A new point scale to improve the championship

[henry]

Perhaps the champion should be the driver who completes the races in the least total time. This the method to decide the winner in the Tour de France cycle race.
Essentially who can complete 19 races in the least time.

This should encourage drivers to drive as fast as they can and to pass people who are preventing that. It would probably need the ability to discard some races , perhaps best 12 from 20. No more get pole, cruise and collect.

[ENGINE TUNER]

Perhaps the champion should be the driver who completes the races in the least total time. This the method to decide the winner in the Tour de France cycle race.
Essentially who can complete 19 races in the least time.

This should encourage drivers to drive as fast as they can and to pass people who are preventing that. It would probably need the ability to discard some races , perhaps best 12 from 20. No more get pole, cruise and collect.

Great so then if you have a mechanical DNF in Monza its much worse than if you have one at Singapora.

The driver with the most wins should always be champion, plain and simple, F1 should be about 1 thing only and that is WINNING races.

[henry]

Perhaps the champion should be the driver who completes the races in the least total time. This the method to decide the winner in the Tour de France cycle race.
Essentially who can complete 19 races in the least time.

This should encourage drivers to drive as fast as they can and to pass people who are preventing that. It would probably need the ability to discard some races , perhaps best 12 from 20. No more get pole, cruise and collect.

Great so then if you have a mechanical DNF in Monza its much worse than if you have one at Singapora.

The driver with the most wins should always be champion, plain and simple, F1 should be about 1 thing only and that is WINNING races.

Good point. The DNF issue would need some thinking about. It might be sensible to normalise the race times to some arbitrary time, say 90 minutes. So finishing first at Monza or Singapore is worth 90 minutes. So if Singapore is 2 hours long and you finish 20 seconds behind you get 90 minutes 15 seconds as your time.

Since there can only be one winner of a race it makes the efforts of other participants meaningless.

Vettel might as well have parked up after 3 laps in Canada. Whereas in a points based competition he had much to gain by driving hard and Hamilton would have been a fool to go any faster.

Even better, if the championship result is dependant on time difference, both Vettel and Hamilton would have been incentivised to drive as hard as they could for the whole race.

A winner takes all system places a premium on one lap pace, winning pole, starting well and then defending the lead, which is pretty easy with today's cars. On the other hand a time based method would favour drivers who drive quickly for the whole race, 70 laps rather than one and a bit.

[hollus]

I don´t know how many people can be expected to read through 9 pages in 2017, I hope many. In any case, there go 9 pages of discussion on this topic from 2014.
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18564&hilit=points+system
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14509&hilit=points+system
Self plug: I really like the length, the rewards for victories and the round numbers in
100 60 40 25 15 10 7 5 4 3 2 1

[ENGINE TUNER]

Since there can only be one winner of a race it makes the efforts of other participants meaningless.

There is 1 winner and everyone else is a loser, losers are meaningless.

Vettel might as well have parked up after 3 laps in Canada. Whereas in a points based competition he had much to gain by driving hard and Hamilton would have been a fool to go any faster.

Canada 2014 bring up any memories? Malaysia 2016? Silverstone 2013? Canada 2011? Hungary 2008? Just because a driver is way out ahead does not mean they will win the race, mechanicals happen. Furthermore, there is the possibility that wins are tied at the end of the year, then the points tally will become the first tie breaker so every position is still important, especially since every position double's(or more) your points haul for the weekend.

Even better, if the championship result is dependant on time difference, both Vettel and Hamilton would have been incentivised to drive as hard as they could for the whole race.

Interesting, but I think mechanicals could still have too much effect on the championship.

A winner takes all system places a premium on one lap pace, winning pole, starting well and then defending the lead, which is pretty easy with today's cars. On the other hand a time based method would favour drivers who drive quickly for the whole race, 70 laps rather than one and a bit.

I agree passing(or even following closely) is too difficult with the current cars, and also that a time based system would make drivers push harder over the full length of the race, it is still too susceptible to having dnf's make too much of a difference in the championship, and it may not emphasize winning enough.

[Manoah2u]

passing is too difficult now

ARTIFICIAL overtaking through DRS has less effect and people start whining. The cars of last what, decade? were too easy to overtake because of artificial means and aerodynamic castration to simplify overtaking, that is not racing, that is puppeteering.

[...]

I think F1 is much better now, and much more exciting. RedBull, Renault and Honda not doing their job good enough doesn't mean there's something wrong with F1. They didn't do a good enough job compared to Mercedes and Ferrari, or hell, Force India for that matter who are doing great.

[henry]

"passing is too difficult now"

#slams head into wall.

seriously, ARTIFICIAL overtaking through DRS has less effect and people start whining. The cars of last what, decade? were too easy to overtake because of artificial means and aerodynamic castration to simplify overtaking, that is not racing, that is puppeteering.

I suggest you start watching F1 atleast Pre-2000's and how racing went on there, all the way back to the 80's. F1 is a man's sport, not little whiny girls sport that can't take it if they aren't good enough to beat the competition. Meanwhile, i guess you haven't seen this season either and only read hatervision comments. I guess some people just are addicted to being and seeing only negatives.

F1 is much better now, and much more exciting. RedBull, Renault and Honda not doing their job good enough doesn't mean there's something wrong with F1. they didnt do a good enough job compared to Mercedes and Ferrari, or hell, Force India for that matter who are doing great.

Without DRS I doubt we would have seen any passes at Canada, other than on the poor old McLarens. The current regulations make following and passing even more difficult than the previous decade.

My watching goes back before the 80s. The excitement used to come from the chasing down and then series of attempted passes perhaps culminating, sometimes, in a pass. Now all we get most of the time is chasing down. They can't get close enough for attempted passes.

As for whiny girls vs men. I guess you've never watched the cross country at an equestrian three day event? That's where some of the women who might have been F1 drivers are. Similarly expensive, exotic, dependant on the "machinery" , fitness, bravery and enormous skill.