- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
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 dont think last year was a particulaly good example of this, we had the most gripping championship ever. My worry is 14 world championships would have lasted less time and only 8 would have lasted longer using hte medal system. It just shows that the FIA really don't listen, even the teams proposed a better solution but F1 gets what Bernie wants!Fil wrote: racers race to win. this'll force Lewis to race properly in Brazil next time (or Abu Dhabi this season)..
Am I the only one thinking that the only thing this will cause is an increase in reckless moves by drivers in the second position? Imagine that, due to circumstances, driver A with X wins is first on a race, very closely followed by driver B with almost no wins. Driver C, with as many wins as driver A but teammate of driver B is third. The risk/reward factor for dumb moves is absurdly high for driver B. Not only he gets a great chance of winning if an overtaking attempt works, but his teammate is rewarded if his move fails!.RacingManiac wrote:Doesn't seem that bad....since the teams are still racing for the points and all, but forces the driver to actually drive for the win. Should encourage more overtaking, especially if it does come down as tight as last season...
Fil wrote:yes the last race was exciting, but was it really that special that we watched someone race for 5th? sounds all too flawed and hollow a finale for me.
nothing more exciting than a battle for race victory.
Stop talking extremes! when doesConceptual wrote:I hope that when it becomes obvious that winning is not possible, that every car on track in that position simply parks it in the garage.
What about consistancy? 1 win and 16 2nd places shouldnt lose to 2 wins and 15 DNF's.
I knew 2009 was looking too good to be true. Leave it to the politicians to screw the pooch once again...
ever happen... name 1 instance when it has happened... if you do then we should discuss it.Conceptual wrote:1 win and 16 2nd places shouldnt lose to 2 wins and 15 DNF's.
freedom_honda wrote:RIP formula one.
Let's just see how it pans out first. Suprisingly enough a good show and the most deserving driver win which I think on average happened last year. I would like to see the championship last as it keeps the excitment going. For cost saving you could see a team like Brawn who have limited resources win the first 8 races and then only put in a lap at each of the remaining races before 'breaking down' and save vast amounts of money.ISLAMATRON wrote:
Meves... are you more interested in a good show or seeing the most deserving driver win the WDC? Who really cares how long the championship lasts if the lesser deserving driver wins the crown? All that does is waste people's time more. what argument can be made against the driver with the most wins taking the crown really?
Because most of the fans are stupid... they asked for shorter races too remember?axle wrote:I don't agree with this.
The fans voted for a bigger points gap not "medals".
Why do they refuse to listen to the fans?
Extremes? How about simple mathmatic probability? The extreme case is just as possible as any other case, and just because it exposes how freaking stupid this idea is, don't trash talk it.ISLAMATRON wrote:Stop talking extremes! when doesConceptual wrote:I hope that when it becomes obvious that winning is not possible, that every car on track in that position simply parks it in the garage.
What about consistancy? 1 win and 16 2nd places shouldnt lose to 2 wins and 15 DNF's.
I knew 2009 was looking too good to be true. Leave it to the politicians to screw the pooch once again...ever happen... name 1 instance when it has happened... if you do then we should discuss it.Conceptual wrote:1 win and 16 2nd places shouldnt lose to 2 wins and 15 DNF's.
And everybody will still be racing for constructors points and thus TV Money if you forgot... if points isnt a good enough incentive than I hope millions of dollars are.
You think they would win 8 in a row and then not try to win more? Once you get to the race and put in 1 lap you have already spent most of the money you will for that race weekend... if you said not show up then they might save some loot... but I believe constructor money only gets paid out if you participate in every race weekend.meves wrote:Suprisingly enough a good show and the most deserving driver win which I think on average happened last year. I would like to see the championship last as it keeps the excitment going. For cost saving you could see a team like Brawn who have limited resources win the first 8 races and then only put in a lap at each of the remaining races before 'breaking down' and save vast amounts of money.ISLAMATRON wrote:
Meves... are you more interested in a good show or seeing the most deserving driver win the WDC? Who really cares how long the championship lasts if the lesser deserving driver wins the crown? All that does is waste people's time more. what argument can be made against the driver with the most wins taking the crown really?
And before I get slated for this I love racing and more overtaking will make an amazing spectacle!
I think last year actually demostrated what a horrible mess would have been made by the driver with the most 'wins' taking the crown. Whoever you support it would've been really controversial...