49 replies to this topic

[HUY]

I know the WDC is a big deal to F1 but I really can't see the point in such a championship, at all. Winning the WDC doesn't really mean anything. In other sports the champion has every reason to be considered of higher skill/speed/strength than the other competitors, but in F1?

For example, Raikkonen won the WDC this year, but who was he racing against? Was he racing against the whole grid? No, he was racing against Massa, Hamilton and Alonso. Not even Massa for the final deciding races. Hell, if Raikkonen had Massa's lousy luck then we'd probably have Massa on the top with Raikkonen pulling over for him to pass.

The only thing it adds is the accursed team orders.

Is the WDC important to you? What does the title of the WDC mean according to you? Would it be better if FIA abolished the WDC altogether and went on with just the WCC?

[mclarensmps]

You could say that about any non spec series, and most non-budget-capped spec series though...

[gerry nassar]

The same can be said for every other world champion in F1 history - even more so over the last decade. This year atleast KR had to fight off 3 other drivers unlike a few other recent championships where there was barely one competitor against the WDC. Thats F1.

If you want to go by most races won - then Kimi wins it again.

The WCC means nothing to alot of fans because despite all the technology - the human element is still the most important aspect of F1 to general fans and hence thats why crowning a WDC is so important.

[scheivlak]

Originally posted by HUY

Is the WDC important to you? What does the title of the WDC mean according to you? Would it be better if FIA abolished the WDC altogether and went on with just the WCC?

For me, the WDC is important only if it creates enough excitement
The ridiculous 10-8 etc format nonsense adds to that feeling. Once you've installed a championship, it's the wins that should really count.
For me, the real thing is winning a GP for the top guys or making a good show and try to do the best they can for the rest - whether they are Sutil, Button, Winkelhock or Nakajima.

The WCC is the most nonsensical invention since errr..... I reaally have to think about that and it's getting pretty late. Maybe they should abolish that one alltogether because it's basically like a freeway for excuses.

Imagine what should happen if the WCC was really the only championship at stake. The current DTM rows between Audi and Mercedes would look like a child's play next to that. In 2009 or even 2010 or 2011 we would still be fighting about the steward's decisions in 2007 up to the European High Court and if possible the UN.

In the mean time......
http://forums.autosp...light=AQUA 2007

[scheivlak]

Originally posted by HUY
Hell, if Raikkonen had Massa's lousy luck then we'd probably have Massa on the top with Raikkonen pulling over for him to pass.

Raikkonen retired 2 times because of mechanical failure (Spain/Europe), Massa only one time (Italy).
Because of that, Massa managed to cover more laps than Kimi http://www.forix.com...l=0&r=2007&c=50

[Atreiu]

Massa had problems at Australia and Silverstone. He covered all those laps but any hope of a podium was dead before the race started.

Not that it matters that much.

[novocaine]

Local Man Realises Motorsport Isn't Fair, Tells Internet

[100cc]

Originally posted by The Big Guns
You could say that about any non spec series, and most non-budget-capped spec series though...

All spec series' and budget capped ones as well imo.

[Ricardo F1]

Usually if you're good enough you get the right seat anyway. I struggle to recall a WDC who sat on the sidelines . . .

[Taboot]

I feel that the WDC this year was a great reflection of the performance of the top drivers. Also, most races taken individually were not very competitive. The WDC was. For me, the WDC saved the season, this year anyway.

[Mauseri]

If there was no WDC, why bother racing at all? Just put the cars in test bench or test them with test drivers to see which is the best car.

In racing, someone has to drive the car. And who achieves best results with his car is the champion. It's not really more complicated than that. I dont see anything wrong with there, except that it would of course be nice to have more winning cars there. But even as things are now, best drivers are supposed to be in best position to get the good seats and the right drivers will win anyway.

[Phucaigh]

The car plays the biggest role in deciding who is the WDC, the best drivers don't always get the best seats. For example Michael Schumacher always had a number 2 to back him up, that is one seat taken out of competition, McLaren had David Coulthard as their number 2 even if people believe the claims by Ron Dennis in equality, that is another good seat gone.
When Alonso was winning his titles at Renault, the team the previous year got rid of a driver who challenged him for a driver who was unable to, another good seat not available to a better driver.

