Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 4 votes

Which point scoring system is/was or would be the best?


  • Please log in to reply
199 replies to this topic

Poll: Best point scoring system (178 member(s) have cast votes)

Which point scoring system is the best?

  1. F1 since 2010 (25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1) (62 votes [34.83%])

    Percentage of vote: 34.83%

  2. F1 2003-2009 (10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1) (22 votes [12.36%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.36%

  3. F1 1991-2002 (10-6-4-3-2-1) (37 votes [20.79%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.79%

  4. F1 1961-1990 (9-6-4-3-2-1) (20 votes [11.24%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.24%

  5. F1 1960 (8-6-4-3-2-1) (1 votes [0.56%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.56%

  6. F1 1950-1959 (8-6-4-3-2) (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  7. Indy Car (50-40-35-32-30-28-26-24-22-20-19-18-17-16-15-14-13-12-11-10-9-8-7-6-5-5..) (7 votes [3.93%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.93%

  8. NASCAR (46-42-41-40-39-38-37-36-35-34-33-32-31-30.....) (1 votes [0.56%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.56%

  9. BTCC (20-17-15-13-11-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1) (1 votes [0.56%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.56%

  10. Moto GP (25-20-16-13-11-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1) (12 votes [6.74%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.74%

  11. Medal system (1 votes [0.56%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.56%

  12. Other (14 votes [7.87%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.87%

Should just the race result be awarded with points?

  1. Yes (130 votes [73.03%])

    Percentage of vote: 73.03%

  2. No (48 votes [26.97%])

    Percentage of vote: 26.97%

In case you answered Question 2 with No: What should also be taken into consideration for the championship points?

  1. Pole position (42 votes [18.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 18.67%

  2. Fastest lap (40 votes [17.78%])

    Percentage of vote: 17.78%

  3. Leading at least one lap (4 votes [1.78%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.78%

  4. Leading most laps of the race (6 votes [2.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.67%

  5. Qualifying result (5 votes [2.22%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.22%

  6. Double points for "special" races (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  7. Dropped result (7 votes [3.11%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.11%

  8. Other (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  9. None of the above (answered question 2 with yes) (121 votes [53.78%])

    Percentage of vote: 53.78%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#151 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • Racing Sims Forum Host

  • 45,699 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 20 July 2015 - 18:49

Why cant it be applied to F1.


Because it is Grand Prix racing, not a time trial. Emphasis on racing.

Advertisement

#152 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 20 July 2015 - 19:08

Because it is Grand Prix racing, not a time trial. Emphasis on racing.

 

And it is anything but these days with drivers hitting cruise control. Handing out points does not make it grand prix racing.



#153 ANF

ANF
  • Member

  • 29,055 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 20 July 2015 - 20:22

I like the 9 - 6 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 best.

 

It keeps the Points race tight in the Championships. it encourages taking risks. Its easy for the fans to calculate point standing during the race

Yes! That's one the things I miss about 10–6–4–3–2–1.

Maybe you could have a top-10 scoring system with negative points? Like 10–6–4–3–2–1–(−2)–(−3)–(−4)–(−6).



#154 ToxicEnviroment

ToxicEnviroment
  • Member

  • 141 posts
  • Joined: February 15

Posted 21 July 2015 - 12:04

10-6-4-3-2-1 gets "user friendly" medal.

9-6-4-3-2-1 gets "best wdc outcome" award

#155 Vibe

Vibe
  • Member

  • 383 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 21 July 2015 - 12:14

MotoGP format with top 3 in qualifying also getting 3, 2 and 1 point.



#156 TurnOffTheLights

TurnOffTheLights
  • Member

  • 755 posts
  • Joined: June 15

Posted 21 July 2015 - 13:10



Do you really think Sauber didn't care about finishing behind Marussia and losing millions of prize money? 

 

As I've stated before, I don't have any problems with ranking Marussia higher than Sauber because of that 9th place Sauber wasn't able to achieve. But if it's just for WCC and the millions of $ connected with it - why not change the way points are rewarded for WCC? For example, don't simply accumulate points of both drivers each weekend, but rate teams at a race weekend the same way you rate drivers: 25 points for the best team, 18 for 2nd best.... 1 for 10th best.

I'm not in favour of such a system, because it again complicates things, but it surely would be a possibility to reward continuosly being better than a rival team.

 

For 2014 WCC would have looked like this:

 

 


                 ||AUS|MAL|BAH|CHI|SPA|MON|CAN|AUS|BRI|GER|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|BRA|ABU|
Mercedes    ||433|| 18| 25| 25| 25| 25| 25| 18| 25| 25| 25| 18| 18| 25| 18| 25| 25| 25| 25| 18|
Red-Bull    ||314|| - | 18| 15| 18| 18| 18| 25|  8| 18| 18| 25| 25| 15| 25| 18| 10| 15| 10| 15|
Williams    ||263|| 12|  8| 12| 10| 12|  8|  8| 18| 15| 15| 12| 12| 18| 12| 15| 15| 18| 18| 25|
Ferrari     ||235|| 15| 15| 10| 15| 15| 15| 10| 15| 10| 12| 15| 15|  8| 15|  6| 12| 12| 12|  8|
McLaren     ||202|| 25| 10|  1|  6|  6| 10| 15| 10| 12|  8|  8| 10| 10|  6| 12| 18| 10| 15| 10|
Force-India ||180|| 10| 12| 18| 12|  8| 12| 12| 12|  8| 10| - |  8| 12|  8| 10|  8| - |  8| 12|
Toro-Rosso  ||116||  8|  8|  8|  8|  4| - |  6| - |  6|  4| 10|  6|  6| 10|  8|  6|  6|  6|  6|
Lotus       || 80|| - |  6|  6|  4| 10|  6| - |  6|  4|  6|  4| - |  4|  4|  2|  2|  8|  4|  4|
Sauber      || 50||  6| - | - |  2|  2| - |  4|  4|  2|  2|  6|  4|  2| - |  4|  4|  4|  2|  2|
Marussia    || 25||  4|  2|  4|  1|  1|  4| - |  2|  1|  1|  2|  2| - |  1| - | - | - | - | - |
Caterham    || 15|| - |  4|  2| - | - |  2| - | - | - | - | - |  1|  1|  2|  1|  1| - | - | 1 |

 

Using such a system would lead to backmarkers actually racing each other, even if there wasn't the slightest chance for a points finish. But the highest finisher would determine, if a team gets 0,1,2 or maybe even 4 points for WCC scoreboard: So there surely would have been good fights between Caterham and Marussia, Sauber and Lotus for 11th-16th place.


Edited by TurnOffTheLights, 21 July 2015 - 13:55.


#157 Kyo

Kyo
  • Member

  • 1,313 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 21 July 2015 - 14:04

As I've stated before, I don't have any problems with ranking Marussia higher than Sauber because of that 9th place Sauber wasn't able to achieve. But if it's just for WCC and the millions of $ connected with it - why not change the way points are rewarded for WCC? For example, don't simply accumulate points of both drivers each weekend, but rate teams at a race weekend the same way you rate drivers: 25 points for the best team, 18 for 2nd best.... 1 for 10th best.

I'm not in favour of such a system, because it again complicates things, but it surely would be a possibility to reward continuosly being better than a rival team.

