New F1 Rules

keefg

Here - New rules means driver who wins most races wins the championship, not the driver with the most points.

mickdw

I dont like that idea but I suppose it will put an end to drivers following each other home for a safe 8 points etc. Points are nearly worthless to those hoping for the championship in this format.

BoardsRanger

Well its a step in the right direction! there were too many occasions last year where drivers in 2nd place would just settle rather than risk the win. I do think it would be better though to revert to the old points system (i think) where first place driver would get 10 points and the 2nd would get 6 and so on.

enviro

Big change this, but I think the sport needs it. Be interesting as drivers can't really afford to hang back and settle for a decent ''in the points'' finish anymore. Only a win will do. I welcome this.

keefg

enviro wrote: »

Big change this, but I think the sport needs it. Be interesting as drivers can't really afford to hang back and settle for a decent ''in the points'' finish anymore. Only a win will do. I welcome this.

+1

SoupyNorman

Nice rule, should raise the levels of internal team conflict!

Tau

It's a bit of a problem for teams that, early in the season, are about to get a 1-2 finish though. You couldn't afford to let your second driver take the win, even if he deserved it, if you thought your first driver was going to be better over the whole season.

Bahrain last year for example - Ferarri probably would have told Massa to let Kimi by rather than take the win if it was more than 2 points that were at stake. (at the time, all championship hopes were resting on Kimi).

SoupyNorman

With Massa, Alonso, Kimi, Hamilton all in serious contention, a win here and a win there for each will really level the playing field out giving other drivers a chance to capitalize through either solid driving or attrition rates.


A problem that arises maybe is if a driver dominates the season the championship could be decided a good while before the season ends, personally I dont think its likely but it's possible.

Frank Bullitt

What if...

Lets say Hamilton wins 6 races next year and didnt finish any of the others, and Kimi won 5 but finished more races in the points?

This is a joke.

SoupyNorman

Gintonious wrote: »

What if...

Lets say Hamilton wins 6 races next year and didnt finish any of the others, and Kimi won 5 but finished more races in the points?

This is a joke.

I dont follow...Hamilton would win!

Hamilton could win 6 races = 60points

Kimi wins 5 races and could have 1,000,000 points

The driver with the most wins...wins!

vectra

Gintonious wrote: »

What if...

Lets say Hamilton wins 6 races next year and didnt finish any of the others, and Kimi won 5 but finished more races in the points?

This is a joke.

You are right there.

It is a joke
I mean in the sence that Hamilton could possibly win 6 races this year with the wheelbarrow of a car he has under him right now

Frank Bullitt

Exactly, i wonder what the drivers think of it, i know Eddie Jordan doesnt agree with it.

dsmythy

When i first heard it i thought bad idea. Reading some of the opinions here has softened that thought. I guess when they change rules that have been in place for years it can come as a bit of a shock to the system. One problem i see is if a championship challenger driver messes up their race and are languishing in 8th coming towards the end they will just simply give up rather than try and pick of a couple of middle of the pack drivers.

Will points scored be used as a tie breaker should two or more drivers win the same number of races?

vectra

dsmythy wrote: »

Will points scored be used as a tie breaker should two or more drivers win the same number of races?

Yes
which is the main reason that no driver will just sit on their laurels and collect a few points.
Every point gained through the season could mean the difference between losing and winning

Richard

dsmythy wrote: »

When i first heard it i thought bad idea. Reading some of the opinions here has softened that thought. I guess when they change rules that have been in place for years it can come as a bit of a shock to the system. One problem i see is if a championship challenger driver messes up their race and are languishing in 8th coming towards the end they will just simply give up rather than try and pick of a couple of middle of the pack drivers.

Will points scored be used as a tie breaker should two or more drivers win the same number of races?

