Alternative Points System

[Moxie]

Ok, I was looking at things from a different point of view, but I get it now. A DNF prior to 2010 only cost 10 points, where as now a DNF costs 25 points.

DNF's must reward zero points. I think the reasons for this are obvious. One of the factors that lead me to suggest a system based on an exponential curve, was that under the current system, a driver that finishes the race in 11th place gets the same number of points as the driver that DNF. There is no incentive, aside from ego, to race for 11th place. Paying points for every finishing position creates incentive throughout the field.

If one makes an example of an individual driver competing for the WDC each race has a potential point pay out of x. With a season that consists of 20 races the season total,will be 20x. Therefore, any single DNF will cost 1/20x. It doesn't matter if x is 10 points, 25 points or as I suggest 200 pts.

Sorry for the double post, but rather than edit my earlier confused post, I figured I'd just recognize my confusion and move on.

[SectorOne]

You have me confused. Are you suggesting that a driver that fails to finish the race should earn more points than drivers that finished the race? Keep in mind that in Australia there were three drivers that finished but were out of the points, and in Malaysia there were six.

I just made the observation that the alternative system penalizes DNF´s more then the current one because the normal one has Hamilton in second but with the alternative system Alonso has managed to jump both Ricciardo and Hamilton.

DNF´s in this alternative system is much much more expensive then the current system.
And it´s simply because of the points distribution

1. Nico Rosberg - 220
2. Lewis Hamilton - 191
3. Daniel Ricciardo - 156
4. Fernando Alonso - 121

1. Nico Rosberg - 243
2. Fernando Alonso - 215
3. Lewis Hamilton - 209
4. Daniel Ricciardo - 203

[zeph]

12-9-6-5-4-3-2-1

When there is only 22 drivers, I think points for P1-P8 is enough. I like the idea of 1 extra point for fastest lap, though.

Incidentally, with my points system, Rosberg would be at 116, and Hamilton at 102.


Or 12-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 might be even better, as it rewards a win more.

[Moxie]

My primary concern is the issue of points for the back of the field. The idea that a team in 11th earns 0 points for finishing the race, the same reward for DNF is particularly distressing. Teams at the rear struggle enough as it is with poor prize money and low exposure for sponsors. On that rare day that they outperform the Mercedes or Red Bull driver, they deserve to reap some reward.

The secondary issue is setting the proper gap between 1st and 2nd.

Point system. 1-2 point gap
1962 - 1990 2 is 67% of 1 DNF's were forgiven as only the best x results counted toward the championship. X was variable
1991 - 2002. 2 is 60% of 1
2003 - 2009. 2 is 80% of 1
2010 - present 2 is 72% of 1

My point system gives 2nd place a value of 89% of 1st. Ideally, a statistical analysis would be performed to determine just what the point gap should be to promote season long competition. The same model could then be used to set the gaps between the other places.

[Ennis]

12-9-6-5-4-3-2-1

When there is only 22 drivers, I think points for P1-P8 is enough. I like the idea of 1 extra point for fastest lap, though.

Incidentally, with my points system, Rosberg would be at 116, and Hamilton at 102.


Or 12-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 might be even better, as it rewards a win more.

I don't like the 1pt for fastest lap. It would be nice in a 'natural' environment, but as soon as you award it you have people throwing on clean supersofts and performing the last lap like a qualy lap.