The WDC is a very good driver but it doesn't mean the best best driver is the WDC. Would a driver like Rosberg be a champion this year if he had a better car?

[jokuvaan]

oh dear, OF COURSE it doesnt mean that title winner is the best driver.....huoh...

[Allin]

Originally posted by HUY
I know the WDC is a big deal to F1 but I really can't see the point in such a championship, at all. Winning the WDC doesn't really mean anything. In other sports the champion has every reason to be considered of higher skill/speed/strength than the other competitors, but in F1?

For example, Raikkonen won the WDC this year, but who was he racing against? Was he racing against the whole grid? No, he was racing against Massa, Hamilton and Alonso. Not even Massa for the final deciding races. Hell, if Raikkonen had Massa's lousy luck then we'd probably have Massa on the top with Raikkonen pulling over for him to pass.

The only thing it adds is the accursed team orders.

Is the WDC important to you? What does the title of the WDC mean according to you? Would it be better if FIA abolished the WDC altogether and went on with just the WCC?

Basically, it's been always the case and I always considered finding yourself a good enough car was an important part of a driver's skill but I have to say that this year the WDC reached a new low.

[Crashand]

I feel the WDC should be made more competitive by not only giving the winner more points compared to the second but also counting only the 15 (8 from the first 9 races and 7 from the last 8 races counted) best results to the drivers tally (disqualification not being among those counted out). This would encourage more racing and risk taking also down the order. And it would gain WCC more legitimacy as the absolute ability for the team to build a reliable car. Then again those not in contention would concentrate on the WCC so it would be better to count the best results for the WCC also. Note that from years 1950-1980 and 1985-1990 Formula 1 had a system where some of the races could be counted out and point system in itself is an arbitrary construction. Another possibility is to give 1 point for the fastest lap to the driver.

[Group B]

Yep, as said, always been that way. Is far from ideal, but that's the way it is. One would like to think that the best drivers generally find their way to a competetive seat sooner or later, but the fact remains that it is hugely car dependant.

[ensign14]

I've said for ages that the WDC is pointless. No Alonsista is convinced by the point system that Alonso is not the best in the world. Ditto Hamitonians. And Kimobsessives would not be convinced that Kimi was not the best had Kubica and Rosberg nerfed each other off.

From that perspective I'm almost hoping the BMs are DQd from Brazil. It would demonstrate that the WDC is a bit of a mockery.

[noikeee]

Every sport has some sort of world championship/world ranking, for two good reasons: because of the motivation it gives to the contestants, to be awarded with something that officially ranks you as the best in the world (even if that's not always the case), and for marketing purposes. I know that F1 is a bit different from most sports because the drivers are given very different equipment amongst them, but that wouldn't magically change if you removed the WDC. Individual races would gain some more importance, yet it'd be the same thing as always - be in a top car or have no chance at all.

The point of the WDC is also that it can only be awarded once per year, that's what makes it special. Remove it and what'd be the highlight of the year? Winning the Monaco Grand Prix? That's already one of the highlights of the year, whoever wins it can already it celebrate it. What you're proposing is basically denying a big celebration to whoever wins the championship each year, for no benefit whatsoever.

I can see that giving more importance to individual races could eventually benefit racing - but bring a better points system, and stop with this non-sense 4-races-per-engine/gearbox thing, and you'd get all-out fights for the win again. Another possible idea would be to bring back special non-championship events in special venues, possibly with different regulations so that teams would be encouraged to try some of the younger drivers that can't seem to make the jump from testing or GP2, into F1. For example: allow any number of cars per team, allow full customer cars, and use pre-qualifying in the event if necessary. That could be very interesting. But don't mess with the world championship.

[Mediansoft]

I always would have loved a rotation system for the drivers... drivers are not sponsored by any team in particular and are allocated randomly to a team at the start of the year... then every 2 races the drivers move one "team" forward untill every driver drove every team"'s car twice... that would make for a real comparisson of driver skill in different situations.... with all a equal chance...

[ensign14]

Originally posted by paranoik0
Every sport has some sort of world championship/world ranking, for two good reasons: because of the motivation it gives to the contestants, to be awarded with something that officially ranks you as the best in the world (even if that's not always the case), and for marketing purposes.

