View Full Version : F-1, Most Wins, Wins!
They did it. Guy with the most wins is the champ. 2nd & beyond determined by current points system. Tie for most wins reverts to points. So, if a guy only wins a race or two but trounces everyone else in points he could finish down the order? Interesting. Autosport. (PS-no medals either...hell, they ought to remove two steps on the podium, too.)
Methanolandbrats
03-17-09, 11:30 AM
Doesnt this rule encourage the Senna/Prost spearfishing driving style?
What about the medals? Max lights it up again! :gomer:
JLMannin
03-17-09, 11:45 AM
Medals proposal is dead, and how the constructors championship is determined is unchanged.
AP article (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hzXI2AubdpkuWjiUsAJp3ssv24ewD96VR91O1)
Just what does this mean?
FIA's World Motor Sports Council also approved further regulation changes to decrease costs in the face of the worldwide economic crisis.
"All teams will have the option to compete with cars built and operated within a stringent cost cap," the council said.
A proposed cap of $42 million would cover expenditures of "any kind" and to give such cars greater technical freedom. That would entail "a more aerodynamically efficient upper body, movable wings and an engine which is not subject to a rev limit or a development freeze."
Agree to spend 42 million or less, and you can do what you want?
Insomniac
03-17-09, 12:26 PM
Well, now you have the perfect scenario for PT myopia! :thumbup: (On the downside, F1 stewards are so bad, it will be controversy central.) It will also show what really is more important, driver's or constructor's championship.
Andrew Longman
03-17-09, 12:32 PM
Is anyone anywhere running motorsports not braindead? (with apologies to what's-her-name who keeps Atlantics together)
Agree to spend 42 million or less, and you can do what you want?
That's at least interesting. Doesn't mean it won't be a complete ****up, but it is interesting.
Plus, can't they just defer payment of personnel to a Panamanian shadow company?
No wonder they don't race in the US.
:gomer:
Michaelhatesfans
03-17-09, 02:33 PM
"All teams will have the option to compete with cars built and operated within a stringent cost cap," the council said.
A proposed cap of $42 million would cover expenditures of "any kind" and to give such cars greater technical freedom. That would entail "a more aerodynamically efficient upper body, movable wings and an engine which is not subject to a rev limit or a development freeze."
I wonder if Jim Hall is reading this stuff?
Also, does this open the door wide enough to run pre-existing cars and engines? You know, from when it was interesting?
ilferrari
03-17-09, 03:37 PM
This is just stupid. What is the point of racing for points now if you are out of contention for the lead? I didn't think that anyone other than that a$$h0le Ecclestone wanted to do this.
Methanolandbrats
03-17-09, 03:49 PM
This is just stupid. What is the point of racing for points now if you are out of contention for the lead? I didn't think that anyone other than that a$$h0le Ecclestone wanted to do this. Ya, if someone wins the first seven or so races it will make the cab "chase" look like a good idea.:shakehead
TrueBrit
03-17-09, 04:27 PM
Doesnt this rule encourage the Senna/Prost spearfishing driving style?
Yes it does.
But when was the last time either one of those arseholes came up with a good idea?
Just what does this mean?
After Max finds enough once not seen as worthy teams by himself and Bernie such as Eurobrun, AGS, Rial and maybe another Andrea Moda to join up, it is all subject to his ever changing whimsical nonsense as has been his tradition.
His recurring theme that the teams can never have a usable idea because he says so. Intelligent reasoned thought need not apply.
Max still controls the non racing third world voting block of the FIA.
On the most wins deal, Bernie must have been miffed that the fans overwhelmingly thought his medal idea sucked. The results of the vote speak for themselves.
Ya, if someone wins the first seven or so races it will make the cab "chase" look like a good idea.:shakehead
Can't wait to see that happen. :rofl:
ferrarigod
03-17-09, 05:21 PM
So if 2 guys have the same wins, the same 10-8-6... system is used. St00pid.
If you're going to do wins and admit the current point system is terrible switch it to 9-6-4...1 for qual or 10-6-4.....(you know the old points systems that there was never anything wrong with in the first place).
good to see them admit they were wrong years after the fact. now that this has been changed, expect it to be changed again and again just like the qualy system. what a joke.
I still don't get what there is not to like about this. In fact, it doesn't go far enough. They need to get rid of points altogether and run for most firsts, most seconds, most thirds, etc., and allow the finishes to tiebreak it all the way down to last place. Add the two car's finishes together to determine the constructor's championship.
Points are for pussies. :laugh:
opinionated ow
03-17-09, 06:35 PM
:flame::flame:F^#$ing MAX!
