The FIA didn't get their way!!

[nichosnz 0]

Yes Jens they were

For Drivers

1950-1959 - 8,6,4,3,2 for top 5 and 1 Fastest Lap;

1960 - 8, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1 for top 6;

1961-1990 - 9, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1 for top 6;

1991-2002 - 10, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1 for top 6 (this is what we are used to).

For Teams

1950-1957 no championship

1958-1959 - 8, 6, 4, 3, 2 for top 5, highest placed car only;

1960-1961 - 8, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1 for top 6, highest placed car only;

1962-1978 - 9, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1 for top 6, highest placed car only;

1979-date - same as for drivers (this is what we are used to).

[nichosnz 0]

I have just done 1970 and we have our first countback championship, Jochen Rindt still tackes it out 5 wins to Jackie Ickx 3.

[Rohan 0]

i like the new changes....it would give a much more exciting friday and saturday sessions leading up to the race!

[nichosnz 0]

I have finished recalculating now and the changes are:

1950 - Luigi Fagioli wins, was Guiseppe Farina

1964 - Graham Hill wins, was John Surtees

1965 - Graham Hill wins, was Jim Clark

1976 - Niki Lauda wins, was James Hunt

1988 - Alain Prost wins, was Ayrton Senna

1994 - Damon Hill wins, was Micheal Schumacher

1997 - Michael Schumacher wins, was Jacques Villeneuve

1999 - Eddie Irvine wins, was Mika Hakkinen

so the affected totals are,

Fagioli 1 DWC (1950), was 0

Farina 0 DWC, was 1 (1950)

G Hill 4 DWC (1962, 64, 65, 68), was 2 (1962, 68)

Surtees 0 DWC, was 1 (1964)

Clark 1 DWC (1963), was 2 (1963, 65)

Lauda 4 DWC (1975, 76, 77, 84), was 3 (1975, 77, 84)

Hunt 0 DWC, was 1 (1976)

Prost 5 DWC (1985, 86, 88, 89, 93), was 4 (1985, 86, 89, 93)

Senna 2 DWC (1990, 91), was 3 (1988, 90, 91)

D Hill 2 DWC (1994, 96), was 1 (1996)

Schumacher 5 DWC (1995, 97, 2000, 01, 02), was 5 (1994, 95, 2000, 01, 02)

Villeneuve 0 DWC, was 1 (1997)

Irvine 1 DWC (1999), was 0

Hakkinen 1 DWC (1998), was 2 (1998, 99)

And only 78 drivers have finished in the top 8 but not top 6, in the 686 championship races to date!

[TotalF1 Jens 0]

Wow! Probably the most striking of those changes is Prost over Senna in 1988, and Hill over Schumacher in 1994. Though I do maintain that Schumacher pulled an unfair move at Adelaide on Hill and it should in reality be Hill's championship, but life is unexplainable..

[nichosnz 0]

The new points seem to benefit the drivers that win less: eg 1958 Hawthorne won less than Moss the difference was 1 point in Hawthornes favour, with the new points he walked it. 1976 Lauda lost by 1 point and won less than Hunt, but under the new system would have taken the DWC (similar to Irv in 1999).

[rodders47 2]

Hi Folks,

Well I too thought that F1 was boring this season but I was sure woken up to what IS a boring race when they held the CART race on the Gold Coast in Oz a couple of weeks back.. OK it was raining hard and a big pile up at the first start, but from then on the PACE car did more laps I think then the RACE cars, at least the PACE car was not required to stop for fuel every 20 laps !!!!!!!

Somehow they awarded a winner !!!!! the TV broadcast shut off before the finish of the race, up till then the only racing was behind the PACE/SAFETY car.. I think they had 5 laps of actual racing !!!!! and the winner gets $100,000 US for THAT !!!!!!!!!

ummmm any wonder why CART racing is not very popular

[nichosnz 0]

Most certainly, I don't like the 'endless yellows' of American racing either. At least when it rains if F1 they race on!

[nichosnz 0]

Adrian Newey has suggested that the quailfing situation was not thought through, and that teams could end up building 2 seperate cars.

"It is a potentially enormous expense, and it doesn't bring anything to the show. It's cheque book motor racing," Newey said, speaking to the BBC.

