The 2007 World Drivers Championship Redux

[Fish_Flake]

What happens when this year's results are tabulated using the various scoring systems used during the history of the Formula 1 World Championship? Well, here it goes.

2003-2007 Points (10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1, all results count)

1. Kimi Raikkonen: 110
2. Lewis Hamilton: 109
3. Fernando Alonso: 109
4. Felipe Massa: 94

1991-2002 Points (10-6-4-3-2-1, all results count)

1. Kimi Raikkonen: 92
2. Lewis Hamilton: 85
3. Fernando Alonso: 79
4. Felipe Massa: 72

1985-1990 Points (9-6-4-3-2-1, best eleven results count)

1. Kimi Raikkonen: 78
2. Lewis Hamilton: 74
3. Fernando Alonso: 72
4. Felipe Massa: 65

1981-1984 Points (9-6-4-3-2-1, all results count)

1. Kimi Raikkonen: 86
2. Lewis Hamilton: 81
3. Fernando Alonso: 75
4. Felipe Massa: 69

1979-1980 Points (9-6-4-3-2-1, best four results from first eight races plus best four results from final nine races count)

1. Kimi Raikkonen: 62
2. Fernando Alonso: 60
3. Lewis Hamilton: 58
4. Felipe Massa: 57

1967-1978 Points (9-6-4-3-2-1, worst result from first nine races and final eight races thrown out)

1. Kimi Raikkonen: 86
2. Lewis Hamilton: 78
3. Fernando Alonso: 73
4. Felipe Massa: 69

1961-1966 Points (9-6-4-3-2-1, best nine results count)

1. Kimi Raikkonen: 70
2. Lewis Hamilton: 66
3. Fernando Alonso: 64
4. Felipe Massa: 59

1960 Points (8-6-4-3-2-1, best nine results count)

1. Kimi Raikkonen: 64
2. Lewis Hamilton: 62
3. Fernando Alonso: 60
4. Felipe Massa: 56

1951-1959 Points (8-6-4-3-2 plus 1 for fastest lap, best nine results count)

1. Kimi Raikkonen: 69
2. Lewis Hamilton: 64
3. Fernando Alonso: 63
4. Felipe Massa: 62

1950 Points (8-6-4-3-2 plus 1 for fastest lap, best nine results count)

1. Kimi Raikkonen: 59
2. Felipe Massa: 54
3. Fernando Alonso: 53
4. Lewis Hamilton: 52

In every scoring system used in the Formula 1 World Championship since its inception in 1950, Kimi Raikkonen wins the championship. In all but two systems, Lewis Hamilton finishes second in the standings, while Fernando Alonso finishes third. In the 1979-1980 system, the two McLaren drivers swap positions in the standings, while in the 1950 system, Felipe Massa leapfrogs both of them into second, and Lewis drops all the way back to fourth!

As a general rule, Kimi Raikkonen's winning margin narrows as winning provides less of a points advantage as second, and as fewer results are tallied. The exception to this rule is with 1950s-era systems which award a point to fastest lap: as both Ferraris have dominated that category this season, Kimi and Felipe both earn more points in 1950s-era systems than they do in the 1960 system, which still pays only eight points to the winner but does not award a point to fastest lap.

The narrowest margin of victory for Kimi comes with the current (2003-2007) system, with only a point separating him from both Lewis and Fernando. The widest margin of victory comes with the 1967-1978 system, with Kimi eight points up on Lewis. The largest range between the top four finishers comes with the 1991-2002 system, with twenty points separating Kimi from Felipe. Meanwhile, the smallest range between the two four finishers comes with the 1979-1980 system, where Kimi and Felipe are only five points apart.

[f1manoz]

So, no matter, what you could say Kimi is more than a deserving World Champion!

[TIMELORD]

I've always felt that 10-6-4-3-2-1 system was the best, as it heavily weighted a GP win, which is the way it should be.

It's good to see that Kimi has come out on top using all the previous systems. It cements the fact that he fully deserves his title.

[Knowlesy]

Yes. I felt he didn't deserve it at all, not one iota, but now I have seen the permutations with the old points systems I feel humbled.