Now who was it who told me this would never happen?
chop456
03-17-09, 06:43 PM
Dumbest thing evar. Max and Bernie need to hold hands and jump into a volcano.
I like it. I'd rather see the standings start with wins and go to points as a tie-breaker through out the standings, but it's a start.
miatanut
03-17-09, 07:16 PM
I still don't get what there is not to like about this. In fact, it doesn't go far enough. They need to get rid of points altogether and run for most firsts, most seconds, most thirds, etc., and allow the finishes to tiebreak it all the way down to last place. Add the two car's finishes together to determine the constructor's championship.
Points are for pussies. :laugh:
With points, a good team having a s***** weekend will still try their heart out on race day to get a 6th place because it may make a difference at the end of the season.
I like that.
Going by most seconds, etc. there is not much chance of turning a s***** weekend into something useful, so why bother? Just park it.
oddlycalm
03-17-09, 07:49 PM
We'll see. It's yet another FIA unilateral brain fart and the teams are pissed, so it's probably not written in stone yet.
oc
Talk about a point system that will encourage bonzai reckless moves. This makes second place virtually worthless. A stupid and potentially dangerous idea.
I like it. I'd rather see the standings start with wins and go to points as a tie-breaker through out the standings, but it's a start.
Exactly. I just don't get the objections. Do people go to races to see the players working the system in order to finish the season the best they can, or do they go to races to see them race?
And regarding the last few cars parking it, the other extreme is NASCAR where you have losers circling the track for no good reason. Stupid to the extreme.
The bottom line for me is that a guy who wins a couple of races should never, ever lose a championship to a guy who consistently finishes second.
Talk about a point system that will encourage bonzai reckless moves. This makes second place virtually worthless. A stupid and potentially dangerous idea.
It still costs you dearly to make the bonzai move and be out of the race. It seems that what you are saying is that it will be too dangerous to make winning the race so important that everyone will actually try to do it. If that is the case, then perhaps racing is too dangerous and should be banned. After all, if you are not there to win, you don't need to be racing.
miatanut
03-17-09, 10:45 PM
Exactly. I just don't get the objections. Do people go to races to see the players working the system in order to finish the season the best they can, or do they go to races to see them race?
I've always been a big fan of strategy. Strategy to win the race, and strategy to win the season. To me, a funky pit strategy win is just as fun as a balls-to-the-wall win.
And regarding the last few cars parking it, the other extreme is NASCAR where you have losers circling the track for no good reason. Stupid to the extreme.
Agreed.
Rogue Leader
03-17-09, 10:55 PM
Increasing the points for a win was such a good idea... and instead they replace it with SUCH A BAD IDEA.... WTF
Seriously...a guy wins the 1st 3 races of the year then blows up or crashes out of the next 15 but wins the title over someone who finishes with just a couple of wins but a whole pile of points and podiums? C'mon. Reward winners with additional points perhaps but counting ONLY wins for the title?:shakehead
Insomniac
03-18-09, 02:52 PM
Ya, if someone wins the first seven or so races it will make the cab "chase" look like a good idea.:shakehead
And if you have enough of a gap, have the teammate run into the back of the closest competitor.
So, since 1950 how many times has the guy with the most wins also won the title and/or how many times has a driver with the title not had the most wins? Pretty sure the guy with the most points has never LOST the championship!:gomer: Maybe the new rule won't make any damn difference in the results and spearing has been going on for years anyway?:confused:
Sean Malone
03-18-09, 04:02 PM
Don't bring the logic. Interferes with the hate! :D
How 'bout a championship for least $$ expended per points earned? The "Index Of Economy" trophy. Pretty sure Honda blew that one.
Insomniac
03-18-09, 04:32 PM
Seriously...a guy wins the 1st 3 races of the year then blows up or crashes out of the next 15 but wins the title over someone who finishes with just a couple of wins but a whole pile of points and podiums? C'mon. Reward winners with additional points perhaps but counting ONLY wins for the title?:shakehead
Has anything like that ever happened? Of course there are crazy hypotheticals. But those exist in the current formula. Last year, someone could've finished 3rd every race and had more points than the champion did. How about no better than 4th all season being champion over someone who won 8 races? 5th better than winning 7 races (no one won 7 races)?
