Comments on: The argument against championship points (III)

By: Shak

Shak — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:38:32 +0000

Has a point for pole been tried before or am I dreaming?

By: Psychic

Psychic — Sat, 05 May 2007 14:03:16 +0000

I’m not too sure about that. If we had a driver or team that dominated the races then the lesser competitors might give up. That would not do the sport any good at all.

By: LoudHoward

LoudHoward — Fri, 05 Jan 2007 15:12:18 +0000

Why is that good though? Renault were more consistant through the year, their highs weren’t as high but their lows weren’t nearly as low. Isn’t that the point of the championship? Being consistant all year long? Points reflect that.

By: Keith

Keith — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 12:41:42 +0000

I’m not keen on the complexity of having a point for pole and fastest lap.

With getting a point for pole you could end up having a championship decided in a qualifying session, which wouldn’t be very good. (But I definitely agree with getting rid of race fuel qualifying!)

And by giving a point for fastest lap you could end up with the situation you had in GP2 this year where lewis Hamilton won the title after Giorgio Pantano has his fastest lap taken off him.

In terms of ‘having both cars at the pointy end’ I think the ‘most best wins’ system works perfectly. In fact it would have made Ferrari Constructors’ Champions instead of Renault last year precisely because they scored more wins and second places (see here http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2006/10/12/places-not-points-revisited/).

By: LoudHoward

LoudHoward — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 11:12:13 +0000

It’s a tough subject, but as jtm said you need to increase the gaps between first and second. However I don’t think the team that wins the race should automatically get the most points. A soccer team with a great attack but horrible defence won’t always beat a team with decent attack and defence.

F1 is a team sport and having both cars at the pointy end should be rewarded.

This is roughly the system I would go with: 20-15-11-8-4-3-2-1 with a point for pole and fastest lap. Theres enough gaps between the top places that theres a big incentive to have a go, atm the gap between 1 and 2 is two points, so passing him isn’t that important if you’re fighting for the championship (a 4 point turn around) but this way it’s 10 points up for grabs!

A point for pole is good as it makes qualifying more interesting, but you’d have to drop the ‘carry race fuel’ mode from qually 3. A point for fastest laps means theres incentive to push even after the final stops!

By: jtm

jtm — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 21:56:14 +0000

I’ve said before that I don’t think this system would punish a failure to finish enough, but I do see your point that wins are not valued enough. I think the problem would be more effectively solved by making a win worth more points. A gap of only two between 1st and 2nd is just not enough. Even back when the gap was 4 in F1 I wondered whether it was enough (although then only the top 6 got points anyway). What do you think of making a win worth, say, 14 points instead of 10?

Also, I don’t think that the point system is always fair in the constructors championship because right now having your cars finish 2-3 is more valuable than one car winning. The win should be worth at least as much as the 2-3 finish.