Len Colombo Posted March 19, 2009 Posted March 19, 2009 Would like to hear thoughts and/or comments on the new rule where the driver's title will be won by the driver who has the most wins.More aggresive driving?
58 Impala Posted March 19, 2009 Posted March 19, 2009 I kind of like the current points system, it' simple and pretty fair.
Nick F40 Posted March 19, 2009 Posted March 19, 2009 Yeah I saw it, bullcrap if you ask me and yes! It's like congratulations for first the rest, yeah we'll figure something out, good try though. If you notcie Ferrari has always been the brainchild with F1, Massa had 6 wins, Hamilton 5.....yeah!
CAL Posted March 19, 2009 Posted March 19, 2009 Clearly they all got drunk and though hey, wouldn't this be a good idea. It's the only explanation.
Guest promodmerc Posted March 19, 2009 Posted March 19, 2009 Holly cow! When did France leave NASCAR and take over F1
CAL Posted March 19, 2009 Posted March 19, 2009 Holly cow! When did France leave NASCAR and take over F1 So let me get this straight. If you get to 9 wins you don't have to show up any more? This is really perhaps the single stupidest thing FIA has ever done.
coopdad Posted March 19, 2009 Posted March 19, 2009 Would like to hear thoughts and/or comments on the new rule where the driver's title will be won by the driver who has the most wins.More aggresive driving? I think would have to mean more aggressive driving especially near the last race. I mean, when the season is nearing the end, drivers will need wins rather than just points to win the championship. I remember many years back when Bobby Rahal won the Indy Car championship by driving a very conservative season, winning only one race I think. It seemed like he came in third every race. Not very exciting in my mind. I have high hopes for the new season. The smaller rear wings will make for more passing (hopefully) plus this rule encouraging winning could make it really fun to watch again. Either that or it will be a gift to unlevel the playing field back to Ferrari to win the championship again....come on, someone had to mention the conspiracy theory...the rules bias to Ferrari didn't they? John
Bernard Kron Posted March 19, 2009 Posted March 19, 2009 (edited) So let me get this straight. If you get to 9 wins you don't have to show up any more? ... I believe that entrants must participate in all races during the season in order to qualify for the championships and the related revenue streams. Of course, nine wins under any circumstances in F1 is no simple matter. But it should mean incredibly aggressive starts and finishes to races up at the front. Also, once a teammate is clearly out of the running he might find new life as "designated hit man". The biggest problem with this approach will be if a single driver dominates long enough during a portion of the the season to get to whatever number race wins required to put the rest of the field out of reach significantly before the end of the season. With the trend to fewer rather than more F1 races this could land up being a very real issue. As long as there are three driver/car combinations that are very competitive this approach should work, but a classic Schumacher style dominance would land up being as boring as ever with the added problem of coming earlier in the season. Edited March 19, 2009 by gbk1
Fletch Posted March 19, 2009 Posted March 19, 2009 F1s new rule has got to be one of the most idiotic things that governing board has ever come up with. Granted drivers need an insensitive to win. But to put the entire emphasis on winnig and not overall consistency throughout the season is insane. The idea if two drivers happen to win the same number of races to then go to the points system to determine the champion. Makes about as much sense as at the end of the regular season in Baseball give the pennant over to the team with the most number of wins. If we should happen to have 2 teams with the same number of win/losses then we'll use some sort tie breaker to determine the champion. This all started at the end of last season when Hamilton beat Massa by a single point for the championship. Just because Massa won 6 races and Hamilton 5, if you're not there at the end to cross the finish line who cares. If your car can't finish a race for what ever reason, why should you be the champion over the guy who was there at the end more then you were. The fact that the season has once again been shortened and the fact that it's on at 1:30 AM here in the states, I expect the viewership to drop. The fact that there is not a single North American date on the schedule doesn't help matters either. Do the powers that be in F1 expect the fans to spend the money to attend an event, say in the last 7 races of the season, where someone has already won 8 races and is effectively already been crowned champion? What would be the point? Your driver has ZERO chance of winning the Championship. I think that if this season turns out to be a run away by one single driver the fans will show their displeasure with this system with their pocketbooks. I have been a fan of F1 for several years and as a fan I don't see where this "NEW" system is anything but a really bad idea brought on by a bad idea on how to be politically correct. My $0.02 worth.
Zoom Zoom Posted March 19, 2009 Posted March 19, 2009 I have a new personal rule that negates the new F1 rule. I won't watch F1 until they race again in N. America, and preferably after Bernie and Max are long gone. Hooray to whomever wins this year.
