They simply don't care about the consequences. It seems inevitable that the majority will continue to cast their votes for them in the upcoming elections, isn't it? And once again, we will likely see funds vanishing into thin air, leaving us to wonder where it all went. We are destined to remain a second-rate nation, perpetually struggling to find our footing on the global stage.
stormybadger8 said:Alright, are we guessing at "best position" or talking about Pole position? Because in some races, P2 or even P3 is technically the "best" spot on the grid... since the guy in P1 has zero slipstream and usually gets eaten alive in the first corner right after the start. 🙂
So what, are we just going to call P2 the "best position" now? 🙂
You're basically reinventing the wheel here... Leclerc started the race from Pole position (he did the formation lap), but he wasn't actually on the starting grid itself, so sure, that's a bit of a gray area when deciding whether to count him... But there is absolutely no way to credit Max, because it makes zero sense—Max didn't start from the position labeled as Pole position. Even though it’s irrelevant to this specific argument—since while that Monaco situation is somewhat debatable, this Bottas-Hamilton thing isn't at all— the grid was set in stone before the start. Bottas was P1 on the actual grid, and everyone knew long before qualifying that Hamilton had no chance at Pole. I don't get why people are overcomplicating this.
The old rule was crystal clear. Nobody could interpret it any other way unless they were just whining because they didn't like the results and wanted to play philosopher... Honestly, this new complication is just going to confuse new fans. They'll be sitting there wondering if everyone knows what "Final Starting Grid" means, where to find the document, and all that nonsense... On the flip side, "the driver who starts from the best position" is something you grasp when you're three years old. ☕
By writing these long treatises, you're actually proving that the rule was poorly worded to begin with. Now, with this new amendment, it will be perfectly clear what is being referred to.👍
stormytiger4 said:Yeah, the starting grid. We’ve been calling it all along, honestly. No surprises there. 👍
Wait a second, let's be precise here—it isn't just the provisional starting grid. There is actually a separate document for that. You see, if you look at Daniel Ricciardo, his position differs between those two specific documents. It is all quite important, really, just so there isn't any unnecessary confusion.
stormytiger4 said:I'm skipping all the fluff because I feel like we already have an understanding here. Just give me a quick answer on how we're playing this: 1) Use the Final starting grid like usual, or 2) Go back to using qualifying results like they did back in 2012?
If it's 1), which is what I'm betting on, then nothing really changes. In that case, I'm calling on the moderator to officially recognize Valtteri Bottas for all of us who called him correctly.
Final starting grid
The 2nd championship is played such that each participant posts their predicted order of all drivers on the grid within the designated timeframe—based on how they believe the race will actually end—plus two additional drivers: the driver marked as 1st on the official FIA Final Starting Grid (the so-called PP category) and the driver who secures the fastest lap of the race (the so-called FL category). Participants can publish their predictions immediately after the previous deadline ends, and no later than the scheduled start of Free Practice 3 during the upcoming race weekend; this deadline applies to every single race of the season. Participants are permitted to correct their predictions or submit entirely new ones an unlimited number of times until that specific deadline passes.
stormybadger8 said:🤦 Oh, sure, whatever you say... At the Monaco GP, Max Verstappen actually started from P2... You can try to play philosopher about how Max started and spin circles all day, but anyone with eyes can see exactly where Max Verstappen's car was sitting...
Yeah, the Pole position went to Leclerc. ☕ Just look at the photos of that start... Leclerc's spot on the grid was left empty; they didn't just bump someone else into his place, the slot stayed vacant.
Why? Because Leclerc was the one supposed to take Pole, and the Pole position was his. ☕
How do you manage to cram so many inaccuracies into a single post? 🤦 Leclerc showed up to the race, Leclerc was on the entry list, and Leclerc is listed in the final standings... Stop overcomplicating things that don't need explaining...
Everything you wrote regarding Monaco is completely, utterly detached from reality... And as far as the rulebook goes, it’s crystal clear: Leclerc took Pole at the Monaco GP. There isn't enough linguistic gymnastics in the world to put anyone else in that spot in Monaco... Maybe in some freak accident scenario you could argue there's no PP, but even in my wildest dreams is that PP ever going to be Max's? ☕
And seriously, what part of the rulebook is confusing here??? It’s stated crystal clear: the results published by the FIA immediately after the race ends (the preliminary standings) What exactly is so hard to grasp??? After the RACE ends. The Race, not qualifying.
Let me simplify this for you. Max started from the best available position. Once you can show me a photo proving someone else started from a better position, then perhaps I will take the rest of your text seriously.
The entire point of this discussion is that the rule as it was written is open to interpretation. Now that we have clarified it, what is being referred to is quite obvious.