Yes

EvilMonkey

This a stupid idea it may work out now, while no one driver is dominating but if someone ever dominates like Schumacher, once they win over 50% of the races the don't even need to turn up anymore and still win the championship. Change the points not this ****. :mad:

SoupyNorman

EvilMonkey wrote: »

This a stupid idea it may work out now, while no one driver is dominating but if someone ever dominates like Schumacher, once they win over 50% of the races the don't even need to turn up anymore and still win the championship. Change the points not this ****. :mad:

Although I do agree to a point, the said driver would need to win 9 races (assuming the next closest wins 8!).

Regardless of whether if seems like a good or bad idea, It is an interesting idea and if it helps to shake things up then great. Many rule changes have come and gone in the past!

EvilMonkey

bravestarr082 wrote: »

Many rule changes have come and gone in the past!

Exactly, because they bring in changes like this without thinking them through and make things worse, what was wrong with the points system change proposed by the teams? Changing the rules so much is damaging for F1.

BaZmO*

I think they should just award more points for a win.

In the time of Schumi the season would've been over after about 10 races.

How do they work out who comes second now?

I think they should've have waited to see how the latest rules panned out this season before implementing this one.

vincenzolorenzo

Not too sure about these new rules. IMO they should never have changed the old system. The current 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 system was brought in to penalise ferrari because they were so far ahead of the opposition and the championship ended too soon. At the time ferrari were up in arms over it, with the exact same argument as the FIA and FOTA now, ie-that there wasn't enough incentive to push for the win, but of course no one wanted to listen after a number of years of ferrari domination. The smaller teams would never let them go back to the old 10-6-4-3-2-1 system because it would be much harder to score points so in my ideal world the points would be 12-8-6-5-4-3-2-1. Big margin between 1st and second but still have a chance to pick up points along the way if you've had a bad day.
They've basically recreated the situation that they moved to avoid 6 years ago, ie-that if one team was dominant the season would be over by Hungary.

SamWiseWoahZay

I also think this is a bad idea. It's not like last year and the year before weren't raced right down to the wire? It was pretty exciting final few races last season, I don't really believe it needed changing.

Plus I fail to see the benefit of racing if you aren't right at the front every race. Once a certain driver has won over half the races it's game over. People wont watch and what will spur teams to compete for second and third?

I also feel that this decision was taken to make Ferarri happy - like lots of other dodgy decisions last year.

There are loads of things I see wrong with this..... But.......

This article gave me food for thought as softened my opinions somewhat.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2009/03/when_bernie_ecclestone_first_p.html

I dont even know what to think about the future regs. My brain hurts. I think I might switch to A1GP!

amacachi

I'm 100% for it, since hopefully along with other things it'll encourage teams to go for speed over reliability.

Dan Sanchez

Who would have won last year if it had come in? Would hamilton have got it?

EvilMonkey

SamWiseWoahZay wrote: »

I also feel that this decision was taken to make Ferarri happy - like lots of other dodgy decisions last year.

Don't know how you worked that out this change ignores the proposal put forward by Luca di Montezemol on behalf of FOTA.
By the way most of the "dodgy decisions" last year were right! :eek:

Dan Sanchez wrote: »

Who would have won last year if it had come in? Would hamilton have got it?

Massa

amacachi

Massa would've won it last year but it would've gone to the last race with Massa needing to win it to win the title, or second place with Hamilton 8th or worse.

*EDIT* In 2006 it would've gone to the last race, had Schumacher won he'd've won the title. In 2005 Raikkonnen was 2nd and Alonso 1st in the final race. With the new points system Raikkonnen would've won the title if he overtook Alonso.

Looked as far back as '96 and the rest of the title races would've been unaffected.

amacachi

Without the most wins rule? True that. Though using the old system Kimi would've won by more in 2007. :P

Ghost Train

Bad idea I think. Will divide the top teams and mid teams up a bit more, and the drivers and constructors championship will be weighted differently

Will be interesting to see if the top drivers are fazed by it. Might see some more mistakes if they feel they have to push more... maybe a lower standard of driving from them... or maybe it will highlight which drivers have a bit more ability when their only focused on winning

vincenzolorenzo

amacachi wrote: »

Looked as far back as '96 and the rest of the title races would've been unaffected.

