F1 Fastest Lap Points - Full of Speed and Fury, Signifying Nothing

 In 2019, Formula 1 introduced a bonus point for the driver who sets the fastest lap at each race (1 point for the driver, 1 point for the constructor).  They added some conditions, the point would only be given to a driver in the top 10 - if someone outside the top 10 sets the fastest lap, no point is awarded.  That struck me as unfair because it's down amongst the bottom half of the constructors’ championship where that extra point will count at the end of the season, especially when it comes to the money given to the teams.

That's part of the problem, the idea seemed to have been to encourage the teams to do something in the often dead last quarter of the race, when the interesting part of the race is over because the cars are too wide to allow overtaking at most tracks and there's no more pitstops to permit over/under cuts. Having cars come in for fresh tyres towards the end of the race to aim for the fastest lap point is supposed to increase interest, rather than being a bad sign that there's enough distance between cars to allow for a pitstop without a loss of place. But at the same time, they didn't want it to have too big an effect, because we'd never hear the end of it if someone won the World title purely because of fastest lap points.

Overall, I doubt adding fastest lap changes that much (and everyone knows how I feel about pointless changes) so I decided to go through the last 10 years’ worth of results (okay 11, because this happened in 2019, and I'm only writing this in 2020) and see if it does change anything. For 2009-2018, would adding fastest lap points change either the drivers’ or constructors’ standings at the end of the season, for 2019 and 2020, would removing them change anything. Because there'll be a lot of numbers, I'm putting them in separate posts and linking to them at various points.

Before anyone else says anything about them, yes there are caveats.  Before fastest lap points became a thing, drivers may not have bothered to go for fastest laps because they were worth nothing (except bragging rights, and bragging rights should never be underestimated), therefore it is a slightly artificial experiment.

The results

2009 (link to results here).  To no-one’s surprise, Mark Webber was one of the first drivers who wouldn’t have got a fastest lap because of finishing outside the top 10.  He finished outside the top 10 when he was fastest at the Japanese Grand Prix. The shock is that the perpetually cursed-with-bad-luck Webber was not the first person this happened to, no, that would have been Timo Glock at the European Grand Prix. Nine different drivers (ten if you want to count Glock) different drivers, driving for seven different constructors, would have gained points.

There would be no changes to the standings in the constructors’ title, and only 16th and 17th place would swap in the drivers’ standings.

For 2010 (link here), three races would have had no fastest lap point awarded.  Six different drivers (or seven counting Petrov who didn’t finish in the top 10 when he set the fastest lap at the Turkish Grand Prix) for four manufacturers would have received fastest lap points.  There would have been no changes to either the Drivers’ or Constructors’ Championship standings.

2011 (link here) would have been the first season that a fastest lap point would have been awarded at each grand prix, because all the people who set fastest laps finished in the top 10 of each particular race.  Six drivers for three teams would have won fastest lap points.  However, it would have had no effect on final standings.

2012 (link here) was much more of a mixed bag.  Four races would not have seen fastest lap points awarded because the person who set the fastest lap either didn’t finish in the top ten or didn’t finish at all.  Even with that, 8 drivers from 5 teams would have won fastest lap points (the unawarded ones raises that to 12 drivers and 7 teams).  This makes no difference to the Constructors’ Championship, but does cause a small movement in the Drivers’ Championship.  In the real world, Lewis Hamilton finished in 4th on 190 points, with Jenson Button finishing in 5th on 188 points.  In our counter-factual universe, where fastest lap points are awarded, Hamilton won none of these (the one race where he set a fastest lap, he did not finish), Button won two, and therefore, they are tied on 190 points.  It then goes to count back.  Both drivers won three races, but Button’s next best finish, 2nd, is better than Hamilton’s next best, 3rd.  Therefore, Button move into 4th and Hamilton is knocked down to 5th.

There are no changes due to the award of fastest lap point in 2013 (link here).  All but one race would have seen a point awarded (Esteban Gutierrez unluckily finishing in 11th at the Spanish Grand Prix).  Six drivers from five teams would have won fastest lap point (seven from six teams if Gutierrez had been luckier).  However, nothing would have changed in the Constructors’ or Drivers’ Championships.

2014, or the year of the silly attempt to add excitement by awarding double points.  (Is it really 6 years since I wrote about that nonsense?  I didn’t like it then, and I am glad they got rid of it.)  If fastest lap points had been awarded in 2014 according to the rules now in use, nothing would have changed with the final positions, 17 out of the 19 races would have seen points awarded, for 6 drivers from 4 teams. 

If points had been awarded to all drivers who set a fastest lap, regardless of final position, something would have changed. Kimi Räikkönen was one of the two drivers who set fastest laps, but would not have been awarded a point because he finished outside the top 10 (at the Monaco Grand Prix in his case). If he had been awarded a point, he would have leapt into 11th place in the drivers’ championship, ahead of Kevin Magnussen, but since the point wouldn’t have been awarded, this is another season where the fastest lap points would have changed nothing. Full details here.

