39 replies to this topic

[Michael Ferner]

Having recently done some research on the Swiss racing car championship, I continue to be amazed by the bizarre scoring method used to this end for many decades. For those ignorant of this little peculiarity (bless your soul!), championship points were not awarded by finishing position, but according to the so-called Leistungsprinzip (performance principle), a sort of index scoring, of which the Swiss were justifiably proud, or so they thought! An editorial comment in a leading Swiss car magazine of 1949, for instance, regarded the fact that the new World Championship was going to be scored by finishing positions instead of the Leistungsprinzip as an outrage, and predicted mass protests by the competing drivers!! Well, that didn't actually happen, did it?

 

Be that as it may, it set me thinking of what-if scenarios: I instantly thought of Jochen Rindt in 1970, scoring five wins and nothing else of consequence in terms of WDC results; how would he have fared under the Leistungsprinzip? Thankfully, in the computer age it's not a big deal to set up a spreadsheet and calculate the standings, as opposed to the days when Swiss Championship results would not be available for hours, days or even weeks following the conclusion of the actual racing events! And sure enough, Rindt would've been not much more than an also-ran in the 1970 season, getting up to second in the standings at one point, but still lying only fourth going into the Monza weekend. In the final outcome, he would've ranked 12th, one place lower even than F1 rookie Ronnie Peterson, who competed in even fewer events than the Austrian, and didn't score a single championship point in real life!! And that is only counting Formula One results; in the Swiss Championship even a Formula Vee driver had the same chance to become overall champion, and would have beaten RIndt in the standings by merely running at the end of at least six events, even if lapped many times by a fellow Formula Vee driver!!!

 

Still, that little exercise proved to be fun, and somewhat enlightening, revealing a certain charme of the Leistungsprinzip which tends to gloss over the whacky nature of its method: before the penultimate round of the GP season, an even dozen drivers were still in with a real chance of scooping the big prize, while going into the last race it was down to a couple of New Zealanders, neither of which had won a race all year long! Chris Amon had a chance to outscore Denny Hulme by finishing at least fifty seconds ahead of the McLaren in Mexico, while Jacky Ickx had to put a similar distance between himself and his Ferrari teammate to take third in the final standings. Hulme, of course, beat Amon to the line in a close finish for third in the race, while Regazzoni held on to third place overall by about twenty-five seconds -  a dramatic finish, filled with suspense all the way through! Better still, the official time keepers fouled up badly, and published a time for Regazzoni which everybody who was present agreed upon as ludicrous, leaving the Swiss a mere 26 thousands of a point ahead of his teammate - beat that!

 

Apart from the two Ferrari drivers, Pedro Rodriguez also had a chance to finish third in the standings, but would have needed to lap the Italian cars in his home Grand Prix, while Jack Brabham could have done so by beating Ickx by about fifty seconds. Even Henri Pescarolo (yes!) had an outside chance of taking third, with Graham Hill and Jean-Pierre Beltoise just out of it due to a couple of very late race retirements - no "classified despite not running at finish" under the Leistungsprinzip! Another rookie, Rolf Stommelen would have finished tenth in points (apart from Regazzoni the only driver to match his actual WDC placing), with Jackie Stewart only just managing to hold off his rookie teammate François Cevert for a lowly 13th! New boy Emerson Fittipaldi would have scored enough points for 15th place, but under actual Swiss Championship rules he'd have failed to place due to not competing in a minimum number of events.

 

Here's the full "virtual standings":

 

 

1 Hulme 695.095
2 Amon 694.347
3 Regazzoni 689.861
4 Ickx 689.835
5 Rodriguez 686.953
6 Pescarolo 682.765
7 Brabham 681.896
8 Hill 663.569
9 Beltoise 592.309
10 Stommelen 586.147
11 Peterson 521.392
12 Rindt 500.000
13 Stewart 496.542
14 Cevert 484.420
- Fittipaldi 385.480*
15 Gethin 375.416
16 Surtees 293.039
17 Miles 292.943

18 Siffert 287.719
- Giunti 285.896*
19 Eaton 282.721
- de Adamich 257.339*
20 Oliver 253.302
- Wisell 185.443*
- Gurney 98.868*
- McLaren 98.836*
- Andretti 98.635*
- Bell 98.009*
- Servoz-Gavin 96.950*
- Love 96.579*
- de Klerk 92.741*
- Schenken 87.712*
- Lovely 86.206*
- Courage 72.446*

 

* did not compete in enough events

Edited by Michael Ferner, 26 February 2014 - 17:24.