 

For 2014 WCC would have looked like this:

 

 


                 ||AUS|MAL|BAH|CHI|SPA|MON|CAN|AUS|BRI|GER|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|BRA|ABU|
Mercedes    ||433|| 18| 25| 25| 25| 25| 25| 18| 25| 25| 25| 18| 18| 25| 18| 25| 25| 25| 25| 18|
Red-Bull    ||314|| - | 18| 15| 18| 18| 18| 25|  8| 18| 18| 25| 25| 15| 25| 18| 10| 15| 10| 15|
Williams    ||263|| 12|  8| 12| 10| 12|  8|  8| 18| 15| 15| 12| 12| 18| 12| 15| 15| 18| 18| 25|
Ferrari     ||235|| 15| 15| 10| 15| 15| 15| 10| 15| 10| 12| 15| 15|  8| 15|  6| 12| 12| 12|  8|
McLaren     ||202|| 25| 10|  1|  6|  6| 10| 15| 10| 12|  8|  8| 10| 10|  6| 12| 18| 10| 15| 10|
Force-India ||180|| 10| 12| 18| 12|  8| 12| 12| 12|  8| 10| - |  8| 12|  8| 10|  8| - |  8| 12|
Toro-Rosso  ||116||  8|  8|  8|  8|  4| - |  6| - |  6|  4| 10|  6|  6| 10|  8|  6|  6|  6|  6|
Lotus       || 80|| - |  6|  6|  4| 10|  6| - |  6|  4|  6|  4| - |  4|  4|  2|  2|  8|  4|  4|
Sauber      || 50||  6| - | - |  2|  2| - |  4|  4|  2|  2|  6|  4|  2| - |  4|  4|  4|  2|  2|
Marussia    || 25||  4|  2|  4|  1|  1|  4| - |  2|  1|  1|  2|  2| - |  1| - | - | - | - | - |
Caterham    || 15|| - |  4|  2| - | - |  2| - | - | - | - | - |  1|  1|  2|  1|  1| - | - | 1 |

 

Using such a system would lead to backmarkers actually racing each other, even if there wasn't the slightest chance for a points finish. But the highest finisher would determine, if a team gets 0,1,2 or maybe even 4 points for WCC scoreboard: So there surely would have been good fights between Caterham and Marussia, Sauber and Lotus for 11th-16th place.

I believe this would be a great system.



#158 Frank Tuesday

Frank Tuesday
  • Member

  • 1,841 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 21 July 2015 - 15:25

I believe this would be a great system.

I've long advocated this.  The big question is how you determine the order.  If you go on the order of the highest placed car, surely a team that goes 2-3 did a better job than one that goes 1-18.  Same problem with lowest: 1-18 is clearly better than 16-17.  Sum of finishing positions?  How to break a tie?   



#159 Kyo

Kyo
  • Member

  • 1,313 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 21 July 2015 - 16:24

I've long advocated this.  The big question is how you determine the order.  If you go on the order of the highest placed car, surely a team that goes 2-3 did a better job than one that goes 1-18.  Same problem with lowest: 1-18 is clearly better than 16-17.  Sum of finishing positions?  How to break a tie?   

The way TurnOffTheLights did seems to be simple and work well enough. Rank teams by the sum of both drivers points followed by highest placed car.



Advertisement

#160 TurnOffTheLights

TurnOffTheLights
  • Member

  • 755 posts
  • Joined: June 15

Posted 22 July 2015 - 09:18

The way TurnOffTheLights did seems to be simple and work well enough. Rank teams by the sum of both drivers points followed by highest placed car.

 

Yes, I don't see an alternative. It would be the easiest and most reasonable choice to award points given the current points system for drivers.

This would be 2015 so far:

 

                 ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUS|BRI|
Mercedes    ||218|| 25| 18| 25| 25| 25| 25| 25| 25| 25|
Ferrari     ||160|| 18| 25| 18| 18| 18| 18| 15| 15| 15|
Williams    ||128|| 12| 15| 15| 15| 15|  2| 18| 18| 18|
RedBull     || 93|| 10| 10|  8| 12| 12| 15|  8|  6| 12|
Force-India || 74||  8|  4|  6|  8|  4| 12| 10| 12| 10|
Lotus       || 66|| - |  8| 12| 10| 10|  4| 12| 10| - |
Sauber      || 63|| 15|  6| 10|  4|  6|  8|  4|  4|  6|
Toro Rosso  || 48||  6| 12|  2| - |  8|  6|  6|  8| - |
McLaren     || 34||  4| - |  4|  6|  2| 10| - | - |  8|
Marussia    || 15|| - |  2|  1|  2|  1|  1|  2|  2|  4|
 

Not too much of a difference, I'd say. Except maybe Lotus who could fight with RedBull for 4th place, if it weren't for their 2 non-finishes.

And Sauber is in a really good shape, not too much behind Lotus and Force India.

This system clearly rewards finishing, even in lower positions.


Edited by TurnOffTheLights, 22 July 2015 - 10:55.


#161 Kucki

Kucki
  • Member

  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 22 July 2015 - 17:20

Having points only for the top 6 made the midfield scrap so intense. One point or a big payday worked wonders


Indeed, it was so intense and provided lots of drama :)

 

One year Michele Alboreto in an Arrows scored only 5 points due to 2 5th and a 6th places. He had 10 7th places that went unrewarded.....
Imagine what the result had been for Alboreto with the current sytem.

But the system you promote is for me by now a real bad one, given the staggering levels of reliability nowadays compared with the years of 9-6-4-3-2-1.


Yes, that Alboreto story is a good example of the intensity and drama that used to unfold. It gave you a story to talk about and add some emotion to it whereas if the points system would be inflated like the new ones are, he would have finished somewhere nobody cares about :)

The effect of a Points system is like a pendulum that moves between rewarding consistency or highest finishing result.

You either reward consistency all down the order by having a system of points inflation, or, you reward taking risks and beeing able to finish high.

To proportionally reward better the higher finishes to midfield teams, encourages them to take a little less importance to reliability of car parts, to driveability of setups, and reliable driving styles, and encourages a more aggressive approach regarding engine mappings, car setups, car parts and driving styles.

I personally do not have a problem seeing an engine go out in a huge ball of fire explosion like it used to be, I enjoy that, I enjoy seeing the hard charging smoking of the tires without them beeing kaput immediately, I enjoy ballsy overtaking moves and so on, I used to like those natural exciting parts of F1, I dont see the attraction of the picture perfect cruising to a high average finishing order. I like to see rewarded those who take some risks, on the driver part and on the car part.

In a system like

9 - 6 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1

The leader of the pack has a bit of harder time running away with the championship.

And towards the end of the points spread, positions 5 and 6... it was often like a second Winner of the Grand Prix. Some mid or even backmarker who had an exciting knife between his teeth dog fight to finish with a mighty important Championship Point.

So you have the highest chance for season deciders going deep into the season, you have the usual runner ups which duke it out hard for cruicial positions (but its not that bad for them to tangle up every once in a while, there not going to lose a huge amount of points if they crash so they can drive harder), and the mid fielder, back markers who are encouraged and rewarded to go all out ballsy in every way, elbow there way infront, be smart, be opportunistic, be risky adding some luck and they celebrate a Championship Point or two not much less enthusiastic then even the race winner. That was fun. And it had some emotional excitement.

Every now and then a backmarker would have the once in a season perfect package, with the car characteristics just perfectly fittimg the track, a setup that was just awesomely dialled in, and a driver who was right in the groove, mixing it up upfront, looking forward to finish high and save the teams season, only to have his engine go kaboooooooom in a huge spectacular cloud of smoke rolling down the front straight, reminding everybody on the stands why they came. The poor bastard climbing out of his car, waving to the fans like a hero. Hahah that was Formula 1. Now he would just even the averages of his finishes out.

I say getting back to rewarding high finishes, have championship points be something special, have tight championship point battles, its not morally wrong. Its froma sporting perspective just as legitimate. And dont forget those who finish outside the points, would still be ordered by finishing orders on the championship table. So finishes outside top 6 would still count something, but a Championship Point is a Championship Point. Something worth celebrating and adding some drama ;)


Edited by Kucki, 22 July 2015 - 17:44.


#162 TurnOffTheLights

TurnOffTheLights
  • Member

  • 755 posts
  • Joined: June 15

Posted 28 July 2015 - 08:32

Made a little excel table to check out how WDC and WCC would unfold at the very moment with different points systems. Quite interesting, I must admit, especially in the midfield. Depending on which points system is used, there are quite hefty changes in the order. Thought, I'd share that with you.

