What about the losers?
Tagged: points HRT Virgin system
21st March 2011, 2:43 at 2:43 am #129060
Last season, HRT finished 11th in the Championship when I think they should have finished 12th. They were clearly the worst team over the whole season, but because of a shock result, they finished ahead of Virgin without earning a single point for the year. I find that ridiculous.
I think that a rule should be implemented that more often rewards better teams over an entire season, when two or more teams go pointless all year. This could hopefully be achieved by using one of these methods:
1) Give every classified finisher of each race a point. This rewards reliability for new teams. I understand, though, that this is throwing points around that aren’t really earned, therefore de-valuing them, so here’s another effort:
2) Any teams that finish a season with no points shall be sorted in order of most race laps completed. Again this rewards reliability, while not ignoring outright pace.
If you can handle the points-for-finish idea, how about this:
Push the amount of current points-system scorers back to 6, but adjust their points hauls proportionately to fit the following:
Divide the non-points finishers in half according to the size of the field. This year there would be 18 left out, so 2 groups of 9.
So, the 7th to 15th placed finishers would receive 2 points each, 16th to 24th receive 1 point each, if they finish. 6th place then earns 3 points, with all other normal points scoring positions being adjusted accordingly, right up to 1st place. This is probably too messy, but it would be a fairer way of judging the best of the worst, aswell as potentially making low ranked point scoring teams not rest on their laurels because they lucked into a point in Monaco, for example.
Any thoughts?21st March 2011, 3:09 at 3:09 am #163884
I find that ridiculous.
Yep, let’s decide final standings not on actual results, but on the qualitative worth of a team to the sport.
Do you work for Ferrari by any chance?21st March 2011, 3:09 at 3:09 am #163885
I have to disagree very much here. Your entire premise is flawed, namely because HRT were more reliable than Virgin, i.e. vitually every system you proposed would most likely put HRT in front of Virgin, just like it was in 2010, rendering your whole change pointless.
Furthermore, “a shock result” does not come from anywhere. Hispania Racing managed to survive in the Australian Grand Prix, something Virgin simply failed to do. “To finish first you have to finish first” still holds true in this day and age. Hispania, due to the ability of the car to last a race distance even in chaotic condition, were better than Virgin in 2010, face it.21st March 2011, 4:32 at 4:32 am #163886
Exactly. Hispania deserved to come 11th instead of 12th simply because they were able to do what Virgin couldn’t. If you say “well, you wouldn’t normally have finished there, so we’re not going to count that result”, you negate the entire point of racing in the first place.21st March 2011, 8:06 at 8:06 am #163887
HRT deserved that position as much as any other team earned theirs.
No pre-season testing and some flawed fuel-cell from Virgin should not de-value HRT’s ‘success’.21st March 2011, 8:43 at 8:43 am #163888
Toby Bushby why are U so interested in losers ??
Is that a (Sigmund) Freud subconscious interest there ??21st March 2011, 8:44 at 8:44 am #163889
Indeed , shock results happen all the time, even amongst the points scorers. In 2008 no one said well STR didn’t really deserve to finish ahead of team X, but because of a shock win at Monza they did.
Its a long season and all the results count. Virgin were indeed the better team, overall, but they dind’t bag the results, so kudos to HRT for being classified 11th.21st March 2011, 10:10 at 10:10 am #163890
More pointless HRT bashing. Let’s all pick on the fat kid on sports day. The whole point of the sport is to finish ahead of the other cars. Virgin deserved last.21st March 2011, 10:15 at 10:15 am #163891
Toby, you have a point, but I hardly think it’s necessary to go changing the points system just because one very poor team was beaten by an even worse one. Of the other 10 teams, you would have to say they ended up in their rightful position in the Constructor’s championship. Virgin probably would’ve done too had Sebastien Buemi not taken Glock out at Korea21st March 2011, 10:52 at 10:52 am #163892
No. HRT were terrible last year, I grant you that, but to say they don’t deserve 11th place because we regard Virgin as being a superior package is ridiculous.
I’d love a points system where I could chose who gets what points, irregardless of race position. Because then I’d be able to give Red Bull 25 points every race. But that would make racing sort of pointless, don’t you think?21st March 2011, 13:29 at 1:29 pm #163893
Hi everyone with some trepidation I am making first post! Please be kind!
With regard to points system because I have have done a lot of dinghy sailing I have often wondered how a “low points” system would work in F1. In dinghy racing for a series or championship nearly always a low points system is used , eg. 1 for win 2 for second etc. for all positions. I prefer the system that gives 3/4 point for first to give extra benefit for winning. Then for a DNF you get 1 more point than no. of starters and for DSQ 2 more points.
Now to allow for some mechanical failure and perhaps being “taken out” there are always a number of discards that do not count, lets say 5 so for last F1 season 14 races to count out of 19. ( it’s ok it’s my fantasy world so I can just make these things up).
This system does mean that in every race every competitor is racing for a real “points” place. (unless they know they will discard it)
I did actually put this in to spreadsheet one winters evening (yes you are right I need to get out more) I was surprised how similar standings were , Hamilton was ahead of Webber and Massa ahead of Kubica. I dealt with different drivers in the lower teams by putting the results together for “car1” and “car2” and by this measure with both cars together, Virgin were last.
Of course it’s all false as the teams were competing to different system. But it kept me entertained for a evening.
If someone can tell me how, I will post the excel spreadsheet so you can have a look.
Hope every one enjoys the season, I can’t wait for 1st qualifying to see where the teams really are.
Regards Rick21st March 2011, 13:49 at 1:49 pm #163894
Any team that gets their fuel cell wrong surely is more ‘deserving’ of last?21st March 2011, 16:42 at 4:42 pm #163895
I don’t think there is anything wrong with HRT not finishing last, despite appearing to be the worst team last year. That’s like saying Renault didn’t deserve to win both championships in 2005 because McLaren had a quicker car. At the end of the day, you can’t reward quicker teams who don’t finish.21st March 2011, 16:52 at 4:52 pm #163896
Any teams that finish a season with no points shall be sorted in order of most race laps completed. Again this rewards reliability, while not ignoring outright pace.
Any teams that finish a season with no points should be sorted in order of best finishes. And this was why HRT beat Virgin.21st March 2011, 17:12 at 5:12 pm #163897
sbl on tourParticipant
i thought the torro rossers might have got a mention here in a thread entitled “what about the losers”
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.