planetf1.com

dpastern wrote:Another reason why Hamilton is the best driver on the grid perhaps?

Lt. Drebin wrote:

dpastern wrote:Another reason why Hamilton is the best driver on the grid perhaps?

Perhaps because he had the best car for many years in succession? (Runs and hides)

Alienturnedhuman wrote:Let's mix it up even more. The 10 fastest laps set by people on the lead lap, 5 laps after pitting/start/restart, get a point each. And this means if one driver gets all 10 fastest laps (while satisfying the conditions) then they get all 10 points - you just take the 10 fastest laps (that satisfy the conditions) and award a point for each. This would have material consequences, and would encouraging pushing. Also, drivers who were doing well in a race buy suffered a fluke retirement - say Hamilton Malaysia 2016, or Montoya Brazil 2001 - could potentially still get some reward. It would also mean that if you end up in the situation where a driver chasing down the leader has extra incentive to push.

I'm not going to say I prefer this to the status quo, but I think this would be a more interesting and less gimmicky change than the arbitrary point for fastest lap that's been implemented.

pokerman wrote:

Lt. Drebin wrote:

dpastern wrote:Another reason why Hamilton is the best driver on the grid perhaps?

Perhaps because he had the best car for many years in succession? (Runs and hides)

Maybe more because of 2017 and 2018?

Siao7 wrote:

DOLOMITE wrote:I find fastest laps as a stat basically meaningless. The reason is that poles, wins. podiums and points are all things that you have to assume a driver will always to try to achieve, no matter what. There's a few exceptions but generally that's OK to assume.

Fastest Laps though... Why would a driver TRY for a fastest lap when there was no incentive? The old adage win at the slowest speed possible. Hamilton, Prost, Senna all have a pretty decent set of fastest laps but I'm sure they would have a lot more if they had reason to set one. Equally Vettel is known to go for it just for the hell of it even when it gains him nothing in terms of points or positions.

You have basically now have what is it - 400 or something races where we have a fastest lap recorded, but that doesn't mean another driver couldn't have gone quicker if they had wanted/needed to.

I'm not following your last point Dolo. Yes, others could have gone for the fastest, but didn't. So what does that prove/mean?

The incentive for the fastest lap would be the 1 point gained I guess. And bragging rights!

Alienturnedhuman wrote:Let's mix it up even more. The 10 fastest laps set by people on the lead lap, 5 laps after pitting/start/restart, get a point each. And this means if one driver gets all 10 fastest laps (while satisfying the conditions) then they get all 10 points - you just take the 10 fastest laps (that satisfy the conditions) and award a point for each. This would have material consequences, and would encouraging pushing. Also, drivers who were doing well in a race buy suffered a fluke retirement - say Hamilton Malaysia 2016, or Montoya Brazil 2001 - could potentially still get some reward. It would also mean that if you end up in the situation where a driver chasing down the leader has extra incentive to push.

I'm not going to say I prefer this to the status quo, but I think this would be a more interesting and less gimmicky change than the arbitrary point for fastest lap that's been implemented.

Lt. Drebin wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Lt. Drebin wrote:

dpastern wrote:Another reason why Hamilton is the best driver on the grid perhaps?

Perhaps because he had the best car for many years in succession? (Runs and hides)

Maybe more because of 2017 and 2018?

Are you trying to dispute that in the last 5 years (2014-2018) he actually had the best car?

Lt. Drebin wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Lt. Drebin wrote:

dpastern wrote:Another reason why Hamilton is the best driver on the grid perhaps?

Perhaps because he had the best car for many years in succession? (Runs and hides)

Maybe more because of 2017 and 2018?

Are you trying to dispute that in the last 5 years (2014-2018) he actually had the best car?

DOLOMITE wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

DOLOMITE wrote:I find fastest laps as a stat basically meaningless. The reason is that poles, wins. podiums and points are all things that you have to assume a driver will always to try to achieve, no matter what. There's a few exceptions but generally that's OK to assume.

Fastest Laps though... Why would a driver TRY for a fastest lap when there was no incentive? The old adage win at the slowest speed possible. Hamilton, Prost, Senna all have a pretty decent set of fastest laps but I'm sure they would have a lot more if they had reason to set one. Equally Vettel is known to go for it just for the hell of it even when it gains him nothing in terms of points or positions.

You have basically now have what is it - 400 or something races where we have a fastest lap recorded, but that doesn't mean another driver couldn't have gone quicker if they had wanted/needed to.

I'm not following your last point Dolo. Yes, others could have gone for the fastest, but didn't. So what does that prove/mean?

The incentive for the fastest lap would be the 1 point gained I guess. And bragging rights!

my point is that we have a stat that is a bit meaningless - driver x has twice as many fastest laps as driver Y - doesn't really signify anything unless you know that both drivers X and Y were both trying for fastest lap.

RaggedMan wrote:

Alienturnedhuman wrote:Let's mix it up even more. The 10 fastest laps set by people on the lead lap, 5 laps after pitting/start/restart, get a point each. And this means if one driver gets all 10 fastest laps (while satisfying the conditions) then they get all 10 points - you just take the 10 fastest laps (that satisfy the conditions) and award a point for each. This would have material consequences, and would encouraging pushing. Also, drivers who were doing well in a race buy suffered a fluke retirement - say Hamilton Malaysia 2016, or Montoya Brazil 2001 - could potentially still get some reward. It would also mean that if you end up in the situation where a driver chasing down the leader has extra incentive to push.

I'm not going to say I prefer this to the status quo, but I think this would be a more interesting and less gimmicky change than the arbitrary point for fastest lap that's been implemented.

IMHO a driver that failed to finish shouldn't be eligible for those points. Or at least complete 95% of the laps, or what ever it is now needed to be classified as a finisher.