 

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

First of all, current points system:

 

                   ||     ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUT|BRI|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|MEX|BRA|ABU|   |
 1. Hamilton       ||  202|| 25| 18| 25| 25| 18| 15| 25| 18| 25|  8|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2. Rosberg        ||  181|| 18| 15| 18| 15| 25| 25| 18| 25| 18|  4|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 3. Vettel         ||  160|| 15| 25| 15| 10| 15| 18| 10| 12| 15| 25|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4. Bottas         ||   77|| - | 10|  8| 12| 12|   | 15| 10| 10|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 5. Räikkönen      ||   76|| - | 12| 12| 18| 10|  8| 12| - |  4| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6. Massa          ||   74|| 12|  8| 10|  1|  8|   |  8| 15| 12|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7. Ricciardo      ||   51||  8|  1|  2|  8|  6| 10|   |  1| - | 15|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8. Kwjat          ||   45|| - |  2| - |  2|  1| 12|  2|   |  8| 18|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9. Hülkenberg     ||   24||  6|   | - |   |   |   |  4|  8|  6| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
10. Grosjean       ||   23|| - |   |  6|  6|  4|   |  1| - | - |  6|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
11. Verstappen     ||   22|| - |  6|   | - |   | - |   |  4| - | 12|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
12. Nasr           ||   16|| 10|   |  4|   |   |  2|   |   | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
13. Pérez          ||   15||  1|   |   |  4|   |  6|   |  2|  2| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
14. Maldonado      ||   12|| - | - | - |   | - | - |  6|  6| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
15. Alonso         ||   11|| - | - |   |   | - | - | - | - |  1| 10|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
16. Sainz          ||    9||  2|  4|   | - |  2|  1|   | - | - | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
17. Button         ||    6||   | - |   | - |   |  4| - | - | - |  2|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
18. Ericsson       ||    6||  4| - |  1|   |   |   |   |   |   |  1|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
19. Merhi          ||    0|| - |   |   |   |   |   | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
20. Stevens        ||    0|| - | - |   |   |   |   |   | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
21. Magnussen      ||    0|| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 
 
                   ||     ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUT|BRI|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|MEX|BRA|ABU|   |
 1. Mercedes       ||  383|| 43| 33| 43| 40| 43| 40| 43| 43| 43| 12|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2. Ferrari        ||  236|| 15| 37| 27| 28| 25| 26| 22| 12| 19| 25|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 3. Williams       ||  151|| 12| 18| 18| 13| 20|   | 23| 25| 22|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4. Red Bull       ||   96||  8|  3|  2| 10|  7| 22|  2|  1|  8| 33|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 5. Force India    ||   39||  7|   |   |  4|   |  6|  4| 10|  8|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6. Lotus          ||   35||   |   |  6|  6|  4|   |  7|  6|   |  6|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7. Toro Rosso     ||   31||  2| 10|   |   |  2|  1|   |  4|   | 12|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8. Sauber         ||   22|| 14|   |  5|   |   |  2|   |   |   |  1|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9. McLaren        ||   17||   |   |   |   |   |  4|   |   |  1| 12|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
10. Manor          ||    0||   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
One would expect the scoreboard with Moto GP system to be pretty similar, but...
 
                        ||     ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUT|BRI|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|MEX|BRA|ABU|   |
 1. (1.) Hamilton       ||  211|| 25| 20| 25| 25| 20| 16| 25| 20| 25| 10|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2. (2.) Rosberg        ||  195|| 20| 16| 20| 16| 25| 25| 20| 25| 20|  8|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 3. (3.) Vettel         ||  169|| 16| 25| 16| 11| 16| 20| 11| 13| 16| 25|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4. (6.) Massa          ||   94|| 13| 10| 11|  6| 10|  1| 10| 16| 13|  4|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 5. (4.) Bottas         ||   90|| - | 11| 10| 13| 13|  2| 16| 11| 11|  3|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6. (5.) Räikkönen      ||   88|| - | 13| 13| 20| 11| 10| 13| - |  8| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7. (7.) Ricciardo      ||   78|| 10|  6|  7| 10|  9| 11|  3|  6| - | 16|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8. (8.) Kwjat          ||   74|| - |  7| - |  7|  6| 13|  7|  4| 10| 20|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9.(13.) Pérez          ||   53||  6|  3|  5|  8|  3|  9|  5|  7|  7| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
10.(10.) Grosjean       ||   50|| - |  5|  9|  9|  8|  4|  6| - | - |  9|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
11.(12.) Nasr           ||   48|| 11|  4|  8|  4|  4|  7|   |  5| - |  5|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
12. (9.) Hülkenberg     ||   47||  9|  2| - |  3|  1|  5|  8| 10|  9| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
13.(18.) Ericsson       ||   37||  8| - |  6|  2|  2|  3|  2|  3|  5|  6|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
14.(11.) Verstappen     ||   36|| - |  9|   | - |  5| - |  1|  8| - | 13|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
15.(16.) Sainz          ||   35||  7|  8|  3| - |  7|  6|  4| - | - | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
16.(15.) Alonso         ||   26|| - | - |  4|  5| - | - | - | - |  6| 11|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
17.(17.) Button         ||   22||  5| - |  2| - |   |  8| - | - | - |  7|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
18.(14.) Maldonado      ||   21|| - | - | - |  1| - | - |  9|  9| - |  2|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
19.(19.) Merhi          ||    8|| - |  1|   |   |   |   | - |  2|  4|  1|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
20.(20.) Stevens        ||    4|| - | - |  1|   |   |   |   | - |  3|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
21.(21.) Magnussen      ||    0|| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 
                        ||     ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUT|BRI|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|MEX|BRA|ABU|   |
 1. (1.) Mercedes       ||  406|| 45| 36| 45| 41| 45| 41| 45| 45| 45| 18|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2. (2.) Ferrari        ||  257|| 16| 38| 29| 31| 27| 30| 24| 13| 24| 25|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 3. (3.) Williams       ||  184|| 13| 21| 21| 19| 23|  3| 26| 27| 24|  7|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4. (4.) Red Bull       ||  152|| 10| 13|  7| 17| 15| 24| 10| 10| 10| 36|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 5. (5.) Force India    ||  100|| 15|  5|  5| 11|  4| 14| 13| 17| 16|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6. (8.) Sauber         ||   85|| 19|  4| 14|  6|  6| 10|  2|  8|  5| 11|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7. (7.) Toro Rosso     ||   71||  7| 17|  3|   | 12|  6|  5|  8|   | 13|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8. (6.) Lotus          ||   71||   |  5|  9| 10|  8|  4| 15|  9|   | 11|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9. (9.) McLaren        ||   48||  5|   |  6|  5|   |  8|   |   |  6| 18|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
10.(10.) Manor          ||   12||   |  1|  1|   |   |   |   |  2|  7|  1|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
2nd best voted in the poll was the 10-6-4-3-2-1-system:
 
                        ||     ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUT|BRI|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|MEX|BRA|ABU|   |
 1. (1.) Hamilton       ||   73|| 10|  6| 10| 10|  6|  4| 10|  6| 10|  1|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2. (2.) Rosberg        ||   62||  6|  4|  6|  4| 10| 10|  6| 10|  6|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   | 
 3. (3.) Vettel         ||   49||  4| 10|  4|  2|  4|  6|  2|  3|  4| 10|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4. (5.) Räikkönen      ||   18|| - |  3|  3|  6|  2|  1|  3| - |   | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 5. (4.) Bottas         ||   17|| - |  2|  1|  3|  3|   |  4|  2|  2|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6. (6.) Massa          ||   15||  3|  1|  2|   |  1|   |  1|  4|  3|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7. (8.) Kwjat          ||   10|| - |   | - |   |   |  3|   |   |  1|  6|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8. (7.) Ricciardo      ||    8||  1|   |   |  1|   |  2|   |   | - |  4|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9.(11.) Verstappen     ||    3|| - |   |   | - |   | - |   |   | - |  3|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
10.(12.) Nasr           ||    2||  2|   |   |   |   |   |   |   | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
11.(15.) Alonso         ||    2|| - | - |   |   | - | - | - | - |   |  2|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
12. (9.) Hülkenberg     ||    1||   |   | - |   |   |   |   |  1|   | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
13.(10.) Grosjean       ||    0|| - |   |   |   |   |   |   | - | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
14.(14.) Maldonado      ||    0|| - | - | - |   | - | - |   |   | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
15.(13.) Pérez          ||    0||   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
16.(16.) Sainz          ||    0||   |   |   | - |   |   |   | - | - | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
17.(17.) Button         ||    0||   | - |   | - |   |   | - | - | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
18.(18.) Ericsson       ||    0||   | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
19.(19.) Merhi          ||    0|| - |   |   |   |   |   | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
20.(20.) Stevens        ||    0|| - | - |   |   |   |   |   | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
21.(21.) Magnussen      ||    0|| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 