[JeremySmith]

Brilliant Fish_ Flake! Thank you for taking the time to do that..

[Fish_Flake]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Yes. I felt he didn't deserve it at all, not one iota, but now I have seen the permutations with the old points systems I feel humbled.

For what it's worth, using the pre-war deduction system, Hamilton and Alonso both edge out Raikkonen by one point, 45 to 46. If you're looking for some sort of vindication, there it is.

[luke]

you have too much time on your hands! but thanks!

[Knowlesy]

Nope. Kimi won it with this system and he worked to that. That's all you can do.

[Fish_Flake]

I just realized an error on my part: the 1950 system counts the best seven results, not the best nine.

[Racer_kyle]

Well done Kimi. You won the most races and in my opinion that still counts for something, even if it isn't properly rewarded by the current points system!

[Bononi]

Nice work fish_flake !

A deserved win by all matters.

[climb]

Good job ff, tho i can't say I'm surprised, since Kimi is the one who won most races, and every previous system tended to privilege wins instead of placements.

[Ralf's Girl]

Originally Posted by TIMELORD

I've always felt that 10-6-4-3-2-1 system was the best, as it heavily weighted a GP win, which is the way it should be.

It was a good system until Schumacher ran away with the 2002 championship. Problem was, they introduced the new system so he wouldn't get away so quickly and people might catch him but he still won the next two.

[ECW Dan Selby]

Great post.

selby

[BootsOntheSide]

The championship system favoured McLaren's reliability, that's pretty clear. Interesting that the 10-6-4-3-2-1 system would have eliminated Alonso before the final race. Maybe in that situation the team would have favoured Lewis at some point, and perhaps he'd've got the title as a result? It's all hypothetical, they played within pre-agreed rules (on the points system, anyway) and Kimi won.

[garcon]

Here's as good a place as any for me to say I can see why the current system was introduced, but I think it fails to put sufficient emphasis on winning races.

I would like to see it change again, but only slightly: give the winner 12 points, but leave the rest as they are.

[RT]

Originally Posted by garcon

Here's as good a place as any for me to say I can see why the current system was introduced, but I think it fails to put sufficient emphasis on winning races.

I would like to see it change again, but only slightly: give the winner 12 points, but leave the rest as they are.

A very good point Garcon, Could we start an e-petition drive???, maybe we will have an effect. It's only fair that the 1st place should have more than 2 points over 2nd. Most importantly, it will encourage risk-taking.

Cheers,

RT

[Marbot]

I propose this system.

1st-1 point
2nd-2 points
3rd-3 points
4th-4 points
5th-5 points
6th-6 points
7th-8 points
8th-10 points

Should improve the midfield battle somewhat.

[duke_toaster]

I propose the following system.

1st - 10
2nd - 9
3rd - 8
4th - 7
5th - 6
6th - 5
7th - 4
8th - 3
9th - 2
All other finishers - 1

Rewards consistancy and reliability.

[bdwoody]

I propose we just ask bernie who he wants to win............no no what am i saying ,must stop sniffing hylomar and have a lye down ..doh

[Bleu]

Finnish champion anyway, duke_toaster!