Before 1991 there are several championships that would have changed, but from 1991 up to now there are very few championships that would have changed. The reason? In 1991 the points system changed to 10-6-4-3-2-1 so the increase in points gap between 1st and 2nd had the desired effect of giving a greater incentive for wins. back to my original point (see post above)

Muff_Daddy

I can't believe what the FIA are doing. Why are they insisting on fixing something that's not broken? The last 4 seasons have gone down to the wire, and the last season went down to the final corner, with the points system - a system that in essence has been in place since 1950.

The new rules essentially make scoring points virtually pointless (excuse the pun) as far as the WDC is concerned. It takes all the focus off the driver standings, and concentrates soley on who is challenging for the wins. Where is the reward for the solid, reliable midfield battlers - for example Robert Kubica - who may not have the car to win many races, but will gain many podiums throughout a season, for getting the very best out of his car. Last year, he was still in the title picture with 3 races to go, despite winning only one race. The more drivers challenging, the more competitive the championship is, whether you think they 'deserve it' or not.

Also, imagine a scenario where the 'championship leader' (I assume he'll still be called that) messes up on the first lap, and ends up at the back of the field. He won't be nearly as motivated to make his way back up the field in the hope of salvaging some points, in fact he'd be better served waiting for his nearest rival to lap him, and taking him out. Is that what we want to see?

I'm not completely dismissing the new rules, and I am willing to give them a chance, I just think they are flawed and they haven't been completly thought through. Another thing that bothers me is how 12 days before the season opener, Max and Bernie have suddenly decided to radically change how the WDC for 2009 will be decided. If the new rules are going to happen, they should be for 2010, not 2009.

amacachi

Muff_Daddy wrote: »

I can't believe what the FIA are doing. Why are they insisting on fixing something that's not broken? The last 4 seasons have gone down to the wire, and the last season went down to the final corner, with the points system - a system that in essence has been in place since 1950.

The new rules essentially make scoring points virtually pointless (excuse the pun) as far as the WDC is concerned. It takes all the focus off the driver standings, and concentrates soley on who is challenging for the wins. Where is the reward for the solid, reliable midfield battlers - for example Robert Kubica - who may not have the car to win many races, but will gain many podiums throughout a season, for getting the very best out of his car. Last year, he was still in the title picture with 3 races to go, despite winning only one race. The more drivers challenging, the more competitive the championship is, whether you think they 'deserve it' or not.

Yes, it does take away from the points system, that's why it's being introduced. It's rewarding the win far more than it is right now. A good thing in my opinion.
Having something competitive just so ya can call it competitive isn't what sport is about. Hell they could've awarded quadruple points for the last race of the season to make it more open last year.

Also, imagine a scenario where the 'championship leader' (I assume he'll still be called that) messes up on the first lap, and ends up at the back of the field. He won't be nearly as motivated to make his way back up the field in the hope of salvaging some points, in fact he'd be better served waiting for his nearest rival to lap him, and taking him out. Is that what we want to see?

You're just being paranoid tbh about the guy just trying to take his competitor out. In 2005 if it had gone on wins Alonso needed to win the final race of the season. Kimi finished 4 seconds behing him in second. You can bet your sweet ass it would've been closer if Kimi knew the win would guarantee him the title. And he wouldn't just take him out either, we've seen Schumacher punished for that (rightly) a few times.



As I've said already, I'm all for these new rules. I don't think it goes far enough tbh, the tiebreaker should be number of second places then thirds etc. If it means teams turning their engines up a bit to push for the lead even though it may blow and cost them in the next race, good. Also, there's just not enough spectacular engine failures in F1 these days. :P
I miss the old days of genuinely not knowing what's going to happen next. The teams constantly pushing the limits with a possibility of engine failure at any point.

I'm open to correction on this, because I don't know exactly how it's done right now, but I think the FIA should take a page out of NASCAR's book and base the prize money more on a per-race basis to the teams. I don't know what the balance is now tbh, but I would like it to be almost exclusively race-based.