 

                        ||     ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUT|BRI|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|MEX|BRA|ABU|   |
 1. (1.) Mercedes       ||  135|| 16| 10| 16| 14| 16| 14| 16| 16| 16|  1|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2. (2.) Ferrari        ||   67||  4| 13|  7|  8|  6|  7|  5|  3|  4| 10|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 3. (3.) Williams       ||   32||  3|  3|  3|  3|  4|   |  5|  6|  5|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4. (4.) Red Bull       ||   18||  1|   |   |  1|   |  5|   |   |  1| 10|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 5. (7.) Toro Rosso     ||    3||   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |  3|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6. (8.) Sauber         ||    2||  2|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7. (9.) McLaren        ||    2||   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |  2|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8. (5.) Force India    ||    1||   |   |   |   |   |   |   |  1|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9. (6.) Lotus          ||    0||   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
10.(10.) Manor          ||    0||   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Then we had a points system proposed in this thread by Kyo that was supposed to reward finishing: 120-80-64-50-40-32-26-22-19-16-13-11-9-7-5-3-2-1
 
                        ||     ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUT|BRI|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|MEX|BRA|ABU|   |
 1. (1.) Hamilton       ||  936||120| 80|120|120| 80| 64|120| 80|120| 32|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2. (2.) Rosberg        ||  830|| 80| 64| 80| 64|120|120| 80|120| 80| 22|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 3. (3.) Vettel         ||  706|| 64|120| 64| 40| 64| 80| 40| 50| 64|120|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4. (4.) Bottas         ||  332|| - | 40| 32| 50| 50|  7| 64| 40| 40|  9|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 5. (6.) Massa          ||  332|| 50| 32| 40| 16| 32|  5| 32| 64| 50| 11|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6. (5.) Räikkönen      ||  324|| - | 50| 50| 80| 40| 32| 50| - | 22| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7. (7.) Ricciardo      ||  254|| 32| 16| 19| 32| 26| 40|  9| 16| - | 64|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8. (8.) Kwjat          ||  246|| - | 19| - | 19| 16| 50| 19| 11| 32| 80|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9.(13.) Pérez          ||  146|| 16|  9| 13| 22|  9| 26| 13| 19| 19| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
10.(12.) Nasr           ||  143|| 40| 11| 22| 11| 11| 19|  3| 13| - | 13|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
11. (9.) Hülkenberg     ||  140|| 26|  7| - |  9|  5| 13| 22| 32| 26| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
12.(10.) Grosjean       ||  140|| - | 13| 26| 26| 22| 11| 16| - | - | 26|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
13.(11.) Verstappen     ||  118|| - | 26|  2| - | 13| - |  5| 22| - | 50|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
14.(18.) Ericsson       ||  106|| 22| - | 16|  7|  7|  9|  7|  9| 13| 16|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
15.(16.) Sainz          ||   96|| 19| 22|  9| - | 19| 16| 11| - | - | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
16.(15.) Alonso         ||   80|| - | - | 11| 13| - | - | - | - | 16| 40|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
17.(14.) Maldonado      ||   64|| - | - | - |  5| - | - | 26| 26| - |  7|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
18.(17.) Button         ||   64|| 13| - |  7| - |  3| 22| - | - | - | 19|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
19.(19.) Merhi          ||   37|| - |  5|  3|  2|  1|  3| - |  7| 11|  5|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
20.(20.) Stevens        ||   26|| - | - |  5|  3|  2|  2|  2| - |  9|  3|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
21.(21.) Magnussen      ||    0|| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 
                        ||     ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUT|BRI|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|MEX|BRA|ABU|   |
 1. (1.) Mercedes       || 1766||200|144|200|184|200|184|200|200|200| 54|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2. (2.) Ferrari        || 1030|| 64|170|114|120|104|112| 90| 50| 86|120|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 3. (3.) Williams       ||  664|| 50| 72| 72| 66| 82| 12| 96|104| 90| 20|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4. (4.) Red Bull       ||  500|| 32| 35| 19| 51| 42| 90| 28| 27| 32|144|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 5. (5.) Force India    ||  286|| 42| 16| 13| 31| 14| 39| 35| 51| 45|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6. (8.) Sauber         ||  249|| 62| 11| 38| 18| 18| 28| 10| 22| 13| 29|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7. (7.) Toro Rosso     ||  214|| 19| 48| 11|   | 32| 16| 16| 22|   | 50|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8. (6.) Lotus          ||  204||   | 13| 26| 31| 22| 11| 42| 26|   | 33|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9. (9.) McLaren        ||  144|| 13|   | 18| 13|  3| 22|   |   | 16| 59|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
10.(10.) Manor          ||   63||   |  5|  8|  5|  3|  5|  2|  7| 20|  8|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Finally, only WCC with a modified current points system, giving 25 points for the best team at a weekend, 18 for 2nd best and so on...
 
                             ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUS|BRI|HUN|
 1. (1.) Mercedes       ||228|| 25| 18| 25| 25| 25| 25| 25| 25| 25| 10|
 2. (2.) Ferrari        ||178|| 18| 25| 18| 18| 18| 18| 15| 15| 15| 18|
 3. (3.) Williams       ||132|| 12| 15| 15| 15| 15|  2| 18| 18| 18|  4|
 4. (4.) Red Bull       ||118|| 10| 10|  8| 12| 12| 15|  8|  6| 12| 25|
 5. (6.) Lotus          || 74|| - |  8| 12| 10| 10|  4| 12| 10| - |  8|
 6. (5.) Force India    || 74||  8|  4|  6|  8|  4| 12| 10| 12| 10| - |
 7. (8.) Sauber         || 69|| 15|  6| 10|  4|  6|  8|  4|  4|  6|  6|
 8. (7.) Toro Rosso     || 63||  6| 12|  2| - |  8|  6|  6|  8| - | 15|
 9. (9.) McLaren        || 46||  4| - |  4|  6|  2| 10| - | - |  8| 12|
10.(10.) Manor          || 17|| - |  2|  1|  2|  1|  1|  2|  2|  4|  2|

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

 

While there isn't much change at the top, ranking in the midfield is heavily dependent on which points system is used. Winners in team battles differ (Bottas/Massa, Ricciardo/Kvyat, Hülkenberg/Perez) as does the order in WCC.

Here is a summary of the best and worst places for every driver and team in these scoreboards (including the system in the following post), so the exactly same race results leading to very different championship outcomes.

 

             best - worst

Hamilton        1.- 1.
Rosberg         2.- 2.
Vettel          3.- 3.
Räikkönen       4.- 6.
Bottas          4.- 6.
Massa           4.- 6.
Ricciardo       7.- 8.
Kwjat           7.- 8.
Hülkenberg      9.-12.
Pérez           9.-15.
Grosjean       10.-13.
Maldonado      14.-18.
Verstappen      9.-14.
Sainz          15.-16.
Nasr           10.-12.
Ericsson       13.-18.
Alonso         11.-16.
Button         17.-18.
Merhi          19.-19.
Stevens        20.-20.
 
             best - worst
Mercedes        1.- 1.
Ferrari         2.- 2.
Williams        3.- 3.
Red Bull        4.- 4.
Force India     5.- 8.
Lotus           5.- 9.
Toro Rosso      5.- 8.   
Sauber          6.- 8.     
McLaren         7.- 9.
Manor          10.-10.