Siao7 wrote:

Alienturnedhuman wrote:Let's mix it up even more. The 10 fastest laps set by people on the lead lap, 5 laps after pitting/start/restart, get a point each. And this means if one driver gets all 10 fastest laps (while satisfying the conditions) then they get all 10 points - you just take the 10 fastest laps (that satisfy the conditions) and award a point for each. This would have material consequences, and would encouraging pushing. Also, drivers who were doing well in a race buy suffered a fluke retirement - say Hamilton Malaysia 2016, or Montoya Brazil 2001 - could potentially still get some reward. It would also mean that if you end up in the situation where a driver chasing down the leader has extra incentive to push.

I'm not going to say I prefer this to the status quo, but I think this would be a more interesting and less gimmicky change than the arbitrary point for fastest lap that's been implemented.

I like the idea, but I think it would make it very complicated for the casual viewer.

Lt. Drebin wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Lt. Drebin wrote:

dpastern wrote:Another reason why Hamilton is the best driver on the grid perhaps?

Perhaps because he had the best car for many years in succession? (Runs and hides)

Maybe more because of 2017 and 2018?

Are you trying to dispute that in the last 5 years (2014-2018) he actually had the best car?

Covalent wrote:Someone could put in the fastest lap on lap 2 before it starts to rain and he crashes out on lap 3.

Edit: Doh, except he's only eligible if his in the top 10. Well he'd stop anyone else getting the 1 point nonetheless.

DOLOMITE wrote:

Covalent wrote:Someone could put in the fastest lap on lap 2 before it starts to rain and he crashes out on lap 3.

Edit: Doh, except he's only eligible if his in the top 10. Well he'd stop anyone else getting the 1 point nonetheless.

With the Top 10 thing.. does it mean that the point is only awarded if the fastest lap is done by a top 10 finisher? So if it's not, then the point simply isn't awarded ? If so it's all a bit of a joke isn't it?

So many stupid scenarios that they may want to manipulate..

Say Ferrari are running with Leclerc 10th and Vettel 11th, Vettel pops in a fastest lap, but Vettel is in contention for the WDC. Ordering the drivers to switch positions now means Leclerc score 0 instead of 1, Vettel scores 2 instead of 0 and the team still only score 1.

OR

Leclerc is in 10th with fastest lap and is therefore on for 2 pts, the swap now means Vettel gains only 1 but Leclerc loses both...

Brilliant.

DOLOMITE wrote:what if the race is stopped before half way and only scores half points - does the fastest lap still get awarded and if so it sit still a full point?

Badgeronimous wrote:I don't think the fastest lap stat means anything at all any more. It might start to mean something again with a point up for grabs.

TBH as with all stats, they don't tell the whole picture.

Covalent wrote:

Badgeronimous wrote:I don't think the fastest lap stat means anything at all any more. It might start to mean something again with a point up for grabs.

TBH as with all stats, they don't tell the whole picture.

Yes it was only the last few years that fastest laps were pointless. In the beginning they awarded points, then they didn't award points but fastest laps at least were indicative of the raw pace, then they weren't even that, and now they're awarding points again and maybe as a result of that they'll be a bit more indicative of pace once again.

DOLOMITE wrote:What if the driver who scores for fastest lap is subsequently disqualified - presumably they lose the f lap point as well, but would that mean the person with the next fastest inherits the point as happens with the WDC points?

DOLOMITE wrote:

DOLOMITE wrote:What if the driver who scores for fastest lap is subsequently disqualified - presumably they lose the f lap point as well, but would that mean the person with the next fastest inherits the point as happens with the WDC points?

or imagine driver who finishes 11th gets fastest lap but unlucky as he not in top 10, but then the driver who finished P10 is DSQ, does he then get both points?

DOLOMITE wrote:

Covalent wrote:

Badgeronimous wrote:I don't think the fastest lap stat means anything at all any more. It might start to mean something again with a point up for grabs.

TBH as with all stats, they don't tell the whole picture.

Yes it was only the last few years that fastest laps were pointless. In the beginning they awarded points, then they didn't award points but fastest laps at least were indicative of the raw pace, then they weren't even that, and now they're awarding points again and maybe as a result of that they'll be a bit more indicative of pace once again.

Fastest lap hasn't scored points since 1959!

DOLOMITE wrote:and another scenario highlighted by Horner! "With the fastest lap, we were even wondering if we take it with Pierre, who was not in the top 10, just to take it away from anyone else"..

Fiki wrote:

DOLOMITE wrote:and another scenario highlighted by Horner! "With the fastest lap, we were even wondering if we take it with Pierre, who was not in the top 10, just to take it away from anyone else"..

I'm glad he said this, and that it happened during the first race with this silly rule in place. I hope they drop it soon.

Asphalt_World wrote:Point for fastest pit stop next?

kleefton wrote:Yeah what I was a little surprised by is how many people actually cared for it, and cars that were on old tires were still setting fastest laps. A testament to this year's tires perhaps being a lot more durable than what Pirelli have had before. Ferrari didn't even bother though even though they had a free pit stop and could have claimed it easily.

mmi16 wrote:And with that pit stop they could have had a gun failure or some other form if pit stop malady.

cmberry20 wrote:Question :
If a driver sets the fastest lap but then retires on the last lap, does the point go to the person who set the next quickest lap but is still running?
Also, does the same rule apply if the driver is, say 9th, and sets the fastest lap then spins and drops out of the top 10 but still finishes?

sandman1347 wrote:I must admit that, while I was opposed to this idea on an ideological level, in practice it did seem to add something to the entertainment value of the race. The drivers seemed very conscious of that point up for grabs and they went for it. If they continue to care about it that much, I can see it making things more interesting overall.