BaZmO*

amacachi wrote: »

As I've said already, I'm all for these new rules. I don't think it goes far enough tbh, the tiebreaker should be number of second places then thirds etc. If it means teams turning their engines up a bit to push for the lead even though it may blow and cost them in the next race, good. Also, there's just not enough spectacular engine failures in F1 these days. :P
I miss the old days of genuinely not knowing what's going to happen next. The teams constantly pushing the limits with a possibility of engine failure at any point.

But doesn't the new Lower Revs rule fly in the face of this?
They've brought it in to reduce the risk of engine failure and IIRC the engine has to last for 3 races now?

amacachi

Yeah but even last season they were turning the revs down below the permitted levels. Engines were built not to be able to do a lot more RPM than what was allowed.

And yes, the engine has to last three races. But with a win being worth so much now, I'm sure teams will be more likely to go for a win if they have any chance of it.

vectra

Muff_Daddy wrote: »

I can't believe what the FIA are doing. Why are they insisting on fixing something that's not broken? The last 4 seasons have gone down to the wire, and the last season went down to the final corner, with the points system - a system that in essence has been in place since 1950.

The new rules essentially make scoring points virtually pointless (excuse the pun) as far as the WDC is concerned. It takes all the focus off the driver standings, and concentrates soley on who is challenging for the wins. Where is the reward for the solid, reliable midfield battlers - for example Robert Kubica - who may not have the car to win many races, but will gain many podiums throughout a season, for getting the very best out of his car. Last year, he was still in the title picture with 3 races to go, despite winning only one race. The more drivers challenging, the more competitive the championship is, whether you think they 'deserve it' or not.

Also, imagine a scenario where the 'championship leader' (I assume he'll still be called that) messes up on the first lap, and ends up at the back of the field. He won't be nearly as motivated to make his way back up the field in the hope of salvaging some points, in fact he'd be better served waiting for his nearest rival to lap him, and taking him out. Is that what we want to see?

I think you missed out on a few points there

For one thing.
A driver will still have to race his heart out simply because it could still come down to the wire.
Picture this

Hamilton
Alonso
Kimi
Massa
Kubica

All on the same amount of wins at the last race.
There would be some going there then

Suddenly Button passes them all out and takes the win
Now it comes down to who gaind the most points through the season.
That is how the champ would be decided on.

Also
Each team needs as many points as possible for the constructers champ.

Dampsquid

Hate this new rule. So there will be three tables. Driver win table, driver points table, and contructer points table... just makes it confusing for new people getting into watching the sport.

How crap will it be for someone to be way ahead on the points table and not win the drivers championship.

Points should be for top 8 like this: 20-12-8-6-4-3-2-1

Tau

There's also a "most fastest laps" table at the moment also - it's going in the direction of most cycling races, where there's prizes for most points, overall time, most stage wins, got to the top of most hills first, best youngest compeditor etc.

FrostyJack

I'm not a fan of this new rule. I can see it going pear shaped for a number of reasons.
1. If it does mean everyone turns up the wick, pushes for the lead and their engine blows, they spin out or have an accident they are out of the race. Imagine travelling at great expense thousands of miles to see your favourite driver and he blows up on lap 2.

2. This may not reward the fastest driver as someone may go hell for leather and end up not finishing any races even though in previous years he would be champion. The guy who is consistant may just pick up the pieces at the end of every race. ( rabbit and the turtle)

3. As stated in previous posts, Massa would have won last year and there would have been a couple of different winners if these rules were enforced in the past making it even more difficult to compare drivers of previous era's.

It isn't the end of the world but the old point system of 10-6-4-3-2-1 would have had a better or the CART/Moto Gp points system too imo. I like most of the rest of the rules changes but we won't see if they work 100% until the first race.

Mena

Apparently the teams, unanimously, have declared the FIA have acted illegally in making this change. Not sure where that will go. (Just seen on Sky News). No hard links yet.