[Tim Murray]

 

... before the penultimate round of the GP season, an even dozen drivers were still in with a real chance of scooping the big prize,

Does Bernie know about this scoring system?

[ensign14]

Poor Chris - second again...

[Vitesse2]

Heh. The Swiss were obviously keen to avoid the embarrassing position they had found themelves in in 1939, when - with the season perforce unfinished - they were faced with two drivers on equal points for the national title. I'm not clear whether the rule was pre-existing or not, but Bernard Blancpain lost out to Max Christen on the grounds that Christen had won the Prix de Bremgarten!

[Michael Ferner]

Well, they always had a rule to break a tie, which was often needed since many classes competed in parallel - 1949 saw no fewer than four sportscar drivers finish with maximum points, for example, and the 1960, 1966 and 1972 racing car championships were decided on an ex-aequo basis between two drivers, each. Tie-break rules, however, changed frequently.

[Glengavel]

You realise you're going to have to do this for every year now?

[Michael Ferner]

[Collombin]

I remember being in a fantasy F1 league at work circa 1999 in which the slow but reliable Minardis were the runaway winners of the championship (despite being the cheapest team to buy), by virtue of a rule that awarded 15 points per position improved during the race (ie. race position v grid position)and only awarded about 20 points for actually winning the race.

[kayemod]

I remember being in a fantasy F1 league at work circa 1999 in which the slow but reliable Minardis were the runaway winners of the championship (despite being the cheapest team to buy), by virtue of a rule that awarded 15 points per position improved during the race (ie. race position v grid position)and only awarded about 20 points for actually winning the race.

 

Forza Minardi!

[ensign14]

You realise you're going to have to do this for every year now?

 

I bet Pascal Fabre wouldn't have lost his job in 1986.

[Glengavel]

 

No rush, end of the week will do.

[ErleMin]

"...even a Formula Vee driver had the same chance to become overall champion,..." - still happens...well almost. I won our championship by turning up at all the rounds but won none of 'em. 

[Michael Ferner]

No rush, end of the week will do.

 
Phew, that's a relief! [no particular week specified, he said sheepishly]

 

I thought 1968 might be interesting, and it was, but in a different way, and somewhat anticlimactic: "only" ten drivers in it with three races to go, dwindling to four at the next race, but all those four still had a chance going into the final GP, despite one of them missing the penultimate round altogether!! Hulme was leading, once again, but Hill only needed to finish a little less than two laps behind the New Zealander to overhaul him in points, and Stewart was right up there, too, on course for runner-up honours after Hulme's early retirement, but losing out in the closing stages. Jacky Ickx was the wild card, and basically Hill's closest rival, but his early retirement meant he dropped to fifth in the end, behind Bruce McLaren. Rodriguez, Beltoise, Siffert, Surtees and Amon filled out the top ten, with Piers Courage 11th when the slightly better placed Dickie Attwood failed to start in the minimum number of events. Rindt was 16th, Gurney 17th and Brabham 18th and last, all three suffering from reliability problems.

 

With both 1969 and 1971 going to Stewart on maximum scores, the Leistungsprinzip therefore produces three identical champions out of a sample of four, with only the 1970 season going badly awry, so it's apparently not that different from the actual WDC scoring. Perhaps a philosophical question, but would we view Rindt in the same way today if he hadn't won that one World Championship, but finished 12th instead? It's probably fair to assume that, given a different scoring method, drivers and teams would've adapted to circumstances, and paid more attention to their finishing record, but not by much, I dare say. Food for thought...

