monza gorilla

Wdc To Be Decided On Wins

186 posts in this topic

actually i worked out your can come last in the points and win the championship!

20th (last)

10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20

8 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 2 1 0 0 4 3 0 0 25

6 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 21

5 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 26

4 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 33

3 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 42

2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 41

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 5 0 0 2 1 33

0 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 5 4 3 2 33

0 6 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 6 5 4 3 37

0 5 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 5 4 44

0 4 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 5 43

0 3 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 42

0 2 6 5 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 40

0 1 8 6 5 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 37

0 0 10 8 6 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33

0 0 0 10 8 6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29

0 0 0 0 10 8 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24

0 0 0 0 0 10 8 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 26

0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 8 6 0 0 0 0 24

Edited by jackgarrett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm another interesting side effect of the proposed system - unless you are in the title contention, you won't want a win, be more interested in getting points as anything below 1st scores points which are more valuable.

Of course you'd want a win, it gets you more points, just like in the old system!

The arguments people are coming up with are ridiculous. If anything, in a competitive season (of which with the new budget cuts, we will hopefully have more) the championship is more likely to go down to the wire, if the champion is one with 3/4 wins. Plus, no sitting in second place and gathering points, how awesome is that.

I am willing to give this a chance at least..

MAssive increase in team orders? Why? That would happen under a better points system too, a 12-8-6 etc system. Team orders are fine, it's a team sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course you'd want a win, it gets you more points, just like in the old system!

The arguments people are coming up with are ridiculous. If anything, in a competitive season (of which with the new budget cuts, we will hopefully have more) the championship is more likely to go down to the wire, if the champion is one with 3/4 wins. Plus, no sitting in second place and gathering points, how awesome is that.

I am willing to give this a chance at least..

MAssive increase in team orders? Why? That would happen under a better points system too, a 12-8-6 etc system. Team orders are fine, it's a team sport.

Driver don't really hold back, they're hold back by dirty air, tire trunking, short straight and chicanes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the driver with most victories wins, so what? It's not the end of the world since that's always the case anyway... but for last season (and few others). Is FIA trying to avoid another goofup like Brazil 2008? Shed a tear for the lewisteric.

There is far more than this change in scoring to be concerned with. For one, what is it with the timing of the decision? Two weeks before the season starts... now there is a record. Couldn't they have done this months back or propose these changes for next season? Knee-jerk changes such as this reveal deep political problems and a serious institutional crisis.

And there is also the budget limitations... to 30 million... come again? Yep, some 10% of the budgets of a few teams... come again? Yep, and it is to include driver salaries... come again? The only thing there is that it will be optional and will come with a much desired relaxing of regulations (even if eye-candy)... which begs the question of _why_ those regulations are there in the first place if FIA can optionally lift them whenever the fck the feel like...

All in all, this is a mess, a FIA-made mess... and one which can only be fixed by changing regulations once again 16 hours before the first race starts in Australia...

I predict a massive increase of team orders from the very beginning of the season. Say, for example, Brawn GP is really that strong as they appear to be, and Jenson and Rubens lead the pack in the opening, Jenson winning the race. If in the next race they are 1-2 during the end stages of the race, with Rubens leading, why on earth wouldn't they just have the drivers swap places: 2 wins for Jenson against 0 for anyone else is a massive lead in the WDC early on the season; most definitely a much better situation for the team than wins being 1-1 for the team drivers and anyone else being able to tie them the very next race.

Same logic applies to any team, of course. Which ever driver has managed to snap even a single win more than his team mate is in a much stronger position, and the pressure within the team is to support that driver.

It depends who the driver is. Just like with this change of regulations, many teams show little interest in anything but pursuing private agendas irrelevant to racing. Victories and WC's have been put aside to favour given drivers... there is nothing new here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest,

the whole situation is now ridiculous and messed up and in such short notice? There's got to be something going on behind closed doors.

I feel as if this new "first or last" points system is just unneeded and pointless. We've been using the points system for years and has produced some brilliant championship campaigns so why fix something which aint broke?

I predict alot of boring lights to flag victories and say a championship contender gets a puncture or whatever, and falls back in the race. An inspiring comeback drive to 2nd or less will go unrewarded WDC-wise. So I can see alot of drivers just giving up after falling back in a race, as realistically you wont be able to win the race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell me why this sucks so bad.

You race to win.

Everything else is losing.

This isn't youth soccer (football).

We can't all get a prize.

Will it make the racing better? No.

But is it the right mentality? I think so.

So what about the little fish in the big pond? Okay, so they're accomplishments may not be recognized in a scoring table, but who uses that to measure success anyway? I think we'll all remember if a smaller team has a good run.

And the sponsors really couldn't care less if Bob's Discount F1 Team scores 1 point or 100. It's all about TV time. That's when the exposure is. If the TV coverage shows their car (and it will, they're not going to only show the leader the entire race even if he's the only one getting a point), the sponsors are happy.

I think the problem is just close-mindedness. I agree, there's no reason to change it whatsoever. But, I'm open to at least trying it. Everyone makes a hero out of the guy who goes for wins, checkers or wreckers, and then when we implement a points system that rewards that, all of a sudden it's terrible.

Is this the best system? Of course not. But it's not the worst and honestly, as long as they're racing those cars, I really couldn't care less who is getting what for points. I just want to watch some racing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I predict alot of boring lights to flag victories and say a championship contender gets a puncture or whatever, and falls back in the race. An inspiring comeback drive to 2nd or less will go unrewarded WDC-wise. So I can see alot of drivers just giving up after falling back in a race, as realistically you wont be able to win the race.

That's something I hadn't considered and in all likelihood negates the above post.

Except for the part about I just want a race. I'm not going to complain about this once there are cars on the track because we've waited all winter for it. So bring it on, no matter who is getting what for points!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is stupid that the champion can be crowned with less points than 2nd...let alone 19th as jack the garret worked out.

One may laugh at A1GP and IRL now, but with F1 forever shooting at their feet, it won't be long before one of these two series, or even another, becomes the place where the top drivers and teams will want to be. Name one other form of motorsport where most-wins-wins system is used?

Something very political is going down....something we can't see....seems Max has deferred to Bernie for some reason...was a coup detat about to happen with Bernie walking off with one or two or more of the teams and tracks to his GP1?

Will i turn off if the season is over at midpoint? probably not.

Will i care if i don't get up to watch a race now? probably not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A pile of cod w*nk, decided by short sighted f*ck nuggets.

1) Agree 100%

2) And the most significant thing on this thread: Cod's wank? Er how, with their tiny flippers? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are making too much of this. The difference will be small (if at all) regarding who takes the DWC.

The racing? Well, it depends on what the drivers make of it. What's true is that if a car breaks down or a safety car screws someone's race, the points lost will be less important since a victory in the following races will make up enough ground. On the other hand, the points got from a second place will always be much much less important than _fighting_ for a win to the last lap.

I think the true screwups of the latest FIA are in the budgets and the optional lifting of regulations... all absurdity beyond belief.

(Edit: Amussing bit. I happen to be watching races from seasons past in my 3rd computer and I'm just now hearing the hypocrites at ITV droolling over Alonso's character and "extraordinary" sportmanship (mid 06)... hilarious bunch without any character themselves.)

Edited by maure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By Alan Baldwin

LONDON (Reuters) - Lewis Hamilton would still be chasing his first Formula One crown instead of starting the season as youngest champion if the new system of deciding the title on race wins had been in force before this year.

The sport's governing body said on Tuesday this season's title would go to the driver who won most races, even if another scored more points over the 17-race championship starting in Australia next week.

In the case of a draw, total points rather than second places will decide the outcome.

Had that been the case last year, Ferrari's Brazilian Felipe Massa would be lining up in Melbourne as champion on March 29.

Massa, who took six wins to Hamilton's five last year, is the most glaring recent example of a driver who lost out on points.

Had the system being in place since the first championship race in 1950, then applying it to the existing tallies and with the benefit of hindsight there would have been some other startling changes.

However that does make the unlikely assumption that drivers, knowing they could retire from a stack of races and still be champion if they won a handful, would not have altered their race strategy to go for victory at all costs rather than playing safe and banking points.

The late Brazilian Ayrton Senna would have been a quadruple champion instead of triple, with the extra championship coming at the expense of France's Alain Prost in 1989.

The professorial Prost, who retired in 1993 with four titles, would still have ended up with the same tally but two of them from different years.

In 1983 he won more races than Brazilian triple champion Nelson Piquet but lost out on points and then the same thing occurred the next year in his duel with Austrian Niki Lauda.

The Frenchman's 1986 title would have gone to Britain's Nigel Mansell however.

MANSELL TRIPLE

While Mansell was happy enough to be champion in 1992, that would have been his third title under the new system because Piquet pipped him on points in 1987 despite having only three wins to his Williams team mate's six.

Piquet, father of the current Renault driver of the same name, would have ended up with just one title -- the same as fellow triple champion Lauda.

However the Brazilian would have ended up completely empty-handed had the same results been subjected to a scheme proposed by Formula One supremo Bernie Ecclestone to decide the championship on an Olympic-style medals system.

That would have seen the title go to the man with the most second places if there was a tie on gold medals, rather than reverting to the points tally. In that case Piquet would have also lost to Prost in 1981 when they both had three wins.

Under this year's arrangement, Britain's first world champion would have been Stirling Moss -- nowadays hailed as the greatest driver never to have won the title -- instead of the late Mike Hawthorn in 1958.

One other driver who retired without a title would have made the grade on race wins -- France's Didier Pironi instead of Finland's Keke Rosberg in 1982.

However Pironi would only have taken the title on a countback to third place finishes since he and Britain's John Watson both ended up with two wins and two second places apiece as well as finishing the season level on 39 points.

Rosberg took the title with just one win and 44 points.

Britain's Jim Clark would have been a four times champion, as well as the first Briton to successfully defend the title.

Compatriot John Surtees would not have become the only man to win titles on four wheels and two, with Clark beating him on wins in 1964. New Zealand's Denny Hulme would have missed out to Clark in 1967.

American Mario Andretti and Australian Alan Jones would each have won two titles instead of one, with the latter depriving South African Jody Scheckter of his success for Ferrari in 1979 and Andretti beating Lauda in 1977.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
actually i worked out your can come last in the points and win the championship!

20th (last)

10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20

8 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 2 1 0 0 4 3 0 0 25

6 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 21

5 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 26

4 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 33

3 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 42

2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 41

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 5 0 0 2 1 33

0 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 5 4 3 2 33

0 6 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 6 5 4 3 37

0 5 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 5 4 44

0 4 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 5 43

0 3 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 6 42

0 2 6 5 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8 40

0 1 8 6 5 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 37

0 0 10 8 6 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33

0 0 0 10 8 6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29

0 0 0 0 10 8 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24

0 0 0 0 0 10 8 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 26

0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 8 6 0 0 0 0 24

Send it to the FIA, FOM and FOTA Jack. Excellent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Send it to the FIA, FOM and FOTA Jack. Excellent.

Nope. It is meaningless. Such a situation has never and will never occur.

And regarding the article, the only driver to lose the DWC in the last 20 years would be Hamilton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nope. It is meaningless. Such a situation has never and will never occur.

And regarding the article, the only driver to lose the DWC in the last 20 years would be Hamilton.

Driver A wins first two races

Race 3, he breaks both his legs in massive shunt. He finishes 20th on points, but no other driver has more than on win to his name.

It is possible.

And re the article....you really are an idiot maureen if you think that that is the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Driver A wins first two races

Race 3, he breaks both his legs in massive shunt. He finishes 20th on points, but no other driver has more than on win to his name.

It is possible.

And re the article....you really are an idiot maureen if you think that that is the case.

I have to agree on both points but I don't think you're an idiot - just wrong!

Edited by Insider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is the best thing that's happened in a long time. The system favors absolute speed and risk-taking over conservatism and reliability. Ask yourself, do you want to see people taking gambles, suicide late breaking, spin out or blow out 5 laps before the end chasing the leader... or lay back and collect the points, overtake and the pit and setting for the place throughout the race?