Ah more - Seems they will leave it for 09 but want it changed in 2010.

vectra

Mena wrote: »

Apparently the teams, unanimously, have declared the FIA have acted illegally in making this change. Not sure where that will go. (Just seen on Sky News). No hard links yet.

Ah more - Seems they will leave it for 09 but want it changed in 2010.

Points system cannot be changed'
20 March 2009

The Formula One Teams' Association (FOTA) has responded to the FIA's latest rule changes following a consultation of the rule book. FOTA's own meeting earlier this month resulted in the teams unanimously developing a new points system which was subsequently denied, and the committee believes that the FIA do not have the right to impose new rules so soon before the start of the season.

The governing body's meeting in Paris on Monday resulted in the decision being made stating that the Drivers' World Championship of 2009 onwards will be decided upon the number of Grands Prix won, as opposed to the greatest numbers of points scored. Although FOTA agreed in Geneva to the idea of 12-9-7 points for the top three positions, the teams have made clear that it is too late for the FIA to change the system without their approval.

A FOTA statement read: "The amendment to the sporting regulations proposed by the World Motorsport Council (WMSC) was not performed in accordance with the procedure provided for by Appendix 5 of the Sporting Regulations and, as per the provisions of the article 199 of the FIA International Sporting Code, it is too late for FIA to impose a change for the 2009 season that has not obtained the unanimous agreement of all the competitors properly entered into the 2009 Formula 1 Championship.

"Since the change to the scoring system unanimously agreed by the teams and proposed to FIA did not receive approval of the WMSC, no change can occur in 2009, and the teams wish to reaffirm their willingness to collaborate with the FIA in order to jointly define a new points system for the 2010 season within a comprehensive set of measures aimed at further stimulating the attractiveness of the F1 sport."

Looks like we are stuck with it

FrostyJack

I think Mosley just read my post

BoardsRanger

vectra wrote: »

Looks like we are stuck with it

You mean stuck with the old system? Its a shame, I dont see why they just would'nt implament the FOTA's recommendation of the 12-9-7-5-4....
Personally, i would prefer 12-8-6-5-4...

EvilMonkey

amacachi wrote: »

Yeah but even last season they were turning the revs down below the permitted levels. Engines were built not to be able to do a lot more RPM than what was allowed.

And yes, the engine has to last three races. But with a win being worth so much now, I'm sure teams will be more likely to go for a win if they have any chance of it.

The engine doesn't have to last three races you have 8 for the season and can do what you like with them. so drivers could use a new engine on a race they think they can win and use used engines when they only think they can score points. which could be interesting
I don't want the driver with the most wins to be World champion i want the best driver over the season to win it.

kaimera

I don't want the driver with the most wins to be World champion i want the best driver over the season to win it.

surely the best driver would have the most wins then?

amacachi

kaimera wrote: »

surely the best driver would have the most wins then?

I think he would prefer an arbitrary value placed on each finishing postion, rather than a clearly defined criteria to decide who the best driver is.

ednwireland

bbc now running with it saying its deferred until 2010

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7955790.stm

dumb idea go for the 3 (or4) point gap for me would make a lot more sense they'll just change it again when a dominant team comes along

vectra

FIA willing to postpone championship rule



The FIA has said that if the Formula 1 teams are not willing to accept the proposed rule where the driver who scored the most race wins in a season will become the F1 champion the FIA is willing to introduce this rule in 2010.

In a statement issued by the FIA the FIA said that "on 17 March, the FIA World Motor Sport Council unanimously rejected FOTA's proposed amendment to the points system for the Formula One Drivers' Championship. The 'winner takes all' proposal made by the commercial rights holder (who had been told that the teams were in favour) was then approved.

"If, for any reason, the Formula One teams do not now agree with the new system, its implementation will be deferred until 2010."

:eek::cool:

amacachi

****sake.

BaZmO*

Have the FAI taken over the FIA? :rolleyes:

Really really amateurish.

EvilMonkey

kaimera wrote: »

surely the best driver would have the most wins then?

Not necessarily especially when you have different spec cars involved, I want a properly weighted fair points system to decide the championship.