But in many sports it's not the be-all and end-all. Tennis players would rather win a major than be world number 1, it seems. Ditto golfers. The World Cup does not determine the best team in the world, "just" who wins the biggest tournament, and is not of course annual. Cricket's World Cup is a totally different beast as "real" cricket does not have a world title.

The WDC is a marketing tool and obscures the point of motor sport. I.e. to win RACES. Not to tool around in 4th place waiting for a team-mate to let you past so you can sneak another couple of Mystical Points.

[HP]

If I follow your logic through, then why bother with F1 races at all?


Anyhow. For me the WDC is fine, if only each race was an 1st quality event, e.g.

There's a race happening vs. there's a procession happening.

If there were no WDC, then F1 had less following. If Brazil for example were yet just another race, you think that the same number of people had watched the race? Also in the race Hamilton's fate would have not meant anything in the championship, hence why bother at all. And when nothing matters, quickly the public won't care for F1.

No WDC and WCC would make perfect sense, if the folks in F1 would want to be left alone and just race for fun. However it appears that some folks want to make money from F1, hence the WDC and WCC. WCC is there to distribute the money to the teams, the WDC is there to generate that money on TV, etc.

[noikeee]

Originally posted by ensign14
But in many sports it's not the be-all and end-all.

And in even more sports it is. The point...? Going with the "but in many sports..." argument you can justify almost anything. In many sports contact is allowed, even in sports where it could be dangerous for the athletes, is that a good idea for F1?

The World Cup does not determine the best team in the world, "just" who wins the biggest tournament, and is not of course annual.

You're talking here about the FIFA World Cup, right? I know that it is a separate event, yet the fact that it can only be won every 4-years actually supports my argument - it makes it particularly "special".

Another analogy could be - take a national league like the English Premiership and stop awarding points for each game, every game becomes individual. I guess that'd be really great.

Cricket's World Cup is a totally different beast as "real" cricket does not have a world title.

Cricket is a crazy sport that makes no sense to me anyway.

The WDC is a marketing tool and obscures the point of motor sport. I.e. to win RACES. Not to tool around in 4th place waiting for a team-mate to let you past so you can sneak another couple of Mystical Points.

... which is a good thing, because otherwise that 4th place would be absolutely meaningless. Got a tyre puncture while leading? Why bother coming back to the race if you have nothing to gain from it anymore, only the 1st place matters. Better save the remaining set of tyres for another event, they cost money.

[HUY]

A good analogy for F1 would be a national football league, not a world cup with knock out stages.

[Dolph]

Originally posted by ensign14
I've said for ages that the WDC is pointless. No Alonsista is convinced by the point system that Alonso is not the best in the world. Ditto Hamitonians. And Kimobsessives would not be convinced that Kimi was not the best had Kubica and Rosberg nerfed each other off.

From that perspective I'm almost hoping the BMs are DQd from Brazil. It would demonstrate that the WDC is a bit of a mockery.

So how is it a mockery again?

[kismet]

The mockery is not the WDC but the people who insist on reading too much significance into titles.

[noikeee]

Originally posted by kismet
The mockery is not the WDC but the people who insist on reading too much significance into titles.

Well said..

[stevewf1]

Originally posted by HUY
I know the WDC is a big deal to F1 but I really can't see the point in such a championship, at all. Winning the WDC doesn't really mean anything. In other sports the champion has every reason to be considered of higher skill/speed/strength than the other competitors, but in F1?

For example, Raikkonen won the WDC this year, but who was he racing against? Was he racing against the whole grid? No, he was racing against Massa, Hamilton and Alonso. Not even Massa for the final deciding races. Hell, if Raikkonen had Massa's lousy luck then we'd probably have Massa on the top with Raikkonen pulling over for him to pass.

The only thing it adds is the accursed team orders.

Is the WDC important to you? What does the title of the WDC mean according to you? Would it be better if FIA abolished the WDC altogether and went on with just the WCC?

So what is the purpose of any goal in life then?

:

[brakedistance]

I love Gilles Villeneuve's tactic of going for the most race wins, and being content if the WDC came as a by-product of that.

[ensign14]

Originally posted by paranoik0


And in even more sports it is.

Is it?

Football, cricket, tennis, baseball, US football, basketball...all one-on-one team or individual sports. The champion is the one who beats most opponents. World titles are either non-existent or a different beast.

Athletics...a one-off event. There's no overall point system.