[Glengavel]

 

Thanks for your sterling effort. I'd be interested to hear how 1958 and 1967 turn out.

[dweller23]

Heh. The Swiss were obviously keen to avoid the embarrassing position they had found themelves in in 1939, when - with the season perforce unfinished - they were faced with two drivers on equal points for the national title. I'm not clear whether the rule was pre-existing or not, but Bernard Blancpain lost out to Max Christen on the grounds that Christen had won the Prix de Bremgarten!

A bit off topic, but is Max Christen a relative of Roland Christen, long time F1 commentator for TSR?

[BRG]

Having recently done some research on the Swiss racing car championship, I continue to be amazed by the bizarre scoring method used to this end for many decades. For those ignorant of this little peculiarity (bless your soul!), championship points were not awarded by finishing position, but according to the so-called Leistungsprinzip (performance principle), a sort of index scoring, of which the Swiss were justifiably proud, or so they thought! 

All right, I surrender.  What IS the leistungprinzip?  

 

I made the mistake of Googling it which thankfully produced nothing obscene, but a lot that was both irrelevant and supremely incomprehensible.

[ensign14]

Looks like you get 100 for a win, 99 if you are 1% behind and so on.

[arttidesco]

All right, I surrender.  What IS the leistungprinzip? 

 

Competitive principle

[kayemod]

Competitive principle

 

I'm sure that your German is a lot better than mine Ralph, but wouldn't you agree that 'achievement principle' would be closer to the intended meaning here?

[Michael Ferner]

All right, I surrender.  What IS the leistungprinzip?  

 
 

Looks like you get 100 for a win, 99 if you are 1% behind and so on.

Basically, yes, that's it. A win in any division of any class is 100 points, and the others running at finish get points according to the difference to their respective division leader. BUT - there's a lot of fine print in the regulations, and that fine print changed frequently!! For example, at times the 100 points were only awarded to class/division winners who kept within a certain time limit, depending on track records or the performance of other class winners. Also, there was always (?) a minimum number of events to compete and/or finish in, and a maximum number of scores to be taken in consideration, sometimes depending on track type (circuit, hill climb or slalom - even rallys for the touring cars!) Knowing the efficiency of the Swiss, I bet the regulations easily filled a mid-size filing cabinet.

[Michael Ferner]

Competitive principle

 
 

I'm sure that your German is a lot better than mine Ralph, but wouldn't you agree that 'achievement principle' would be closer to the intended meaning here?

I googled "Leistungsprinzip translation", and picked "performance principle" as the English term that appeared to me to describe the meaning best.

[arttidesco]

I'm sure that your German is a lot better than mine Ralph, but wouldn't you agree that 'achievement principle' would be closer to the intended meaning here?

 

Yes, but Michael has nailed it

[BRG]

 
Basically, yes, that's it. A win in any division of any class is 100 points, and the others running at finish get points according to the difference to their respective division leader. BUT - there's a lot of fine print in the regulations, and that fine print changed frequently!! For example, at times the 100 points were only awarded to class/division winners who kept within a certain time limit, depending on track records or the performance of other class winners. Also, there was always (?) a minimum number of events to compete and/or finish in, and a maximum number of scores to be taken in consideration, sometimes depending on track type (circuit, hill climb or slalom - even rallys for the touring cars!) Knowing the efficiency of the Swiss, I bet the regulations easily filled a mid-size filing cabinet.

Thanks.  So the time or distance gap between finishers is taken into account in some mysterious way?  If I come second but am 5 minutes behind, how many points do I get?  Not 99 presumably, but 42 or something?

 

 Just for clarity, how have you applied this to F1 results?

[Frank de Jong]

Most interesting. The principle was used elsewhere too; in the German "rundstreckenpokal" there was a bonus system in case of ex-aequo in points (which happened often, considering the number of classes - 22 sometimes from the top of my head) which used the distance between first and second; and even the ETCC seemed to use such a bonus system in the early years; again many classes with predictable winners. Rumor has it that the Saab team, when leading 1-2-3 in class, made ultra-long pit stops for cars in second and third positions, making the cars nice and shiny, and getting a lot of distance between the class winner and number 2...