BaZmO* wrote: »

Have the FAI taken over the FIA? :rolleyes:

Really really amateurish.

FIA, Max, and Bernie at this point are way worse than fai in my opinion

Muff_Daddy

amacachi wrote: »

Yes, it does take away from the points system, that's why it's being introduced. It's rewarding the win far more than it is right now. A good thing in my opinion.
Having something competitive just so ya can call it competitive isn't what sport is about. Hell they could've awarded quadruple points for the last race of the season to make it more open last year.

Disagree. IMO, when sport organisers make the playing field uneven for all competetors that goes against everything sport stands for. It's my belief that these rules do just that. Looking back since 93, there have only ever, in any given season been two or three, teams capibable of winning GP's on a consistant basis in a season. Within these teams are usually number 1 drivers. That leaves us at an early stage of the season knowing which 2 or 3 drivers will challenge for the title.

There is usually always a 4 tier system of constructor in F1:

the top teams (Last year Ferrari, McLaren)
the high point scorers (BMW, Renault)
the midfield (Red Bull, Toyota, Torro Rosso, Williams)
and the also-rans (Honda, Force India)

Last year, only the Ferrari's and McLarens were capable of challenging for wins, in normal condititions. What this new rule does is set the second tier teams further adrift from the first tier teams. That doesn't sit very well with me. We'd never have had Frentzens challenge for the title in 99, we'd never have had Kimi's challenge in 03, in fact the 2003 season would have been ruined under the new rules.

You're just being paranoid tbh about the guy just trying to take his competitor out. In 2005 if it had gone on wins Alonso needed to win the final race of the season. Kimi finished 4 seconds behing him in second. You can bet your sweet ass it would've been closer if Kimi knew the win would guarantee him the title. And he wouldn't just take him out either, we've seen Schumacher punished for that (rightly) a few times.

Maybe I was being a bit extreme, but my point remains, why would a driver push his way through a field when he's a minute down on the leader as a result of an early mistake? For a marginilsed chance of scoring points that may not even matter if he loses the WDC by one race? Would he not be better off parking and saving the engine for the next race? It just cheapens the battle through the field for points, if they even matter, IMO.

Vectra wrote:

A driver will still have to race his heart out simply because it could still come down to the wire.
Picture this

Hamilton
Alonso
Kimi
Massa
Kubica

All on the same amount of wins at the last race.
There would be some going there then

Suddenly Button passes them all out and takes the win
Now it comes down to who gaind the most points through the season.
That is how the champ would be decided on.

Not denying that would be an awesome scenario, but the chances of that actually happening is slim to none. When has there ever been 5 drivers tied on GP wins on the last race of the season. Even 2 drivers tied on GP wins is statisticly unlikley. However, I guess anything can happen in F1.....

Also
Each team needs as many points as possible for the constructers champ.

I get the feeling that some of them drivers couldn't give two hoots about the constructers championship.


Anyway, I'm glad to see common sence has prevailed, and the FIA didn't get their way. What other sporting organisation in the world would propose such a fundamental change in rules days before a season is to begin? Changing rules of this significance 12 days before a season is to begin is crazy.

Zaph

There are two main inconsistencies with the rules as proposed by the FIA that I can't understand:

1. If the championship was to be decided on wins, why in the event of a tie would it be decided on points and not most second or third places?

2. Why didn't the FIA introduce the new system for the WRC this year? It uses the same points scheme as F1 and falls under their jurisdiction, so it would seems sensible to be consistent.

I think this was all about the FIA bowing to commercial pressure from Bernie Ecclestone rather than deciding what's best for the sport, and I'm glad that they've been forced to back down. While wins are obviously important, so is technical supremacy and reliability and I want to see the consistently best driver over the season winning the championship, not just someone who manages to get a few wins on favoured circuits and does little else for the rest of the season.

vectra

Zaph wrote: »

I want to see the consistently best driver over the season winning the championship, not just someone who manages to get a few wins on favoured circuits and does little else for the rest of the season.

+1
Thats what I want to see as well