New points system

[MichaelC]

Just something I was thinking over the weekend. From next year, we'll have 24 cars (in theory) starting each race. They'll be scrapping for just 6 places worth anything. This leaves quite a lot of cars who have run a good race, finished well without being lapped, and having gained nothing.

Is it perhaps time the FIA started to award points down to say 10th place, to give teams such as Jaguar, Sauber and Arrows more chance of getting a few more points on the board?

[badoer fan]

I've always used my own system for points, 15-12-10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1. Its much better, and allows better comparisons with those cars further down the field who only get 1 or 2 points a season. The only problem is it may shift the emphasis from speed to reliability, as in some races just getting to the end very slowly may get you a couple of points (eg Monaco)

[Wrex]

I posted a topic on this back when I first came here. Top 6 is just crazy.

20-15-11-8-6-5-4-3-2-1

No points for pole or fastest lap though.

Should improve no. of cars finishing (no more "I just can't be bothered" retirements) and will reward consistancy as well as a hard earned win.

I don't think it would change who wins the WDC - but would be a fairer representation for the bottom teams - see Minardi

[TeddyG]

This is something that I think should definately be looked into. Perhaps drivers who finish the race (out of the top 6) could get 0.5 point. Give the teams something to show their sponsors!

[Ralf's Girl]

It is a good idea, but in a way it defeats the object, because scoring points is what F1 is about - and in races where not many cars reach the finish, drivers won't have to try as hard because points will be guaranteed.

But on the other hand, it would be nice to see teams like Minardi scoring points.

[DancingMachine]

i like the badoer point system....good 1

[Orange]

Exactly...
We don't want to see "Point Inflation," where points mean nothing, but there does need to be better differentiation between the midfield teams

[EERO]

I think B-Fan's system is pretty good, but it ignores the greater benefit acheived by a win. 20 points for first and twelve for second would keep the balance. I do agree though that points need to be assesed through the first ten Finishers. One solution might be to asign points only to those still running at finish. In a race of high attrition, if only seven cars finish, only seven cars get points.

[badoer fan]

It hasn't happened for years I know, but what if only about 3 or 4 cars finished a race AND WERE CLASSIFIED. I think this happened at Monaco 1966. Do the people who retired last (when there are only 5 or 6 cars left) get the points, or do the points for 5th and 6th go begging

[badoer fan]

The problem with 20for a win and 12 for second etc, is that it is a much bigger penalty if one retires, or if one finishes 7th or 8th when a rival wins. In 1999, where Hakkinen retired a lot but still won, in my system Irvine won the championship, because he often just kept it on the road for 4th or 5th, and a win made the gap much bigger

[Valve Bounce]

YES!!

[robert2000]

We'll have to check all of F1 with this system - Stirling Moss may have won the championship had they been using this system.

[badoer fan]

It gets very confusing when you get back past 1990, with dropped scores and different points systems, and teams who only entered one or two races, or privateers

[kuchi]

Well I agree with Wrex's points system, but I think if the current system prevails is going to be fun to watch alot of temas fighting for the points, and I think this may rise the competition level in F1.

[Marshal]

Originally posted by robert2000
We'll have to check all of F1 with this system - Stirling Moss may have won the championship had they been using this system.

With 10 points for a win (now) rather than 9 points for a win (then), Moss was World Champion in '58, not Hawthorn....

Also, without dropped scores, Prost, not Senna, is World Champion in '88. There are probably others too.

I agree with the sentiment, but the fact that scoring a point is so hard makes it more satisfying when Minardi do so.

[Speed]

I think most of you are getting the CART influence... what's next ? turbo ?, super-ovals ? (LOL)

[Raoul Duke]

Well I think that something closer to the Cart points system would be good. But the Nascar points system is just a disgrace.

[Speed]

NASCAR fans don't care about points, NASCAR fans like spinning cars, crashes, and things like that... (Hey NASCAR fans I'm joking here, OK !)

[renault110]

True about the NASCAR fans!!

Don't foreget that Big Bad Bernie has to pay the travelling costs for any F1 teams obtain at least one point!!

[riusnow]

Originally posted by Speed
NASCAR fans don't care about points, NASCAR fans like spinning cars, crashes, and things like that... (Hey NASCAR fans I'm joking here, OK !)

That's no joke Speed. I know some NASCAR fans and that's what they say. I guess they like to see action (or carnage). I live less than an hour away from a speedway so we have plenty of fans around.
No disrespect here either, it's just a different sport.

[SparX]

A few nice points systems have been mentioned here but i think my system would work better that all the rest (i havnt cheaked it fully thou)

the system goes like this.........
if you come:
1st u get 1 point
2 you get 2 and so on, the driver with the least points @ the end of the year is the title winner.
But you ask, what happens when a driver retires ??? well they get the points akin to this :
first to retire 24 points, 2nd to retire 23 points and so on.

Then you wil try and tell me that this system would not work if 2 drivers crashed into each other,
but it would, the driver @ the cause of the crash would get the lesser amount of points, if no driver was found to be responsipel then the 2 drivers would get
the average of the points that teh drivers would earn in teh paragraph.
...tell me what you think.

SPARX

P.S> 2nite, just may be i will work out how many points,using this system the drivers would have got @ the malasian GP (thats teh only gp i have good enuff deatails to work from, if any one has deatailed results from the 4 races pls send me the url - talktosparx@hotmail.com )

[RussianFriend]

Originally posted by badoer fan
The problem with 20for a win and 12 for second etc, is that it is a much bigger penalty if one retires, or if one finishes 7th or 8th when a rival wins. In 1999, where Hakkinen retired a lot but still won, in my system Irvine won the championship, because he often just kept it on the road for 4th or 5th, and a win made the gap much bigger

BF,

I like your score system, I was supporting Irvine in 1999. Maybe IRA should take over Bernies private plane and demand of the 1999 champoinship revision.

[Danielsun]

I know F1 is all about being the best out there, but this discussion is not going to go away - especially with even more big name manufacturers entering in recent times, like Honda, BMW and Toyota.

I believe that the current scoring system needs to be changed, perhaps even just being extended to the top eight finishers. Top ten really defeats the purpose (I notice that Badoer used the BTCC scoring method), given that most drivers would then score points, once reliability is taken into account.

Whether the FIA is willing to change this is another matter...

[Nicholas]

The trouble with F1 next year is that now Minardi has to beat 2 teams instead of 1 team to get travel benefits. I propose a system of points to the top eight. Hey didn't a Minardi finish eighth recently?
The other problem is that now Williams is back most of the time it'll be Ferrari Mclaren and Williams dominating the top6 except when Jordan and Sauber wear their lucky underpants ;-)

[badoer fan]

Danielsun, I didn't deliberately use the BTCC method, it wasn't until after I realised theywere the same