[Michael Ferner]

Thanks.  So the time or distance gap between finishers is taken into account in some mysterious way?  If I come second but am 5 minutes behind, how many points do I get?  Not 99 presumably, but 42 or something?
 
 Just for clarity, how have you applied this to F1 results?

Fairly simple: calculate average speed, and index to winner's average.

Example, 1968 ZA GP:

1 Clark 172.885 kph = 100 points
2 Hill 172.248 kph = 99.631 points
3 Rindt 172.120 kph = 99.557 points
etc.

Using a spreadsheet, I only put in the number of laps and finishing time, and the computer did the rest.

[Michael Ferner]

Just for interest, here are the actual rules for the 1953 season (thanks to Automobil Revue 8/53, p3):

[er, don't be with me, but I was definitely not going to translate...]

Schweizerische Automobilmeisterschaft 1953

Für das Jahr 1953 wird je ein «Schweizerischer Automobilmeister der Tourenwagenkategorie», ein «Schweizerischer Automobilmeister der Sportwagenkategorie» und ein «Schweizerischer Äutcmobilmeister der Rennwagenkategorie» ernannt, wobei für die Meisterschaft die Resultate folgender Sportveranstaltungen in Betracht kommen:
a) 6./7. März: Rallye des Neiges (Sektion Genf des ACS).
b) 3. Mai: Nationaler Autoslalom (Sektion Basel des ACS).
c) 17. Mai: Nationale Zuverlässigkeitsfahrt (Sektion Zürich des ACS).
d) 12. Juli: Internationales Bergrennen Vue-des-Alpes (Sektion Montagnes Neuchâteloises des ACS).
e) 16. August: Nationales Bergrennen Ollon—Villars (Sektion Vaudoise des ACS).
f) 22. August: Nationales Rundstreckenrennen «Preis vom Bremgarten» (Sektion Bern des ACS).
g) 23. Aiigust: Internationales Rundstreckenrennen «Grosser Preis der Schweiz» (Sektion Bern des ACS).
h) 5./6. September: Nationales Bergrennen Mitholz—Kandersteg (Sektion Bern des ACS).
In Betracht gezogen werden:
1. Für die Tourenwagenkategorie die sechs mit a), b), c), d), e) und h) bezeichneten Veranstaltungen.
2. Für die Sportwagenkategorie die fünf mit b), d), e), f) und h) bezeichneten Rennen.
3. Für die Rennwagenkategorie die fünf mit b), d), e), g) und h) bezeichneten Rennen.

Bewertung

Die Bewertung der Meisterschaft erfolgt auf Grund des höchsten Punkttotals von folgender obligatorischer Anzahl für die Meisterschaft zählender Veranstaltungen:
5 für die Tourenwagenkategorie;
4 für die Sportwagenkategorie;
3 für die Rennwagenkategorie.
Anlässlich der erwähnten Veranstaltungen werden für die Meisterschaft nur die Resultate der durch den ACS lizenzierten Fahrer schweizerischer Nationalität sowie der durch den ACS lizenzierten Ausländer berücksichtigt, letztere jedoch unter der Bedingung, dass sie seit mindestens 5 Jahren in der Schweiz domiziliert sind.
Jeder für die Meisterschaft zählenden Veranstaltung wird eine Grundpunktzahl von 100 Punkten für eine bestimmte Leistung zugrunde gelegt. Für nicht dieser Leistung entsprechende Resultate wird die Punktzahl wie folgt berechnet:
1. Rallye des Neiges und Zuverlässigkeitsfahrt: Das absolut beste Resultat entspricht der Grundpurtktzahl von 100. Den nachfolgenden Konkurrenten wird für die Differenz zwischen den erhaltenen Strafpunkten und denjenigen des Erstklassierten pro Strafpunkt 1/100 Punkt von der Grundpunktzahl in Abzug gebracht.
2. Autoslalom sowie Bergrennen Vue-des-Alpes, Ollon—Villars und Mitholz—Kandersteg: Die in jeder Klasse gefahrene Bestzeit entspricht der Grundpunktzahl von 100. Das umgekehrte Verhältnis der gefahrenen Zeit zur Bestzeit der Klasse ergibt direkt die Punktzahl der im Range folgenden Fahrer. Zum Beispiel:

Erster 5'28,2" — 100,000 Punkte
Zweiter 5'32,8" —
5'28,2" • 100 / 5'32,8" —
328,2" • 100 / 332,8" — 98,618 Punkte

3. Rundstreckenrennen: Die in jeder Klasse gefahrene Bestzeit entspricht der Grundpunktzahl von 100. Das Produkt aus dem umgekehrten Verhältnis der gefahrenen Zeiten und dem Verhältnis der gefahrenen Runden ergibt direkt die Punktzahl der im Range folgenden Fahrer. Zum Beispiel:

Erster 20 Runden in 47'17,8" — 100,000 Punkte
Zweiter 20 Runden in 47'20,2" —
47'17,8" • 100 • 20 / 47'20,2" • 20 —
2837,8" • 1 0 0 • 2 0 / 2840,2" • 20 — 99,915 Punkte
Dritter 19 Runden in 47'31,1" —
47'17,8" • 100 • 19 / 47'31,1" • 20 —
2837,8" • 100 • 19 / 2851,1" • 20 — 94,557 Punkte

Bei Berg- und Rundstreckenrennen entspricht die Bestzeit in allen Klassen der Grundpunktzahl von 100 nur dann, wenn sie
a) in der Kategorie serienmässige Tourenwagen mindestens der entsprechenden Bestzeit der Klassen mit kleinerem Hubraum entspricht;
b) in der Kategorie Spezial-Tourenwagen mindestens der entsprechenden Bestzeit der Klassen mit kleinerem Hubraum dieser Kategorie und zudem der entsprechenden Bestzeit der gleichen und kleineren Klassen der Kategorie serienmässige Tourenwagen entspricht;
c) in der Kategorie serienmässige Sportwagen mindestens der entsprechenden Bestzeit der Klassen mit kleinerem Hubraum dieser Kategorie und zudem der entsprechenden Bestzeit der gleichen und kleineren der unter a) erwähnten Fahrzeugkategorien entspricht;
d) in der Kategorie Rennsportwagen mindestens der entsprechenden Bestzeit der Klassen mit kleinerem Hubraum dieser Kategorie und zudem der entsprechenden Bestzeit der gleichen und kleineren Klassen der unter a), b) und c) erwähnten Fahrzeugkategorien entspricht;
e) in der Kategorie Rennwagen mindestens der entsprechenden Bestzeit der Klassen mit kleinerem Hubraum dieser Kategorie und zudem der entsprechenden Bestzeit der gleichen und kleineren Klassen der unter a), b), c) und d) erwähnten Fahrzeugkategorien entspricht.

Ist dies nicht der Fall, so werden dem in Frage kommenden Fahrer für die Differenz zwischen seiner Zeit und der diesbezüglichen Bestzeit der Klassen mit gleichem, resp. kleinerem Hubraum die entsprechenden Punkte von der Grundpunktzahl in Abzug gebracht.
Dagegen muss in allen fünf Fahrzeugkategorien die Bestzeit der Klasse mit dem niedrigsten Hubraum mindestens der um 10 % (bei den Rundstreckenrennen um 5 %) erhöhten Bestzeit der nächsthöheren Klasse oder bei Ausfallen derselben der um 20 % (bei den Rundstreckenrennen um 10 %) erhöhten Bestzeit der zweithöheren Klasse der betreffenden Kategorie usw. entsprechen. Ist dies nicht der Fall, so werden den Fahrern für die Differenz zwischen ihrer Zeit und der um 10 % resp. 20 % (bei den Rundstrekkenrennen um 5% resp. 10%) usw. erhöhten Bestzeit der Klasse mit höherem Hubraum die entsprechenden Punkte von der Grundpunktzahl in Abzug gebracht.

