217 replies to this topic

[feybrand]

they push these rules through supposedely to please the fans but everyone ive spoke to thinks it rubbish and wants it to stay as it is so why go ahead with it ecclestones out of touch and too old anyway its time he retired

[Dan]

i think there may be some truth in the fact the winner isn't rewarded enough but a much better option would just be to award 12pts to the winner and keep the rest the same

Although that is essentially just a return to the old points structure, the current points allocation was bought in to stop any one driver dominating too early in a season and wrapping it up half way through the year. Increasing the gap between first and second place points or giving the championship to the winner of the most races will only take us back to the situation that we had before with Mansell, Schumacher and other top names being able to win the whole season before the European, making the rest of the season expensive and amusing but fairly pointless. The idea was to keep people watching races right through the season.

[Phaeton]

If Bernie wants them racing to the flag give the driver who gains the fastest fastest lap 2 points. Currently with 20 laps to go the team makes a prediction they can't catch the driver in front so back the car off. If another 2 points were at stake then maybe they'd keep racing & pushing hard even if they knew they couldn't catch up.

Alan...

[Guess-Works.com]

If Bernie wants them racing to the flag give the driver who gains the fastest fastest lap 2 points. Currently with 20 laps to go the team makes a prediction they can't catch the driver in front so back the car off. If another 2 points were at stake then maybe they'd keep racing & pushing hard even if they knew they couldn't catch up.

Alan...

Isn't that what they had in Indy ?

Points for fastest lap, and I believe also points for most laps lead, and pole ?

[scrog]

they should add up every ones full distance race times and the lowest average wins
that way the slower more consistant teams stand a chance

or just see who has the most money in the bank at the start of the season and declare them the winner

much sooner watch touring cars any day 10x better raceing

Edited by scrog, 23 March 2009 - 11:26 AM.

[davegreory42]

i think there may be some truth in the fact the winner isn't rewarded enough but a much better option would just be to award 12pts to the winner and keep the rest the same

Although that is essentially just a return to the old points structure, the current points allocation was bought in to stop any one driver dominating too early in a season and wrapping it up half way through the year. Increasing the gap between first and second place points or giving the championship to the winner of the most races will only take us back to the situation that we had before with Mansell, Schumacher and other top names being able to win the whole season before the European, making the rest of the season expensive and amusing but fairly pointless. The idea was to keep people watching races right through the season.

i suppose i hadn't thought of it that way, and to be honest i hadn;t thought about those seasons, i thought the early 00' were raced on the current 10-8-6 system, but surely with the new winner takes all system that is just as possible?

never has the saying 'if it aint broke don't fix it' been more apt.

[Jammy]

Exactly! Much was made about the fact that Lewis won the championship last season even though he hadn't won the most races, but as everyone has said the championship (in any sport) should reward the most consistently good participant. Massa had a dire start to the season, whilst Hamilton was never off the podium. Why should a driver who was only good for half the season win the championship!?

[Dan]

they should add up every ones full distance race times and the lowest average wins
that way the slower more consistant teams stand a chance

And if the point of the series was to come 3rd or 4th consistently in every race that might be a good way to allocate points but oddly enough the idea is to win (incidentally, that wouldn't work anyway. The person with the lowest average full distance time is the winner, the maths isn't that hard to work out). Formula 1 is not a reliability trial, the racing was far better when the cars were designed to last exactly 200 miles and were more heavily tailored to each track. The point of the sport is to build the best car you can for the track you are racing on and drive it around faster than anyone else for the closest complete number of laps to 200 miles. When you put it like that it's simple. Whoever achieves that most often should win the title but as I said above it makes for a very boring season to give the title to whoever wins the most races. The current points system works well and the current division of points is fair and promotes racing to the end of the year. The point of the sport is not to build the most reliable car, not to record the fastest lap, not to turn up every week and sit consistently in the middle of the pack and not to hammer your car to the end of the race if you don't need to. As said above, 'if it ain't broke...'.

[Jammy]

The FIA have now confirmed that the 'most wins gets the championship' system will now be deferred for a year. Arguments are on-going over a controversial rear diffuser that Brawn and Williams and one other team are using.

And there is this interesting article over which teams are looking promising based on their pre-season testing -
http://uk.eurosport....ting-times.html

[[email protected]]

I can see some protests being lodged tomorrow by some teams, if those cars make it through scrutineering. Rumour has it that the design that Brawn, Williams and Toyota are using is worth 4-5 tenths per lap.

[Jupitus]

I'd be interested to see what the other teams say in their appeal (assuming they do) - all I have read so far is that they feel it is 'not in the spirit of the rule' or something... light + shed anyone?

[Jammy]

As I understand it (and details seem hard to come by), that strictly speaking a device such as an undercar rear diffuser is now illegal. However as always happens in F1, these three teams have managed to interprate the rules in a slightly different way. Mosley has said he wouldn't be surprised if it had to be settled in a FIA Court of Appeal, and that there is a strong case for them being legal, and a very strong case for them being illegal.

[[email protected]]

As I have read it, they are all allowed to run diffusers, and that the rear wings and diffusers have to be a certian height and size each. Some teams have used a clause that adds the addition of bodywork, to act as their diffuser

http://www.formula1....2009/0/622.html

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/73083

Edited by [email protected], 25 March 2009 - 12:16 PM.

[Jupitus]

Thanks Simon - for my money the teams seem to be using the rules to the full, but not beyond, based on that

[Jammy]

I think it is both wrong and right! lol

But given that 7+ (Ferrari count as more than one team) teams are against and only 3 are for, I can guess which way the verdict is going to go!