Double points “really artificial” – Rosberg

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Nico Rosberg echoes the criticism of double points by Mercedes motorsport director Toto Wolff.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Double points system is artificial and I don’t like it, but winning is winning… (Daily Mail)

“The concept is really artificial, I don’t like it and that is a pity, but that is the way it is and we have got to accept it.”

F1 Will Race In Azerbaijan In 2016 Says Ecclestone (Forbes)

“Bernie Ecclestone has revealed that a Grand Prix in Baku, capital of the oil-rich country of Azerbaijan, will be added to the Formula One calendar in 2016 whilst a race in New Jersey will not take up its slot next year.”

‘We are going backwards’ – Alonso (ESPN)

“At the moment we are not super happy with the performance and we try to keep improving to score more points because, especially with the constructors’ championship, we are going backwards a little bit. We need to put both cars in the points as many times as possible.”

Sebastian Vettel Q&A: Maybe I’ll say I’ve lost the trophy… (F1)

“Q: When will the FIA call you to hand over the trophy – to polish it and probably engrave a new name?
SV: Ha, maybe I don’t have to give it back – mathematically – even if it doesn’t look so likely that I’m keeping it. Maybe I’ll tell them I’ve lost it or it was stolen: “I’m so sorry…” (laughs) Usually I’ve had to give it back in October. I don’t know why they need three months to put one name and one signature on.”



With Formula One set to return to the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez for the Mexican Grand Prix next year, here’s one of the most recent occasions an F1 car was in action at the track – Robert Kubica at the Formula BMW World Finals in 2008.

Comment of the day

The planned alterations to Mexico’s famed Peraltada were a source of disappointment for many. Could modern F1 cars withstand a high-speed impact at the corner?

I disagree with people saying changing the layout was inevitable.

The cars are so safe now that drivers can survive every possible crash except a direct hit on the head so I can’t see why corners have to be altered in the name of safety.
Patrick (@Paeschli)

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Lookingspiffy and Rdiulv!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Five years ago today Felipe Massa was seriously injured when he was struck by a spring which had fallen from Rubens Barrichello’s car during qualifying for the Hungarian Grand Prix.

Massa recovered from his head injuries but was ruled out of competition for the rest of the year.

Image © Daimler/Hoch Zwei

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

41 comments on “Double points “really artificial” – Rosberg”

  1. Could modern F1 cars withstand a high-speed impact at the corner? Probably. Could they withstand another hit as they bounce back across the track? Maybe, but I dont want to see that scene.

    1. I agree with you. It may take an hour to replace a guardrail, or you may have to alter some corners to bring them up to code, but I have yet to see a convincing argument against ensuring the highest standards of safety in F1.

      I’d hate for a false sense of security or any kind of complacency set in regarding safety in F1. It’s been two decades since a driver has died at a race weekend, let’s ensure that there isn’t any other in the coming decades. F1 is and always will be dangerous, but it doesn’t have to be deadly.

      1. Yes, it has been 2 decades since a driver fatality, but not since a marshal fatality…

        The cars and drivers are well protected, but whether spectators and marshals would be protected from a high-speed crash there, especially given it’s proximity to a public road there, is much more doubtful.

    2. Great comment.

      To see what could happen on this kind of situation, here goes a good reminder:

      On that German GP we noticed that marshals are people with good will and love for the sport, but they are really not properly trained and prepared.

      And FIA knows that – something that scared me even more – and still, Charlie Whiting choose to expose them.

      The best observation regard all that mess by FIA, was made by @Pastaman on other post:

      “…What I’m even more surprised about is the lack of coverage of this by media and fan outlets…”

      Thats a great point!

      So why F1 press is mute regard this event so far?

      Will Buxton have criticised Kimi for his crash at Silvertone and his tone against FIA on the same issue was equally vehement.

      Kudos for him, but what I have been noticing is that, in general, F1 press seems to fear FIA and FOM. They use not to make unconfortable question to drivers too, maybe fearing that they could lose some kind of privileges inside the padock (The corporatism of our Brazilian press here is a good example).

      The last time a journalist/driver criticised FIA, he almost lost his credential (Martin Brundle).

      So, who is going to put Charlie Whiting against the wall and make unconfortable questions for him?

      1. Like Alonso said, they deploy the safety car for front wing debris…

      2. Clearly you don’t read Autosport..

    3. what corner?

    4. The question should be: can they make the corner safely?

  2. I see @Paeschli ‘s point. Peraltada really isn’t all that different to any corner on an oval circuit. Surely there’s other ways of making it safe without neutering the corner.

    1. Without modifying the track layout, I don’t know. IndyCar is a bit too dangerous for my liking, but the F1 cars would go through the corner much slower than you’d see at ICS oval race — that might make it safe enough, it might not.

