegorzChyla
  • Member

  • 325 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 19 March 2008 - 20:52

You can translate Bernies proposition in points terms:

1 point for victory.
0 points for 2nd and worse.

I am against. Note that it is probable that last races have no meaning for the championship.

secondly:
imagine a championship of 4 drivers and 3 races.
Results are:
race 1: A, B, C, D
race 2: C, B, A, D
race 3: D, B, C, A

for Bernie it is C: he has 1 win and 2 third places.
but please note that B has beaten him 2 times and lost only once, so in direct comparison B is better than C.
Also looking further the same way B is better than A and D.

I allways liked old 9-6-4-3-2-1 scheme, with 2/3 ratio between 1st and 2nd and between 2nd and 3rd.
that would lead starting from 20 to:
20-13.3-8.8-5.9-3.9-2.6-1.8-1.2
or if rounded:
20-13-9-6-4-3-2-1

well... I always thought racing is mostly about thinking. It is not only driving as fast as you can. Sometimes you have to slow (for instance on turns).

For me giving championship for most wins is the same as giving race victory for top speed on a straight.

#64 alfa1

alfa1
  • Member

  • 1,850 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 20 March 2008 - 06:10

Originally posted by Tigershark
I don't like this idea because it diminishes the efforts of people like Michael Schumacher who went from 22nd to 5th in Monaco to score some points.



Under Bernie's suggestion, why would Michael have bothered putting the effort?
I'm going to presume his primary motivation during that drive was to get as many championship points as possible, because it all counts towards HIS championship hopes during the year... but if Bernie has his way, then his personal motivation is going to be ZERO apart from giving his friends in the team something to smile about.

And as an aside, can someone calculate how soon we would have decided last years championship. We had several contenders right up until the last race with the current system, what was it with Bernies?

#65 britishtrident

britishtrident
  • Member

  • 1,954 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 20 March 2008 - 07:49

As if at the moment Ferrari lawyers don't have quite enough to be sure they can decide the championship ?

#66 travbrad

travbrad
  • Member

  • 690 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 20 March 2008 - 09:27

I agree to an extent that the driver who wins most should be champion, but they should do this by increasing points gap between 1st and 2nd, rather than this ridiculous idea of "2nd through 22nd count for nothing". That way consistency does still matter (although to a slightly lesser extent, and winning would be a bit more important), and the smaller teams can still get points.

Another way to help achieve this is to bring back the "throw out your worst 2-3 races of the half-season" system, but the main thing is to increase the points gap for 1st place. Getting 2nd vs 3rd is no different than 1st vs 2nd currently. I think the winner of the race should get a small "bonus" to his points for winning. It makes winning a race more special, from a points/championship perspective.

Even 1 extra point may not be enough though, just look at the 1987 season when it was 9pts for 1st and 6 for 2nd. Piquet won 3 races, while his teammate (Mansell) won 6 races and consistently out-drove the Brazilian, yet Piquet still won the championship by a healthy margin. A 3pt gap would certainly be an improvement over 2pts though.

#67 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,447 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 20 March 2008 - 09:30

Wasn't it in 1988 where it was the best 10 results. Hence who ever won the most races between Senna and Prost would take the title.

I agree with others here, very bad idea. 12 points for a win.

#68 thiscocks

thiscocks
  • Member

  • 973 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 20 March 2008 - 11:51

What a stupid idea. Agree with above posts. Why not just revert back to the old points system?

#69 Frank Booth

Frank Booth
  • Member

  • 796 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 20 March 2008 - 12:05

Originally posted by alfa1
Under Bernie's suggestion, why would Michael have bothered putting the effort?


Thats easy:
Because he or any other driver gets paid millions of dollars to do the best they can every single time they are in the car.

Thats the bottom line here folks, drivers are employees just like the guy who sweeps the garage every night. I'm pretty sure my boss would tell me to back my bags if I told him I wasn't motivated to do my job to the best of my abilities every single day I'm there.

#70 Arska

Arska
  • Member

  • 747 posts
  • Joined: April 02

Posted 20 March 2008 - 14:57

Originally posted by thiscocks
Why not just revert back to the old points system?


Because giving points to just 6 drivers is not enough. I'd rather see 10 drivers getting points, but with higher positions being more rewarding than now.

#71 Crazy Canuck

Crazy Canuck
  • Member

  • 2,517 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 20 March 2008 - 15:05

How about if English is your second language or if you are visible minority you get double points?

Means Sato gets Quadrouple points!!!

Sato for WDC Champ 2009!!!!

Sorry Jenson and Davidson....you guys are stuck with regular points.....


:rolleyes:

CC

#72 Frank Booth

Frank Booth
  • Member

  • 796 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 20 March 2008 - 15:14

Originally posted by Crazy Canuck
How about if English is your second language or if you are visible minority you get double points?

Means Sato gets Quadrouple points!!!

Sato for WDC Champ 2009!!!!

Sorry Jenson and Davidson....you guys are stuck with regular points.....


:rolleyes:

CC


Minority in who's eyes? Judging by world population I think that would bump up those two.

#73 Crazy Canuck

Crazy Canuck
  • Member

  • 2,517 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 20 March 2008 - 15:18

Originally posted by Frank Booth


Minority in who's eyes? Judging by world population I think that would bump up those two.


Shit....that's a good point...I guess the poitns system proposal was not very well thought out.....


hmmmmm



CC

#74 angst

angst
  • Member

  • 7,135 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 20 March 2008 - 16:45

Originally posted by Frank Booth


Thats easy:
Because he or any other driver gets paid millions of dollars to do the best they can every single time they are in the car.

Thats the bottom line here folks, drivers are employees just like the guy who sweeps the garage every night. I'm pretty sure my boss would tell me to back my bags if I told him I wasn't motivated to do my job to the best of my abilities every single day I'm there.


Indeed. And I would add that, points or no points, if he didn't have the pride to perform for that position (for his team) then he wouldn't have been the driver that he was - and would be unlikely to have been employed by a top team in the first place....

#75 angst

angst
  • Member

  • 7,135 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 20 March 2008 - 16:47

You know. Before there was a WDC, and ven when there was, when there were non-championship races. When drivers used to take part in Euro F2 cup races without being able to score points - the drivers still raced. The likes of those who are in cars that are unlikely to finish in the points still battle it out for each position in the races now.

#76 F1Champion

F1Champion
  • Member

  • 2,928 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 20 March 2008 - 18:37

I don't like this idea at all and it won't work.

Yes the winner of a race needs to be rewarded more so just go back to the old days of 10,6,4,3,2,1. It's not like the Ferrari domination is continuing so why not switch back? If the teams need points to go to 8th place then 12,8,6,5,4,3,2,1...........job done. The winner gets rewarded like he should and builds up a lead in the WDC but he also isn't invincible because he's still subject to the odd DNF or bad result, this allows the competition to stay alive.

#77 F1 Tor.

F1 Tor.
  • Member

  • 2,832 posts
  • Joined: August 04

Posted 20 March 2008 - 18:49

I can see the arguments for both sides here. Personally, I'd keep everything the same but award 15 points for first(the way it is now is no good) and I'd give a point for pole position and fastest lap. So, potentially, someone could walk away with 17 points from a GP. If that doesn't motivate you, don't know what will. :wave:

#78 travbrad

travbrad
  • Member

  • 690 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 20 March 2008 - 23:38

I might agree with a point for pole position if it was on equal fuel loads, but with the current qualifying that wouldn't really seem fair. Besides, starting in front of everyone for the race already seems like a pretty good reward considering how difficult it is to overtake, not to mention in the wet it can be a huge advantage.

15 points for a win vs 8 for 2nd would be a bit extreme IMO, but it would certainly give some motivation as you said :) I think 12-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 would be good, not that it matters what I think ;)

#79 F1 Tor.

F1 Tor.
  • Member

  • 2,832 posts
  • Joined: August 04

Posted 21 March 2008 - 00:18

Originally posted by travbrad
I might agree with a point for pole position if it was on equal fuel loads, but with the current qualifying that wouldn't really seem fair. Besides, starting in front of everyone for the race already seems like a pretty good reward considering how difficult it is to overtake, not to mention in the wet it can be a huge advantage.

15 points for a win vs 8 for 2nd would be a bit extreme IMO, but it would certainly give some motivation as you said :) I think 12-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 would be good, not that it matters what I think ;)



Yeah, 15 might be too high. I was just throwing numbers around. Some other posters have suggested 12 as well and that might be better. I still like a point for fastest lap though. That way you'd see people trying to get it rather than just cruising after the second set of stops. :wave:

Advertisement

#80 512 TR

512 TR
  • Member

  • 2,228 posts
  • Joined: April 06

Posted 21 March 2008 - 00:32

Originally posted by UPRC
While Max's ideas are good in theory but bad in reality.... Bernie's ideas are just plain bad. :down:


The truth! :up:

#81 spwolf

spwolf
  • Member

  • 62 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 21 March 2008 - 01:31

Originally posted by pRy
The Autosport article has this paragraph which points out this is the case now anyway. But I can see Bernies fear with the 2nd place points rule. Perhaps he fears this years title will go to the 2nd place man.

"Despite Ecclestone's comments, the Formula One title has gone to the driver with the most race wins in the championship in every year since 1989."


ha ha. thanks.

#82 pkenny

pkenny
  • Member

  • 198 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 21 March 2008 - 13:43

I think many of us predicted that the points system introduced after MS won the championship in early July would not long survive his retirement. I am surprised it didn't come in this year but then BE tells us he was distracted last year.

BE is doing what he always does - throwing in a grenade to get the debate going.

There is no perfect system and none of us would probably agree on the fair distribution of points. I always liked the 9-6... one. There is a nice sequence in that.

The discussion of a separation in the drivers and constructors championships may have merit. How to do that is not simple - you may remember the moving around of drivers between the teams. I think BE may have pulled the pin on that one too. For me that is what the drivers market does. Everyone notices when a driver outperforms his car - so to speak. Such drivers do not automatically become WDC but the normally get the chance to do so and the money to go with it.

#83 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 21 March 2008 - 13:50

Now even Bernie E himself joins the chorus of the ignorants who think that changing the point system would create better racing.

#84 bobqzzi

bobqzzi
  • Member

  • 360 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 21 March 2008 - 14:23

Originally posted by Frank Booth


Thats easy:
Because he or any other driver gets paid millions of dollars to do the best they can every single time they are in the car.

Thats the bottom line here folks, drivers are employees just like the guy who sweeps the garage every night. I'm pretty sure my boss would tell me to back my bags if I told him I wasn't motivated to do my job to the best of my abilities every single day I'm there.


Except in modern F1 the gear box has to last 4 races and the engine 2...


In addition, your conception of the driver as "just an employee like the guy who sweeps the garage" is far from the truth. There is a reason the top guys get 40 million a year- because people who can drive a race car at that level are an incredibly tiny minority.