Wertungsgruppen

Werden beim Slalom oder den Bergrennen verschiedene Klassen in Wertungsgruppen zusammengezogen, so werden die Fahrer für die, Meisterschaft in den ihren Fahrzeugen entsprechenden Klassen bewertet.
Falls bei Rundstreckenrennen alle Sport- resp. Rennwagen gesamthaft oder in verschiedenen Wertungsgruppen getrennt starten, jedoch die gleiche Distanz zu absolvieren haben, werden sie in ihre entsprechenden Klassen eingeteilt und gemäss den erzielten Resultaten bewertet.
Starten die Sport- resp. Rennwagen in mehreren Wertungsgruppen getrennt und hat jede derselben eine andere Distanz zu absolvieren, werden sie in jeder Wertungsgruppe in ihre entsprechenden Klassen eingeteilt und gemäss erzielten Resultaten bewertet.

Ex aequo

Erreichen Fahrer in der Schlussbewertung der Meisterschaft die gleiche Punktzahl, so entscheidet für die Rangordnung bei
a) Tourenwagen: das beste Resultat der sechsten, bisher nicht berücksichtigten Veranstaltung, dann die bessere anlässiich des Internationalen Bergrennens Vue-des-Alpes erzielte Zeit;
b) Sportwagen: das beste Resultat der fünften, bisher nicht berücksichtigten Veranstaltung, dann die bessere anlässlich des Internationalen Bergrennens Vue-des-Alpes erzielte Zeit;
c) Rennwagen: das beste Resultat der vierten, bisher nicht berücksichtigten Veranstaltung, dann das beste Resultat der fünften Veranstaltung; herrscht auch hier Gleichheit, so gewinnt derjenige, der anlässlich des Internationalen Bergrennens Vue-des-Alpes die bessere Zeit erzielte.

Edited by Michael Ferner, 04 March 2014 - 19:03.

[ensign14]

I have come to the conclusion that the Swiss didn't ban motor racing because of Le Mans, but because their points system became so dense it collapsed into itself and became an event horizon.

[arttidesco]

Michael Ferner, on 04 Mar 2014 - 18:48, said:

 

[er, don't be with me, but I was definitely not going to translate...]

Swiss automotive Championship 1953

Each a " Swiss automotive master of touring car category ," a " Swiss automotive master of sports car category » and is " Swiss Äutcmobilmeister the category of racing car " appointed for the year 1953 , which qualify for the championship , the results of the following sporting events are:
a) 6/7 March : Rallye des Neiges ( Geneva section of the ACS ) .
b ) 3 Mai: National Auto Slalom ( Basle section of the ACS ) .
c ) 17 Mai: National reliability test ( Zurich section of the ACS ) .
d ) 12 July : International Hill Climb Race Vue -des- Alpes ( section Montagnes Neuchâteloises of ACS) .
e) 16 August: National Hill Climb Ollon -Villars ( Vaudoise section of the ACS ) .
f) 22 August: National circuit race " by price Bremgarten » ( Bern section of the ACS ) .
g) 23 Aiigust : International circuit race " Grand Prix of Switzerland " ( Bern section of the ACS ) .
h) 5/6 September : National Hill Climb Mitholz Kandersteg ( Bern section of the ACS ) .
Be considered :
1 For the touring car category, the six with a), b ), c) , d), e ) and h) designated events.
2 For the sports car category, the five labeled b), d ), e) , f) and h) race.
3 For the cars category, the five labeled b ), d) , e), g ) and h) race.

