FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[What's Burning?]

Another points systems comparison, but this one is pretty comprehensive. (over on GPUpdate.net)

Comparing the points systems

For the first time in Formula 1 history, the top ten finishers all score points in 2010, with the new system replacing the top eight scheme which was in place for the previous seven seasons. GPUpdate.net's Gregory Haines takes a look at how the standings would be displayed under the preceding pair of F1 scoring systems.

Of course, knowing the scoring arrangement in mind, drivers and teams would approach entire race weekends differently – meaning that, to an extent, direct translations to the old systems are inaccurate. However, the simple conversions make for some fascinating reading…

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------

CHAMPIONSHIP BATTLE AFTER SINGAPORE GRAND PRIX

2010 system – top 10 drivers score:
25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1

1. Mark Webber – 202
2. Fernando Alonso – 191
3. Lewis Hamilton – 182
4. Sebastian Vettel – 181
5. Jenson Button – 177

(Top five separated by points margin of one race win)


2003-2009 system – top 8 drivers score:
10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1

1. Mark Webber – 80
2. Fernando Alonso – 77
3. Lewis Hamilton – 75
4. Sebastian Vettel – 74
5. Jenson Button – 72

(Top five separated by points margin of one second place)


Pre-2003 system – top 6 drivers score:
10-6-4-3-2-1

1. Mark Webber - 64
2. Fernando Alonso - 63
3. Lewis Hamilton – 59
4. Sebastian Vettel – 54
5. Jenson Button – 52

(Top five separated by points margin of one win plus one fifth place)


Proposed medals system – most wins takes title, lower places decided by points

1. Mark Webber - 4 wins, 2 second places, 2 third places)
2. Fernando Alonso - 4 wins, 2 second places, 1 third place)
3. Lewis Hamilton – 182 points, 3 wins
4. Sebastian Vettel – 181 points, 2 wins
5. Jenson Button – 177 points, 2 wins

(Note: Medals system was set to be introduced for 2009 season, although mentions of points here take into account the 2010 scoring structure)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------

The comparisons show that, under both of the previous two scoring systems and with four races to go, the top five would be placed in the same positions as currently.

Under the medals system suggested by Bernie Ecclestone and briefly in place before last season, Webber and Alonso would be equal on wins and second places although the Australian would lead by virtue of one more third place.

Interestingly, returning 7-time World Champion Michael Schumacher would have only scored four times this season if last year’s scoring system was in use, amassing a total of 15 points.

Under the pre-2003 system, which awarded only top six finishers and was in use for five of his title years, that figure would decrease to only three points-scoring occasions and a total of 7 points for the German.

[formula1man]

I prefer points only going to 6th. It made scoring a point much more of an achievement. But i reckon the wins system is ok if all the other positions are made up of points, but i reckon points only to 6th is the best, 8th max, 10th is just way too many. I mean in just 2002 there were 22 cars with points to 6th. the lower teams can still get money from but just if you score points you get more prize money.

[Jabberwocky]

with an expanded field there needs to be more points paying positions as it would not look good for an F1 team to have no points at the end of the season.

[myownalias]

with an expanded field there needs to be more points paying positions as it would not look good for an F1 team to have no points at the end of the season.

Not really as back in the day the points were 10, 6, 4, 3, 2 and 1 and there were more teams than grid spots; it worked well enough then!!! But I prefer the new points system as it gives drivers a much bigger incentive to drive for the win; two points difference last season, not much incentive, seven points, much better!

[What's Burning?]

I just don't see the argument of incentive to drive for the win, every driver with a competitive car will say that they want the win. I think a better way to put it is to discourage drivers from playing things safe, but there will always be a mathematical position to be in where you're safe even if you don't win. The other problem I have with the medal system is that there's no reward for consistency. I wouldn't mind it if a driver came in 4th every race of a season and that performance allowed them to outscore someone that won 6 races and DNF or didn't score in 10 others.

EDIT: so 12 points times 19 races, is 228... right smack in the thick of it all at the end, instead of with nothing to show for a phenomenally consistent year.

[formula1man]

I just don't see the argument of incentive to drive for the win, every driver with a competitive car will say that they want the win. I think a better way to put it is to discourage drivers from playing things safe, but there will always be a mathematical position to be in where you're safe even if you don't win. The other problem I have with the medal system is that there's no reward for consistency. I wouldn't mind it if a driver came in 4th every race of a season and that performance allowed them to outscore someone that won 6 races and DNF or didn't score in 10 others.

