|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
Net
The 2002 Season F1fan-eBook 
|
Do you see the eBook Contents pane on the left? No? Then access the entire F1-fan eBook here! |
Inflation or deflation?
 |
|
Although not true in every single case, the new points system tends to be more rewarding, in general, for drivers who have consistently made to the final flag throughout a given season (the chart at What if 2002..., provides a fairly detailed overview of the matter, taking the 2002 Season as an illustration). In other words, both car reliability and driver ability to avoid spins and crashes should, at large, pay off more generously in 2003 than previously. The fact that now both seventh and eighth places will likewise punctuate also contributes to making a difference here.
On the other hand, the new points system means a deflation as to the worth of a victory, in contrast with an inflation regarding the lower placements, as illustrated in Points+Article 26. Fourth place emerges particularly advantageous, as the different comparisons below indicate.
For example, whereas in 2002 a driver arriving in P4 would add 3 points to his championship tally (that is, half of the points earned by a driver arriving in P2), he will now score 5 points, which is half of the points earned by the winner of a race. In other words, if in 2002 two fourth place finishes were equivalent in points to one second place finish, with the new rules, two fourth place finishes are as worthy as a victory in terms of points.
Putting it yet another way, suppose a driver wins half of the sixteen Grand Prix in 2003 and scores no other points (his final tally: 8x10 = 80), whereas another driver arrives in fourth every race of the season (his final tally: 16x5 = 80). These drivers will finish the season equalled in points.
By the same token, a driver coming in second place in half of the sixteen Grand Prix in 2003 and scoring no other points (his final tally: 8x8 = 64), this driver's tally will be identical to that of another driver arriving in fifth place every race of the season (his final tally: 16x4 = 64).
Analogously, a driver arriving in third place in half of the sixteen Grand Prix in 2003, and scoring no other points (his final tally: 8x6 = 48), will total the same number of points as another driver arriving in sixth place every race of the season (his final tally: 16x3 = 48).
The correspondence breaks down at fourth place: a driver coming in fourth in half of the sixteen Grand Prix in 2003 and scoring no other points (his final tally: 8x6 = 40), will actually be eight points ahead of another driver arriving in seventh place every race of the season (his final tally: 16x2 = 32). Two fourth places (2x5 = 10) delivering as many points as one victory (please see above), in addition to being 2 points more valuable than four seventh places (4x2 = 8), it follows that P4 has been converted in the most advantageous finish, relatively speaking.
Now, a driver arriving in fifth place in half of the sixteen Grand Prix in 2003, and scoring no other points (his final tally: 8x4 = 32), will end the season with an equal tally to another driver arriving in seventh place every race of the season (his final tally: 16x2 = 32).
Up to 2002, in contrast, this driver arriving in fifth place would end up in equal terms, as far as points, with a driver arriving in sixth in twice the number of races. Such were the cases of Takuma Sato and Mark Webber, 1 fifth each, and Mika Salo and Heinz-Harald Frentzen, 2x sixth each, all of whom totaled 2 points at the closing of the season. Despite equal in points, Sato and Webber finished the Season ahead of Salo and Frentzen because the former drivers had conquered a fifth place, which the latter had not (this follows 'Article 26' of the Formula One World Championship Sporting Regulations, which states that one fifth place has more value than a sixth, in case of a tie in the points).
From 2003 on, however, a driver finishing in 6th place twice (his tally: 2x3 = 6) will be better off than a driver finishing in 5th place once (worth 4 points). This is easily evident from the current and fictional situations charted for Takuma Sato and Heinz-Harald Frentzen in Drivers-Comparison, and detailed in What if 2002... and Season Statistics. (In the next section, the apparent paradox inherent to the new rules is further considered.)
The correspondence we have been examining breaks down once more at sixth place: a driver arriving in sixth place in half of the sixteen Grand Prix scheduled for 2003, and scoring no other points (his final tally: 8x3 = 24), will again end up the season eight points ahead of another driver arriving in eighth place every race of the season (his final tally: 16x1 = 16).
Finally, a driver coming in seventh place in half of the sixteen Grand Prix scheduled for 2003, and scoring no other points (his final tally: 8x2 = 16), will total the same number of points as another driver arriving in eighth place every race of the season (his final tally: 16x1 = 16). This relationship is analogous to that binding fifth and sixth places under the old rules.
The above indicates that the new points system grants sixth and fourth places, especially, an obvious relative inflation, as far as their worth in points.
A win, on the other hand, has been largely deflated. To start with, a win will now be just 2 points ahead of a second place. This is the lowest ever points recognition for a victory. A win, under the 2003 rules, is seemingly back to the value it was granted from 1950 to 1960, relatively speaking, when a win was two points more valuable than a second place.
But, in truth, a win will be granted the lowest recognition ever from 2003 on: whereas in the 1950-1960 period a win was equivalent in points to two third places, it will now be granted no better than the same points as two fourth places!
Second place, in turn, is the arrival order that has hardly been granted an advantage. For if it is now 2 points closer to a victory, it has been deflated to a points equivalence to 2 fifth places, whereas up to 2002 it had been equivalent to 2 fourth places.
Close inspection to the new points system, therefore, indicates that the more outstanding the achievements in Grand Prix racing, the more sour the deflation that they have been prescribed. This deflation, in turn, benefits the avarage racing driver/team, who manages mid and lower finishing positions. Fourth and sixth places, as already seen, enjoy the highest inflation, now constituting the most advantageous finishing places towards a final points tally, from a relative viewpoint, of course.
At any rate, when all finish possibilities are weighed relatively to each other, it follows that the average driver and team will now be more highly valued and rewarded, whereas those whose performances are above average are conversely less valued and rewarded.
The section What if 2002... clearly indicates that [1] the Championship winner should be followed more closely by the remaining drivers in 2003, and that [2] the mid and lower Championship places should be the ones touched more directly, under the new points system, to be in force from the 2003 Season on. These likely effects become especially evident on the pages Drivers-Comparison and Constructors-Comparison.
So, the emerging pattern, as can so far be detected regarding the new points system, seems to evoke the inclination for a leverage of the Championship toward the average plane. Whether or not the current changes will be good for the sport, in the long run, as well as productive in keeping the fans actively interested and attracting new fans, in addition to looking likewise attractive to commercial partners and sponsors that help keep the show on the road, time will tell.
Taking into account a driver's/team's performance throught the season, do you find the new points system more accurate and fair than the one used from 1991 to 2002? The many tables in the Season Statistics section may help you derive your own view.
As far as the qualifying sessions, little can be antecipated, especially in view of variable track and weather conditions during an entire session, along with strategies that will certainly be devised by the teams throughout the season, to help their drivers ensure advantageous line-up places on the grid.
Moreover, some drivers (as is the case with Michael Schumacher) seem at ease with setting a fast time straight away, whereas other drivers seem more comfortable with a gradual build-up. These of course will have to adjust their style to the new qualifying norms.
A word should be put in, with the rookies in mind. How will they do in circuits that they are likely facing for the first time, when all they have at hand is an unforgiving unique lap to secure their place on the grid? And in circuits like Imola (GP of San Marino) and Montreal (GP of Canada), for example, it remains to be seen how swiftly the rookies will get to terms with how hard they can attack the kerbs, a fundamental aspect for a good lap in such tracks.
All these factors should contribute to creating interesting grid lineups that could, in turn, contribute to making the Grand Prix races more exciting. Let's wait and see...
|
 Grand Prix & Auto-Racing Image Gallery  Pictures + Posters:
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
