2021 F1 Championship Game

shadowstag10 said:Turkish GP results are live at this link:

Turkish GP

Points have been logged, but without accounting for Bottas taking Pole position.

Jason Parker2 and TBF1D both think—and honestly, I get it—that even though we’ve got Hamilton in the mix, Bottas deserves the credit for Pole.

I need everyone else to weigh in here. If we hit a majority consensus, I'll give the Pole position points to Bottas; otherwise, we’re sticking with what’s already down.

silentbear49, Amanda Kelly, darkmarlin16, and cosmicridge5 (two out of four for changing the score)

You guys have until Sunday at 11:59 PM to make your voices heard. And don't even try the "I didn't see this" excuse—if you stay silent, I'm counting it as a "no" and leaving things as they are.

Honestly, it's not that I don't see the point in voting, it's just that this whole thing is completely nonsensical.
Retroactively changing rules to add or subtract points makes zero sense. We've never done this before, so why start now?

I might understand if it were some ambiguous situation, but it isn't.
It just feels like certain people are twisting facts and making stuff up to suit their own agendas...
The rules explain this situation clearly enough, so I really don't see why anyone is overthinking it. 🤔

stormybadger8 said:Honestly, it's not that I don't see the point in voting, it's just that this whole thing is completely nonsensical.
Retroactively changing rules to add or subtract points makes zero sense. We've never done this before, so why start now?

I might understand if it were some ambiguous situation, but it isn't.
It just feels like certain people are twisting facts and making stuff up to suit their own agendas...
The rules explain this situation clearly enough, so I really don't see why anyone is overthinking it. 🤔

But it clearly wasn't "loud and clear" before (even if it is now), considering like 7 people—which is basically half the group?!—voted for Hamilton to take Pole position, despite the fact we've known since Thursday he had a penalty.

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.👍

shadowstag10 said:But it clearly wasn't "loud and clear" before (even if it is now), considering like 7 people—which is basically half the group?!—voted for Hamilton to take Pole position, despite the fact we've known since Thursday he had a penalty.

I was convinced we were predicting the order/positions actually earned during qualifying. You know, what they achieved through pure driving.
To me, that's what the Pole position prediction should have been about.

Then you factor in penalties, where drivers lose spots after the fact.
It just made more sense to me to guess based on what happened on the track, rather than waiting a day to see how the grid looks right before the race starts.
Now that I think about it, that logic holds up. My vote goes to Hamilton.

Man...
For now, I'll just put my money on Bottas (not that I want to be the one overcomplicating things... actually, scratch that, I totally am... ugh... lost my train of thought already)

But honestly, I feel the same way as Amanda Kelly—whatever happens at the end of qualifying, regardless of penalties or whatever nonsense they use to shuffle the grid, that should be what counts for pole position

Logical? Doesn't matter if it's logical or not—the current rulebook is what it is. You guys are totally free to pitch whatever changes you want at the end of the season, so why not just suggest we start guessing the qualifying winner on Saturday (or Friday if it’s a sprint weekend)?

Hamilton PP

shadowstag10 said:But it clearly wasn't "loud and clear" before (even if it is now), considering like 7 people—which is basically half the group?!—voted for Hamilton to take Pole position, despite the fact we've known since Thursday he had a penalty.

Some people even put Kubica in their predictions, so what then?
We should probably change the rules for him too, right? 🙂

I put Hamilton in my prediction, and lo and behold, I’m one of those infamous seven...
But hey, that’s my own fault for sticking with an old prediction.
My mistake shouldn't be used as an excuse to strip someone else of points they actually earned according to the rulebook.☕

If someone was too lazy to read the rules... that's on them.
If someone was too lazy to write a new prediction... that's on them.
If someone didn't realize Hamilton had a penalty... that's on them.
If someone just copied my prediction, or graniteharbor502's, or whoever... that's also on them.

