Home Mobile Forum News Cookbook FaceBook Us T-Shirts etc.: Europe/Worldwide. eBay Motorsport Links Advertising Live Chat  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Single Seater Racing > Formula One

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 3 Sep 2017, 21:07 (Ref:3764274)   #2341
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 235
Taxi645 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Originally Posted by Richard Casto View Post
I personally don't have a solution (may post later if an idea comes to mind), but just like not going negative on the points, fans and the media still do the math and report negative points. Why? They do this today with grid penalties. The math generates massive penalties (effectively negative numbers with respect to the last position on the grid), but yet you can't start any further back than last on the grid. My point is that generally speaking the "size" of the penalties is mostly pointless, but everyone is overly obsessed with them. I am not saying I agree with the current situation either.


In principle you're right of course it would technically come down to the same. However a few reasons it would be practically different and received more favourable by fans:

1 It hurts the constructor, not the driver as it should.
2 It doesn't mess up the qualification and thus race result.
3 It's generally less intrusive to the Grand Prix weekend.

You could do it differently by splitting an absolute penalty in an absolute and relative part. So for instance an engine penalty would mean you lose 5 points plus 5% of your collected constructors points. That way it doesn't overly hit the bottom teams the way absolute constructors penalties would. I would still not let it go negative, but with this approach the chance of that to happen would be much reduced in the first place.

I reckon this would be an acceptable compromise, that would go a long way to solving the issues with the current set up while not being too complicated.

Last edited by Taxi645; 3 Sep 2017 at 21:14.
Taxi645 is offline  
Old 11 Sep 2017, 19:15 (Ref:3766137)   #2342
hondafan37's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2011
Buenos Aires, Argentine
Posts: 1,243
hondafan37 should be qualifying in the top 10 on the grid
Originally Posted by hondafan37 View Post
I expect to see the future Mercedes AMG Project One as a safety car.
Especially after some complaints of out of pace of the current safety car.

hondafan37 is offline  
Old 11 Sep 2017, 19:27 (Ref:3766140)   #2343
S griffin
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,829
S griffin should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridS griffin should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridS griffin should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridS griffin should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
That looks like a good one to use, so yeah, should be used soon enough
S griffin is offline  
He who dares wins!
He who hesitates is lost!


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[Rules] Are more rule changes necessary ? Marbot Formula One 51 27 Sep 2009 17:19
F1 future rule changes TheNewBob Formula One 57 20 Dec 2006 08:19
Sensible ideas for future technical regs anyone?/Rule changes - more to come [merged] AMT Formula One 74 12 Nov 2002 15:09
Future Tourer Future Crash Test Australasian Touring Cars. 13 17 Jul 2002 23:01

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:23.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2016 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.