With the drivers now only having one lap to set a qualifying time, Newey believes special qualifying chassis could be constructed. They would could potentially use highly-stressed qualifying engines designed to last a solitary high performance lap as well as utilising modified bodywork and smaller radiators.

Newey added: "The engine has only got to do three laps - and only one of them is timed - rather than at least four timed laps.

"Engine wise, that means lower mileage so you can take things to more of an extreme. Revs is obvious, but there are others as well.

"With the chassis, cooling springs to mind. You don't need to worry about heavy radiators, and taken to an extreme you might not have any radiators at all."

"That would mean new bodywork to take advantage of the aerodynamic potential, and if you do that you would make a new chassis. So you could end up with two different cars."

[TotalF1 Jens 0]

I dont think they will, because the FIA will probably quickly make a decision to ban such things. As they did with X-wings in 1998, and so forth. Bernie wont let his masterplan be ruined by anything like this

[nichosnz 0]

I hope he does because I don't feel that such a situation would be within the spirit of F1.

[nichosnz 0]

Sorry guys I just noticed an error where I showed you all the point history of F1, I have now edited the post and highlighted the correction in red. So note that in 1961 the teams and drivers scored a different number of points for a win.

[TotalF1 Jens 0]

Well the entire aim of the meeting was to cut costs and improve the show, and creating new chassis does the opposite for the costs part. I actually await the December meeting with more enthusiasm than I did for the one last week, as the next meeting will discuss getting the cars back into the hands of the drivers.

[nichosnz 0]

I hope that they find a way to do that, that can be policed, but only if it doesn't interfere with the spirit of F1.

[TotalF1 Jens 0]

They are planning on standardized ECUs or something like that, though I hope it turns out to be a conclusion that is both fair and within the spirit of F1.

[nichosnz 0]

I hope they don't standardise the electronics for the whole cars, eg telemetry sensors, or the radio, lol. That would just be going over the top.

[TotalF1 Jens 0]

I think a simple change back to the semiautomatic gearboxes of four years ago would do the trick. This can be easily policed, and would really put the car back into the drivers hands.

Also I hope they get rid of the stupid launch control and give us real starts once again. I hate launch control, and this could also be policed quite obviously - the cars not spinning wheels or anything of the sort would be a bit suspicious...

And traction control should be banned, I think it can be policed simply by ear. The sound the cars make through corners now is just misfires, and the difference of TC or no TC is clear.

[nichosnz 0]

Somehow I don't think TC can be policed as easy as that, as the awful noise we are getting is full-blown TC. If it is illegal then partial, not noisy, TC is still an advantage over what other teams would have.

[TotalF1 Jens 0]

If people can be smart enough to put a man on the moon, I think a way can be figured out to police against traction control.

[nichosnz 0]

Ah but did they put a man on the moon?

Just kidding, taking the p**s, etc.. As I have recently heard that a exploratory documentary has been commissioned to prove that, due to the fact as many a 5% of Americans beleive it never happened.

The FIA admitted the reason it was allowed back mid 2001 was due to the fact they didn't know how to police it, but standardised ECU's would be a place to start.

[TotalF1 Jens 0]

I think a standardised ECU could cause some problems, as they for one control the engine and no two engines are alike. But maybe they can work around that somehow, I think that the combined brain power of the team bosses will be able to come up with something good, or then nothing at all. Or then something good that no one agrees on.

[nichosnz 0]

Chances are it will be that last one, Someting good that no-one will agree on.

[TotalF1 Jens 0]

The team bosses go into these meetings admittedly only thinking about the benefit to their own team, not the sport. There is no collective environment there, I would imagine it all being quite selfish stuff.

[nichosnz 0]

That is probably why no effective policing method has been come up with in the past, even with attempts having being made.

[nichosnz 0]

Max has publicly admitted one of the proposed changes to qualifing that was seriously discussed in the recent meeting.

Drivers score points for Qualifing (same as for the race) then the top ten places are reversed, so Pole is the driver who went tenth fastest, but enters the race with no points yet from the weekend. 10th on the grid is the driver who went fastest but starts the race already with 10 points.

As we know this was discarded in favour of the one lap format, Max is hoping that at each event at least one fast driver has to work through the field.