Points change in 2014

[astracrazy]

Not sure if this is previously discussed somewhere, couldn't find it. But Ant Davidson has spoke about many times changing the points system so that every driver can pick up a point (next year 1st to 22nd). Back in the day only the top 10 gained points because of reliability. But its not like that now.

i like the way it is at the front, big gaps between 1st and 2nd and 3rd but it needs to spread out more. Maybe last doesn't get a point.

It would spice up the standings a bit more, midfield and the back of the grid. I haven't though of a system yet, perhaps this:

1=37
2=30
3=27
4=24
5=22
6=20
7=18
8=16
9=14
10=12
11=11
12=10
13=9
14=8
15=7
16=6
17=5
18=4
19=3
20=2
21=1
22=0

Pole Position = 2

Thoughts?

[Javert]

Your system I think would be bad
every retirement, which would count 0,
would be lethal to title chances.

I would think
100 points -> 1st
70 points -> 2nd
50 points -> 3rd
30 points -> 4th
28 points -> 5th
26 points -> 6th
20 points -> 7th
18 points -> 8th
16 points -> 9th
10, 8, 6, 4, 2, 1 -> 10,11,12,13,14,15th

this would lead to good racing for win
and easy recover in the table with the faster car
also some positions (4-5-6 and 7-8-9) are 'zoned' as similar
absolutely a priority to get on the podium

[Websta]

For the system to work, you would need a wider spread. The system you* proposed has first place earning only ~3 times as many points as 10th place, compared to the current 25 times as many. The championship would be too geared towards consistency . For example, if someone wins the opening race but retires in the second race, then a person who finishes 7th and 6th would be ahead by 1 point in the standings. The points system should be geared to favouring drivers that win more races in my opinion.

These things are difficult to think out though, so I would suggest you apply your points system to a previous season and see what it does to the final standings. That is the best way to evaluate a new points system - does it change anything for the better?

*Edit: OP

[WhiteBlue]

For my taste there has been already too much diddling with the points system. They should have kept the old one.

[astracrazy]

you guys make some good points, like i say i hadn't thought of anything its just what i wrote down. Regardless of what route you go down, i think the points system needs to extend beyond 10th place with a grid of 22 cars (which for average purposes are reliable - i'm excluding accidents etc. And HRT as they have gone). Any better?

1st 50
2nd 38
3rd 30
4th 24
5th 20
6th 18
7th 16
8th 14
9th 12
10th 10
11th 9
12th 8
13th 7
14th 6
15th 5
16th 4
17th 3
18th 2
19th 1
20th 1
21st 0
22nd 0

[FoxHound]

If you are going to give points out for every position, it makes racing less relevant.

Look at the scrambles we have seen for 10th over the last few years, giving some quite incredible racing. Further to this, what happens if someone retires on lap one and gets a point? Yet someone can complete a race distance and only get 1 more point to the guy who didnt even get to the first corner.

Keep it as it is, finishing 10th and getting a point is reward enough. We have other measures for ascertaining who gets the wooden spoon without the need to further dilute the points system.

[timbo]

For my taste there has been already too much diddling with the points system. They should have kept the old one.

Pretty much agreed.

[piast9]

In my opinion the 2010 change was a good step. The previous system worked nice in the "ancient" F1 times when in most GPs less than half of the field made to the finish which caused that backmarkers could occasionally score something with better reliability and luck.

Then the gradual increase of scoring positions to 8 and 10 somewhat compensated for unprecedented reliability and the quality of driving (or is it better drivability of the cars?) that we have now. But I wouldn't go much further because of the issues mentioned by FoxHound.

Apart from the lack of the points the non-scoring positions still have the importance and they count for the rankings so I think even though the backmarkers are out of the points they still drive the best they can.

[turbof1]

IMO, the current system is perfect for me. Now it forces alot of midfield contenders to their utter best to get to that tenth place, leading IMO to better racing. Giving everybody points would lead to drivers being less pushed to move up a place.

[Belatti]

I liked when you really had to fight hard to get a WC point and escape being named in F1Reject`s webpage...

F1rejects still will have add a team profile (HRT) and some drivers profile (Chandhok, Yamamoto, Karthikeyan, DiGrassi, Anthony Davidson)

[beelsebob]

I've got an idea for a "new" points system. I think this would work much better:

1. 10pts
2. 6 pts
3. 4 pts
4. 3 pts
5. 2 pts
5. 1 pt

Bob

/me ducks

[Neno]

I've got an idea for a "new" points system. I think this would work much better:

1. 10pts
2. 6 pts
3. 4 pts
4. 3 pts
5. 2 pts
6. 1 pt

Bob

/me ducks

I like this system, it getting you to invest money in car devolpment, we would have better qualy and not much playing strategy shity games for saving tires. races would be better because every point would be important

[beelsebob]

Just in case this was lost on anyone, this is the points system F1 used between '91 and '02. Another interesting concept from before this system was the idea of only paying attention to a driver's n best results, so for example, last year, we would have had a much tighter battle, because Hamilton, Alonso and Vettel all had similar numbers of very good results.

[Burgess]

I prefer the new system to the old, the percentage share of points is much tighter, but without making wins seem almost diminished in value. A win was worth 66.6% more than finishing second, the new system is 38.8%, I'd rather a slight upping in the figures (to around 45%) but I'd much rather have 38.8% than 66.6%.

[CHT]

Bernie wont pay for it