tbh I prefered it 'back in the day' when they could drop a few bad results, if they were to change anything, I'd like to see tht bought back, but only for the drivers championship, not the WCC.
Points For Qualifying?
- Thread starter TheJudeanPeoplesFront
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
tbh I prefered it 'back in the day' when they could drop a few bad results, if they were to change anything, I'd like to see tht bought back, but only for the drivers championship, not the WCC.
I think Pole does deserve something extra but. As somebody mentioned previously I wouldn't want to see the championship decided on a Saturday.
Ha! Now, that's an interesting idea Tomcat! It's beautifully simple.
That said, I'm sticking to my guns about there being no need for any change at all. I am not aware of any grounds for complaint for what we have; so in my view, any alteration would be for alteration's sake! The way I see it, change for its own sake is pointless.
_________________________________
I've read everyone's comments in this thread and believe I understand what's being said; nevertheless, I might be missing something which keeps me on an endless loop – one which repeats this general question:
What is wrong with what we have?
nothing at all really. The only bad thing with qualifying is the protection of tyres. Everything else is perfect. I think the 3 stage qualifying has been the biggest success.
Qualifying should be about ultimate speed and the race day about endurance+speed+race craft+strategy
I think theres nothing wrong with the current points system or the Sunday, its Saturday thats the problem. The top 10 shootout is usually only a top 6 shoot out and even then its still a tyre saving exercise.
I agree that tyres are the problem. However, I don't think altering the points to compensate can do anything more than treat the symptom.
An easier solution, in my view – which might genuinely address the cause – might be to look at the whole concept of requiring anyone to start the race on tyres used to set fastest qualifying lap. I'm not saying it's wrong, necessarily; but rather that this might be a better place to start looking to improve the show than altering the points system in any way.
One way or another, and regardless of any ultimate solution, I certainly agree that there is now too much focus on tyres – and from almost every conceivable angle!
Miggins:5001448 said:
Sod that... Vettel is hard enough to beat without being able to wipe out his bad results.
If I remember rightly, that was in place to help offset terrible reliability in the day, which is kinda irrelevant these days.
TomTom94
Well-Known Member
On the subject of reliability, apologies if I'm slightly off-topic, but it's quite interesting when you think that Bianchi's engine blow-up in Germany was probably the first we've had in a while. I remember when Raikkonen's used to blow pretty much once a week! Astonishing the loads they put through them (they have to last 4 races now right?) and they still hold up, when they used to burn through so many each weekend and still have problems.
Why doesnt F1 use the MotoGP points scoring system instead? 15 drivers will be able to score points, still a max. of 25 points, however, not as many points awarded for winning races. It will make the midfield and Caterham/Marrussia battles a lot more interesting.
the reasonb they changed it was so winning a race would give a bigger points advantage and stop people settling for 2nd or 3rd.
I like the big gap between first and second, Alonso's kind of in control of his own destiny at the moment because if he wins races he doesn't need Vettel to have a bad race to take points out of him, and at the same time Vettel's been really able to damage his rivals by winning the most races.
I agree. I think the big points gap has been one of F1's better changes but, on the other hand, a few points for further down the field sounds like a good idea to me, we have a large field and a lot of races now.
I don't like the way that the Caterham/Marussia battle is decided by a single freak result. If one team is consistently finishing higher, but then there's a race with a big accident, rain, or whatever and the other team nick an 11th, that's the constructor's pretty much sorted. If the points system was extended to cover them/give them a greater chance, then that problem is negated. There's nowhere else in the constructors championship where a single freak result decides where a team finishes, it's all about the accumulation of points over many races.
I tried to give you rep for this but, as usual, it wouldn't let me!
I would certainly like to see the lower teams more included in the sport, they're treated almost as gate crashers.
TomTom94
Well-Known Member
I agree with you in principle but I'd argue the only reason it's an issue with Caterham and Marussia is because they are so far behind the other teams (with the worrying exception of Williams, who are suffering the same issue now) that neither of them has a chance of getting points without a lot of luck. I mean we could expand the points system to cover this and I think you'd still have the same issue that it's going to come down to whoever gets lucky with other people retiring, or a pit-stop in the wet, in one particular race to pick up a big haul (for them) of points.
The best thing to hope for is that the massive technical shake-up next season might alleviate the problem.
A reasonable question, nh-f1.
Of course, the two sports have separate governing bodies, each of which has evolved in its own way, but it is interesting that the two systems are now far more similar than they were, despite the significance of 50% more rewarded for their heroics on a bike. The differences in scoring are justified for three reasons, although it might be argued that with MotoGP's recently reduced grid it has almost become two and a half!
Overtaking a bike on a bike is far easier than overtaking an open-wheeled car with another, especially in F1 where aerodynamics are such an important factor*.
Bike racing tends to have more non-finishers.
Moto GP also has more competitors, despite its grid having become reduced over the past few years.
- - -o0o- - -
*In bike racing aerodynamics do not have a negative effect upon overtaking at all, whereas this has been F1's perennial problem.
I think these are good points but claiming the odd point here and there would be inspiring and psychologically transformative, as well as transmitting a more positive energy from F1 to the spectator than it currently projects. There's too much negative feeling around the sport at the moment.
The FIM are certainly doing a much better job than the FIA. Everyone criticised the decision to introduce CRT's but their plans have worked and now they aren't that far behind Pramac and Ducati. In contrast, the FIA haven't given the newer teams much support and because of that they are still a few seconds a lap behind the front runners. The FIA should have done more to ensure that they can keep up with the midfield teams. I feel the FIA could learn a lot from the FIM, despite the differences between cars and bikes
The points difference from 1st to second is still quite a big margin (5 points), so I dont see that to be much of a problem. Due to the gap between 2nd and 3rd is 4 points and 3rd and 4th is 3 points, they could easily tweak the MotoGP system around so that winner gets more of a points advantage over everyone else, but still have the top 15 scoring points.