Fewer drivers would have won fastest lap points in 2015 (link here), with only 5 drivers for 3 different teams setting fastest laps.  While this doesn’t change anything in the constructors’ championship, fastest lap points would have moved Daniel Ricciardo up to 7th place in the drivers’ championship, ahead of Daniil Kvyat.  With the addition of fastest lap points, Ricciardo and Kvyat would have the same number of points, and, although their best result is the same (one second place each), Ricciardo’s next best result is better than Kvyat’s next best result (a third place vs a fourth).

Two races in 2016 would not have seen points awarded, with Nico Hülkenberg missing out due to finishing 15th at the Chinese Grand Prix, and Fernando Alonso missing out due to finishing 14th at the Italian Grand Prix.  Fastest lap points would have been awarded to seven drivers from four teams (it would have been nine drivers from six teams if points were awarded no matter the finishing position).  There are no changes in the drivers’ or constructors’ championships, and the only thing the fastest lap point would have done would be to increase the gap between Rosberg and Hamilton at the end of the season.  Full details here.

Seven drivers would have received fastest lap points (it would have been eight but Sergio Perez finished in 13th at the Monaco Grand Prix), for four different constructors (would have been five if Perez had been given the point) in 2017.  There would have been no changes to the constructors’ or drivers’ championships (details here).

In the 2018 season, two races would not have seen points awarded, Valtteri Bottas finished in 14th at the Azerbaijan Grand Prix, while Kevin Magnussen finished in 18th at the Singapore Grand Prix.  Personally, I say if somehow, anyone manages to get a Haas to be the fastest car of a race, they ought to receive a point, but that’s not what the rules state.  Adding fastest laps does not change anything in the constructors’ Championship.  In the drivers’s championship, Bottas would have moved into 3rd from 5th, with Verstappen narrowly missing out on passing Räikkönen for what would now be 4th.  (Full details here)

This was the year where Force India had to reconstitute themselves mid-season.  Fastest lap points do not change either of their positions.  Obviously, if both “Force India”s points were added together, they race up the constructors’ championship but adding fastest lap points wouldn’t change that amalgamated table either.

Now we come to the second half of this accidental natural experiment, 2019 and 2020, years in which fastest lap points were awarded.  For these two seasons the question is, will positions change with fastest lap points removed.

2019 – Six drivers from three teams won fastest lap points, both members of the three big teams.  Two races didn’t see fastest lap points, because Kevin Magnussen finished in 17th at the Singapore Grand Prix and Bottas DNF at the Brazilian Grand Prix.  Again, I would like to state my policy that if anyone manages to get a Haas to be the fastest car of a race, they ought to receive a point (although giving Magnussen that point wouldn’t have changed anything in the drivers’ championship).  (Details here)

2020 was a weird season in a weird year.  Fastest driver points were awarded in all 17 Grand Prix.  They were awarded to 7 drivers across 4 teams (details here).  Removing fastest lap points makes no difference to the Constructor’s title (don’t look at the constructors table, it is a thing of horror for all Ferrari fans).  In the Drivers’s championship, removal of the fastest lap points would move Albon ahead of Carlos Sainz jnr, but I am not sure that would have saved his seat, Red Bull being what they are.

Conclusion:

So, what have we established? At no point did adding or removing fastest lap points change the standings in the Constructors’ Championship.

0/129 placings.

0%.

Zero.

Zulu. Echo. Romeo. Oscar.

[add in other languages, as applicable]

This established, let's look at the Drivers’ Championship: 11 drivers would have changed the finishing position with the addition or removal of fastest lap points (11/284 = 3.9%).

However, none of these changes would affect who won the title, and since I’m not party to individual contracts; I don’t know if anyone would have made some extra money or if anyone missed out on some cash.

Mostly, this has been a change that affected nothing, but why is this? Partly it’s the small size of the “fastest lap bonus”: a single point compared to the 25 points for a win.

I think they made it deliberately small so it wouldn’t affect the big things like the Drivers’ championship, but it’s so small that it doesn’t affect anything in the Constructors Standings (where money is more obviously at stake).

While I disapprove of change for change's sake; I don’t think those in charge will get rid of the fastest lap point in the short term because it gives the appearance of excitement, gives the commentators something to talk about in the dead space after the pitstops.

I’d rather they tweak the rules to give spectators more exciting racing; but I don’t think I’m getting that any time soon either.

My Top Films of 2020 Explained

I really wasn't joking when I said a lot of this is 'I agree with Christopher Nolan'

The first film I saw in the cinema during the brief period of "not-locked-down" in the summer was Inception, because I felt the precautions were solid enough, and I wasn't going to pass up the chance to see Inception on an IMAX screen.

Totally worth it.  

Admittedly, part of that was because I one of maybe 5 people in the cinema, so social distancing was simple.  That might explain why film studios decided cinema releases weren't financially viable for the time being.