Edited by TurnOffTheLights, 28 July 2015 - 09:01.


#163 TurnOffTheLights

TurnOffTheLights
  • Member

  • 755 posts
  • Joined: June 15

Posted 28 July 2015 - 08:46

I've always thought it makes sense to give a lot of drivers points, because points are there to distinguish between the drivers in the championship, and you want an accurate reflection down the order. Points are not "trophies" handed out to just the top drivers/teams.

And even though it's more extreme than the old 10-6 system, I think giving the winner double the points of second makes sense. I'd rather put a bit more emphasis on good results rather than just finishing (although not to the extent of the medals system). If the winner takes double the points of second, then with a retirement in a race, it could still take wins in the next two races to catch up. I wouldn't want it to be possible to win 2/3 of the races and not win the championship. And as I think someone else said, it would be quite neat to then have third place getting 1/3 of the winner's points, fourth getting 1/4 and so on. Obviously if you want to give out integer points there would have to be some rounding, but I think for 20 points positions, the following works quite well:

120-60-40-30-24-20-17-15-13-11-10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1

 

Forgot that one, which had a few likes:

 

                        ||     ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUT|BRI|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|MEX|BRA|ABU|   |
 1. (1.) Hamilton       ||  840||120| 60|120|120| 60| 40|120| 60|120| 20|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2. (2.) Rosberg        ||  695|| 60| 40| 60| 40|120|120| 60|120| 60| 15|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 3. (3.) Vettel         ||  538|| 40|120| 40| 24| 40| 60| 24| 30| 40|120|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4. (6.) Massa          ||  210|| 30| 20| 24| 11| 20|  6| 20| 40| 30|  9|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 5. (5.) Räikkönen      ||  209|| - | 30| 30| 60| 24| 20| 30| - | 15| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6. (4.) Bottas         ||  207|| - | 24| 20| 30| 30|  7| 40| 24| 24|  8|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7. (8.) Kwjat          ||  169|| - | 13| - | 13| 11| 30| 13|  9| 20| 60|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8. (7.) Ricciardo      ||  164|| 20| 11| 13| 20| 17| 24|  8| 11| - | 40|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9.(13.) Pérez          ||  105|| 11|  8| 10| 15|  8| 17| 10| 13| 13| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
10.(12.) Nasr           ||  104|| 24|  9| 15|  9|  9| 13|  5| 10| - | 10|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
11. (9.) Hülkenberg     ||  100|| 17|  7| - |  8|  6| 10| 15| 20| 17| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
12.(10.) Grosjean       ||   96|| - | 10| 17| 17| 15|  9| 11| - | - | 17|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
13.(18.) Ericsson       ||   84|| 15| - | 11|  7|  7|  8|  7|  8| 10| 11|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
14.(11.) Verstappen     ||   82|| - | 17|  4| - | 10| - |  6| 15| - | 30|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
15.(16.) Sainz          ||   69|| 13| 15|  8| - | 13| 11|  9| - | - | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
16.(15.) Alonso         ||   54|| - | - |  9| 10| - | - | - | - | 11| 24|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
17.(17.) Button         ||   50|| 10| - |  7| - |  5| 15| - | - | - | 13|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
18.(14.) Maldonado      ||   47|| - | - | - |  6| - | - | 17| 17| - |  7|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
19.(19.) Merhi          ||   45|| - |  6|  5|  4|  3|  5| - |  7|  9|  6|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
20.(20.) Stevens        ||   36|| - | - |  6|  5|  4|  4|  4| - |  8|  5|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
21.(21.) Magnussen      ||    0|| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 
                        ||     ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUT|BRI|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|MEX|BRA|ABU|   |
 1. (1.) Mercedes       || 1535||180|100|180|160|180|160|180|180|180| 35|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2. (2.) Ferrari        ||  747|| 40|150| 70| 84| 64| 80| 54| 30| 55|120|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 3. (3.) Williams       ||  417|| 30| 44| 44| 41| 50| 13| 60| 64| 54| 17|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4. (4.) Red Bull       ||  333|| 20| 24| 13| 33| 28| 54| 21| 20| 20|100|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 5. (5.) Force India    ||  205|| 28| 15| 10| 23| 14| 27| 25| 33| 30|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6. (8.) Sauber         ||  188|| 39|  9| 26| 16| 16| 21| 12| 18| 10| 21|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7. (7.) Toro Rosso     ||  151|| 13| 32| 12|   | 23| 11| 15| 15|   | 30|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8. (6.) Lotus          ||  143||   | 10| 17| 23| 15|  9| 28| 17|   | 24|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9. (9.) McLaren        ||  104|| 10|   | 16| 10|  5| 15|   |   | 11| 37|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
10.(10.) Manor          ||   81||   |  6| 11|  9|  7|  9|  4|  7| 17| 11|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 


#164 John B

John B
  • Member

  • 7,952 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 28 July 2015 - 17:21



And towards the end of the points spread, positions 5 and 6... it was often like a second Winner of the Grand Prix. Some mid or even backmarker who had an exciting knife between his teeth dog fight to finish with a mighty important Championship Point.

So you have the highest chance for season deciders going deep into the season, you have the usual runner ups which duke it out hard for cruicial positions (but its not that bad for them to tangle up every once in a while, there not going to lose a huge amount of points if they crash so they can drive harder), and the mid fielder, back markers who are encouraged and rewarded to go all out ballsy in every way, elbow there way infront, be smart, be opportunistic, be risky adding some luck and they celebrate a Championship Point or two not much less enthusiastic then even the race winner. That was fun. And it had some emotional excitement.

Every now and then a backmarker would have the once in a season perfect package, with the car characteristics just perfectly fittimg the track, a setup that was just awesomely dialled in, and a driver who was right in the groove, mixing it up upfront, looking forward to finish high and save the teams season, only to have his engine go kaboooooooom in a huge spectacular cloud of smoke rolling down the front straight, reminding everybody on the stands why they came. The poor bastard climbing out of his car, waving to the fans like a hero. Hahah that was Formula 1. Now he would just even the averages of his finishes out.

I say getting back to rewarding high finishes, have championship points be something special, have tight championship point battles, its not morally wrong. Its froma sporting perspective just as legitimate. And dont forget those who finish outside the points, would still be ordered by finishing orders on the championship table. So finishes outside top 6 would still count something, but a Championship Point is a Championship Point. Something worth celebrating and adding some drama ;)

 

 

Agreed - I remember Hill celebrating a 6th place point for Arrows but have a hard time remembering the race winner.

Think some of the backmarkers running at the front and blowups/failures could be related..... :D

 

I would bring back the 10-6 -- reward winning as much as possible and make all of the championship points earned. Not opposed to the concept of pole points either though who knows what kind of shenanigans that would bring out.....



#165 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 28 July 2015 - 18:13

Since we are doing a show n tell, here is how my proposed system 10-5-3-2-1 will look. Looks good to me.

 

23ru6w8.jpg



#166 ANF

ANF
  • Member

  • 29,055 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 28 July 2015 - 21:29



30–21–15–12–10–8–7–6–3–1

 

There you have it, the perfect system.

And here you have the 2015 championships standings!