      I don’t mind them not wanting to risk it, I prefer watching sports where people don’t die. That said, I wish their solution wasn’t so… awful. I’d prefer either of the previous solutions (the simplified stadium or the chicane) over the current pointlessly complex and slow stadium layout.

    2. Quite surprised to get a COTD on this one, thank you Keith :)

      First of all I want to say it was more of a quick reflexion I made and I hadn’t put much thought into it. I’m also born in 1994 so I haven’t seen any fatal accidents in F1 in my life (at least if I only consider the drivers …)

      On what you said @austus, “Could they withstand another hit as they bounce back across the track?” With some type of barriers (someone mentioned this accident on the other thread), it’s almost sure the driver won’t bounce back on the track. The car only has to resist the first crash, and I’m pretty confident every F1 car can resist a high speed crash without too much trouble.

      Changes can be made by putting special barriers without altering the track itself. Like @plushpile said “there’s other ways of making it safe without neutering the corner.”

      In recent years, we’ve seen a safety overkill IMO. The only fatal type of crash I can imagine at the moment, is something like the Henry Surtees crash we’ve seen a few years ago. I wish the head of the driver was more protected. I’d like to see safer cars, not easier corners.

      We could have at least tried out the current lay-out next year, and if it’s is deemed to dangerous, the changes could be made for 2016 …

  3. I thought the Azerbaijan GP was supposed to be on for the 2015 season, anyway does anyone have any idea what the tack layout is like, is it the same track thats used for the GT championship?

    1. @burkenheim Nobody knows anything.

    2. I’d rather have a South African GP… but folks in RSA might not be inclined to break the bank to please Bernie and Friends.

      I would make sense to stage a race in South Africa because Africa is the spot missing in F1 calendar.

      BTW, when will Bernie retire? He’s signing lots of mid/long term contracts as of late and already defining the foreseeable future of F1, so even if someone new takes his place in 1 or 2 years, changes will not happen before 2018/2019.

  4. BERNIE SAYS “the New Jersey GP will/wont definitely happen “

  5. This whole double points thing likely won’t have as big of an impact on the championship as some might think. If one Mercedes driver enters the WDC with 15 points or more of a lead over the other, the WDC is almost guaranteed unless something big goes wrong.

    Don’t get more wrong, double points is extremely artificial and the rule should never have been introduced, but it’s impact is blown out of proportion. I have heard many people say that “the final race is all that matters now”. Really? Not at all, unless one of them DNF’s.

    1. “unless one of them DNFs” yeah, that wont happen.

      1. Like it didn’t happen for Hamilton and Canada, or Rosberg at Silverstone :P

    2. yeah I am sure that with all the ageing componentry that they are all running by the last race that there wont be many retirements. as the season wears on, i think we will see less running in FP sessions

    3. It may not have an impact on the championship but it most certainly will in the battle for 3rd 5th possibly 10th place in the constructors, and that is real money at stake in a race that can undo a year’s worth of hard work.

    4. Something could really go wrong.

    5. For sure, we are not talking about a final race shootout here but the double points finale still could leave a bitter aftertaste. You simply cannot know how the title fight is going to unfold this year or any other year.

      I believe that Rosberg and Hamilton have been equally strong so far this year and thus both equally deserve the title. There can be only one champion but double points should not have any impact on the outcome of this wonderful battle. And imagine how fans would react if someone, who has done wonders with an inferior car (like Alonso did in 2012) lost the title just because of the double points.

      I personally will also be upset if Force India loses a place (and several million dollars) in the Constructors’ Championship because of the rule. It is written to solve a specific “problem”, namely, that sometimes the title battle is over several races before the end of the season. But the author(s) of this “bright” idea clearly have not thought about the potential side effects.

      1. @girts

        I’m sure they’re well aware of the potential for it to give a major reshuffle to the championship order, and that is exactly why they want to do it. It’s not just about keeping the championship alive, it’s about raising the stakes for every team and driver on the grid, adding an extra level of tension where otherwise championship positions may have been cemented already.

        I don’t agree with doing it, but to say they haven’t considered that it would have an impact on the championship is backwards logic – it’s precisely because of the impact it may have that they have chosen to do it. Whether we agree or not, Abu Dhabi is certainly going to be an incredibly tense finale.

        1. @mazdachris

          It depends on the situation.

          I would say that double points would have made the 2010 season finale less tense as Alonso would have had to finish 2nd (instead of 5th) to win the title despite Vettel’s victory and that never seemed realistic during the weekend. In 2011, Vettel would have secured the championship with three (instead of four) races to go. In 2012, the finale was thrilling enough without double points. In 2013, Vettel would have clinched the title in the Indian GP anyway.

          Of course, in some years the rule would have made the final race(s) more tense but it would also often have made no difference and might even have spoiled the party on some occasions.

          In 2003, FIA changed the point scoring system so that it rewarded consistency more only because Schumacher had secured the title on July 21 in 2002, without thinking about different scenarios and other consequences. In 2010, they decided that victories should be rewarded (again) to make drivers fight harder.