I went through the standings back to 1980. Doesn't change much in the last 20 years, but it wreaks havoc to the 1980s. Of course, a few things to consider. Usually changing the points system has little change to the end results since the motivation doesn't change much. But this is a drastic change that could render points meaningless if all you want is the championship. Hard to tell what the psyche will be since points will matter after that. No telling how past championships would play out with these rules. But, I did see one thing. There is precedent for disqualifying a guy for intentionally crashing someone to aid their championship hopes. Michael Schumacher was DQ'd from the championship in 1997 after colliding with Jacques Villeneuve (although this doesn't cover where you can prevent someone from getting points, but getting DQ'd would be a deterrent).
Season - Actual Champ - Champ by Wins - Notes
2008 Hamilton (5) - Massa (6) [Champion decided in the last race.]
2007 Raikkonen (6) - Raikkonen (6) [Champion decided in the last race.]
2006 Alonso (7) - Alonso (7) [Champion decided in the last race. Schumacher also had 7 wins, but Alonso had more points.]
2005 Alonso (7) - Alonso (7) [Champion decided in the last race. Raikkonen also had 7 wins, but Alonso had more points.]
2004 Schumacher (13) - Schumacher (13) [Champion decided after Round 11 (of 18).]
2003 Schumacher (6) - Schumacher (6) [Champion decided after Round 14 (of 16).]
2002 Schumacher (11) - Schumacher (11) [Champion decided after Round 11 (of 17).]
2001 Schumacher (9) - Schumacher (9) [Champion decided after Round 13 (of 17).]
2000 Schumacher (9) - Schumacher (9) [Champion decided after Round 15 (of 17).]
1999 Mika Hakkinen (5) - Mika Hakkinen (5) [Champion decided in the last race.]
1998 Mika Hakkinen (8) - Mika Hakkinen (8) [Champion decided in the last race.]
1997 Jacques Villeneuve (7) - Jacques Villeneuve (7) [Champion decided after Round 15 (of 17).]
1996 Damon Hill (8) - Damon Hill (8) [Champion decided after Round 13 (of 16).]
1995 Schumacher (9) - Schumacher (9) [Champion decided after Round 14 (of 17).]
1994 Schumacher (8) - Schumacher (8) [Champion decided after Round 15 (of 17).]
1993 Alain Prost (7) - Alain Prost (7) [Champion decided after Round 13 (of 16).]
1992 Nigel Mansell (9) - Nigel Mansell (9) [Champion decided after Round 10 (of 16).]
1991 Ayrton Senna (7) - Ayrton Senna (7) [Champion decided in the last race.]
1990 Ayrton Senna (6) - Ayrton Senna (6) [Champion decided in the last race.]
1989 Alain Prost (4) - Ayrton Senna (6) [Champion decided after Round 15 (of 16).]
1988 Ayrton Senna (8) - Ayrton Senna (8) [Champion decided after Round 15 (of 16).]
1987 Nelson Piquet (3) - Nigel Mansell (6) [Champion decided after Round 14 (of 16).]
1986 Alain Prost (4) - Nigel Mansell (5) [Champion decided after Round 15 (of 16).]
1985 Alain Prost (5) - Alain Prost (5) [Champion decided after Round 14 (of 16).]
1984 Niki Lauda (5) - Alain Prost (6) [Champion decided in the last race.]
1983 Nelson Piquet (3) - Alain Prost (4) [Champion decided in the last race.]
1982 Keke Rosberg (1) - Didier Pironi (2) [Champion decided in the last race. 5 drivers with 2 wins. Pironi won 3rd place tie breaker.]
1981 Nelson Piquet (3) - Nelson Piquet (3) [Champion decided in the last race.]
1980 Alan Jones (5) - Alan Jones (5) [Champion decided in the last race.]
I didn't calculate points and tie breakers to determine how early the championship was locked up under the new system. I just went by wins and the fact it was impossible for anyone to end up with more from that round forward.
oddlycalm
03-18-09, 05:16 PM
I just don't get the objections.
Changing the rules in substantial ways 2wks before the season opener is objectionable IMO. Had they announced this two months ago a debate over the merits would be interesting but 2wks before the opener it's just Max and Bernie running the series like a brothel as per usual.
oc
cameraman
03-18-09, 05:28 PM
They did not change the method for calculating the manufacturer's championship. That is the one that the teams really care about most so the overall strategy probably won't change by too much if at all.
So in 29 years F-1 would have seen 1/4 of it's championships turn out differently, including a couple of new champs. Pretty significant I'd say. Factor in another 30 yrs and the results might even be greater? Whatever, this represents a GIGANTIC change to the sport comparable to the NFL awarding the Lombardi Trophy to the team with the most wins (+ tiebreakers) Good luck, F-1.