Bernard Kron Posted March 19, 2009 Posted March 19, 2009 (edited) F1's new rule has got to be one of the most idiotic things that governing board has ever come up with. Granted drivers need an incentive to win. But to put the entire emphasis on winning and not overall consistency throughout the season is insane. ... This all started at the end of last season when Hamilton beat Massa by a single point for the championship. Just because Massa won 6 races and Hamilton 5, if you're not there at the end to cross the finish line who cares. .. The fact that the season has once again been shortened and the fact that it's on at 1:30 AM here in the states, I expect the viewership to drop. The fact that there is not a single North American date on the schedule doesn't help matters either. Do the powers that be in F1 expect the fans to spend the money to attend an event, say in the last 7 races of the season, where someone has already won 8 races and is effectively already been crowned champion? What would be the point? Your driver has ZERO chance of winning the Championship. I think that if this season turns out to be a run away by one single driver the fans will show their displeasure with this system with their pocketbooks. I have been a fan of F1 for several years and as a fan I don't see where this "NEW" system is anything but a really bad idea brought on by a bad idea on how to be politically correct. Over the past 48 hours several drivers have commented on the change, somewhat tentatively in most cases, couched in language about the suddenness and immediacy of the decision, but generally questioning why it is necessary to constantly fiddle with the rules. This is symptomatic of a sport in full crisis, not just Formula One but the sport in general. A sport which has bet heavily on corporate sponsorship as the means by which to fund various formulae which can otherwise prove to be ruinously expensive. Formula One is just the "pinnacle" of the sport and thus the most dependent on corporate largess to stay alive. Now that money spigot is being turned off and the various principals in Formula One are having to assess what to do to keep their sport/business/passion/investment (depending on who you are) alive. Gradually over the past couple of decades we have seen a concentration of the most important formulae in fewer and fewer hands. Even inherently populist spectacles like the World Rally Championship have found themselves struggling to attract sponsorship/viewership/attendance as they price themselves out of participation in world markets. Other corners of the sport have seen themselves "dumbed down" to idiotically manipulative formulae under the guise of preserving competition and cutting costs (i.e. NASCAR, CART, IndyCar. GrandAm, etc.) Now Formula One, whose very reputation was based on technological excellence and the uniqueness of individual efforts to prevail, is going down the same path. But the sport in general, and Formula One in particular, has survived crisis of this sort before. Clues can be found on the MCM board itself. Look at the excitement that builds like Dale Watts' (fordsixty) two "pigs" (see "'31 Model A LMP2, ...another pig out of the pen", http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=18723 ) have created, or the interest in a comment like lilsquirt's "Gimmie tha old NASCAR racing, MY OPINION" ( http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.p...mp;#entry164694 ). Alongside lilsquirt's resentment of the rise of "foreign" manufacturers like Toyota is a critique of silhouette racing and restrictor plates, which goes to the heart of the matter. Motorheads will prevail. We will enjoy our sport where we find it. Whether it's the relative openness of LMP, the Pinks phenomenon with its explicit evocation of weekend drag racing (Pinks AllOutakes), or the global developing-world phenomenon that is GP-style motorcycle racing, the clues are there. Perhaps in F1 died-in-the-wool motorheads like Ron Dennis and Frank Williams from the older generation, and now Ross Brawn and Norbert Haug from the middle generation, and no doubt countless younger F! die-hards, will finally make their disgust known and we will see the emergence of lesser non-championship F1 races as an excuse to run their machines under more open rules and begin to develop a path out of the bind they find themselves in. It's happened before... How about a North American "Tasman Series" for F! cars running less restrictive aero packages? Bernie, Max and the investment bankers would be furious!!! Edited March 19, 2009 by gbk1
Nick F40 Posted March 19, 2009 Posted March 19, 2009 The smaller rear wings will make for more passing (hopefully) plus this rule encouraging winning could make it really fun to watch again. Either that or it will be a gift to unlevel the playing field back to Ferrari to win the championship again....come on, someone had to mention the conspiracy theory...the rules bias to Ferrari didn't they? John I agree with the small wing but hey of course ,and i'm even a Ferrari fan! But yeah it's liske what Chris said, so he only has to finish first in a few events then the rest of the season, take vacation, you won anyway! Bob, still not going to huh? I can't wait for that also as much as I don't like saying that about people....