Changing the rules retroactively makes zero sense, especially when the rules are already crystal clear.
Do whatever you want, but leave me out of it. I'm done playing this game. Period.
The idea of "voting" on something so obvious is a joke—let alone stripping players of deserved points just so someone else can get them undeservedly...

stormybadger8 said:Some people even put Kubica in their predictions, so what then?
We should probably change the rules for him too, right? 🙂

I put Hamilton in my prediction, and lo and behold, I’m one of those infamous seven...
But hey, that’s my own fault for sticking with an old prediction.
My mistake shouldn't be used as an excuse to strip someone else of points they actually earned according to the rulebook.☕

If someone was too lazy to read the rules... that's on them.
If someone was too lazy to write a new prediction... that's on them.
If someone didn't realize Hamilton had a penalty... that's on them.
If someone just copied my prediction, or graniteharbor502's, or whoever... that's also on them.

Changing the rules retroactively makes zero sense, especially when the rules are already crystal clear.
Do whatever you want, but leave me out of it. I'm done playing this game. Period.
The idea of "voting" on something so obvious is a joke—let alone stripping players of deserved points just so someone else can get them undeservedly...

The new rule won't be applied retroactively; instead, it will take effect starting from the next Race.

shadowstag10 said:That argument against vividlynx68 doesn't really hold water because on the official results, Leclerc is listed under DNS, meaning he *is* on the list.

For NOP purposes, any driver on the FIA entry list who fails to secure a finishing position counts—regardless of whether they are marked DNF, NC, or Ret...

Honestly, I don't see the point in arguing this further—some people are pulling one way, others the other, and both sides have valid points.

Since you all seem to agree that I'm being too harsh, nobody gets the PP for this race. From the next one until the end of the season, we’ll be using the list provided by stormybadger8 (Final starting grid), so please update Article 2 to reflect that.

It'll be easy enough to just tweak the rule for next season.

I have no idea why this is bolded unless it's some retroactive attempt at making up rules on the fly...🙄

And honestly, it’s all pretty obvious. It’s only an issue because certain people apparently couldn't be bothered to read and actually understand rules that were written crystal clear—rules they literally wrote themselves, which is just pathetic. 🤦
So now, what, we’re supposed to punish the people who actually know how to read and strip them of points just so those who can't follow basic instructions don't feel cheated? 🙂

The race director ultimately holds the power when things get messy, and frankly, that is exactly what we are facing right now. We have a genuine problem on our hands. The current rule regarding the PP isn't formulated with enough clarity, which has understandably left several folks on the forums feeling quite confused. It feels as though we need to take decisive action and refine it; after all, shouldn't the entire goal of this game be centered around clarity and transparency? Shouldn't we strive for a system where everything is crystal clear rather than one that relies so heavily on subjective interpretation? Up until this point, we haven't explicitly specified which document serves as the ultimate authority for the PP category. Therefore, we have developed a proposed set of rules that defines this distinction very clearly.

The Race Director really does make the calls when things fall through the cracks of the rulebook. But honestly, that’s not even the point here. The real issue is just that some drivers were totally left in the dark about how penalties actually work when the qualifying winner gets hit. Not knowing the rules isn't really anyone's problem except for the person who's confused. From where I'm sitting, if you just stop obsessing over the lack of clarity, you're basically just making drama out of how people interpret the regulations.

stormytiger4 said:The Race Director really does make the calls when things fall through the cracks of the rulebook. But honestly, that’s not even the point here. The real issue is just that some drivers were totally left in the dark about how penalties actually work when the qualifying winner gets hit. Not knowing the rules isn't really anyone's problem except for the person who's confused. From where I'm sitting, if you just stop obsessing over the lack of clarity, you're basically just making drama out of how people interpret the regulations.

Which specific rule are we discussing?

edit:
it was actually the moderator who initially raised the question about how to calculate that PP.

The way this rule is currently phrased feels open to far too many interpretations, wouldn't you agree? It really ought to be refined.

The moderator only asked the question because seven people voted for Hamilton even though everyone knew he was going to get penalized. Out of those seven, six of them didn't actually get what was being looked at—they just didn't know. As for the last one, you, I can't tell if you just didn't know or if you just didn't get it. Honestly, the moderator's only mistake here was asking the question in the first place. But he did it, like he said, just so it wouldn't look like he was playing favorites.