Current system: 25–18–15–12–10–8–6–4–2–1
Perfect system: 30–21–15–12–10–8–7–6–3–1

Current system         Perfect system

share  pts  pos        pos  pts share

 .200  202    1   HAM    1  236  .209
 .179  181    2   ROS    2  210  .186
 .158  160    3   VET    3  173  .153
 .075   76    5   RAI    4   81  .072
 .076   77    4   BOT    5   77  .068
 .073   74    6   MAS    6   74  .065
 .050   51    7   RIC    7   53  .047
 .045   45    8   KVY    8   51  .045
 .024   24    9   HUL    9   28  .025
 .023   23   10   GRO   10   28  .025
 .022   22   11   VES   11   25  .022
 .015   15   13   PER   12   20  .018
 .016   16   12   NAS   13   19  .017
 .012   12   14   MAL   14   14  .012
 .009    9   16   SAI   15   13  .012
 .011   11   15   ALO   16   11  .010
 .006    6   17   BUT   17    9  .008
 .006    6   18   ERI   18    8  .007
 .000    0        STE         0  .000
 .000    0        MER         0  .000

 .379  383    1   Mer    1  446  .395
 .234  236    2   Fer    2  254  .225
 .150  151    3   Wil    3  151  .134
 .095   96    4   RBR    4  104  .092
 .039   39    5   F.I    5   48  .042
 .035   35    6   Lot    6   42  .037
 .031   31    7   T.R    7   38  .034
 .022   22    8   Sau    8   27  .024
 .017   17    9   McL    9   20  .018
 .000    0        Mar         0  .000

Edited by ANF, 28 July 2015 - 21:30.


#167 Kyo

Kyo
  • Member

  • 1,313 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 28 July 2015 - 21:42

Then we had a points system proposed in this thread by Kyo that was supposed to reward finishing: 120-80-64-50-40-32-26-22-19-16-13-11-9-7-5-3-2-1
 
                        ||     ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUT|BRI|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|MEX|BRA|ABU|   |
 1. (1.) Hamilton       ||  936||120| 80|120|120| 80| 64|120| 80|120| 32|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2. (2.) Rosberg        ||  830|| 80| 64| 80| 64|120|120| 80|120| 80| 22|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 3. (3.) Vettel         ||  706|| 64|120| 64| 40| 64| 80| 40| 50| 64|120|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4. (4.) Bottas         ||  332|| - | 40| 32| 50| 50|  7| 64| 40| 40|  9|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 5. (6.) Massa          ||  332|| 50| 32| 40| 16| 32|  5| 32| 64| 50| 11|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6. (5.) Räikkönen      ||  324|| - | 50| 50| 80| 40| 32| 50| - | 22| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7. (7.) Ricciardo      ||  254|| 32| 16| 19| 32| 26| 40|  9| 16| - | 64|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8. (8.) Kwjat          ||  246|| - | 19| - | 19| 16| 50| 19| 11| 32| 80|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9.(13.) Pérez          ||  146|| 16|  9| 13| 22|  9| 26| 13| 19| 19| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
10.(12.) Nasr           ||  143|| 40| 11| 22| 11| 11| 19|  3| 13| - | 13|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
11. (9.) Hülkenberg     ||  140|| 26|  7| - |  9|  5| 13| 22| 32| 26| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
12.(10.) Grosjean       ||  140|| - | 13| 26| 26| 22| 11| 16| - | - | 26|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
13.(11.) Verstappen     ||  118|| - | 26|  2| - | 13| - |  5| 22| - | 50|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
14.(18.) Ericsson       ||  106|| 22| - | 16|  7|  7|  9|  7|  9| 13| 16|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
15.(16.) Sainz          ||   96|| 19| 22|  9| - | 19| 16| 11| - | - | - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
16.(15.) Alonso         ||   80|| - | - | 11| 13| - | - | - | - | 16| 40|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
17.(14.) Maldonado      ||   64|| - | - | - |  5| - | - | 26| 26| - |  7|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
18.(17.) Button         ||   64|| 13| - |  7| - |  3| 22| - | - | - | 19|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
19.(19.) Merhi          ||   37|| - |  5|  3|  2|  1|  3| - |  7| 11|  5|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
20.(20.) Stevens        ||   26|| - | - |  5|  3|  2|  2|  2| - |  9|  3|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
21.(21.) Magnussen      ||    0|| - |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 
                        ||     ||AUS|MAL|CHI|BAH|SPA|MON|CAN|AUT|BRI|HUN|BEL|ITA|SIN|JAP|RUS|USA|MEX|BRA|ABU|   |
 1. (1.) Mercedes       || 1766||200|144|200|184|200|184|200|200|200| 54|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 2. (2.) Ferrari        || 1030|| 64|170|114|120|104|112| 90| 50| 86|120|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 3. (3.) Williams       ||  664|| 50| 72| 72| 66| 82| 12| 96|104| 90| 20|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 4. (4.) Red Bull       ||  500|| 32| 35| 19| 51| 42| 90| 28| 27| 32|144|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 5. (5.) Force India    ||  286|| 42| 16| 13| 31| 14| 39| 35| 51| 45|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 6. (8.) Sauber         ||  249|| 62| 11| 38| 18| 18| 28| 10| 22| 13| 29|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 7. (7.) Toro Rosso     ||  214|| 19| 48| 11|   | 32| 16| 16| 22|   | 50|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 8. (6.) Lotus          ||  204||   | 13| 26| 31| 22| 11| 42| 26|   | 33|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
 9. (9.) McLaren        ||  144|| 13|   | 18| 13|  3| 22|   |   | 16| 59|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
10.(10.) Manor          ||   63||   |  5|  8|  5|  3|  5|  2|  7| 20|  8|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

Great job for all the tables!

 

I really like my system.  :p

 

Lewis - Rosberg

106p difference

7-3 races finished

0-0 DNF

 

Vettel - Kimi

382p difference

5-2 races finished

0-3 DNF

 

Bottas - Massa

0p difference

5-4 races finished

1-0 DNF

 

Ricciardo - Kvyat

8p difference

3-4 races finished

1-2 DNF

 

Perez - Hulk

6p difference

4-4 races finished

1-2 DNF

 

Nasr - Ericsson

37p difference

6-2 races finished

1-1 DNF

 

Grosjean - Maldonado

76p difference

2-1 races finished

3-6 DNF

 

Verstappen - Sainz

22p difference

1-3 races finished

4-4 DNF

 

Alonso - Button

16p difference

2-1 races finished

6-5 DNF

 

Merhi - Stevens

11p difference

3-3 races finished

2-3 DNF

 

The only result that seems off at a first look is Verstappen-Sainz but it really isn't since MV best results where way better than CS best results.

 

Also I quite like the teams standings. If Ferrari had the same amount of retirements of STR or Lotus they would certainly be behind Williams and RBR so why is Sauber behind Lotus and STR? Why reward reliability for big teams but not for medium and small ones?

 

Overall I believe it is a big improvement compared to todays system and rewards and punishes all in a much similar way independently if they are top scorers or not.



#168 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 4,648 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 29 July 2015 - 10:07

Safety cars have always been a lottery, they can continue to be one.
 
Lapped cars end the race after the flag is shown and even then they can be timed exactly how far behind they were in terms of time up to the leader's lap before.
 
Who makes a move on the last lap of the race anyway. Drivers have stopped making moves for the last 20 laps these days.
 
And yes you are right with driver A and B, this is how the system works.

Safety cars would be more than a lottery - they'd make entire races virtually irrelevant.

And with lapped cars, it could sometimes be to a driver's advantage to let themselves get lapped, and they could end up "beating" a driver in front of them that completes the last lap.

#169 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 29 July 2015 - 17:49

Safety cars would be more than a lottery - they'd make entire races virtually irrelevant.

And with lapped cars, it could sometimes be to a driver's advantage to let themselves get lapped, and they could end up "beating" a driver in front of them that completes the last lap.

 

SCs still give random results, like Kvyat and Max last race.

 

No, lapped cars will still be behind laps on lead cars.



#170 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 4,648 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 29 July 2015 - 20:54

SCs still give random results, like Kvyat and Max last race.
 
No, lapped cars will still be behind laps on lead cars.

Safety cars can jumble things up a bit now, but you still generally get the same drivers winning. But that's very different from making a win meaningless. You could be 15 seconds behind in one race, and then win the next except because it was behind a safety car, you make up just one of those 15. I think that's very unsatisfactory.

On lapped cars - my understanding was that you were saying a driver's gap to the leader on the last lap they completed would be the relevant gap. Two backmarkers could be running very close together. The leader splits them so one has to complete the last lap and one doesn't. The one that gets lapped has their gap locked in after the penultimate lap. The one that's ahead could take longer to complete the last lap than the locked-in gap from the other car.

