Jump to content


Photo

Scrap WDC "points" system: seconds over par


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 01 May 2008 - 18:06

I dislike the "points" system for a number of reasons:

1) It doesn't give any credit to the driver who delivers a staggering performance - but at the back of the pack;

2) It's biased towards rewarding the best car;

3) It's biased towards rewarding the 1st place qualifier.

For the constructor's championship, this makes sense.

For the driver's championship, it doesn't (IMO).

So....

---------------




What really explains, in numbers, the performance of a driver during a race? I want a system that represents in a numerical figure:

How many passes the driver made;
How long he kept the position;
How that performance was affected/limited by the car in front - in other words, is the car in front sandbagging/blocking, or racing? This is important to prevent a scenario where a faster package deliberately qualifies low to gain.

So, I'm thinking when it comes down to it, "performance of the driver" has to be equated to the amount of time the driver has managed to pull out *relative to the other drivers*.

So, at the front that means:

Last place car gets how many seconds the *next place* car finishes with - this is the baseline.
The second to last place car gets the same seconds awarded - plus, the amount spent running ahead of the last place car

This rewards passing, *and* continued racing. The beauty of it is that, it *doesn't* reward sandbagging. A driver will not only have to make up positions to gain championship placement, but he'd also be *adding to the driver ahead of him* if he sandbags, furthering his "championship distance" relative to the driver in front of him.

Third place would get the prior two position's cumulative times, plus his own - and so forth.

Additional benefits of this system would be that a driver that gets the lead early, *has to keep his pace*. If he's in the championship lead, he's losing ground to the second place finisher by not trying to increase his gap; if the lead driver is second in the championship, he stands to gain by trying to continue to race hard ahead of second place, even if the race is "already won".

In the end you'd have each driver awarded maximal *performance* time; not just positional placement, but what he did to get that placement. The driver that managed to greatly pull out a gap mid pack versus his team mate won't be closely matched; his leading time and positional gain will be more dramatically reflected. Likewise, the conservative driver - who also may impede the progress of trailing drivers - will be penalized by *not* gaining as much "performance time".


Or something like that.

The championship would be won by the driver with the most cumulative "performance" time, while the constructor's would remain the same. It would reflect not just what the driver did during the season, but also give a nice comparison of real performance of each driver from season to season. Slower cars would still be slower; but the "intramural" performance would be more obvious, and the competition at the front would be increased as each driver not only attempts to gain position (to garner combined time) but also to *actively reduce the lead driver's time*. The drivers would still get the glory of winning the race, but the World Driver's Championship would be more indicative of their performance, IMO.

End of season maybe you'd have the winning driver with the most time in front, combined with positions below. WCC would be as it is, drivers would still get 1st 2nd 3rd at each race, and we'd have a WDC that actually was based on performance - not just arbitrary result numbers.


Or something like that. Just a thought, people have thoughts.

Advertisement

#2 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 01 May 2008 - 18:54

Sorry... but the point of a competition is to WIN. :)

The good drivers get good cars, win races and becomes world champions. There is exceptions, but there always will be, regardless of the system.

#3 Dudley

Dudley
  • Member

  • 9,245 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 01 May 2008 - 19:46

How do you handle retirements?

#4 imaginesix

imaginesix
  • Member

  • 5,486 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 02 May 2008 - 16:16

We can come up with all sorts of convoluted points systems to force the type of competition you wish to see. The problem is that it all becomes a lot contrived. What exactly is the competition we have when we're done?

I think the best is to start with a basic concept for the competition (for example; to drive a set distance faster than your opponents) and then within that framework, devise rules that most equitably award points to all the competitors. In other words the points system shouldn't define the nature of the competition, it should be the other way 'round.

#5 Dolph

Dolph
  • Member

  • 4,864 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 03 May 2008 - 18:50

Originally posted by Dudley
How do you handle retirements?


I had the same question

#6 SevenTwoSeven

SevenTwoSeven
  • Member

  • 368 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 03 May 2008 - 20:02

An interesting system, although its took me several read throughs to get to grips with it. Also, the general viewing public who dip into a race by chance lets say, how would they fathom what was going on? On that basis maybe its a little too complicated.

As an aside - how would James Allen cope with it!!!

#7 Torch

Torch
  • Member

  • 254 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 03 May 2008 - 20:36

Interesting (in a good way)!

Wouldn't a normal time trial get the same result?

#8 Blot

Blot
  • Member

  • 32 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 03 May 2008 - 20:50

I think it's a bad idea. That would be like rewarding beautiful goals in football. A goal is a goal no matter how it's scored.

