F1 points systems Old New and Theoretical.

[Nikko2]

I was wondering what sort of effect the change in points system has had on the drivers standings. I have read a few posts where the general consensus is that the shift from 10-6 to 10-8 etc. has not changed an outcome of a WCC to date. The biggest effect it has had is letting the midfield bag a few more points with points available for 7th and 8th places.

I then wondered what the effect of a further revision to the points system would do. Secifically if the points did not stop at 8 but went right through the field. This would be good for the teams and drivers at the back of field as they would be scoring points throughout the season. It would also allow drivers that show consistency across the whole race and season some further recognition of a job well done.

I chucked the data from last year and this year to date into a spreadsheet and had a play with a couple of surprising results with my theoretical points system.

2007 season:

The old and current system would have had no change in the order. But the theoretical system would have seen Alonso a WC Hamilton in 2nd and Raikkonen despite all those wins in 3rd place.

Current Pos Driver Current Pts Old Points Alt Points
3 Fernando Alonso 109 85 738
2 Lewis Hamilton 109 87 736
1 Kimi Räikkönen 110 93 702
4 Felipe Massa 94 72 670
5 Nick Heidfeld 61 33 596
7 Heikki Kovalainen 30 12 554
6 Robert Kubica 39 18 502
8 Giancarlo Fisichella 21 9 500
9 Nico Rosberg 20 6 452
20 Rubens Barrichello 0 0 418
13 Jarno Trulli 8 1 398
11 Alexander Wurz 13 7 382
12 Mark Webber 10 4 342
10 David Coulthard 14 7 340
16 Ralf Schumacher 5 1 326
17 Takuma Sato 4 1 324
15 Jenson Button 6 2 308
23 Anthony Davidson 0 0 266
18 Vitantonio Liuzzi 3 1 210
19 Adrian Sutil 1 0 200
14 Sebastian Vettel 6 3 130
25 Christijan Albers 0 0 92
24 Sakon Yamamoto 0 0 88
21 Scott Speed 0 0 84
22 Kazuki Nakajima 0 0 32
— Markus Winkelhock 0 0 0

2008 Season: So far…..

This was unexpected. There is difference in placing between old and new points for Raikkonen and and Kubica. But the theoretica points throw up a wild card. Heidfelds overall consistency puts him top as one of the only runners this year not to retire. Massas inconsistency puts him in 6th. It also shows up the difference between Alonso and Piquet 9th and 18th respectively.

Current Pos Driver Current Pts Old Points Alt Points
5 Heidfeld 41 27 398
3 Räikkönen 51 40 396
1 Hamilton 58 52 394
4 Kubica 48 34 360
2 Massa 54 46 358
6 Kovalainen 28 15 356
7 Trulli 20 9 336
8 Webber 18 6 300
9 Alonso 13 5 290
12 Rosberg 8 4 260
13 Nakajima 8 1 240
10 Barrichello 11 5 228
16 Glock 5 3 220
14 Coulthard 6 4 218
17 Button 3 1 180
18 Bourdais 2 0 162
15 Vettel 6 2 160
11 Piquet 10 6 138
19 Fisichella 0 0 124
21 Sutil 0 0 70
20 Sato 0 0 64
22 Davidson 0 0 42

Food for thought I guess.

[Nikko2]

Hmm the BB didnt like my tables sorry if its hard to read.

[mariof1]

Ok but... what's your theoretical system?

[bhall]

I don't like any system that could potentially allow a win-less driver to be World Champion.

[Belatti]

Ok but... what's your theoretical system?

I think its similar to nowadays IRL

I´ll quote a comparison made long time ago in another webpage:

If one thinks about it, the two criteria for any points system should be:
1. Fairness to all competitors, and
2.Simplicity, so contestants and fans alike can understand what the situation is.

IRL: points given are 50, 40, 35, 32, 30, 28, 26, 24, 22, 20, 19, 18, 17, and so on down to 1 point for 29th. Good aspects include a fairly wide margin of benefit for a win but even then it only takes a 7th and an 8th to match a win in points, hardly a fair indication of effort. It provides some reward for all the field, which is good of course, but it may be a bit hard for the amateur enthusiast to keep track.

CART: points given are 20, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, with one point for fastest in each qualifying session, one for pole on ovals, and two for pole on non-ovals.
Theoretically, 14 drivers could therefore gain a point or more at a race meeting. Good aspects of the system include recognition for two-thirds of current fields and an incentive for drivers lying lower than sixth to keep racing because there are points available. Similarly, there is sense in a CART driver continuing after a lengthy pit stop because he may pick up a point or two, whereas in F1 a long pit stop is usually a reason to park it, jump in the Lear, and watch the end of the race on TV in one's Monaco pad. Criticisms include complication, and the fact that two fifth-place finishes have the same value as a win, whereas in F1 a second and a third are needed to equal a win.

F1: points given are 10, 6, 4, 3, 2, 1.
Easy for everyone to follow. But it only rewards six cars, and in situations where three teams (six cars) dominate it can result in the rest of the field being left out in the cold. Some may say that with recent fields of as few as 18 cars, awarding points to a third of them is about right but it does not seem all that long ago that we had 36 cars striving for GP glory. Surely more than six points-paying positions in those days would have been fully justifiable.
What is often overlooked is the number of changes to the points system in F1 that have taken place since the championships started in 1950. Originally it was 8,6,4,3,2 with an extra point for fastest lap. That point was later dropped and one added for sixth place. In response to a clamour that the winner should get greater recognition, an extra point was awarded in 1961, making the points 9,6,4,3,2,1. Exactly 30 years later, a similar clamour resulted in the winner being awarded 10 points.

[Nikko2]

Good info Belatta.

My theoretical system was just keep the simplicity of the current system. No points for fastest laps or poles.

1st = 50
2nd = 48
3rd = 46

etc. etc. etc.

I also don't like the way it throws up a non race winner into the lead. But I imagine drivers and teams adapt to the scoring system and would fight hard once out of the top 8 with this system I dont imagine Massa would still have a job after silverstone.

In any case I do like the way it punishes inconsistency.

[donskar]

Wasn't so long ago points were awarded 9-6-4-3-2-1.

I liked it.