If there is one negative with the system, it is that it only applies for first place. I would like to see place finishing deciding places 1-5 or more for the WDC, constuctors title should still be decided by points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Driver A wins first two races

Race 3, he breaks both his legs in massive shunt. He finishes 20th on points, but no other driver has more than on win to his name.

It is possible.

And re the article....you really are an idiot maureen if you think that that is the case.

Insults from the maori-hating racist. Unsurprising.

Regarding your babble, well, it all wild hypotheses, nothing more. Tell me of one season when such a thing has happened or, better yet, continue to confuse jejune dreams with reality and relate it all to the rest of us while bragging of intellectual powers...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think this is the best thing that's happened in a long time. The system favors absolute speed and risk-taking over conservatism and reliability. Ask yourself, do you want to see people taking gambles, suicide late breaking, spin out or blow out 5 laps before the end chasing the leader... or lay back and collect the points, overtake and the pit and setting for the place throughout the race?

If there is one negative with the system, it is that it only applies for first place. I would like to see place finishing deciding places 1-5 or more for the WDC, constuctors title should still be decided by points.

Folks around here have busied themselves calculating impossible scenarios and congratulating themselves for it. If they bothered to think it through, they would see that there are potential problems with the new system far closer to reality...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to agree on both points but I don't think you're an idiot - just wrong!

:lol: You diplomat, you.

I think this is the best thing that's happened in a long time. The system favors absolute speed and risk-taking over conservatism and reliability. Ask yourself, do you want to see people taking gambles, suicide late breaking, spin out or blow out 5 laps before the end chasing the leader... or lay back and collect the points, overtake and the pit and setting for the place throughout the race?

If there is one negative with the system, it is that it only applies for first place. I would like to see place finishing deciding places 1-5 or more for the WDC, constuctors title should still be decided by points.

I agree completely, Mister Kuskor. No doubt the negative aspect of the new rules is there to placate the always troublesome teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Insults from the maori-hating racist. Unsurprising.

Regarding your babble, well, it all wild hypotheses, nothing more. Tell me of one season when such a thing has happened or, better yet, continue to confuse jejune dreams with reality and relate it all to the rest of us while bragging of intellectual powers...

1999 with Schumacher out from several races. If by wins you can also add Malaysia win to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to agree on both points but I don't think you're an idiot - just wrong!

Do consider the implications of garrett's numbers together with the pakeha's visions.

A driver, say Massa, wins two races and then "breaks his legs". He is out for the rest of the season. What is it required for him to win the DWC? Namely that 15 other drivers win the remaining races, one each exactly. Do I need to say more or you can already see how impossible that is?

I suppose that one could dream up a situation where all BMW, McLaren, Renault, and Toyota drivers break their legs too right after each win a race. You will be free then to make yourself believe that, in that situation, FI and TR drivers will be able to get their victories... so that garrett's predictions could come true.

In sort, the kind of preposterous thing that only the pakeha could consider possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1999 with Schumacher out from several races. If by wins you can also add Malaysia win to him.

Did he missed all but two races and still win the DWC?

Ahh...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Maure, even if it doesn't happen to such an extreme, this year a lot of teams look strong, even McLaren who are lagging aren't that far behind, so it might be perfectly possible for the winner to finish, say, 5th in standings or so, and I think most of us would indeed find it a disgrace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well Maure, even if it doesn't happen to such an extreme, this year a lot of teams look strong, even McLaren who are lagging aren't that far behind, so it might be perfectly possible for the winner to finish, say, 5th in standings or so, and I think most of us would indeed find it a disgrace.

Good. Discarding the extreme as reason to rule out the change is a positive start.

Again, look back at the last 20 years. You will find that, for the WDC, the amount of wins corresponds to the amount of points.

Taking your example, you would need to find a WDC winner (by points) that had been beaten by four drivers (by wins). Still a stretch.

As I said, the difference (between points and wins) is little and the problem lies elsewhere...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldnt some teams got for it and use 8 engines in the 1st 8-16 races until a driver wins 9 races?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now