Golf...mass tournaments with no world title.

Horse racing...no such thing.

There are precious few sports where you amass points to an overall title.

Originally posted by paranoik0

You're talking here about the FIFA World Cup, right? I know that it is a separate event, yet the fact that it can only be won every 4-years actually supports my argument - it makes it particularly "special".

But that's the point - it's an event. It does not necessarily determine the best team in the world. The WDC is meant to determine that, hence it's annual over a set number of races.

Originally posted by paranoik0
Another analogy could be - take a national league like the English Premiership and stop awarding points for each game, every game becomes individual. I guess that'd be really great.

That's how it was until 1888. The Football League was formed because the V***a were pissed off at being knocked out of the FA Cup in the first round. True story.

Originally posted by paranoik0

... which is a good thing, because otherwise that 4th place would be absolutely meaningless. Got a tyre puncture while leading? Why bother coming back to the race if you have nothing to gain from it anymore, only the 1st place matters. Better save the remaining set of tyres for another event, they cost money.

Prize money. That's why Johnny Tosspot has a go at Roger Federer even though he's going to get whitewashed. It would change the dynamics of F1.

Originally posted by Dolph


So how is it a mockery again?

All those people praising Kimi for winning the world title would either have to think otherwise because of something nothing to do with him, or would ignore the fact that he was no longer world champ and would still think of him as the real champ. So what would the purpose of the "official" title?

[stevewf1]

Originally posted by HP
If I follow your logic through, then why bother with F1 races at all?

I agree completely with your comment, HP...

(following on the logic of the thread-starter), if we're going to "get rid" of championships, then why not go several steps further?

With the available technology today, we can easily have a "championship" without drivers, teams, cars or even fans... I'm sure that simulators can be set up to "run" theoretical "races" to determine a "champion"... we can even have theoretical "fans" vote for a winner - oops - I forgot, we don't need a "winner" (champion) do we...

[HUY]

What the hell? I didn't suggest abolishing all championships, just the meaningless WDC. We can keep WCC that really says which team did the best job, driver included. Why should we have two championships?

It's funny that most people want to keep the WDC but they rip their clothes apart in anger when team orders ruin the competition.

If McLaren really wanted the WDC this year then they could have had it. Just sign a slow driver and use him as #2 so the #1 wins it. Raikkonen had the good luck with Massa being out of contention for the last few races so he essentially had 4 free points, which Hamilton/Alonso didn't have. In the end he won it by one point and now he's WDC? That's the most meaningless title in all of sports.

[Crashand]

Then again you could say it is the WCC that is the meaningless one. The sport wouldn't be 10th of what it is today without awarding a title for a driver. Most people are just not interested in the constructor battle. If they had enough teams in contention I doubt people would even care about clear 1-2 policy.

[HUY]

Originally posted by Crashand
Then again you could say it is the WCC that is the meaningless one. The sport wouldn't be 10th of what it is today without awarding a title for a driver. Most people are just not interested in the constructor battle. If they had enough teams in contention I doubt people would even care about clear 1-2 policy.

Hmmm, I think team sports are massively popular (much more popular than personal sports) all over the world and in most cases only 2-3 teams are in serious contention for the title. So I don't know where do you draw your certainty from.

[giacomo]

Originally posted by HUY
I know the WDC is a big deal to F1 but I really can't see the point in such a championship, at all. Winning the WDC doesn't really mean anything. In other sports the champion has every reason to be considered of higher skill/speed/strength than the other competitors, but in F1?

For example, Raikkonen won the WDC this year, but who was he racing against? Was he racing against the whole grid? No, he was racing against Massa, Hamilton and Alonso. Not even Massa for the final deciding races. Hell, if Raikkonen had Massa's lousy luck then we'd probably have Massa on the top with Raikkonen pulling over for him to pass.

The only thing it adds is the accursed team orders.

Is the WDC important to you? What does the title of the WDC mean according to you? Would it be better if FIA abolished the WDC altogether and went on with just the WCC?

Well, maybe soccer is the right sport for you then...

[Crashand]

Originally posted by HUY


Hmmm, I think team sports are massively popular (much more popular than personal sports) all over the world and in most cases only 2-3 teams are in serious contention for the title. So I don't know where do you draw your certainty from.

