[Theo Parkinson]

The last few days I’ve been thinking a lot about the medal system that was scrapped before the start of 2009. It was an inherently flawed system but a system based around best results (the same as the count back is now) has a lot of potential. It’s simpler and will encourage drivers to fight more and worry less about picking up safe points. All points systems have their flaws and you can make any system sound bad by creating the right scenario so I do not understand a lot of the criticism. It got me thinking what the championship would look like now.

1) Hamilton 1st(4)
2) Rosberg 1st(1)
3) Magnussen 2nd(1)
4) Alonso 3rd(1)
5) Ricciardo 3rd(1)
6) Vettel 3rd(1)
7) Button 3rd(1)
8) Perez 3rd(1)
9) Hulkenberg 5th(2)
10) Bottas 5th(2)

At the front it would seem a bit fairer. Hamilton has largely had the better of Rosberg and he has a deserving cushion at the top. The duel in Bahrain would have been even more intense due to it being for the lead of the championship at the time. Problems then emerge with Magnussen. Due to the rare event of a Mercedes DNF, he has been lifted to 3rd in the table despite having a poor run of form since his debut. Places 4-7 are quite accurate to be honest. The other big issue is Hulkenberg behind Perez , despite having the better of him so far. That’s a problem that I think will disappear as the season progresses however, and I think if they were racing this year with this mindset, Hulkenberg would have been a bit more aggressive in that race.

To remedy these issues I thought about this. A mandatory repeat of the position to have it count towards the standings. Otherwise it is added to their next best result. A driver would have to win twice to get on the board and fluke results wouldn’t look as much as an anomaly. The standings would be:

1) Hamilton 1st(×4)
2) Rosberg 2nd(×5)
3) Alonso 4th(×3)
4) Ricciardo 4th(×2)
5) Vettel 4th(×2)
6) Hulkenberg 5th(×2)
7) Bottas 5th(×2)
8) Button 6th(×2)
9) Raikkonen 7th(×2)
10)Massa 7th(×2)
I personally think this represents the order better although it still has some issues. Both Perez and Magnussen would be thrown down the order not appreciated by their good results, and this system takes away some of the simplicity that the medal system creates. What do you guys think of this version? Please comment below.

[andae23]

@theo-hrp I have a couple of issues with this system: first of all, we’re at the final race and Magnussen, who’s best result has been one second place, is leading the race. For the championship, this would mean he would have let the guy in second place through, right? Drivers will need to think whether they want to equal their best result so far, or take a risk and finish in a higher finishing spot, hoping they will equal it later in the season – this just doesn’t sound like racing to me. Also, I think it’s strange to rate two tenth places higher than a first and second place. And what about the extreme case where all races are won by different drivers, and a driver who hasn’t won a single race that year, but finished second many times, wins the championship?

I think this system is way too complicated. Yes it works for, but I’m sure there are years where the scores would be all over the place (the start of 2012 springs to mind). I would prefer a points system with more emphasis on victory (kinda like the old 10-6-4-3-2-1 system).

[hunocsi]

A guy with one result of each of the top 10 places and with two 11th would be nowhere.
I never really liked the idea of the medal system, in my view continuity is supposed to be more rewarding in a year-long championship than a single outstanding performance.

[Theo Parkinson]

@hunocsi Sorry, I explained it poorly. If a driver had a 1st,2nd,3rd,4th and 5th they would have a 2nd because they have the second place and the first place which goes down to a second.

[hunocsi]

Then it looks a bit over-complicated to me. Could you count the result of the last one or two season for example? Just to see how it would change the results after a whole season.

[Max Jacobson]

I like points. Points reward consistency, which is how it should be.

The major adaptation I would make to the current system is by awarding points down to 15th – that would encourage drivers much more readily in the lower positions to push, and would reward consistency in finishing.

If that could be coupled with a higher win percentage gain relative to second, all the better.

[Max Jacobson]

You could potentially award the world championship solely on the basis of the medals system and then every other position plus the constructor’s championship could be dictated using normal points, since the simplistic element would only really be of effect to the driver’s championship.

[Theo Parkinson]

@hunocsi
Here are 3 recent seasons. It generally works well with the champion normally being worthy. With the added rule of you need to have that finish twice for it to be counted or it counts as your next best, you get some quite odd results.

2013:
Vettel 1st(13)
Alonso 1st(2)
Rosberg 1st(2)
Raikkonen 1st(1)
Hamilton 1st(1)

Added rule
Vettel 1st(13)
Alonso 1st(2)
Rosberg 1st(2)
Raikkonen 2nd(7)
Webber 2nd(5)
Nothing really changes much except for Webber losing out on the first one and Hamilton losing out on the second. In fact he almost lost to Grosjean.
2012:
Vettel 1st(5)
Hamilton 1st(4)
Alonso 1st(3)
Button 1st(3)
Webber 1st(2)
Raikkonen 1st(1)
Rosberg 1st(1)
Maldonado 1st(1)

Added rule
Vettel 1st(5)
Hamilton 1st(4)
Alonso 1st(3)
Button 1st(3)
Webber 1st(2)
Raikkonen 2nd(4)
Prez 2nd(2)
Rosberg 2nd(1)

The championship wouldn’t have been as close as it seemed with Hamilton actually being out of contention in Abu Dhabi. The added rule works in lowering Maldonado greatly. I went into further detail because 2012 had an enormously large amount of different winners.

2010:
Vettel 1st(5)
Alonso 1st(5)
Webber 1st(4)
Hamilton 1st(3)
Button 1st(2)

Pretty much exactly the same, even with the added rule. Hamilton wouldn’t of been in contention in Abu Dhabi despite being seeming one win off.

[Author]

Posts