Another point system! (Well, it's just mine...)

[Schummy]

Having a very active thread about the comparison between new and old system, it could seem useless to add another point system (and possibly an idiotic one ), but here I go.

I have posted in the Bike forum about a little system I use in MotoGPs to score the GP weekend (basically the race!). It is as simple as this:

Qualifying (grid): 0.25 for pole, 0.1 for 2nd
Race fast lap: 0.5 for fastest lap, 0.25 for 2nd, 0.1 for 3rd
Race result: 1-0.5-0.25-0.1 for the first four positions.

(Why I use all those decimals numbers? I admit it possibly is dumb: multiplying by 8 all numbers become integers Yes, it would be easier)

Fast laps add a sense of who was quick in the race, althiugh it also can depend on strategy. The same about grid positon, and, of course race positions depend on random circunstances along the 300 kms of race. all in all, I think the aggregation produces a reasonable result about who was or not "hot" in the GP.

The first 4 GPs threw the following results:

MS  1.75  1.5   1.75  1.6   = 6.6
JB        0.4   0.25  1.0   = 1.6
RB  0.9   0.1   0.6         = 1.6
JPM       1.0         0.25  = 1.25
FA  0.4         0.25  0.25  = 0.9
RS  0.1         0.1         = 0.25
JT              0.1         = 0.1
MW        0.1               = 0.1

The crushing score of MS is of null interest (we all know it already), it is the rest of drivers who could (or not) be interesting to observe.

By now, not a lot of difference with WDC table, but as season develops, a considerable deviation is expexted as this system put accent in top perfomances, not in regularity.

• Only MS has done well in every GP
• MS dominated absolutely 2 GPs, and in the other 2 (MAL and SMA) JPM and JB put *some* resistance. The rest of drivers never played an important role.
• The two Ferraris, two Williams, Button and Alonso are the only who did "something" in more than one (fluke) GP.
• I don't put total for teams because it's embarrasing to see Ferrari's points

"Curriculum Vitae" for each driver is:

MS: 4 wins, 3 fastest laps and one 2nd FL, 3 poles and one front row.

JB: Three podiums (one 2nd and two 3rds), one second FL and one 3rd FL, one pole.

RB: Two 2nd positions and one 4th, one second FL, two front rows.

JPM: Two podiums (2nd and 3rd), one fastest lap.

FA: One podium (3rd) and one 4th, one 2nd FL and two 3rd FL.

RS: 4th postion and 3rd fastest lap.

JT: 4th position.

MW: One front row.

[climb]

Schummy, will you ever do anything unamazing?

[ralf fan]

good stuff Schmmy.... whats the difference though MS still dominates!!

[climb]

Honestly, mixing cards would be very very tough, ralfie

[Schummy]

Aargh! We all try to find a system in which MS is not crushing the rest of the field! Damn! Someone knows how to do it? LOL

[krt917]

Actually Schummy, that's not - or shouldn't be - the point of the scoring system. It should be to find the best driver/car combination. This year that's been Schuey so he should have a big lead, which is why your system is good.

PS. Mutliplying 0.1 by 8 doesn't give an integer!

[Schummy]

Actually "my" 0.1 is 0.125 but I round it to one decimal.

(Also, note the ironic tone in my former post about systems and MS )

[ralf fan]

well atleast THIS system shows MS only 5 pts ahead!

[Red]

Nah, this system shows him with more points than all the others added together

[ralf fan]

good one RED!!!

[Attila]

Schumi let me guess :-) your happen to be a statistician. By the way that is what I do at the moment.

[Don K]

Originally posted by Schummy
Aargh! We all try to find a system in which MS is not crushing the rest of the field! Damn! Someone knows how to do it? LOL

If you start by awarding 0 points for pole and 0 points for the race win, you'ld probably end up with having both Montoya and Button ahead of Michael.

[Don K]

If you really want a good system, you should go for a simple system.

For instance:

Race Win: 7 points.
p2: 3 points.
p3: 1 point.

or:

Race win: 5 points.
p2: 3 points.
p3: 1 point.

or perhaps:

Race win: 4 points.
p2: 2 points.
p3: 1 point.

In a system like that, it would be impossible for a (relatively) "mediocre" driver to come close to the WDC.

To be WDC, you would have to win a number of races.
And you would also need to have some consistency, as you'll need podium finishes to score points.
But podium finishes without race wins won't do ...

---------------

Of course the big problem with this system, is that only the best will score points.
And the other team will not like that.

So because of commercial reasons, this system could never be implemented.
But this system would certainly lead to worthy World Champions.

[Schummy]

In my system, race scores are the same as your 4-2-1 system (because 1-0.5-0.25 is equivalent to 4-2-1) and very similar to your 7-3-1 and 5-3-1 (mine's would equivalent to 6-3-1.5).

That's why I chose that system, I like to reward very good results to see who is dominant. But added to this I like to consider other info we get from the weekend.

[krt917]

Don K, I think that your systems are good, though I would like to see a few more get points. Not for any commercial considerations, you understand, but because I think the lower teams deserve something.

How about 25-12-8-6-4-3-2-1 with bonus point similar to what Schummy has suggested?

I suppose we could go on and on coming up with systems and, as you say, the FIA would carry on in their own blinkered way....

[rodrigomarban]

Great, Schummy! Another great "number crunching" thread.

I like the idea.

[BSchneiderFan]

One has to remember, though, that a critical factor is that the points system be relatively simple and transparent. I confess that NASCAR baffles me utterly, whereas F1 (though perhaps the new points system is not ideal) is fairly straightforward. Personally, I'd probably go with 12-8-6-5-4-3-2-1, plus a point for pole and a point for fastest lap, but there you go.

[Schummy]

I agree. In fact "my" point system was not intended as a proposition for WDC, but just as a tool to analyse what drivers are doing a top work.

Appart for some complication for the spectator, fastest laps could be "cheated" by special strategies, I'm afraid. In second thought, though, maybe those strategies could be interesting to watch.

[krt917]

Originally posted by Schummy
I agree. In fact "my" point system was not intended as a proposition for WDC, but just as a tool to analyse what drivers are doing a top work.

That, surely, is what a WDC should be about!! That's why I like your sytem!! If a points system does anything other than give us a way of measuring ('officially') who are doing the best jobs, then what's the point?!