assessment

The evaluation of the championship takes place on the basis of the highest point of following Totals obligatory number for the championship scoring events :
5 for the touring car category ;
4 for the sports car category ;
3 for the cars category.
On the occasion of the events mentioned only the results of the licensed by the ACS driver Swiss nationality and licensed by the ACS foreigners will be considered for the championship , the latter on the condition that they are domiciled in Switzerland for at least 5 years.
Each counting for the championship event will be based on a basic score of 100 points for a specific service. For this performance not appropriate results, the score is calculated as follows :
1 Rallye des Neiges and reliability test : The absolute best result corresponds to the Grundpurtktzahl of 100 The following competitors will be brought for the difference between the obtained penalties and those of Erstklassierten penalty point per 1/100 point of the base number of points deducted.
2 Car slalom and hill climb Vue -des- Alpes, Ollon -Villars and Mitholz - Kandersteg : The Mileage fastest time in each class corresponds to the base score of 100 The inverse ratio of the course time for fastest time of the class directly gives the score of the following in the range driver . For example:

First 5'28 , 2 " - 100,000 points
Second 5'32 , 8 " -
5'28 , 2 "• 100 / 5'32 , 8" -
328.2 " • 100 / 332.8 " - 98.618 points

3 Circuit racing : The best time driven in each class corresponds to the base score of 100 The product of the inverse ratio of the lap times and the ratio of laps directly gives the score of the following in the range driver . For example:

First 20 laps in 47'17 , 8 " - 100,000 points
Second 20 laps in 47'20 , 2 " -
47'17 , 8 " • 100 • 20 / 47'20 , 2" • 20 -
2837.8 " • 1 • 2 0 0 0 / 2840.2 " • 20 to 99.915 points
Third 19 laps in 47'31 , 1 " -
47'17 , 8 " • 100 • 19 / 47'31 , 1" • 20 -
2837.8 " • 100 • 19 / 2851.1 " • 20 to 94.557 points

In mountain and circuit races the best time is in all classes of primary score of 100 only if they
a) at least equal to the corresponding best time of the classes with smaller displacement in the category fitted as standard touring car ;
b ) in the category of special touring cars at least equal to the corresponding best time of the classes with smaller displacement in this category and also the corresponding fastest time of the equal and smaller classes category fitted as standard touring car ;
c ) at least equal to the corresponding best time of the classes with smaller displacement in this category and also the corresponding fastest time of the equal and smaller of the vehicle categories mentioned under a) in the category of sports cars fitted as standard ;
d) at least the best time of the corresponding classes with smaller displacement in this category and also the corresponding fastest time of the equal and smaller classes in a) , b) and c corresponds ) mentioned vehicle categories in the category of racing car;
e) in the category of racing car at least equal to the corresponding best time of the classes with smaller displacement in this category and also the corresponding fastest time of the equal and smaller classes in a) , b), c) and d ) above vehicle categories.

This is not the case, then the possible drivers for the difference between his time and the relevant best time of the classes with the same , respectively . smaller displacement brought the corresponding points of the base number of points deducted.
In contrast, in all five vehicle categories must set the fastest time of the class with the lowest engine capacity of at least the 10% increase ( in the circuit race by 5% ) fastest time of the next higher class or fail the same the increased by 20% ( at the track races at 10 %) Best time the second higher class of the relevant category, etc. correspond . If this is not the case, then the drivers for the difference between their time and 10% respectively are . Brought 20% (when the Rundstrekkenrennen by 5 % resp . 10 %), etc. increased fastest time of the class with higher engine capacity the corresponding points of the base number of points deducted.

scoring groups

Are drawn together in different classes scoring groups in the slalom or the mountain race , the drivers are for , championship rated in classes appropriate to their vehicles.
If in circuit racing all sports respectively . Have overall or separately in different rating groups start racing cars , but to complete the same distance , they are divided into their respective classes and evaluated according to the results obtained .
Start the sports respectively . Race car isolated in several scoring groups and has each of them to complete a different distance, they are divided in each age group in their respective classes and evaluated according to achieved results.

