While Bernie Ecclestone's medal system didn't make it, there is however a major change in the points system. As of 2009, the driver's championship will be awarded to the driver that wins the most Grand Prix, rather than the most points as was previously the case.
I understand that=))Ciro Pabón wrote:Timbo, what do you mean "one of every three drivers"? Those are all drivers that scored in history. Sometimes I despair...
Why is that? Luca says that Bernie gets 50% of the revenue, and the teams split the other 50%.WhiteBlue wrote:Perhaps Bernie started the discussion to fill the agenda. After all the FOTA may start asking for a bigger share of FOM revenues in earnest. He would be in big trouble.
Conceptual, you and I could take turns taking a week off - we seem to be much in tune on some points - especially this one. 20%? Good, but 25% or even 1/3 would help very much - both financially and in the spirit of teamwork and unity.Conceptual wrote:Why is that? Luca says that Bernie gets 50% of the revenue, and the teams split the other 50%.WhiteBlue wrote:Perhaps Bernie started the discussion to fill the agenda. After all the FOTA may start asking for a bigger share of FOM revenues in earnest. He would be in big trouble.
In such a crisis, why doesn't Bernie drop down to about 20%, let the teams split 80% and use that as a "cost cutting" measure in F1?
Oh, right. Greed always seems to get in the way of these things...
Medals are rediculous. Maybe Bernie should just pay the salaries of the winning drivers out of his 50%?
I like that articlemeves wrote:I think the statistic that is most telling is 14 world championships would have lasted less time and only 8 would have lasted longer. For me this alone kills ths idea dead... Why do we want fewer to the wire championships?
Fourteen World Championship battles would have been shorter (1955, 1970, 1978, 1987, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 2000, 2001, 2003 and 2004).
Eight World Championship battles would have lasted longer (1973, 1977, 1979, 1980, 1990, 1991, 2001 and 2005).
Excellent point. It seems the suits in charge are flailing about trying to make changes - any changes - without due consideration of the effect. I would vote for one change - give at least another point or two for first. I think a win is currently undervalued.Metar wrote:I think the most important change would happen lower down in the field. Suddenly, the consistent 8th-6th place finishers could be eclipsed by a one-off podium - Piquet or Barrichello, for example - and a single lottery-weekend could see these guys rocket up the standings thanks to pure luck on a single day. 20 points from consistently finishing 8th-6th would count less than another driver who, by pure coincidence, scrapped together a 3rd-place finish thanks to rain, safety-cars, or both.
Formula One will use a medals system to decide the world champion from the 2009 season onwards, the FIA announced on Tuesday.
The FIA said it had rejected a proposal by FOTA to change the current system, and Formula 1 will instead use the Olympic-like medals system proposed by Bernie Ecclestone last year.
The world champion will be the driver who wins the most races in a season.
"The WMSC accepted the proposal from Formula One Management to award the drivers' championship to the driver who has won the most races during the season," said the FIA in a statement.
"If two or more drivers finish the season with the same number of wins, the title will be awarded to the driver with the most points, the allocation of points being based on the current 10, 8, 6 etc. system.
"The rest of the standings, from second to last place, will be decided by the current points system. There is no provision to award medals for first, second or third place. The Constructors' Championship is unaffected.
"The WMSC rejected the alternative proposal from the Formula One Teams' Association to change the points awarded to drivers finishing in first, second and third place to 12, 9 and 7 points respectively. "