#171 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 29 July 2015 - 21:04

Safety cars can jumble things up a bit now, but you still generally get the same drivers winning. But that's very different from making a win meaningless. You could be 15 seconds behind in one race, and then win the next except because it was behind a safety car, you make up just one of those 15. I think that's very unsatisfactory.

On lapped cars - my understanding was that you were saying a driver's gap to the leader on the last lap they completed would be the relevant gap. Two backmarkers could be running very close together. The leader splits them so one has to complete the last lap and one doesn't. The one that gets lapped has their gap locked in after the penultimate lap. The one that's ahead could take longer to complete the last lap than the locked-in gap from the other car.

 

How many races end behind the SC on the last few laps? Canada 2014 comes to mind or Monaco few years back when MSc passed Alonso after the SC line on the last lap.

 

Look at the last race and even though the SC came out 20 laps from the end, the gaps were huge as they should be.

 

As regards lapped drivers, for example in the last race, a driver is lapped and only finished 68 laps. His gap to the lead driver would be calculated based on the delta between him finishing lap 68 n the lead driver finishing lap 68 (and not 69). That would be more than all cars that finish lap 69.



#172 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 4,648 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 29 July 2015 - 21:23

As regards lapped drivers, for example in the last race, a driver is lapped and only finished 68 laps. His gap to the lead driver would be calculated based on the delta between him finishing lap 68 n the lead driver finishing lap 68 (and not 69). That would be more than all cars that finish lap 69.

So let's say it's lap 69 for Hamilton in the lead (the last lap) and right in front of him are Stevenson and Merhi (in that order) both on lap 68. Hamilton laps Merhi just before the end and Merhi finishes his 68th lap 80 seconds after Hamilton completed his 68th lap. He's half a second behind Hamilton on the road, so Hamilton completed his last lap in 79.5 seconds. Stevenson was half a second in front of Hamilton on the road to make it onto the final lap. Being slower than Hamilton, he completes his final lap in 81.5 seconds, and ends up 81 seconds behind on lap 69 of 69. What points are scored?

#173 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 29 July 2015 - 22:41

So let's say it's lap 69 for Hamilton in the lead (the last lap) and right in front of him are Stevenson and Merhi (in that order) both on lap 68. Hamilton laps Merhi just before the end and Merhi finishes his 68th lap 80 seconds after Hamilton completed his 68th lap. He's half a second behind Hamilton on the road, so Hamilton completed his last lap in 79.5 seconds. Stevenson was half a second in front of Hamilton on the road to make it onto the final lap. Being slower than Hamilton, he completes his final lap in 81.5 seconds, and ends up 81 seconds behind on lap 69 of 69. What points are scored?

 

Yes I thought of this corner case and it will be a problem. Many ways to solve it including adding a time penalty like 10 seconds for every lap they were behind at the finish.



#174 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 01 August 2015 - 14:05

Building on the idea of timing drivers as opposed to dishing out points, here is how 2014 n 2015 would look. Here are the rules I used but obviously can be tweaked:

 

1. Drop 4 worst races for each driver

2. Number of races finished on lead laps

3. Lowest possible time (each race is timed relative to race leader and time is only counted for races finished on lead laps)

 

2qcml2p.jpg



#175 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 01 August 2015 - 14:06

2uz9gsl.jpg



#176 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 01 August 2015 - 14:07

In 2014, HAM clinches the title in Brazil.



#177 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 44,257 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 01 August 2015 - 14:12

Problem about your idea: its heavily safety car affected. For example the gap in China between the Merc drivers was before the SC around 12 seconds. Your idea is just working if we get a rid of the SC and just use the VSC.


Edited by Marklar, 01 August 2015 - 14:12.


#178 Collombin

Collombin
  • Member

  • 8,589 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 01 August 2015 - 15:08

The other problem is that the drivers weren't driving the races with that system in mind - the flaw of all retrospective recreations, but probably even worse where time gaps are taken into account.

#179 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 01 August 2015 - 20:19

Problem about your idea: its heavily safety car affected. For example the gap in China between the Merc drivers was before the SC around 12 seconds. Your idea is just working if we get a rid of the SC and just use the VSC.

 

How was the SC and the results in Hungary 2015 any justified? SCs almost always alter results and we have already learned to live with it. So even though you are right, nothing in the world can fix the influence of SCs on races.



Advertisement

#180 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 01 August 2015 - 20:22

The other problem is that the drivers weren't driving the races with that system in mind - the flaw of all retrospective recreations, but probably even worse where time gaps are taken into account.

 

Agreed and if this system were in place, drivers wont be cruising around for sure and making a mockery of the sport as we know it today.



#181 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 44,257 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 01 August 2015 - 20:41

How was the SC and the results in Hungary 2015 any justified? SCs almost always alter results and we have already learned to live with it. So even though you are right, nothing in the world can fix the influence of SCs on races.

So imagine the following scenario: we heading into the final race and Vettel and Hamilton are the drivers who can stil win the WDC. Hamilton is leading the WDC with a 10 seconds but he is struggeling in the race and is way behind, so Rosberg is doing a Piquet: SC is out, Hamilton WDC, we have an controversity...

Next problem: what happens if a driver is dominating and winning almost every race but DNF 5 times (which is not unlikely)?


Overall its not a bad idea and I would love it if the actual gap would be the basis for the points, but this is just working if the gaps are not affected by the SC otherwise it makes no sense for me to introduce it. Only solution besides the VSC would be to let the cars releasing at the restart with the gap before the SC. Eg if the gap before the SC was 15 seconds between the 1st and the 2nd, the 2nd is allowed to ovetake the SC 15 seconds after the 1st.

Edited by Marklar, 01 August 2015 - 20:43.


#182 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 44,257 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 01 August 2015 - 21:07

The other problem is that the drivers weren't driving the races with that system in mind - the flaw of all retrospective recreations, but probably even worse where time gaps are taken into account.

Thats probably something positive because then nobody will give up a race when he is 15 seconds behind, he will always fight, which would be great.



#183 TurnOffTheLights

TurnOffTheLights
  • Member

  • 755 posts
  • Joined: June 15

Posted 01 August 2015 - 21:24

2uz9gsl.jpg

 

As you can see in your own example, your system is not fair. Just look at Alonso, he could finish the whole rest of the season on podium, even win some races, and still end in the 2nd half of the scoreboard because of all that DNFs till now. Furthermore, every system with dropping results leads to unnecessary intricacy, especially in the last (championship deciding) races.


Edited by TurnOffTheLights, 01 August 2015 - 21:31.


#184 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 01 August 2015 - 21:28

And finally THE system that declares Alonso winner of 2010 and Vettel in 3rd.

 

ejv75z.jpg



#185 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 44,257 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 01 August 2015 - 21:37

And finally THE system that declares Alonso winner of 2010 and Vettel in 3rd.

 

ejv75z.jpg

One DNF more for VET or HAM and they finish the season between Massa and Rosberg.

 

Or to say it this way: Let a driver DNF five times and he can win all the other 14 races with an massiv gap and he would stil finish somewhere at P6-P7.....



#186 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 01 August 2015 - 21:40

@Marklar & @TurnOffTheLights

 

Yes, dropping races would always play truant but we need to account for DNFs. 15 races in a 19 race season is around 80% and this number can be tweaked but there is no getting around it.

 

I am not getting into a SC debate. In the normal system, SC always changes the race order like last race. Rosberg should have had an easy 2nd and he ended 8th, so let us go back to the title deciding race and apply this. Same problem.



#187 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 01 August 2015 - 21:44

One DNF more for VET or HAM and they finish the season between Massa and Rosberg.

 

Or to say it this way: Let a driver DNF five times and he can win all the other 14 races with an massiv gap and he would stil finish somewhere at P6-P7.....

 

Agreed but a similar problem with the points system. Remember it was possible for Rosberg to win the title last year with half the race wins as Hamilton.