Ex aequo

Reaching drivers in the final evaluation of the Championship the same score , so opt for the ranking in
a) touring car : the best result of sixth, previously unrecognized event , then the better anlässiich the International mountain race Vue -des- Alpes recorded time ;
b ) sports car : the best result of fifth , previously unrecognized event , then the better scoring on the occasion of International Mountain race Vue -des- Alpes -time ;
c ) Race : the best result of fourth , previously unrecognized event , then the best result of fifth event , there is also a tie, the winner is , who scored the best time on the occasion of International Mountain race Vue -des- Alpes.
 

..... the computer did the rest.

 

[Michael Ferner]

Chapeau!, Ralph

[BRG]

Pretty straightforward as long as you have a Cray supercomputer to hand...

 

My old motor club had the same problem in working out our champion driver each year, when club members were doing rallies, races, sprints & hill climbs and autotests.  We just used a simple formula that gave you as many points as people you beat.  So finishing 20th in a rally with 120 starters gave you 100 points.  Events done on a class basis were scored by class.  There were bonus points for outright 1st/2nd/3rd places.  It was never a perfect system, but sort of worked.  If only we had known of the leistungprinzip and had access to a computer (although I doubt if a Sinclair XZ would have been up to the job back then)!

[Michael Ferner]

The funny thing is, this formula was used from 1939 to 1979, so no personal computer to help calculations! And imagine, most of the Swiss Championship rounds attracted between 150 and 200 starters, split up into about 30 classes, so keeping up with the points must've been a fulltime job. One almost can't escape the feeling that this was all done by one man, and when he reached retirement age, the scoring method was pensioned off as well...

[kayemod]

The funny thing is, this formula was used from 1939 to 1979, so no personal computer to help calculations! And imagine, most of the Swiss Championship rounds attracted between 150 and 200 starters, split up into about 30 classes, so keeping up with the points must've been a fulltime job. One almost can't escape the feeling that this was all done by one man, and when he reached retirement age, the scoring method was pensioned off as well...

 

Quite possibly true, and it's truly remarkable what the human brain is capable of. My late father was a banker all his working life, for most of the time pre-computers, so everything had to be done by hand and cumbersome adding machines, and everything was entered in ledgers at the end of the day with a dip-pen of the kind some of us will remember from our schooldays. Like most of his colleagues, Dad became so adept at this that he could run his finger quite quickly down a column of figures and write the correct total at the end, and he almost always got it right, though sadly this came from long practice, the skill didn't run in the family, with the result that I struggled with maths. Being Swiss your Championship recorder was almost certainly a banker, so he probably found it easy, but then isn't everybody in Switzerland in banking, apart from a small number making cuckoo clocks?

[arttidesco]

but then isn't everybody in Switzerland in banking, apart from a small number making cuckoo clocks?

 

Didn't Einstein come from Switzerland, maybe he was a member of the motor club ?

[Collombin]

isn't everybody in Switzerland in banking, apart from a small number making cuckoo clocks?

What narrow minded drivel. The cheese hole drilling profession is still thriving.

[kayemod]

Didn't Einstein come from Switzerland, maybe he was a member of the motor club ?

 

No, Albert was born in Germany, Ulm in the province of Württemburg, he didn't gain Swiss citizenship until 1901 when he was in his 20s, so I doubt if he could have been the motor club scorer.

[D-Type]

No, Albert was born in Germany, Ulm in the province of Württemburg, he didn't gain Swiss citizenship until 1901 when he was in his 20s, so I doubt if he could have been the motor club scorer.

Perhaps he taught the motor club scorer.  The system appears to rely on relative positions

[kayemod]

Perhaps he taught the motor club scorer.  The system appears to rely on relative positions

 

Yes, that's quite possible, I wonder if the mc in E=mc² stands for motor club. His theory has always been beyond me though, I'm thick as a Planck.

[Glengavel]

What narrow minded drivel. The cheese hole drilling profession is still thriving.

 

Er...and Toblerone?

[Tim Murray]

No holes in Toblerone, Shirley?

I understand there is a small but significant industry in the Zurich area producing gnomes.

[Michael Ferner]

Now, now! No more jokes about the "oath fellows" - unless you can Tell who made Steve's Job difficult in Switzerland!