EDIT: so 12 points times 19 races, is 228... right smack in the thick of it all at the end, instead of with nothing to show for a phenomenally consistent year.

228 wouldnt be enough to win this season at least, but with the proposed medal system i think only the champion is decided by most wins, all the other positions are decided by points, so a consistent season would result in the same championship position.

[Jabberwocky]

with an expanded field there needs to be more points paying positions as it would not look good for an F1 team to have no points at the end of the season.

Not really as back in the day the points were 10, 6, 4, 3, 2 and 1 and there were more teams than grid spots; it worked well enough then!!! But I prefer the new points system as it gives drivers a much bigger incentive to drive for the win; two points difference last season, not much incentive, seven points, much better!

There was more teams but there was less money involved. Look at Williams, they can go to sponsors and say look last year we scored 34.5 this year we already have 56, we are improving so buy into us now while we are cheap

[What's Burning?]

with an expanded field there needs to be more points paying positions as it would not look good for an F1 team to have no points at the end of the season.

Not really as back in the day the points were 10, 6, 4, 3, 2 and 1 and there were more teams than grid spots; it worked well enough then!!! But I prefer the new points system as it gives drivers a much bigger incentive to drive for the win; two points difference last season, not much incentive, seven points, much better!

There was more teams but there was less money involved. Look at Williams, they can go to sponsors and say look last year we scored 34.5 this year we already have 56, we are improving so buy into us now while we are cheap

LOL are you insinuating that some sponsors may be gullible and don't really know much about F1 and can be convinced to spend their money by artificial numeric results? I'd hope that at that level of sponsorship money that wouldn't be the case, but you know it's happened.

[hounddub]

I'm not sure about the medal thing...just seems like tinkering for the sake of it.

However...I would still love to see them award a single WDC and CC point for the pole winner each Saturday. That would make serious interest in the Saturday session.

[Fred_C_Dobbs]

Sponsors sponsor race teams to see their brand name displayed before the race viewers. I know NASCAR have a system where someone watches the race coverage (on tape, naturally) and counts the seconds that every sponsor's logo is on screen. They publish this information internally so each individual sponsor can assess the effectiveness of their sponsorship. Naturally, the logos on the more competitive cars get more airtime than those on the backmarkers.

I'm sure F1 must have a similar system. I'm fair certain the sponsors are not blindly surrendering the sums of money involved in F1 sponsorships without some means in place of determining the return on their investment. Their only interest in "points" per se in is how they impact their exposure.

And the only points total that has any advertising carry-over into the offseason is the one driver at the top of the heap. From a public relations standpoint, second place is first loser.

The medals thing is just another symptom of Bernie's senility.

[Forza_Rosso]

I think the medal system would be a bad idea. First of all the need for consistency in points wouldn't be as high because more wins - Championship... thus reducing needs for 2nd and 3rd's and so on. Second, even though it would've made Massa champion in '08 (I DON'T WANT TO START ON THIS TOPIC! I JUST WANT TO USE IT AS AN EXAMPLE ... THATS IT !!!!) because he had 6 wins and Lewis 5, and even though it pains me to say iy but Lewis was more consistent in points (although not by much) he won because of that one point. So I say keep points not Medals.

[formula1man]

here is this years championship in the old 10 6 4 3 2 1 system

1. Webber...............70
2. Alonso ................67
3. Vettel.................64
4. Hamilton..............61
5. Button................55

1. Red Bull..............134
2. McLaren.............125
3. Ferrari................88
4. Mercedes............32
5. Renault...............24
6. Williams...............7
7. Force India...........6
8. Sauber................1

[mafiyo]

If Schumacher took 15 years to achieve 1000 points, todays best driver maybe will take only 8 years to do the same. Remember last time Webber receive huge applause when getting 1 point with Minardi. No one will mention him if he score 1 point now, or even 8 points (same 6th position). The value of points has decreased..

[formula1man]

yes, that is why I want the top 6 back again, because the value of points increases. I mean Toro Rosso is the only team to end up without points who had them before, which quite frankly means they don't deserve any. They can still hand out money to the teams so they dont go under, but make points more of a privilege

[texasmr2]

If Schumacher took 15 years to achieve 1000 points, todays best driver maybe will take only 8 years to do the same. Remember last time Webber receive huge applause when getting 1 point with Minardi. No one will mention him if he score 1 point now, or even 8 points (same 6th position). The value of points has decreased..

Maybe your coverage say's otherwise but anyone with any common sense realize's the value of each and every point gained and does not need the mention from either team members or commentator's to grasp the value.