Alternate Championship Points

[Wrex]

I was just visiting Planet-F1.com and they run an show the championship with different points scheme. It can be found HERE.

Points System:

1st: 20, 2nd: 16, 3rd: 14, 4th: 12, 5th: 10, 6th: 8, 7th: 6, 8th: 5, 9th: 4,
10th: 3, 11th: 2, 12th: 1.

Pole: 3pts Fastest Lap: 2 Most Laps Led: 1

While I disagree with the Poll, fastest laps & laps led points, the championship does appear to be a little fairer and give a better indication of performances.

Current Drivers Championship

1 Schumacher M Ferrari 134
2 Barrichello Ferrari 71
3 Montoya Williams 47
4 Schumacher R Williams 42
5 Coulthard McLaren 41
6 Raikkonen McLaren 20
7 Button Renault 13
8 Trulli Renault 9
9 Irvine Jaguar 8
10 Heidfeld Sauber 7
11 Fisichella Jordan 7
12 Villeneuve BAR 4
13 Massa Sauber 4
14 Panis BAR 3
15 Webber Minardi 2
16 Salo Toyota 2
17 Frentzen Sauber, Arrows 2
18 McNish Toyota 0
19 Yoong Minardi 0
20 de la Rosa Jaguar 0
21 Sato Jordan 0
22 Bernoldi Arrows 0
23 Davidson Minardi 0

Alternative Drivers championship:

1 Michael Schumacher 333
2 Rubens Barrichello 199 (his second place not secure)
3 Juan-Pablo Montoya 182 (can still finish 2nd - but 3rd is his)
4 David Coulthard 152 +1
5 Ralf Schumacher 150 -1
6 Jenson Button 74 +1
7 Nick Heidfeld 73 +3
8 Kimi Raikkonen 70 -2 (DNF's have really hurt Kimi)
9 Jarno Trulli 59 -1
10 Giancarlo Fisichella 55 +1
11 Jacques Villeneuve 53 +1
12 Felipe Massa 52 +1
13 Eddie Irvine 47 -4 (2 good races not enough here Eddie)
14 Mika Salo 39 +2
15 Olivier Panis 29 -1
16 Takuma Sato 25 +5
17 Mark Webber 24 -2 (still looking good though)
18 Pedro de la Rosa 24 +2
19 Allan McNish 21 -1
20 Heinz-Harald Frentzen 20 -3
21 Alex Yoong 9 -2
22 Enrique Bernoldi 4
23 Davidson Minardi 0

This looks like a more acurate picture of the pace and reliability of each driver. Although it hurts a few drivers I like, such as Webber, I can't agree with a points system that rewards a one off effort. Had Marks car failed that Day, Yoong would be in the points instead!!

The constructors championship also comes out a little different (and fairer IMO).

1 Ferrari 532
2 BMW-Williams 332
3 McLaren-Mercedes 222
4 Renault 133
5 Sauber 125
6 BAR-Honda 82 +1
7 Jordan-Honda 80 +1
8 Jaguar-Cosworth 71 -2
9 Toyota 60 +1
10 Minardi-Asiatech 33 -1
11 Arrows-Cosworth 24

Renault/Sauber would still have unfinished business, as do BAR and Jordan.

[DNQ]

I like the current system because of its historical relevance, but I've got to admit, that looks pretty decent, probably the best alternative system I've seen

[Wrex]

Well looking at it from a potential sponsors point of view, if I was judging my contribution on the performance of the team over a season, this looks pretty close to me.

[DNQ]

That's the thing - it's all very well having an alternative championship were Williams could still beat Ferrari in Suzuka, but that doesnt reflect what's going on in Formula 1 - Ferrari have dominated by far, and deserve to be streaks ahead in the points system.

[Wrex]

Well DNQ - I dont think a point sytem exists that would make it possible for Williams to still win this championship, unless you deducted points for winning.

[DNQ]

haha

I guess it'd be possible if you made it a 10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1- system were only your five best scores count of something absurd like that.

[Wrex]

I don't think that would work either, some quick maths tells me this might work.

1st - 1 point
2nd - 2 points
3rd - 3 points
4th - 4 points
5th - 5 points
6th - 6 points

And on the bright side, Austria would'nt have happened

[CleanTone]

It's the 3rd attempt(alternative points) to spice up this season. No use.

[Schummy]

Certainly F1 points system is a bit dramatic about finishing in a good position and doesn't reward a lot regularity and middle positions.

I prefer that alternate system and, in general, CART-like systems. By the way, historically systems in car and bike racing have used to be more "CARTish" than "F1ish"; in fact I don't remember any championship with a more extreme point system than F1.

In the other end of the range me have NASCAR system, which I don't like at all because it rewards finishing races above all.

Anyway, fair or not, regularity prone systems tends to decide championships in the last race, meanwhile F1 systems tends to produce champions before the end of the season. It can be seen through simulations with real championships using differents score systems.

[Yoong Montoya]

I don't see why they can't reward 9 points for a win instead of 10. F1 used to have 9-6-4-3-2-1 for the top six for most of it's history. Why can't they bring it back? It's one suggestion to Max Mosley to make F1 better I suppose, although it probably needs a lot more than that.

[nameless]

i like the alternative system as it rewards teams who wouldnt otherwise have a chance at scoring points if they have good reliability. I woould imagine it would give greater motivation for lower teams if they are scoring points and promote racing and action in the midfield. this still probably wouldnt make f1 exciting though, the only way to do that would be to restrict the number of wheels allowed to 2, make the car much narrower and get colin edwards and troy bayliss to drive them

[JonesF1]

One of the best alternative systems I've seen yet. Still puts a high price on placing but awards "effort." Few can do both. Anyway I agree with Yoong Montoya, go back to 9 points for wins. 8 was too low (maybe?) and 10 is too high.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Yoong Montoya
I don't see why they can't reward 9 points for a win instead of 10.

This is proberbly because, if the winner gets 9 points and 2 team-mates (from another team) get 2nd and 3rd, that team could get more points than the team that has won. (providing the 2nd driver doesn't score a point of course)

[Valve Bounce]

While Ferrari has this exclusive partnership with the one tyre supplier, there is no sensible points scoring system that will counter the domination of Ferrari. And make no mistake, this is not a short term revival - this will go on for years until Bridgestone or Michelin gives F1 away.


Valve