We'll get the voting results and the final standings from the last Race tomorrow. Once the championship wraps up, we can sit down and hash out what we should be watching. So, please, everyone just stop with the unnecessary drama.

stormytiger4 said:The moderator only asked the question because seven people voted for Hamilton even though everyone knew he was going to get penalized. Out of those seven, six of them didn't actually get what was being looked at—they just didn't know. As for the last one, you, I can't tell if you just didn't know or if you just didn't get it. Honestly, the moderator's only mistake here was asking the question in the first place. But he did it, like he said, just so it wouldn't look like he was playing favorites.

We'll get the voting results and the final standings from the last Race tomorrow. Once the championship wraps up, we can sit down and hash out what we should be watching. So, please, everyone just stop with the unnecessary drama.

If we are going to stick strictly to the letter of the law, then I must insist that the points for Monaco be revised.
It is always such an elegant thing when we have a concrete document to refer to, isn't it? The FIA's preliminary results cover everything, including the FL (which isn't necessarily the fastest lap of the entire race, but rather the fastest lap among those scoring points), yet we find no mention of the PP there. The closest thing we have are the qualifying results, which you all refuse to recognize, despite the fact that they clearly state the PP lap.

Look, I don't have any issues with the potential stewards' review for Monaco, even if the circumstances aren't exactly the same. But this whole situation happening right here, right now? Yeah, I definitely have an issue with that.

I feel like I'm falling through the air here; it's honestly depressing reading such a massive argument over these bizarre situations.

Leclerc in Monaco—He clocked the fastest lap in qualifying, which should legitimately give him pole position, but a mechanical failure during the formation lap leaves him in a DNS situation. As we saw, his deserved P1 spot on the starting grid was essentially vacant, yet the grid wasn't shuffled to hand Max Verstappen P1. In my opinion, whoever assigned Leclerc the PP shouldn't be getting points for it. If Leclerc had actually made it through the warm-up lap and then his gearbox failed right at the start of the race, then the people who gave Leclerc the PP would be considered legitimate point scorers in your championship. I see you all trying to stay aligned with the FIA regarding documentation and how they implement scoring rules, but keep in mind that the FIA is only semi-transparent and they love changing their implementation depending on the specific case. Take Sergio Perez, for example—they wiped away his DNS in Belgium this year; it's a total precedent and the peak of absurdity.

Hamilton in Barcelona 2012 and Turkey 2021—There’s no debate there. You're the fastest in qualifying and you qualify as P1, but you haven't earned the PP because you were either disqualified, hit with a penalty from the previous race, or forced to change components outside of regulations.

I think the best way to handle these cases for your PP is as follows:

* A driver who takes a grid penalty or is disqualified during qualifying despite setting the fastest time doesn't have a legitimate PP.
* A driver who should be starting on pole, but suffers a mechanical failure during the formation lap or the warm-up lap, does not have a legitimate PP.

"DNS" is a clean term that solves your headaches, because if a driver has the PP but can't actually start the race from that position, they don't have the PP.

graniteharbor502 said:The race director ultimately holds the power when things get messy, and frankly, that is exactly what we are facing right now. We have a genuine problem on our hands. The current rule regarding the PP isn't formulated with enough clarity, which has understandably left several folks on the forums feeling quite confused. It feels as though we need to take decisive action and refine it; after all, shouldn't the entire goal of this game be centered around clarity and transparency? Shouldn't we strive for a system where everything is crystal clear rather than one that relies so heavily on subjective interpretation? Up until this point, we haven't explicitly specified which document serves as the ultimate authority for the PP category. Therefore, we have developed a proposed set of rules that defines this distinction very clearly.

Wrong.
The moderator is only making a call because you won't stop whining about how "it isn't clear" and how "problematic the situation is." 🙂
Let's be real: it couldn't be any clearer, unless we're just lying to ourselves...

