Poll on ITV-F1.com.....
Discussion
There is a pole on the ITV F1 website about whether or not Alonso deserved the world championship win. The strange thing about it is just over one third of the people who voted don't think he deserves it!!!!!
Why not!? What's going on!!!???? He did nothing wrong all season!
Is it jealousy because their favourite driver didn't win or did I miss something?
Why not!? What's going on!!!???? He did nothing wrong all season!
Is it jealousy because their favourite driver didn't win or did I miss something?
Most people would rather see someone charging for a win rather than just sitting back and being reliable to get it.
I cant be bothered to work it out, but would be interesting to know how the points would stack up on the old 10-6-4-3-2-1 system. I dont think the current system rewards the winners enough and takes an age to chase down a lead.
I cant be bothered to work it out, but would be interesting to know how the points would stack up on the old 10-6-4-3-2-1 system. I dont think the current system rewards the winners enough and takes an age to chase down a lead.
Possibly brought about by Ron Dennis' comments on Alonso's strole to the champoinship. A bit harsh perhapse as he as put in a couple of stellar drives (Australia anyone), but it does come down to where do people think that the championship should go to. Should it go to an aggressive win at all costs racer, or someone who finishes second in sixteen GP's in a year (not that that describes Alosns).
As for the points system, remember that the switch from 10-6- etc to 10-8-... was because MS built an inasailable lead by the fifth race of the season. The only way to get more fire in is to allow dropped rounds which always works well.
As for should Alonso be champion - of course he should. He and his team assessed the rules situation and played a blinder in order to dominate the championship, even if not the races. Would they have done the same with a different rules environment - possibly not.
So I agree with Ron, that Alonso still has a way to go to prove that he is the outright best in the same way that Schumacher managed, but at the end of the day you can't design a championship that relies on teamwork, strategy and compromise and then belittle the guy that won it by employing these three qualities.
As for the points system, remember that the switch from 10-6- etc to 10-8-... was because MS built an inasailable lead by the fifth race of the season. The only way to get more fire in is to allow dropped rounds which always works well.
As for should Alonso be champion - of course he should. He and his team assessed the rules situation and played a blinder in order to dominate the championship, even if not the races. Would they have done the same with a different rules environment - possibly not.
So I agree with Ron, that Alonso still has a way to go to prove that he is the outright best in the same way that Schumacher managed, but at the end of the day you can't design a championship that relies on teamwork, strategy and compromise and then belittle the guy that won it by employing these three qualities.
the scoring system in F1 needs radical overhaul. at the moment there is nothing to make drivers really go for it in the last few laps, especially if they are close. look at canada a few years ago, the top four were within a fag paper of each other for thelast five laps but no one wanted to risk going out of the race so nobody tried a good overtaking move.....
so i would suggest the gaps between points are increased. at present, if you are seventh and trailing sixth by 1 second on the last lap (and forgetting for one moment the difficulties of overtaking on modern day F1) would a driver risk it for a single point? no. So, 25 for the winner. 18 for second, 15 for third, 10 for fourth, 8 for fifth, 5 for sixth, 3 for seventh and 1 for eighth with a point for fastest lap and pole.
and as for alonso not being a worthy winner, people forget he had it wrapped up bar the shouting in hte summer and so needed to just keep going after the british GP. the Mercedes was and is, so unreliable that Kimi could not mount a serious challenge. well done Fernando i say!
>> Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 27th September 13:24
so i would suggest the gaps between points are increased. at present, if you are seventh and trailing sixth by 1 second on the last lap (and forgetting for one moment the difficulties of overtaking on modern day F1) would a driver risk it for a single point? no. So, 25 for the winner. 18 for second, 15 for third, 10 for fourth, 8 for fifth, 5 for sixth, 3 for seventh and 1 for eighth with a point for fastest lap and pole.
and as for alonso not being a worthy winner, people forget he had it wrapped up bar the shouting in hte summer and so needed to just keep going after the british GP. the Mercedes was and is, so unreliable that Kimi could not mount a serious challenge. well done Fernando i say!
>> Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 27th September 13:24
Pulsatingstar said:
Andrew Noakes said:
I can't be bothered to work it out either, but if anyone does they ought to use the right points score - which ws 9-6-4-3-2-1.
When was it 9? Sure it used to be 10.
It was changed for the 1991 season.
Plus I think they should give 1 point for pole and 1 for fastest lap.
Edited to add, I've also corrected the spelling of 'Poll' in the title
>> Edited by FourWheelDrift on Tuesday 27th September 13:44
As with any 'end-of-season' poll, people tend to have short memories. Look at any Best Album/Film/TV Programme etc and the later it's released in the year, the better it will do.
So Fernando's early season charges and drives are forgotten (Imola, anyone - how many other drivers could take that pressure?), plus the fact that he's blown Fisichella away.
So Fernando's early season charges and drives are forgotten (Imola, anyone - how many other drivers could take that pressure?), plus the fact that he's blown Fisichella away.
kevin ritson said:
...plus the fact that he's blown Fisichella away.
I noticed "the c
k" saying that on Sunday. It was the first GP since the spring that he didn't mention how unlucky Fisichella has been with breakdowns this year. 
(In comparison to Alonso of course, I think the McLaren boys probably get the overall prize). Personally, I can see a case for saying that Kimi deserved it more. He has also put in some stunning drives but his challenge was hamstrung by the car's reliability. From that point of view I can see a case for saying that Renault perhaps deserve the manufacturer's title and Kimi the driver's. In the end I'd probably go for Alonso, but it's a close thing.
V8 Archie said:
Personally, I can see a case for saying that Kimi deserved it more. He has also put in some stunning drives but his challenge was hamstrung by the car's reliability.
Maybe a reliable McLaren wouldn't have been so quick.
There are plenty more runners-up who 'deserved it more' over the years. Didn't Lauda deserve it more than Hunt? Did Prost deserve to lose by half a point? Did Peter Collins deserve to win in ’56 when he gave up his car to Fangio? Did Mansell deserve to win in 1986?
Come to think of it, did Kimi deserve it more in 2004...?
Eric Mc said:
Back in the 50s there was a point awarded for fastest lap. I think Mike Hawthorn won the 1959 WDC by dint of a single point won in this manner.
Which meant with one win he beat Moss who had four wins.
To be honest, there'll never be a perfect points system. I think this is proved by the fact that F1 has had so many different systems. Plus, given that they still can't decide on how and when to have qualifying, its interesting that the Formula is 55 years old and they still haven't got it right.
Perhaps it should be just down to wins. Or do away with the championship all together and have seeding instead and award a prize for the top seed at years end.
Regarding Alonso/Raikkonen - its McLarens fault that FA has had to stroke it over the last few races, no-one elses. And given FA's defence of Schumi at Imola there's no evidence that he wouldn't have won had it came down to a fight.
Also, given how many mistakes Kimi made - 2 at Nurburgring, his spin in Italy, his flatspotting again in Brazil, just for instance, - there is no evidence that Kimi would have come out on top had he had to have a real fight with Fernando. I mean, he now seems to be struggling to beat Monty.
Fernando has been much the better driver in my book, and the deserving champion. His driving this season has been as good as any other championship drive, IMO.
Mansell only lost it in 86 because the Goodyear Techies had checked one of Prost's tyres after he came in for a puncture, and decided that their tyres were good for the full race...
What they didn't allow for is the different driving styles of Prost & Mansell. Prost was THE smoothest driver of the time, Mansell was considerably more aggressive.
Mansell blew a tyre on the Brabham straight and barely managed to get the car up an off-road. He should have spun it on the straight and got the race red-flagged.
What they didn't allow for is the different driving styles of Prost & Mansell. Prost was THE smoothest driver of the time, Mansell was considerably more aggressive.
Mansell blew a tyre on the Brabham straight and barely managed to get the car up an off-road. He should have spun it on the straight and got the race red-flagged.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff