![Sad :(](./images/smilies/icon_e_sad.gif)
Martin Brundle even mentioned that they could leave Esteban's car at that point since it wasn't really in a precarious position
![Sad :(](./images/smilies/icon_e_sad.gif)
Thank you for posting that link Hail22Hail22 wrote:Well this is a sad thing to hear right now may he rest in peace and his family are taken care of.ced381 wrote:It appears the man has died from his injuries. Very sad story.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/108014
ill do a re-calculation of 2010-2012 championship and show u the difference it wud make if we used the old point system. stay tune.raymondu999 wrote:Rubbish. 25 for a win makes no difference, because what goes around comes around. 25 for a win means it's easier to pull a big gap, but also easy to reel it back. Try dividing the points system by 2.5:maranello55 wrote:Whoever approved the 25 pts for a gp winner is a fool.
25 == 10
18 == 7.2
15 == 6
12 == 4.8
10 == 4
8 == 3.2
6 == 2.4
4 == 1.6
2 == 0.8
1 == 0.4
Now compare that to 2009:
10 == 10 (no change)
8 == 7.2 (10% decrease)
6 == 6 (no change)
5 == 4.8 (4% decrease)
4 == 4 (no change)
3 == 3.2 (6.67% increase)
2 == 2.4 (20% increase)
1 == 1.6 (60% increase)
Other than points for P9 and P10, the only key differences are "more points" for P7 and P8
Don't bother. We get the same champion every year. I know, because I was the one doing the 2010 and 2011 calculations. Search for them if you don't believe me. Someone else did the 2012 calculations, not memaranello55 wrote:ill do a re-calculation of 2010-2012 championship and show u the difference it wud make if we used the old point system. stay tune.raymondu999 wrote:Rubbish. 25 for a win makes no difference, because what goes around comes around. 25 for a win means it's easier to pull a big gap, but also easy to reel it back. Try dividing the points system by 2.5:maranello55 wrote:Whoever approved the 25 pts for a gp winner is a fool.
25 == 10
18 == 7.2
15 == 6
12 == 4.8
10 == 4
8 == 3.2
6 == 2.4
4 == 1.6
2 == 0.8
1 == 0.4
Now compare that to 2009:
10 == 10 (no change)
8 == 7.2 (10% decrease)
6 == 6 (no change)
5 == 4.8 (4% decrease)
4 == 4 (no change)
3 == 3.2 (6.67% increase)
2 == 2.4 (20% increase)
1 == 1.6 (60% increase)
Other than points for P9 and P10, the only key differences are "more points" for P7 and P8
2010raymondu999 wrote:Brazil. Vettel takes it by ONE point![]()
Vettel – 115
Alonso – 114
Raikkonen – 82
Hamilton – 76
Button – 76
Webber – 71
Massa – 47
Grosjean – 37
Rosberg – 36
Perez – 26
Kobayashi – 21
Hulkenberg – 19
Schumacher – 17
Maldonado – 16
di Resta – 15
Senna – 8
Vergne – 4
Can't seem to find 2011 at the moment. Will try later.raymondu999 wrote:Vettel 104
Alonso 101
Lewis 100
Webber 97
Jenson 87
Felipe 57
Rosberg 55
Kubica 52
Schumacher 25
Sutil 15
Barrichello 15
Kobayashi 9
Petrov 9
Hulkenberg 6
Liuzzi 5
DelaRosa 2
Heidfeld 1 1
Buemi 1
Alguersuari 0
maranello55 wrote:Some saw Vettel using the DRS when running alone last night. Can anyone confirm this?
btw, Im not a Vettel hater. Just curious.
Same champion i see. But the psychological thing wud be less stressful if they numerically see the gap not as much as when using the new point system i think.raymondu999 wrote:Actually I DID do 2012. Lol.
So 2012;
2010raymondu999 wrote:Brazil. Vettel takes it by ONE point![]()
Vettel – 115
Alonso – 114
Raikkonen – 82
Hamilton – 76
Button – 76
Webber – 71
Massa – 47
Grosjean – 37
Rosberg – 36
Perez – 26
Kobayashi – 21
Hulkenberg – 19
Schumacher – 17
Maldonado – 16
di Resta – 15
Senna – 8
Vergne – 4Can't seem to find 2011 at the moment. Will try later.raymondu999 wrote:Vettel 104
Alonso 101
Lewis 100
Webber 97
Jenson 87
Felipe 57
Rosberg 55
Kubica 52
Schumacher 25
Sutil 15
Barrichello 15
Kobayashi 9
Petrov 9
Hulkenberg 6
Liuzzi 5
DelaRosa 2
Heidfeld 1 1
Buemi 1
Alguersuari 0
Were you expecting them to be different?maranello55 wrote:Same champion i see.
Possibly for the moment. But I'm willing to wager that after a few years it will seem natural.But the psychological thing wud be less stressful if they numerically see the gap not as much as when using the new point system i think.
This new point system was borne out of the need of rewarding more places (P9 & P10) with points, and the unwillingness to have decimal points.Why the need of the new point system anyways?
Bummer. I didn't even know they worked for free. Seeing the pictures made me even sadder.stefan_ wrote:I don't give a damn about what happened in the race anymore. Very sad to wake up and read about the marshall - people like him are really passionate for the sport and ready to work a lot (a lot!) for free and risk their lives in order to make racing safer for the guys in the cars.
I don't have strong enough opinion to argue long about it. Watching the race I didn't see any pass attempts and any blocking, Sutil was driving quite fast Force India at his own speed not Caterham. Was Hamilton blocking Vettel in Germany last season? Blocking meaning preventing to go faster, of course he was. Did he have to actively get out the way? It was different (speed) but same principals should apply. I felt it didn't affect anything (results, Ham's race) that much to warrant drive-through. Maybe Sutil was significantly slower, I can't be bothered to check lap times, fine then.turbof1 wrote:I agree there is inconsistency, but clearly there was no attempt to pull aside and let Hamilton through. The rules are clear on that: you are allowed to ignore the flags 2 times, at the 3d one you are forced to slow down and let the ones behind go through. The blue flags are there to stop you from minding your own race and minding the race of the ones behind you.iotar__ wrote:Sutil's penalty was bullshit. He didn't try to prevent the pass, he was driving his own race, I've seen worse ones not penalized, he's right talking about double standards. Being in front of lapping car is not the same as blocking, it's up to the driver behind to make the pass, it's up to driver in front to let be passed. Here it was at worst borderline.
For some teams and drivers stewards are trigger happy, it's as Red Bull put it F1 is like fake wrestling. Consistency of stewarding should be a subject of discussion not constant tyres yapping.
Although I completely agree with you the stewards failed to correctly apply the rules in similar situations in the past, there is no reason to criticise them when they do apply them correctly.
And to give an incentive to attack rather then bag points as it´s far more lucrative trying to get first place if it´s a 7 point difference between first and second.raymondu999 wrote:This new point system was borne out of the need of rewarding more places (P9 & P10) with points, and the unwillingness to have decimal points.