Jump to content

F1 Rule change..


JustMike
 Share

Recommended Posts

Does this mean that drivers in contention for the title will just pull out of races if they are stuck back in 6th , 7th , 8th place or whatever in order to save on engines, tyres etc.

 

the points system is still in place for both drivers and constructors but the drivers title will go to the person with most wins. Like the article says, lets hope we dont get a driver dominating the 1st half of season as the title will be decided by Silverstone. Could mean alot of dull races

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Retarded system. Just changing the rules to suit Ferrari.

 

Massa didn't deserve to win last seasons Championship because he wasn't as consistent as Hamilton. Hitting Coulthard in Australia, spinning off in Malaysia, spinning 7 times in Silverstone, taking the fuel rig for a walk in Singapore.

 

Would love it if Someone like Button or Kubica won the WDC, but Ferrari would have won on the old system. Love it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What it will mean is that teams can test parts during the early races, safe in the knowledge that if they hit on a winning formula it could win them the WDC, on race wins, later on. This is particularly useful to teams which have one driver on a level far below the other, thus knowing that the WCC is probably beyond them. I can't think of a team like that though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What it will mean is that teams can test parts during the early races, safe in the knowledge that if they hit on a winning formula it could win them the WDC, on race wins, later on. This is particularly useful to teams which have one driver on a level far below the other, thus knowing that the WCC is probably beyond them. I can't think of a team like that though.

 

I'm genuinely not sure if you're being sarcastic there. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Retarded system. Just changing the rules to suit Ferrari.

 

Massa didn't deserve to win last seasons Championship because he wasn't as consistent as Hamilton. Hitting Coulthard in Australia, spinning off in Malaysia, spinning 7 times in Silverstone, taking the fuel rig for a walk in Singapore.

 

Would love it if Someone like Button or Kubica won the WDC, but Ferrari would have won on the old system. Love it!

 

Agreed. Under the old system if the top drivers had a bad pit stop, damaged wing or puncture they at least had a chance to get back into the points to challenge for the overall title, now will the top drivers bother racing once they are out of contention for the win?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....now will the top drivers bother racing once they are out of contention for the win?

 

Let's see...

 

Stringent rules on engine life with 10 place penalties up for grabs if you exceed 8 engines per season.

The same applies to gearboxes.

The risk of damaging the car.

2nd place being considered the 1st of the losers.

 

Versus

 

Valuable Constructors' points.

 

 

It's going to backfire spectacularly IMO but I guess we'll see come Melbourne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not just extend the gap between the points for 1st, 2nd & 3rd; eg 20 for a win 12 for 2nd, 8 for third ? That puts the emphasis on finishing first, or at least trying to. Under this stupid arrangement if a driver wins 6 races and fails to finish any of the rest, ( but overall he has the most wins ) , he would become champion over somebody who wins 5 races and gets 12 2nd places, despite only having 60 points to the runner-up's 146 !:smt102

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just looks like a rule to stop the british winning

 

 

I agree, it's bloody racist. Not only will it significantly effect all British drivers, it will also affect all black drivers as well as the white ones. It's a disgrace; old Bernie has a lot to answer for!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like it in the slightest. What's the point in having a points system at all? What happens if all sports adopt this system? Imagine the premiership being decided on wins rather than points?

 

It's utter rubbish and another example of the poison dwarf messing with tradition just because Ferrari didn't win last season.

 

If it had been in place this season then Kubica's thoroughly deserved points tally for his consistent podium finishes would have been totally worthless.

 

Take this scenario;

 

A driver from a 2nd tier team such as BMW, Renault or Brawn (hopefully!) put's in an ultra consistant season putting in podiums virtually every race and even winning a couple of times, amassing a thoroughly respectful points total of around 90-100 points.

 

Someone (maybe Scandanavian) from one of the top teams (maybe a red one) wins 4 races over the season and spends the rest of the time spinning off, retiring to save engines when they're too far from the front, crashing into other people in a desperate attempt to get to that golden 1st place and generally driving like a clown. They finish the seaon on 40 points.

 

Who deserves the title?

 

Utter folly and a complete joke...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn them wanting the fastest cars to win!

 

The thing is it's not all about the fastest cars winning. It's about the balance of speed, consistency and reliability over the whole season. If you've got an ultra fast car that only finishes one in 4 races and blows up in the other 3 because it's so highly strung then it's not deserving of the title in my eyes.

 

A car that finishes every race in the season in the top 3 without a single mechanical breakdown is surely the one that deserves it isn't it? Surely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is it's not all about the fastest cars winning. It's about the balance of speed, consistency and reliability over the whole season. If you've got an ultra fast car that only finishes one in 4 races and blows up in the other 3 because it's so highly strung then it's not deserving of the title in my eyes.

 

A car that finishes every race in the season in the top 3 without a single mechanical breakdown is surely the one that deserves it isn't it? Surely?

Apparently not in Bernie's eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This makes interesting reading. I've always held the opinion that Nelson Piquet was nowhere near worth 3 World Championship titles, and Nigel Mansell was worth far more than 1. And perhaps the early part of the article will have a few heads nodding. Then comes the second part, and you look back up at the photo of Ecclestone and Moseley and realise that Ecclestone is completely bananas.

