Clicky

Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

mock

Scoring System

Recommended Posts


10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.

With a point for Pole Position and another one for the fastest lap.

So then If a driver dominates the weekend with Pole, fastest lap and victory, then he gets what he deserves, the full 12 points, over second place with 8.

But if a driver who scores Pole, Fastest lap, but finishes in second place, then he has lost nothing to the Victor, as they both will score the same amount of Points,10.

But if also a driver was dominating the weekend with Pole, fastest lap, but retires, at least his efforts don't go un rewarded because he will still score 2 points anyway.

I think it would spice things up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmm I dunno, actually I favour something more radical:

If you are a female driver and look like Emma Bunton or Salma Hayek +1 million points (irrespective of where you finish) :)

All drivers get 100 points to start with.

You get one point for every lap in the lead and for the poor teams at the back of the grid, they get an extra 5 points if they come last three times in succession :)

You get 1 point for every time you overtake and lose 1 point if you get overtaken :)

You get 1 point for each 1 second gap between you and the car behind.

If you have a silly name, you get 50 bonus points.

If you slag off your team mate publically - 1,000 points each time.

If you build a car with ugly things on it (not in it :) ) you get -50 points.

If you have daft facial hair you lose 50 points. 50 points also deducted for tasteless sunglasses.

Points can be traded for grid positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the scoring system is pretty representative. The point the consistency is already accounted for in the constructors championship doesn't really hold up for 2 reasons.

1st - the constructors still get points depending on driver performance - yes, having a good car counts, but a crappy driver can nullify that advantage, plus a good driver can get more out of a crappy car.

2nd - should consistency not count in the driver's championship? - I for one think that it should. A consistent driver should be higher rated (by teams and in the WDC) than a driver who wins a few and crashes out in other races.

One thing I'd like to see would be the margin of victory accounted for in the points system. I think that a win by 2 minutes is better than a win by 10 seconds and that a 2nd place finisher who is right behind the leader at the line shouldn't be penalised in the points system as much as one who finishes a few miles behind and gave up long before the race was over.

Think about it - every driver would then have an incentive to push to the very end - right the way through the field. The leader would want to increase the gap to score more points over the 2nd placer and the 2nd placer would be driving like billy-o to decrease that gap.

Rally championship works this way - why not F1? Not that I'm saying times are all that matters, but a time weighting added to the positional scoring system would make things more interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is there a scoring system where it is tehnically possible never to win a race and still be world champion ? Isn't consistency already measured in the constructors title? Someone help me out here....

With anothe

r scoring system keke Rosberg won the WDC with only 1 gp won on one of the worst WC in history!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In order to make the point for pole a workable thing, you need to change qualy back to the 2000 format, letting cars modify the set-ups during the sessions and running light fuel. With qualy as it is now, the chances of a surprise pole by a small team are three times as difficult. Instead of making one blazing lap and securing pole with your Williams or Red Bull, you now have to make three such laps; one in each session--and one of those with fuel added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In order to make the point for pole a workable thing, you need to change qualy back to the 2000 format, letting cars modify the set-ups during the sessions and running light fuel. With qualy as it is now, the chances of a surprise pole by a small team are three times as difficult. Instead of making one blazing lap and securing pole with your Williams or Red Bull, you now have to make three such laps; one in each session--and one of those with fuel added.

And compromising your race due to that....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And compromising your race due to that....

Were you watching in 2000? Probably not. The teams were allowed to work on their cars before the race and fuel loads were determined on race day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quoting myself - what self-promotionalist I am. :blush:

One thing I'd like to see would be the margin of victory accounted for in the points system. I think that a win by 2 minutes is better than a win by 10 seconds and that a 2nd place finisher who is right behind the leader at the line shouldn't be penalised in the points system as much as one who finishes a few miles behind and gave up long before the race was over.

Think about it - every driver would then have an incentive to push to the very end - right the way through the field. The leader would want to increase the gap to score more points over the 2nd placer and the 2nd placer would be driving like billy-o to decrease that gap.

No replies on this - thoughts anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Were you watching in 2000? Probably not. The teams were allowed to work on their cars before the race and fuel loads were determined on race day.

Nah i was saying, that if a smaller team did try to do that next season; i.e. with 3 qualfying sessions, putting fastest laps in all 3 (with the last in fuel load) they would have be really light to get that good laptime and therby compromise on strategy....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In order to make the point for pole a workable thing, you need to change qualy back to the 2000 format, letting cars modify the set-ups during the sessions and running light fuel. With qualy as it is now, the chances of a surprise pole by a small team are three times as difficult. Instead of making one blazing lap and securing pole with your Williams or Red Bull, you now have to make three such laps; one in each session--and one of those with fuel added.

Agreed, let's do it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quoting myself - what self-promotionalist I am. :blush:

No replies on this - thoughts anyone?

Nope, I disagree, I think it's a bad idea. Sometimes it is necessary for a driver to back off in the last stint so I don't think this is a good idea, also it just doesn't seem that fair, what if the driver in P2 retires, the guy in P3 moves up a place but might be 20 seconds behind, I think he still deserves a good haul of points despite this.

A win is a win is a win. A dominant drive is rewarded with lots of adjectives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its good that the top 8 get points, but I think the winner should be more well rewarded, like getting 12 points instead of 10.

I strongly disagree with bringing in a radical new MotoGP-style scoring system, because then all the records in F1 history will be almost worthless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nah i was saying, that if a smaller team did try to do that next season; i.e. with 3 qualfying sessions, putting fastest laps in all 3 (with the last in fuel load) they would have be really light to get that good laptime and therby compromise on strategy....

Quite right. Sorry I misunderstood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...