[Sky Sports F1]

Lewis Hamilton has revealed his hatred of driving for points as he attempts to become F1's youngest World Champion.

Lewis wants wins, not points

[Racer Duck]

finally a driver who is focused on racing, not surviving.

[Bob Tanner]

I knew I liked this kid for some reason! If we could find a way to bottle that attitude, I know of a certain servies where a couple cases of it is needed!

[DOF_power]

I think you guys haven't read the whole article:


"There was less pressure to achieve a victory because of the unusual circumstances, which meant I was actually able to start thinking of the World Championship."
"I hate driving for points, but I think we can all see the benefit of that approach at the moment."


It's like when Carl Edwards said that he hates second but it's good for points.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

I think you guys haven't read the whole article:

"There was less pressure to achieve a victory because of the unusual circumstances, which meant I was actually able to start thinking of the World Championship."
"I hate driving for points, but I think we can all see the benefit of that approach at the moment."

It's like when Carl Edwards said that he hates second but it's good for points.

Go ahead... Just throw cold water on our wishful thinking! I bet that when you throw a party, you lock the liquor cabinet just when the party gets going! <Big Grin>

I care not what Hamilton, Edwards or any other driver consumed with a title says, I watch a race to see drivers driving to win that particular race, and NOT collect points for some championship! For a driver to do any less is, IMNSVHO, a slap in the face of race fans and nominally giving all watching the race a proverbial finger.

[Racer Duck]

The only proven way to win championships year in and year out is to try to win every race.

It's those drivers who try to win every race that receive my admiration and who I will most often root for. I'll never condemn anyone for trying to win instead of "playing it safe"... And, if they loose the championship, so be it - it just wasn't their time .. this time!

[DOF_power]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

The only proven way to win championships year in and year out is to try to win every race.

It's those drivers who try to win every race that receive my admiration and who I will most often root for. I'll never condemn anyone for trying to win instead of "playing it safe"... And, if they loose the championship, so be it - it just wasn't their time .. this time!

Stirling Moss never won a world championship despite being the fastest driver (after Fangio) and runner up 4 or 5 times. He said he cannot see racing for the world championship as a military operation with points mathematics (he also lost the 24h of Le Mans in 1959 that way).
The worst was in 1958 when he won 4 championship GP races while rival/contender and friend Mike Hawthorne won just 1 GP but in the end he had one more point over Moss.
Other that should have become champions but didn't where Ronnie Peterson and Gilles Villeneuve.

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

Stirling Moss never won a world championship despite being the fastest driver (after Fangio) and runner up 4 or 5 times. He said he cannot see racing for the world championship as a military operation with points mathematics (he also lost the 24h of Le Mans in 1959 that way).
The worst was in 1958 when he won 4 championship GP races while rival/contender and friend Mike Hawthorne won just 1 GP but in the end he had one more point over Moss.
Other that should have become champions but didn't where Ronnie Peterson and Gilles Villeneuve.

which shows the stupidity of the way the championship is constructed.

when you remember racers, you automatically think about their talent and "style" and "fervor" for the sport, not whether they won a championship or not .. that's a later thought.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

which shows the stupidity of the way the championship is constructed.

when you remember racers, you automatically think about their talent and "style" and "fervor" for the sport, not whether they won a championship or not .. that's a later thought.

Championships based on consistency and not winning automatically leave the door wide open for "sandbagging style driving" (a.k.a. points racing). Racing for consistency is a code term for mediocre racing.

The answer to having good racing AND a highly prized championship is simple; make winning worth a lot of points, and finishing least finishing in the three or four worth considerably more than finishing farther back in the field.

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Championships based on consistency and not winning automatically leave the door wide open for "sandbagging style driving" (a.k.a. points racing). Racing for consistency is a code term for mediocre racing.

The answer to having good racing AND a highly prized championship is simple; make winning worth a lot of points, and finishing least finishing in the three or four worth considerably more than finishing farther back in the field.

in other words, use a more logarithmic scale than a linear scale. (sorry to confound the mathematically challenged - the 2 "L" words are spelled right so go look them up!)

[DOF_power]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

which shows the stupidity of the way the championship is constructed.

when you remember racers, you automatically think about their talent and "style" and "fervor" for the sport, not whether they won a championship or not .. that's a later thought.

Remember ?!

The majority of the current fanbase in a pole not long ago, at the question of greatest F1 drivers ever, didn't even a pick single driver from before the 1980s. No Fangio, Moss, Ascari, Clark, Brabham, Stewart, instead they picked Senna, Prost, Mansell, Schumacher and Kubica. Very short memory from the TV and Internet era.

Moss and Co. "never" existed.
Oh, the points sytem was changed.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

in other words, use a more logarithmic scale than a linear scale. (sorry to confound the mathematically challenged - the 2 "L" words are spelled right so go look them up!)

I'm familiar with the terms. I went to public school before they became government schools and switched from education to indoctrination. Why, I kin cipher right well.

I wouldn't go so far as to use a algebraic formula, or a trig table of sines, cosines and tangents to get a good point set up. Just pick an arbitrary number over 150 for winning, make 2nd worth 80% (rounded to the closest whole number) of that number, 3th 85% (again, rounded) of 2nd, 4th 90% of 3rd, and 5th and beyond...? Whatever.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

Remember ?!

The majority of the current fanbase in a pole not long ago, at the question of greatest F1 drivers ever, didn't even a pick single driver from before the 1980s. No Fangio, Moss, Ascari, Clark, Brabham, Stewart, instead they picked Senna, Prost, Mansell, Schumacher and Kubica. Very short memory from the TV and Internet era.

Moss and Co. "never" existed.
Oh, the points sytem was changed.

As you are aware, the very same malady befalls NA__AR. A frighteningly large number of people believe the ONLY drivers of note who competed before Jeff Gordon were Richard Petty and Dale Earnhardt Sr.

Really sad.

[WestCoast]

I don’t see any reason why it would be otherwise.
Those are the rivalries that we are familiar with, not the ones that weren’t televised over 50 years ago, and had a small regional audience.
And only marveled at by our elders that tend to live in the past.
They don't make them like they used to crowd.

Although I do have the greatest respect for those "suicide pilots" that raced on glass-ply tires with no body harness or a real helmet.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by WestCoast

I don’t see any reason why it would be otherwise.
Those are the rivalries that we are familiar with, not the ones that weren’t televised over 50 years ago, and had a small regional audience.
And only marveled at by our elders that tend to live in the past.
They don't make them like they used to crowd.

Although I do have the greatest respect for those "suicide pilots" that raced on glass-ply tires with no body harness or a real helmet.

Of course not everyone is as old as those of us who were waiting on the pier, waiting for the ocean to fill. I, personally, don't have a problem with those who are new to the sport but have an interest in the past and have a respect for that history, as you note so well in your response.

What I do have a real problem with are those who completely discount auto racing's rich history, literally turn up their collective noses whenever a discussion on past drivers is made and come across as though nothing existed prior to "their driver" blessing the sport with his appearance.

I see none of that in this particular Motorsports Forum. But that feeling is all too common in other venues.