AND...45% of the championships since 1980 decided in the last race!? Looks to me like they're trying to fix something that ain't broke! Where have we seen THAT before?:shakehead
Insomniac
03-19-09, 11:00 AM
So in 29 years F-1 would have seen 1/4 of it's championships turn out differently, including a couple of new champs. Pretty significant I'd say. Factor in another 30 yrs and the results might even be greater? Whatever, this represents a GIGANTIC change to the sport comparable to the NFL awarding the Lombardi Trophy to the team with the most wins (+ tiebreakers) Good luck, F-1.
I'm sure if you applied various points systems to the championships that the champion would change a few times as well. Massa wins in 2008 with the 10-6-4-3-2-1 system for example.
I don't see it the same way you do. The rules are the same for everyone and winning is most important. I don't agree with the new system for one reason. It's odd that the manufacturer's championship is decided differently (should also be by wins first).
The NFL analogy doesn't work because all of the teams don't get to compete against each other.
Ackkk!
The WDC used to mean something. Now it is handed out to a bunch of hacks.
Has anything like that ever happened?
The suggested new points system that was turned down would have changed 13 championships. Stirling Moss would have actually been a champ instead of a 4 time runner-up. Ol' Nige would have been a 3-time champ instead of one. Jimmy Clark would have been a 4 time winner, not twice. Mario would have won in both '77 and '78, but 3 time World F-1 Champion Nelson Piquet would not have won ANY! And others. Perhaps the current change won't have a BIG effect but I hope the guy who finishes 2nd never has MANY more points than the champ.:)
TrueBrit
03-20-09, 02:40 PM
....aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand now not so much.... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7955790.stm
:gomer::shakehead
oddlycalm
03-20-09, 02:59 PM
....aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand now not so much.... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7955790.stm
:gomer::shakehead
Yes, quite a non-surprise....:laugh: Once the teams all stood together and told Max and Bernie to piss off it was effectively over and they crawled back into their coffins.
oc
Nice to see the backpeddling. :laugh:
Rogue Leader
03-20-09, 06:03 PM
THANK GOD
Since when can teams dictate policy in racing?...and some good policy against tyranny?
Oh wait..:gomer:
Back in play :rolleyes:
The controversial 'winner takes all' scoring system has been rubber stamped for introduction in 2010 by the FIA World Motor Sport Council. (http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/090504152333.shtml)
The news has until now slipped the attention of the media because - unlike all other changes to the rules - the amended rule was not highlighted in pink and underlined in copies of the 2010 sporting regulations. :laugh:
oddlycalm
05-05-09, 05:08 PM
Back in play :rolleyes:
I have a theory that people with a massive amount of money always think their ideas are the best ones and never see a new day. I can't prove it, but the evidence is mounting....:tony:
oc
Insomniac
05-06-09, 02:21 PM
Too bad they didn't have it this year. It may've been the only possible way Button isn't WDC. :yuck:
May have been his only way of winning the title. Compounded together the suckage would have been much greater.
chop456
05-07-09, 11:56 AM
It's like they're trying to make me stop watching. :shakehead
Methanolandbrats
05-07-09, 12:29 PM
It's like they're trying to make me stop watching. :shakehead I pretty much have.
Sean Malone
05-07-09, 01:13 PM
I pretty much have.
I would stop watching too if this season wasn't so damn kick ass. :)
oddlycalm
05-07-09, 02:18 PM
From Massa
" At the moment there are too many political games around F1 that I don't want to put myself in the middle of. The only thing I can say is that it would be nice to have a better sport, less political, and more sport."
Word.
oc
Sean Malone
05-07-09, 02:52 PM
From Massa
Word.
oc
My how opinions change when you're running at the back. :)
Insomniac
05-09-09, 05:25 PM
From Massa
Word.
oc
A budget cap may be the only solution. It puts everyone on the same financial field, so the threat of losing them is just their name, not a crazy amount of money.
oddlycalm
05-09-09, 07:01 PM
Now the FIA is backing away from the most wins again. :shakehead
Toyoda is talking about leaving F1 due to governance issues.
"There are concerns about the governance process within the sport,
Toyota may not submit 2010 entry (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/75164)
Can't argue with that assessment.
oc
Insomniac
05-10-09, 11:48 AM
Now the FIA is backing away from the most wins again. :shakehead
Toyoda is talking about leaving F1 due to governance issues.
Toyota may not submit 2010 entry (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/75164)
Can't argue with that assessment.
oc
On SPEED they said they came out and said it was a mistake that most wins was there. It wasn't supposed to be. (There weren't any plans to switch to that for 2010.)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.