1 Heikki Kovalainen 81 - 10 - 8 - 4 5 - 8 10 10 6 8 10 2 - -
2 Nick Heidfeld 67 4 4 4 - 6 2 - 5 6 6 3 4 4 5 - 8 6
3 Robert Kubica 64 - - 6 4 5 - - 4 4 8 5 10 5 - 8 - 5
4 Fernando Alonso 49 2 1 5 3 1 8 2 8 2 1 4 3 1 3 - 2 3
5 Nico Rosberg 46 8 - - 6 - - - - - - 8 8 6 6 - - 4
= Giancarlo Fisichella 46 5 6 10 - 4 - - 6 10 - - - - - 5 - -
7 Felipe Massa 42 6 5 1 1 3 - 3 2 5 2 - 1 - 2 6 3 2
8 Kimi Raikkonen 41 1 3 3 - 10 5 4 1 1 - 2 2 3 1 3 1 1
9 Lewis Hamilton 40 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 3 3 - 1 5 2 4 1 - 8
10 Jarno Trulli 32 - 8 8 - - - 6 - - - - - - - - - 10
11 Ralf Schumacher 26 10 - - - - 10 - - - - 6 - - - - - -
12 Jenson Button 25 - - - - - - - 10 - - - - 10 - - 5 -
13 David Coulthard 24 - - - 5 - - - - - 5 - - - - 4 10 -
14 Mark Webber 19 - - - - - - 8 - - 3 - - - 8 - - -
15 Takuma Sato 16 - - - 10 - 6 - - - - - - - - - - -
16 Alexander Wurz 15 - - - - 8 3 - - - 4 - - - - - - -
17 Sebastian Vettel 14 - - - - - - 10 - - - - - - - - 4 -
18 Adrian Sutil 10 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10 - -
19 Vitantonio Liuzzi 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 -
20 Scott Speed 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
= Sakon Yamamoto 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
= Rubens Barrichello 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
= Markus Winkelhock 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
= Kazuki Nakajima 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
= Christijan Albers 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
= Anthony Davidson 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[Fish_Flake]

The current point system has run its course. Yes, it was created in part to soften the blow of the Schumacher/Ferrari domination of 2001 and especially 2002, but two more important factors were at work behind its creation.

1. The system intended to reward teams in the middle or lower tiers of the grid for performance that, though not at the same level as those in the upper echelon of the sport, were still impressive in their own right. Prost and Arrows had gone under during a span in 2001 and 2002 due to a lack of results and the loss of sponsorship money that comes with not being a mainstay in the top six. There were legitimate worries that the Formula 1 grid would consist of as few as twelve factory-backed entries if the smaller privateers would continue to not be rewarded.
2. The system also intended to offset the larger range of position a frontrunner would finish in over the course of the season due to the tire war at the time. The first year under the current system is a perfect example of that. When Bridgestone brought the right tire to the track, the F2003 was unbeatable, but the car was downright mediocre if Michelin brought the better rubber. McLaren's MP4-17 was a year old and at the tail end of the development ladder, but the team had enough data on the car to know how to but it on the podium even if it did not have the tire advantage.

Those problems no longer exist in Formula 1. The series now runs on a control tire, and as Jordan-Midland-Spyker-Force India have demonstrated, the teams at the bottom of the sport's food chain always manage to find a backer.

The problem with the current system is that it eliminates too much of the risk factor in the sport. With the reliability of today's cars, it is too easy for a team to build a strong championship portfolio by playing safe and collecting a string of second or third place finishes. Although Kimi Raikkonen pulled it off this year, the point system doesn't allow for a big swing in points after one driver wins and another gives a mediocre performance.

That's why I would want Formula 1 to return to the 9-6-4-3-2-1 format, and in addition award a point for fastest lap. I would also only have the top 75% of a driver or team's season results to count toward the championship (fastest laps count regardless of finishing position). As the season progresses and a team uses more of its allotted finishes, there would be much more of a need to continue going for the win, as the only way to score points during the last quarter of the season would be to better the results one had already placed.

If this system were in place during the 2007 season, the standings going into the final round in Brazil would have been Hamilton 83, Raikkonen 81, Alonso 80. To collect points for position in the race, each driver would have had to finish in a higher position than their 13th-best result of the year; for Raikkonen and Alonso, that would have meant finishing higher than fifth, and for Hamiton, that would have meant finishing higher than fourth. Hamilton's seventh would have garnered no points, giving him a season total of 83 points. Alonso's third would have meant only a net gain of two points after dropping his fifth-place finish, giving him a season total of 82 points. Raikkonen's win and fastest lap would have meant a net gain of eight points for the race, and his 89 points for the season would have given him the championship.

[FPV GTHO]

Why go back to 6 points paying positions when theres still the problem of lower end teams not scoring big points unless its a freak race? On any normal weekend, Renault Williams Toyota Red Bull and Honda have been competing for 7th and 8th.

[STEALTHY]

Want a system that rewards the race winner?


1st - 1 point.

Done

[Bononi]

Oh yeah.. 17 max points makes a champion.