Bernard Kron Posted March 20, 2009 Posted March 20, 2009 Well here ya go. After an endless stream of drivers and team managers, even Michael Schumacher, complaining, the Formula One Teams Assocations (FOTA) has spoken, finally! Now we'll see where this goes. Is this the straw that's broken the camel's back? Date: 20 March, 2009 Statement on 2009 drivers’ championship award 20 March 2009 Following the decision of the World Motorsport Council of the 17 March 2009 to change the way the drivers’ championship is awarded, the Teams gathered and unanimously agreed to question the validity of this decision. FOTA had made a proposal that was carefully based on the results of a Global Audience Survey, which allowed listening to preferences of the public, and all the Teams firmly believe that these indications should be properly taken into account. The amendment to the sporting regulations proposed by the World Motorsport Council 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 point system for the 2010 season within a comprehensive set of measures aimed at further stimulating the attractiveness of the F1 Sport.
CAL Posted March 20, 2009 Posted March 20, 2009 Well here ya go. After an endless stream of drivers and team managers, even Michael Schumacher, complaining, the Formula One Teams Assocations (FOTA) has spoken, finally! Now we'll see where this goes. Is this the straw that's broken the camel's back? Date: 20 March, 2009 Statement on 2009 drivers’ championship award 20 March 2009 Following the decision of the World Motorsport Council of the 17 March 2009 to change the way the drivers’ championship is awarded, the Teams gathered and unanimously agreed to question the validity of this decision. FOTA had made a proposal that was carefully based on the results of a Global Audience Survey, which allowed listening to preferences of the public, and all the Teams firmly believe that these indications should be properly taken into account. The amendment to the sporting regulations proposed by the World Motorsport Council 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 point system for the 2010 season within a comprehensive set of measures aimed at further stimulating the attractiveness of the F1 Sport. I guess we will see, FOTA proposed a point structure that was unanimously turned down by FIA.
HotRodaSaurus Posted March 20, 2009 Posted March 20, 2009 What does Bernie Ecclestone know about Motor racing anyway,he has never won a championship himself and apart from a couple of wins and placings back in his racing days he had a crash and gave up!
Bernard Kron Posted March 20, 2009 Posted March 20, 2009 (edited) What does Bernie Ecclestone know about Motor racing anyway,he has never won a championship himself and apart from a couple of wins and placings back in his racing days he had a crash and gave up! Well actually, like Frank Williams a few years later, Bernie sold used racing cars and racing car parts as a young man. He also owned and ran the Brabham F1 team for 15 years ('72-'87) with Gordon Murray as his chief designer for much of the period. Although the team under his direction never won the Constructor's Championship (although they fnished 2nd twice and 3rd three times) he delivered 2 Driver's Championships for Nelson Piquet ('81 & '83). And Max Mosley was the "M" in MARCH. I think it's fair to say that these guys are pretty genuine motorheads. Unfortunately this doesn't preclude them eventually losing their way... Edited March 20, 2009 by gbk1
moparmagiclives Posted March 20, 2009 Posted March 20, 2009 I dont know much about or watch much Indy or F1 ,but I thought racing was to finish first. I'm not saying the guys in 2nd,3rd and so on dont deserve somthing for the effort. But I also dont think the guys that (what I feel is sandbagging) hang back all year and just rack up points, should be able to take it away from the ones who get out there and fight for the wins.I have mixed feelings on this kind of stuff I guess.
HotRodaSaurus Posted March 21, 2009 Posted March 21, 2009 Well actually, like Frank Williams a few years later, Bernie sold used racing cars and racing car parts as a young man. He also owned and ran the Brabham F1 team for 15 years ('72-'87) with Gordon Murray as his chief designer for much of the period. Although the team under his direction never won the Constructor's Championship (although they fnished 2nd twice and 3rd three times) he delivered 2 Driver's Championships for Nelson Piquet ('81 & '83). And Max Mosley was the "M" in MARCH. I think it's fair to say that these guys are pretty genuine motorheads. Unfortunately this doesn't preclude them eventually losing their way... Thats ok, I was just light heartedly summing up his racing career The guy obviously has a better buisiness brain than driving skills
Bernard Kron Posted March 22, 2009 Posted March 22, 2009 Looks like game over for now - the FIA blinked and backed off. It's very likely the new rule, if it ever goes into effect, will only apply in 2010 at the earliest. The FIA released the following press release last night. Obviously the FOTA teams will "not now agree with the new system" and so the whole fiasco is put off until 2010. What a bunch of bureaucratic clowns! I still can't figure out why they tried to make the change in the first place... Press Release FIA Formula One World Championship 20/03/2009 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.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now