And worst of all, I get the feeling they're deciding this way just because your username is black. 🤦
Right now, I'm actually embarrassed that my own username is black...
So there it is, before I lose my manners...

graniteharbor502 said:If we are going to stick strictly to the letter of the law, then I must insist that the points for Monaco be revised.
It is always such an elegant thing when we have a concrete document to refer to, isn't it? The FIA's preliminary results cover everything, including the FL (which isn't necessarily the fastest lap of the entire race, but rather the fastest lap among those scoring points), yet we find no mention of the PP there. The closest thing we have are the qualifying results, which you all refuse to recognize, despite the fact that they clearly state the PP lap.

I didn't follow how the points were handed out in Monaco, but if a review is needed, fine...
But that situation has nothing to do with this one. This current issue is already laid out in the existing rulebook as clear as day...

The elegant way to handle this is to refer to an official document. The FIA's preliminary results cover everything, including FL (which isn't necessarily the fastest lap of the race, but the fastest lap among those scoring points), but we don't have PP listed there. The closest thing is the qualifying results, which you refuse to acknowledge even though they clearly state the PP lap.

Stop reinventing the wheel.
There's a document called the "Final starting grid" that shows exactly where everyone is positioned, and it covers absolutely every scenario, including that famous Monaco mess. ☕

And what on earth is this "FL" you're talking about that—according to you and only you—isn't necessarily the fastest lap of the race? 🙄

Singapore GP:
https://www.formula1.com/en/results....ce-result.html
https://www.formula1.com/en/results....test-laps.html
https://www.fia.com/sites/default/fi...sification.pdf

Kevin Magnussen gets an FL even though he wasn't even in the points, and that's assuming they were already handing out points for FL back then...
Stop making up problems where they don't exist.

It's pretty obvious there’s no real leadership here. Your championship needs a solid set of rules that don't necessarily have to mirror the FIA rulebook.

For instance, you shouldn't be calling it "best in qualifying" instead of just "PP." You need to stick to that. Drivers who have a DNS, get disqualified from qualifying, or take grid penalties aren't legitimate PP winners because that's not what PP means—it signifies the best starting position. A DNS doesn't give you the best starting position since you aren't actually at the front of the grid when the lights go out.

And regarding the FL, it would honestly be better to just count the absolute fastest lap, since that's the only true fastest lap of the race. What seems to be confusing everyone is—well, let me rephrase that—according to F1, a driver earns 1 point for the fastest lap if they finish in the Top10, but that simply means they are the legitimate winner of that point, regardless of the fact that a driver outside the Top10 might actually hold the absolute fastest lap time of the race.

I honestly can't believe these basic things aren't included in your rulebook.

stormybadger8 said:Wrong.
The moderator is only making a call because you won't stop whining about how "it isn't clear" and how "problematic the situation is." 🙂
Let's be real: it couldn't be any clearer, unless we're just lying to ourselves...

And worst of all, I get the feeling they're deciding this way just because your username is black. 🤦
Right now, I'm actually embarrassed that my own username is black...
So there it is, before I lose my manners...

I didn't follow how the points were handed out in Monaco, but if a review is needed, fine...
But that situation has nothing to do with this one. This current issue is already laid out in the existing rulebook as clear as day...

The elegant way to handle this is to refer to an official document. The FIA's preliminary results cover everything, including FL (which isn't necessarily the fastest lap of the race, but the fastest lap among those scoring points), but we don't have PP listed there. The closest thing is the qualifying results, which you refuse to acknowledge even though they clearly state the PP lap.

Stop reinventing the wheel.
There's a document called the "Final starting grid" that shows exactly where everyone is positioned, and it covers absolutely every scenario, including that famous Monaco mess. ☕

And what on earth is this "FL" you're talking about that—according to you and only you—isn't necessarily the fastest lap of the race? 🙄

Singapore GP:
https://www.formula1.com/en/results....ce-result.html
https://www.formula1.com/en/results....test-laps.html
https://www.fia.com/sites/default/fi...sification.pdf

Kevin Magnussen gets an FL even though he wasn't even in the points, and that's assuming they were already handing out points for FL back then...
Stop making up problems where they don't exist.

I have no objection to assigning Valtteri Bottas the PP for this race. However, we really ought to amend the rule. That is the core of the matter. I don't have any issues whatsoever with the moderator's decision.