Terry Carter2 said:That is an exception that changes absolutely nothing about this race. 😁
It doesn't change anything for this one, but personally, I wasn't credited with 4 points in Monaco.🙄
Point 2 is being updated and now reads as follows: 2. The championship is conducted such that each participant must publish their predicted ranking of all drivers on the grid within the designated timeframe, reflecting how they believe the race will conclude, along with two additional specific drivers: the driver identified as the 1st driver on the official FIA Final Starting Grid (the so-called PP category) and the driver who secures the fastest lap of the race (the so-called FL category). Participants may submit their predictions immediately following the conclusion of the previous deadline, and at the very latest, by the scheduled start of Free Practice 3 during the weekend of the upcoming race; this deadline applies to every single race in the season. Furthermore, participants are permitted to correct their predictions or submit entirely new ones an unlimited number of times until that specified deadline passes.
Point 13 is also being amended and shall henceforth read: 13. Competition results are calculated based strictly on the results published by the FIA immediately upon the conclusion of the race (the preliminary standings). No subsequent corrections issued by the FIA will be taken into account. Regarding NOP drivers, this includes all drivers listed on the FIA entry list who fail to achieve a finishing position, regardless of their specific status (such as DNF, NC, Ret...). Otherwise, according to FIA regulations, a driver is considered to have retired from the race if they complete less than 90% of the total race distance, and the race itself is run for the exact number of laps determined by the FIA through its own official ruling, whether it be a standard or extraordinary decision. Drivers who fail to qualify during the qualifying sessions and therefore do not participate in the race will be counted as NOP only if they are included on the official FIA entry list. The PP category is determined according to the official FIA Final Starting Grid document..
Terry Carter2 As if anyone could have truly predicted how this all would unfold, right? It makes one wonder, doesn't it? When we look back at the sheer unpredictability of the sport, can we really say any of us were prepared for the complexities of the current season? I find myself sitting here, reflecting on the nuances of the regulations and wondering if we are merely witnessing the inevitable consequence of a system that refuses to remain static. Does it not feel as though we are constantly chasing a moving target, hoping that the next turn of the wheel brings clarity where there was only chaos before? Regarding the PP designation, it refers to Valtteri Bottas, and honestly, haven't we already dissected this exact issue in previous discussions? It was precisely because of this kind of ambiguity that the rulebook was updated to clarify that the term specifically denotes whoever secures the best starting position. As far as I am concerned, there isn't even a question of any doubt here! 😁
Well, I suppose I have already demonstrated through that example from the Monaco GP that things simply aren't being made clear, haven't I? 🙄
No, I don't think so. The issue arises because point number two states: 2. The championship is conducted such that a participant must publish their predicted ranking of all drivers on the grid within the designated timeframe, based on how they believe the race will conclude, along with two additional categories: the driver who starts from the best grid position and the driver who secures the fastest lap of the race.
During the Monaco GP, Max Verstappen started from the best grid position.
Furthermore, if we look at point eleven: If a participant includes a driver who does not actually appear in the race—meaning they are not found on the official FIA results (the entry list for a specific race)—then no points will be awarded for that selection.
However, vividlynx68 was awarded points for Leclerc even though he didn't show up in the race.
To make a long story short, the rule isn't clearly articulated. This is especially problematic given that the only authoritative document refers to the "results published by the FIA immediately following the conclusion of the race (the preliminary standings)."
stormybadger8 said:I don't see what part of Charles Leclerc is confusing here. 🤔
He didn't even start from pole position, so can you see the kind of complications I am referring to here? Given how this rule currently functions in the sport, don't you think it really requires some fine-tuning?
stormybadger8 said:That's actually exactly what it's called... because being first on the grid is Pole position ☕ The Pole position Pole-sitter is whoever wins qualifying; nobody ever calls them "pole position."
As for the championship, the rules make it crystal clear. This whole thing is a game where you predict race results, not qualifying results. ☕ So, naturally, you only look at the actual race... That’s why we write that Lewis Hamilton won the Democratic Party, not that he won qualifying.
I don't get why anyone is surprised. It feels totally ridiculous to me that I’m actually scoring points for Lewis Hamilton's imaginary Pole position—and I only have him in my picks because I forgot to submit a new one... If I had actually submitted a fresh prediction for the Democratic Party, it could have been absolutely anyone other than Lewis Hamilton or Carlos Sainz Jr.☕
Who, then, held the Pole position at the Monaco Grand Prix this year?
"Pole-sitter" is just short for "pole position sitter." It refers to the person who secured the pole position.