People like drama. That's about it. Team battles in motor sports happens somewhere in the backroom. When drivers battle for themselves on track they also battle for their team. The two goals are not contradictory most of the time.

[stevewf1]

Originally posted by Crashand
Then again you could say it is the WCC that is the meaningless one. The sport wouldn't be 10th of what it is today without awarding a title for a driver. Most people are just not interested in the constructor battle. If they had enough teams in contention I doubt people would even care about clear 1-2 policy.

Yes, that's the way I see it, too.

People like people - personalities (even Kimi ).

IMO, one of the BIG problems with modern F1 is that it's become WAY too technical. I wish there were a way to return F1 to the "driver skills" demonstrated by GP2.

Let's see the actual drivers driving the actual cars.

So, if we're going to abolish something here, let it be the Constructors' Championship...

[Lada Lover]

In the long run we're all dead. Some days I don't even feel like driving my Ferrari.

[stevewf1]

Originally posted by Lada Lover
In the long run we're all dead. Some days I don't even feel like driving my Ferrari.

That's why you need to drive your Ferrari now...

[Shadow Mike]

What the hell?

WDC is ok, the points system is ok (we can correct the number of points given for a certain possition, but overally it's ok), you have to win as much races as possible or at least be consistent that is finish in the podium and so on.

[stevewf1]

Originally posted by Shadow Mike
What the hell?

WDC is ok, the points system is ok (we can correct the number of points given for a certain possition, but overally it's ok), you have to win as much races as possible or at least be consistent that is finish in the podium and so on.

Uh-Oh... :

I don't like the current points system at all.

I say go back to the old 10-6-4-3-2-1 system... If it should be "closer", then the 9-6-4-3-2-1 system...

Points should be valuable.

Just IMO...

[Risil]

With any of the old systems, we'd have had only Ferrari, Mclaren and BMW scoring points!

[stevewf1]

Originally posted by Risil
With any of the old systems, we'd have had only Ferrari, Mclaren and BMW scoring points!

Not true...

If Points are that important, then just give all the drivers and teams 1 point at the start of the season. That way, EVERYONE gets a point...

[DavidR]

Originally posted by novocaine
Local Man Realises Motorsport Isn't Fair, Tells Internet

haha

[wrighty]

Originally posted by gerry nassar
The WCC means nothing to alot of fans because despite all the technology - the human element is still the most important aspect of F1 to general fans and hence thats why crowning a WDC is so important.

F1 should be the pinnacle of technology and the drivers championship an extension of this .....praise be it should be ever thus, they are as important as each other

[ensign14]

Originally posted by Risil
With any of the old systems, we'd have had only Ferrari, Mclaren and BMW scoring points!

They should give points based on where the second car finishes. If you can only get 50% of your cars to the finish, you don't deserve any.

[wrighty]

Originally posted by ensign14

They should give points based on where the second car finishes. If you can only get 50% of your cars to the finish, you don't deserve any.

pah thats what sports cars and touring cars are for, reliability running, the winner takes the spoils in F1

[ensign14]

But for the team prize...

[former champ]

Originally posted by gerry nassar
The same can be said for every other world champion in F1 history - even more so over the last decade. This year atleast KR had to fight off 3 other drivers unlike a few other recent championships where there was barely one competitor against the WDC. Thats F1.

If you want to go by most races won - then Kimi wins it again.

The WCC means nothing to alot of fans because despite all the technology - the human element is still the most important aspect of F1 to general fans and hence thats why crowning a WDC is so important.

[HUY]

This is what the WDC leads to:

Hamilton: "I'm ranked No. 2 in the world and that's pretty good; it exceeded my expectations."

[Peter]

I suspect most fans really support a team rather than a driver, so the WCC is, in theory, more important than the WDC.

However, it is the WDC that takes most attention. The farce of insisting that McLaren loose all its WCC points, but having to continue to provide cars for the WDC, proves this.

The complication in all this is when two drivers in the same team are competing for the WDC. Team tactics are expected to protect the leader from other teams (or drivers), but cannot adequately protect from internal competition.

The biggest problem with the sport these days is that the FIA cannot bring itself to promote the WDC exclusively when all its rules and regulations are about the teams (or manufacturers), thus promoting the WCC.

At the end of the day, it is the drivers who are featured as the winners, or losers, so the WDC is the thing to go for.