 

We will never get a perfect system but I am proposing this system as I am tired of cars being asked to slow down and not race and settle for points. That is bs at this level of the sport.



#188 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 44,257 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 01 August 2015 - 22:15

Agreed but a similar problem with the points system. Remember it was possible for Rosberg to win the title last year with half the race wins as Hamilton.

We will never get a perfect system but I am proposing this system as I am tired of cars being asked to slow down and not race and settle for points. That is bs at this level of the sport.

Yes, that is also a problem I see. Maybe we could give points for the gaps?

For example
Win = 25
0-1 sec = 18
1-3 sec = 15
3-6 sec = 12
6-10 sec = 10
10-15 sec = 9
15-21 sec = 8
21-28 sec = 6
28-36 sec = 5
36-45 sec = 4
45-55 sec = 3
55-66 sec = 2
66-78 sec = 1
78 < sec = 0

Edit

Or an other alternative

Giving the points for positions as usual (e.g. 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1) so that they are really fighting for positions and than giving also additional points for the gap

Win 10
0-1 sec 8
1-3 sec 6
3-7 sec 5
7-15 sec 4
15-31 sec 3
31-63 sec 2
> 63 sec 1
Lapped or DNF 0

Edited by Marklar, 01 August 2015 - 23:23.


#189 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 02 August 2015 - 07:41

Yes can be done and I am thinking on the lines of (no points for race order but purely on time)

 

Winner = 25 points

Within 5% time = 20 points

Within 10% time = 15 points

Within 30% time = 10 points

Within 50% time = 5 points

Within 60% time = 4 points

Within 70% time = 3 points

Within 80% time = 2 points

Within 100% time = 1 point

 

You must finish on the lead lap to avail any points and beyond 100% you score 0.

All percentages relative to avg lap time over race distance for race winner.

 

Again may not be perfect, but we got to somehow get time calculations to affect the scoring system. Without the time incentive, we will have Rosberg doing a Hungary every time and only bothering about Hamilton being behind him as opposed to gunning for the win.



#190 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 44,257 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 02 August 2015 - 08:10

Yes can be done and I am thinking on the lines of (no points for race order but purely on time)

 

Winner = 25 points

Within 5% time = 20 points

Within 10% time = 15 points

Within 30% time = 10 points

Within 50% time = 5 points

Within 60% time = 4 points

Within 70% time = 3 points

Within 80% time = 2 points

Within 100% time = 1 point

 

You must finish on the lead lap to avail any points and beyond 100% you score 0.

All percentages relative to avg lap time over race distance for race winner.

 

Again may not be perfect, but we got to somehow get time calculations to affect the scoring system. Without the time incentive, we will have Rosberg doing a Hungary every time and only bothering about Hamilton being behind him as opposed to gunning for the win.

How do you define 5 % of the time? If the race winner needs 90 minutes for his race victory, than 5 % is actually 4.5 minutes.....

 

Anyway I think if they should do that, than I think that they should devide the points into these "gap points" and the actual position, because if you are giving points for certain intervalls than a driver will not be bother to overtake, because it will likely not affect his point outcome.

 

For example

 

Position points

1st = 10

2nd = 8

3rd = 6

4th = 5

5th = 4

6th = 3

7th = 2

8th = 1

 

Gap points (based on the pole lap?)

Winner = 10

5 % = 8

10 % = 6

20 % = 5

30 % = 4

50 % = 3

70 % = 2

100 % = 1

 

In the case of Hungary: Pole lap: 1:20.020

5 % (8) = 4.001 sec

10 % (6) = 8.002 sec

20 % (5) = 16.004 sec

30 % (4) = 24.006 sec

50 % (3) = 40.010 sec

70 % (2) = 56.014 sec

100 % (1) = 80.020 sec

 

Which leads into the following result for Hungary

 

VET 10+10 = 20

KVY 8+5 = 13

RIC 6+3 = 9

VES 5+2 = 7

ALO 4+2 = 6

HAM 3+2 = 5

GRO 2+1 = 3

ROS 1+1 = 2

BUT 0+1 = 1

ERI 0+1 = 1

NAS 0+1 = 1

MAS 0+1 = 1



#191 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • Racing Sims Forum Host

  • 45,699 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 02 August 2015 - 08:21

Agreed and if this system were in place, drivers wont be cruising around for sure and making a mockery of the sport as we know it today.

 

Making a mockery? Some great drivers of the past made it a point of winning as slowly as possible. I don't see why it should matter whether you win by a minute or by 1/000th of a second. It's better than turning the sport into a massive year long time trial. I want a Grand Prix to be a race, with all the tactics and strategy applicable to one.



#192 Tarzaan

Tarzaan
  • Member

  • 1,679 posts
  • Joined: April 06

Posted 02 August 2015 - 08:26

F1 1991-2002 (10-6-4-3-2-1)

 

Only the top 6 gets points -- > that gives some value if somebody get a point.

The point margin between 1st-2nd-3rd place ara also big enough.

 

+Points only fore race result.



#193 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 4,954 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 02 August 2015 - 09:25

Since we are doing a show n tell, here is how my proposed system 10-5-3-2-1 will look. Looks good to me.

 

23ru6w8.jpg

 

Ewwww no. Why not just go full medal system at that point? :down:



#194 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 02 August 2015 - 09:26

Making a mockery? Some great drivers of the past made it a point of winning as slowly as possible. I don't see why it should matter whether you win by a minute or by 1/000th of a second. It's better than turning the sport into a massive year long time trial. I want a Grand Prix to be a race, with all the tactics and strategy applicable to one.

 

We are no longer in the past. Please do give it up for the good of the sport. We need something that will see races on the edge, not a cruise n snooze fest.



#195 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • Racing Sims Forum Host

  • 45,699 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 02 August 2015 - 09:43

We are no longer in the past. Please do give it up for the good of the sport. We need something that will see races on the edge, not a cruise n snooze fest.

 

I don't see what you're proposing being good for the sport.



#196 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 02 August 2015 - 14:42

I don't see what you're proposing being good for the sport.

 

It will make the drivers speed up, even the guy in P1, so I dont see why not. We wont have Rosberg just wanting to stay ahead of Hamilton and give up on the race either. We wont have team orders that will tell their drivers to hold station in the first stint and the last stint, which covers about 2/3rds of the race. The points system has made drivers and teams complacent and nobody wants to race, they just want to collect points. I have had enough of that.



#197 TurnOffTheLights

TurnOffTheLights
  • Member

  • 755 posts
  • Joined: June 15

Posted 02 August 2015 - 14:55



The points system has made drivers and teams complacent and nobody wants to race, they just want to collect points. I have had enough of that.

 

I'm afraid your points system would only lead to even more "nobody wants to race". We all know, it costs time to defend position against another driver. Still, today we will see drivers fighting for their position, because it is rewarded with more points to stay in front. With your system everybody would be forced to always let the quicker driver past immediately (only exception: fight for 1st place), because only time is important and defending position means losing time.


Edited by TurnOffTheLights, 02 August 2015 - 15:00.


#198 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 02 August 2015 - 16:49

2008

 

9r1z04.jpg



#199 RubalSher

RubalSher
  • Member

  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 02 August 2015 - 17:44

2007

 

mrfe3a.jpg



Advertisement

#200 Counterbalance

Counterbalance
  • Member

  • 1,657 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 02 August 2015 - 18:01

Points fot fastest laps is a bad idea. Pretty much any midfield team can stick a set of option tyres on in the last few laps of a race (because they're nowhere in genuine race pace), set a fastest lap and walk away with a reward. How does that work? You get rewarded for ragging the **** out of a car for one lap when others are looking at the bigger picture during the entire race. Sorry, don't agree with that at all. I'm also not a fan with points down to 10th place. Why? Let's promote racing and make drivers charge for the top 6. Heaven's above, we might see drivers take a risk to get into a point scoring position. I'd love to see the qualifying format remain the same, points down to 10-6,4,2,1 and see what happens from there. The currents point system was designed to drag the championship battle out, nothing more.

 

Anyway, that's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it!