          All of this only proves that our sport was and still is ruled by people, who prefer knee-jerk reactions over long-term visions.

    6. petebaldwin (@)
      25th July 2014, 11:15

      I hate double points as much as everyone else but we just need to accept that for this year at least, it’s happening.

      It’s part of the rules and as such, the drivers know what they are going into. It might be “unfair”, but in reality, it’s the the same for everyone. It’s no more unfair than half of the teams being stuck with engines that aren’t up to it for a whole season!

      Changing rules half way through a season is grossly unfair but everyone has known about this from the start of the season.

    7. Note the current points gap @kingshark. It could make a massive difference.

  6. Its going to be another weekend of disappointment for Ferrari. I just hope Fernando has a few good scraps, thats the best we can hope for. I just hope the car is relatively more competitive after the summer break, but I wouldnt put my house on it.

    They are so far back that I doubt next years car will be any closer to the Mercs….unless they find a massive advantage.

    1. To be fair, Ferrari have disappointed on such a regular basis that I’m just used to it now. If they actually do put up competitive machinery, it’s an act of god.

      What a sad state of affairs for the team that has all the resources at it’s disposal and the best f1 driver on the grid racing for them

      1. @todfod

        To be honest I think it’ll be good for them to finish way down the order this year. For the past few years they have managed to be runners up simply by luck and by virtue of having one of the best drivers on the grid. The finishing position has flattered them to the point where they can convince themselves they were almost in the championship hunt. The fact is that since 2010 they have been absolutely nowhere and the time for excuses has long since passed.

        There was a great quote from someone writing for Autosport. I forget who it was. But they said that an F1 team is a bit like a jigsaw puzzle; you can have all of the best pieces in the world, but unless you are able to put them together in the correct way, it’s just a jumbled mess. You need someone to correctly assemble the jigsaw in a way that reveals the true picture. It’s what Ferrari have lacked really since they lost Brawn and Todt. And it’s the reason why a team like Williams, with only a few team changes, can go from the back of the grid to near the front in the space of a year. All they did was put the jigsaw together and success is automatically the result.

    2. They can go for a brand new approach and abandon their current concept. Many teams have done it with success. Both teams (chassis and engine) should grab the best ideas of 2014 and build a new package. Red Bull and Renault will certainly take a look at other people’s garage in search of valuable ideas to integrate in their next challenger, even though RB chassis is not as problematic as Ferrari’s.

  7. If Ferrari are so far back ,
    When is it likely for Fred to jump ship ?

    1. As soon as a top team (Mercedes, Red Bull, Mclaren) try to poach him,

      Honestly, Williams look like a better bet than Ferrari as well

      1. @todfod if he brings Santander with him, Williams could be an even stronger team. As of today, I don’t think Williams can afford Alonso, unless he takes a huge pay cut.

        1. If I were Alonso I’d be thinking about just getting in a good car, forget the money he must be rich enough already. If he stays at Ferrari he’ll never win another championship.

        2. I don’t think Alonso really cares as much about the money as much as he does about a 3rd title

    2. petebaldwin (@)
      25th July 2014, 11:06

      @greg-c – Where would he go though? Mercedes have both drivers on multi-year deals and Red Bull use their young driver programme to recruit new drivers. Can’t see them removing Vettel and Ricciardio is safe.

      McLaren aren’t really any faster (in fact, they’re slower) than Ferrari at the moment. There are obviously going to be questions over what the Honda engine will be capable of as well…. That’s the only possible move I can see but it certainly wouldn’t guarantee him a better car.

      Then what? Williams would be a huge risk as there is no guarantee they’ll come up with a good car. I suppose if he takes Santander with him they could be in with a shout but even so, money needs to be spent well and it would take time to recruit the right people etc.

      His best bet is to stay with Ferrari and hope for the best unless he knows something about McLaren-Honda we don’t.

  8. How beautiful is this BMW Sauber…

    And who would’ve thought that Kimi will drag Ferrari down the order so much… thank god Massa does Kimi at Williams too.

    1. I also like how the barriers have Aztec symbols on them, a nice touch. I don’t remember seeing something similar elsewhere, but you bet FIA will make them disappear for next year…

      1. Probably. They make COTA paint over the cool stars on the runoff areas.

    2. Kimi did really well for Lotus so i think he’s due some slack while they get the car to his liking ,
      In his defense , Fred is often spoken of in the same sentence as “the best driver on the grid” and he’s not doing much winning either ,
      If Kimi hasnt picked up the pace by years end and is “on it” next year , by all means hand him his eviction notice ,

      1. No much winning but has something like 4x the points that Kimi has. Kimi is driving like an amateur if he can be this far off Alonso’s pace just because car isn’t “to his liking”. You’d think he’d learn how to drive this car after 10 races?

Comments are closed.