#9 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 03 May 2008 - 21:58

Since entertaining the TV audience is the primary goal, I think it is best to use the #1 formula (formula one) for deciding the winner nowadays - a jury and a phone vote. The jury is not necessary here, they race as usual and the result of the race is the base for 30% of the final score. Then people can vote for half an hour while there is a great show with dancers, joggler's, hip boy bands and women with very little clothes on.

Then Bernie comes in with three envelopes.
-"Third place goes to.... [drumroll]... Takuma Sato!"
Takuma comes up on stage, gets his price and hold a speech where he thanks all his sponsors.
-"Second place...."

Well, you get the idea. Then there could be awards like "The best donut", the "Best overtaking attempt that almost worked" and "Best crew costumes". It would be a hit :up:

#10 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 04 May 2008 - 06:34

Originally posted by Torch
Interesting (in a good way)!

Wouldn't a normal time trial get the same result?


No, because it scales depending on the performance of the trailing drivers and lead drivers.

#11 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 04 May 2008 - 06:42

Originally posted by Blot
I think it's a bad idea. That would be like rewarding beautiful goals in football. A goal is a goal no matter how it's scored.


This isn't football. A win is a win? I disagree; some are more contested than others, and there's no measure of it. The guy that wins by 5 seconds, after passing 3 guys should have more credit than the one that inherits 1st place and just cruises there, ahead by a second. Also, the guy that starts at the back, but gains 10 positions - that should be rewarded versus the guy that starts 11th and finishes 10th.

#12 Mauseri

Mauseri
  • Member

  • 7,505 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 04 May 2008 - 07:29

Originally posted by Rubens Hakkamacher
This isn't football. A win is a win? I disagree; some are more contested than others, and there's no measure of it. The guy that wins by 5 seconds, after passing 3 guys should have more credit than the one that inherits 1st place and just cruises there, ahead by a second.

Why? If you are first you beat your all competitors. It doesnt matter how you beat them, a win is a win.

#13 Mauseri

Mauseri
  • Member

  • 7,505 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 04 May 2008 - 07:30

Would you also get points for beautiful driving lines, or new helmet designs?

#14 FrankB

FrankB
  • Member

  • 2,600 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 04 May 2008 - 07:52

Originally posted by Rubens Hakkamacher
The guy that wins by 5 seconds, after passing 3 guys should have more credit than the one that inherits 1st place and just cruises there, ahead by a second.


How would your system differentiate between an heroic, late braking overtaking move and an inherited place due to a driver error or mechanical problems in the car being passed? Should a driver who "inherits" 3 places be more highly rewarded than the driver who fights for and gains 1 place through his driving skill?

Once a driver has reached the lead, and finds that he can maintain that position without overstretching himself or the car, why should he be expected to push to increase his lead from one to five seconds?

#15 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 04 May 2008 - 08:32

Originally posted by micra_k10
Would you also get points for beautiful driving lines, or new helmet designs?

Bonus points should go for beautiful girlfriends as well? Since the action on the race track would mean nothing until after the race when the computer have finished computing the podium, whe might as well get a miss wet t-shirt competition in the pits? If they compete as couples we might see a return of Ralf Schumacher! It is an interesting idea Rubens, and it opens for some new angles of TV entertainment. Not for racing fans, but there is not many of them left anyway. :up:

#16 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 04 May 2008 - 08:36

Originally posted by FrankB


How would your system differentiate between an heroic, late braking overtaking move and an inherited place due to a driver error or mechanical problems in the car being passed? Should a driver who "inherits" 3 places be more highly rewarded than the driver who fights for and gains 1 place through his driving skill?

Once a driver has reached the lead, and finds that he can maintain that position without overstretching himself or the car, why should he be expected to push to increase his lead from one to five seconds?

His system reminds me of when my stepson came to me once, when he was about three years old, with a ballon in his hands. He squeezed it, jumped on it and was all excited. "Look, it can not break!", he said.

#17 Mauseri

Mauseri
  • Member

  • 7,505 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 04 May 2008 - 08:44

The points system should be as simple as possible. It doesnt need to be perfect way to rate the drivers, and even if we went the Hakkamacher route it would be impossible to take all things into account.

But as it is, a simple scoring system with one goal. And the rest is left for us to discuss who are the ones driving better than the points indicate.

#18 SkorbiF1

SkorbiF1
  • Member

  • 1,208 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 04 May 2008 - 09:20

If you qualify your car in 22nd position, and finish 12th, you should be rewarded more than your teammate that qualifies 10th and finishes 8th?

#19 StefanV

StefanV
  • Member

  • 1,214 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 04 May 2008 - 09:22

Originally posted by SkorbiF1
If you qualify your car in 22nd position, and finish 12th, you should be rewarded more than your teammate that qualifies 10th and finishes 8th?

Careful with that needle!