 

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

Edited by St Landrew
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that article it says that Bernie and Max are "paranoid about not enough teams making the grid in 2010". Well this little change will hasten that happening, in the current world climate, who is going to continuing chucking millions of dollars down the drain to not even have any chance to win a championship. This will become like the Football Premiership the top four get all the money and everyone else is left to bob about as cannon fodder with almost zero chance of breaking into the golden circle.

 

Years ago these 2 poked their fingers into the Sportscar (Le Mans) series. Jaguar had just racked up a couple of Le Mans wins 1000k endurance races were very well attended. Big manufacturers backed the series, Jaguar, Mercedes, Porsche, Aston Martin. Yes some of the engines were a tad obscene by todays standard: 7ltr Jags, 5ltr lightly blown Mercs, 6 ltr Astons, 3.5ltr fully blown Porsche, but they were all the type of engines that you expect from these marques. Then then probably as a result of the attendance popularity encroaching on F1 these 2 changed the engine rules making them all 3.5ltr normally aspirated engines, 1000 kilometre races were stopped, as a result most of the privateers threw in the towel. We went to the Silverstone round the year these changes were made the race started the cars went past us and my wife said where's the rest of the cars "thats the lot" was my reply. "What only 8 cars!" she exclaimed. In reality we paid good money to see a poor spectacle compared to the big field 1000k days only the year before.

 

I bet they are paranoid because if only 8 cars made the Formula 1 grid in 2010 the pair of them would be lynched by the folks in the grandstands who had just stumped up £120 for the privilege of watching a very dull affair.

 

I will look forward to cutting my grass this summer when there is very little point in watching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that article it says that Bernie and Max are "paranoid about not enough teams making the grid in 2010". Well this little change will hasten that happening, in the current world climate, who is going to continuing chucking millions of dollars down the drain to not even have any chance to win a championship. This will become like the Football Premiership the top four get all the money and everyone else is left to bob about as cannon fodder with almost zero chance of breaking into the golden circle.

 

Years ago these 2 poked their fingers into the Sportscar (Le Mans) series. Jaguar had just racked up a couple of Le Mans wins 1000k endurance races were very well attended. Big manufacturers backed the series, Jaguar, Mercedes, Porsche, Aston Martin. Yes some of the engines were a tad obscene by todays standard: 7ltr Jags, 5ltr lightly blown Mercs, 6 ltr Astons, 3.5ltr fully blown Porsche, but they were all the type of engines that you expect from these marques. Then then probably as a result of the attendance popularity encroaching on F1 these 2 changed the engine rules making them all 3.5ltr normally aspirated engines, 1000 kilometre races were stopped, as a result most of the privateers threw in the towel. We went to the Silverstone round the year these changes were made the race started the cars went past us and my wife said where's the rest of the cars "thats the lot" was my reply. "What only 8 cars!" she exclaimed. In reality we paid good money to see a poor spectacle compared to the big field 1000k days only the year before.

 

I bet they are paranoid because if only 8 cars made the Formula 1 grid in 2010 the pair of them would be lynched by the folks in the grandstands who had just stumped up £120 for the privilege of watching a very dull affair.

 

I will look forward to cutting my grass this summer when there is very little point in watching.

 

The constructors championship hasn't changed, that will still be determined on points. Its only the drivers championship which is affected.

 

I think he change is for the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The constructors championship hasn't changed, that will still be determined on points. Its only the drivers championship which is affected.

 

I think he change is for the better.

 

On what basis? Interesting to hear that someone actually likes it.

 

Read my post above about it and tell me how that could be considered better?

 

I'm not jumping down your throat. I'm just interested to hear the other side of the argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank feck. Though they want to make their bleeding minds up, arsing around like this just before the start of the season.

 

Hopefully it'll actually allow teams to object properly and get something done about it, rather than the whole concept just being deferred for a year - if the latter is the case, they may as well have just left it in force now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How are the fastest cars supposed to win now?

 

I think it is disgusting that they have overturned this. It is positive discrimination in order to ensure that the British win. It is no coincidence that Ecclestone is British and he is overturning rules so that there is a benefit for the British. You don't see Sepp Blatter overturning rules so that the Swiss will win the World Cup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How are the fastest cars supposed to win now?

 

I think it is disgusting that they have overturned this. It is positive discrimination in order to ensure that the British win. It is no coincidence that Ecclestone is British and he is overturning rules so that there is a benefit for the British. You don't see Sepp Blatter overturning rules so that the Swiss will win the World Cup.

 

oh dear :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On what basis? Interesting to hear that someone actually likes it.

 

Read my post above about it and tell me how that could be considered better?

 

I'm not jumping down your throat. I'm just interested to hear the other side of the argument.

 

I think it would have created more overtaking. All to often drivers will settle for 2nd place because they still get 8 points, if there was more incentive to win they would push right to the end, although maybe they just need to increase the points gap between 1st and 2nd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...