I don't see the problem here. For crying out loud, the menu explicitly states that the final starting grid is an "official document."🤣
Perhaps the category itself was simply poorly titled, given that I—along with many others, I suspect—have always operated under the assumption that we were predicting the first place finisher during qualifying. Is it not in the best interest of the entire sport that we all share a clear, unambiguous understanding of what exactly we are predicting? Until now, my interpretation was that we were looking at the FIA standings following qualifying. It would perhaps be wise to rename the category to "1st Place on the Starting Grid" to ensure total clarity.
Whatever decision the race director ultimately makes, that’s how it’s going to go down, I suppose. However, I can't help but feel that this rule really needs a crystal-clear definition for the future to prevent any further confusion. My personal suggestion would be this: Pole position should simply be awarded to whoever holds first place on the provisional qualifying standings published by the FIA immediately following the session. If we could just implement something that straightforward, everything would be smooth sailing from there.
shadowstag10 said:Well, damn, if we're sticking strictly to the rulebook, then Valtteri Bottas walks away with 4 points today—and hey, if things go our way, changing the points for the Monaco Grand Prix retroactively isn't even the biggest headache. I’m betting graniteharbor502 edits their first post right now to clarify that the points go to whoever starts P1 on Sunday—you know, like, the guy sitting on pole before the formation lap starts.
The real trouble you're facing there is the lack of an official document you can actually lean on; if you look at the official race results, there simply isn't any data provided regarding the starting positions.
To issue isn't actually anything new within this championship.
Back in 2012, we saw this exact same debate sparked by this post.
At that time, the rule was adjusted so that the distinction shifted from the winner of qualifying to whoever actually takes the first starting spot on the grid—something I only just realized myself. Is it really necessary to have this rule at all, or perhaps it simply needs a more thorough refinement? I wonder what the other competitors think about this matter.
My own suggestion would be that for the Democratic Party, we should strictly adhere to the official FIA results immediately following the qualifying sessions. By doing so, we could sidestep all the messy complications involving post-race penalties, pit lane malfunctions, or issues during the warm-up lap and such.
stormytiger4 said:That only needs fixing if we decide to look at the qualifying results instead of just the starting grid positions. Because right now, it clearly states who starts first, and when I actually went back to check Rule 2, there really isn't any ambiguity about it. It literally says:
2. The championship works by having competitors publish their predicted full grid order within the designated timeframe, based on how they think the race will finish, along with two extra picks: the driver starting from the best grid position and the driver who sets the fastest lap. Competitors can post their predictions as soon as the previous deadline passes, and no later than the scheduled start of Free Practice 3 during a race weekend; this deadline applies to every single race in the season. Participants can edit their picks or submit new ones an unlimited number of times until that deadline hits.
Look, if we’re going to change the rules just because qualifying results feel more "natural" to us—even though things could easily shift, like if Bottas picks up a penalty and loses pole—then I think we should handle that during the off-season, not in the middle of the season.
I didn't receive any points for Max Verstappen in Monaco even though he started in first place, mainly because we have always traditionally predicted the winner based on the actual race outcome, regardless of any penalties handed out on the starting grid.
shadowstag10 said:But look, the whole point is what's written in Article 2. It says we should be looking at who actually starts on pole, not just staring at some preliminary qualifying data—because, newsflash, that's nowhere in the rules.
My issue here—and I'm being totally honest—is that if I hadn't already put Valtteri Bottas for the PP, I would've easily, without a single shred of guilt, picked him too. I'm not trying to play favorites or rig my own bets here.
This really needs to be corrected. After all, we are supposed to be predicting the driver who secures the Pole Position, which is exactly what the category name implies, is it not?
shadowstag10 said:Look, it's talking about the race itself—there’s zero mention of Q3 here. I took it to mean this applies strictly to the final race results.
If you are looking for the qualifying results, one simply consults the official preliminary standings provided by the FIA. Is there really any ambiguity to be found there?
shadowstag10 said:The championship works like this: you gotta post your full predicted grid within the deadline—basically how you think everyone will finish—plus two extra picks: whoever grabs pole position and whoever clocks the fastest lap.
So, I was crunching the numbers in Excel, and I've ended up in this annoying little dilemma—like, do I actually award 4 points to the prediction where Valtteri Bottas takes the PP, or go with the one where Lewis Hamilton gets it?
According to Article 2 of the rules, the PP goes to the driver who starts from the best grid position—which, in this specific scenario, would be Valtteri Bottas.
If anyone out there can dig through the rulebook and find some loophole that justifies giving Lewis Hamilton those 4 points for the PP instead, please, let me know right here.
Rule 13. The competition results are calculated based strictly on the official results released by the FIA immediately following the conclusion of the race (the preliminary standings).
darkmarlin16, have you perhaps lost interest in following the races lately? I noticed there isn't even any sign of Robert Kubica on the entry list anymore...