One of the most fun parts was watching the interview before the film which was Christopher Nolan talking about making Inception, and why he chose practical effects - as he suspected, yes, they have held up better than their CGI equivalents would have done - and the sheer glee-making thing of listening him talk about Hans Zimmer's score and using the same sound effects to describe *that* noise as the rest of us do.  It was so much fun.  I like that Nolan is an utter film geek, and loves cinema.  I feel the same way.

It's not just films themselves.  There's something I like about going to the cinema, the whole process.  Possibly it's because my hometown didn't have a cinema from when I was 7 to when I was about 15 so seeing a film was always a treat.  Or it could be that going to the cinema means there's at least an hour and a half where people can't expect to be in contact with you.  I like the way the room darkens and the anticipatory hush.  I like the ability to set myself aside for some time and be elsewhere.  I like going with friends and watching the trailers to decide what we want to see in future.  I like sharing popcorn and watching other people's reactions.

Even at my lowest, films in the cinema have been able to transport me away from everything, and watching them at home doesn't give me the same kick.

And I'm slightly worried that this will be the excuse companies use to switch to streaming only.  I understand that some people prefer watching films at home, and I want them to have the possibility of doing that, but I don't enjoy watching films at home as much as I do at the cinema.  It's just not as easy to lose yourself in the film's world, to see all the details and enjoy the full effect of all the hard work that goes into how a film looks and sounds.

So, about the films I did get to see in the cinema, and where I've ranked them.

I continue to use these 4 criteria:

a – did the film do what it set out to do?

b – did it use its resources to its best ability? A £250,000 film is not going to have as good explosions as a £25,000,000 film, or it shouldn’t, and if it does, there’s something wrong with the £25,000,000 film. Basically, it's a technical merit score.

c – Intellectual satisfaction – does the film’s plot pull some really stupid move at the last moment? Does the plot rely on characters being more stupid than they are?

d – Does this work as a whole? Did it work for me? I am aware that this is the most subjective of subjective criteria!

My top 4 films of 2020 are 

1 - Jojo Rabbit - This is a masterwork.  There is no aspect of the film that I can't heap heavy praise on - the acting, the writing, the soundtrack, the costume, the acting (I do not care that I am repeating myself).  It is a fantastic, human, film that I can't praise enough.

2 - Away - other than wanting to know which sociopath thought that this was kid-friendly (it really isn't, it would have terrified me and caused nightmares as a child), I was blown away by it.  It's an odd, slight film, but very effective.  You have this real fear about what will happen to the protagonist.  

3 - Spies in Disguise - I can tell whether someone is going to like Spies in Disguise with one phrase.  If "pigeon Bond girl" does not spark joy, you will not like this film.  It sparked idiot glee in me and I enjoyed it a lot.  It's a bit heavy-handed in parts, but it's a good film for when you want big stupid fun.

4 - Tenet - Tenet didn't work for me.  But I enjoyed watching it not work.  I want to watch it again, to try and make sense of it.  It's a type of "didn't work for me" that I want to see more of, because it's original, not based on a work in another medium, it's not a prequel or a sequel and it's telling a fresh story.

Every film I saw in the cinema this year was worth watching.  There might not have been a lot of them, but the quality was high.  I would recommend all four to other people, with the caveats above. 

Top Films of 2020

I only saw 4 films in the cinema this year.  I am confident that my ranking will not change between now and writing up my reasoning.  Warning, at the moment my write up is mostly "I agree with Christopher Nolan."

My top 4 films of 2020 are:

1 - Jojo Rabbit

2 - Away

3 - Spies in Disguise

4 - Tenet

Ferrari Foul-Up Bingo - After the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix

I promise this was delayed because of work, not because I couldn't think of anything to write.  I mean, I also couldn't think of anything to write, but … does any one remember either Ferrari doing anything at all in Abu Dhabi?

I mean, really?!

The only important thing that happened as far as Ferrari are concerned was that BOTH FERRARIS FINISHED BEHIND AN ALFA ROMEO!!!

Really, you let a customer team beat you!

What?!

Even Binotto accepts that this was 'not acceptable'.  Do something to fix it, you're the team boss.  If you can't, no one can.

I am trying to be positive about next year, but if there's no change in the technical regulation I can't see anyone beating Mercedes, definitely not Ferrari.  The thing that frustrates me as Ferrari fan is not the getting beaten, it's how much Ferrari are being beaten by.

Due to complete lack of anything happening, Ferrari-wise, there has been no change to the bingo card.

L believes that Vettel bursting out into song should count as a dab for "not sure why Vettel is laughing like that, let's not do it again", but I don't think it does.  I do think that Vettel transferring to Racing Point (or Aston Martin as they will be) will be good for Vettel, Ferrari and Racing Point.

I hope the team will be better for Sainz jnr.  (His father is a world champion, he is Sainz jnr., whatever the F1 coverage says.)

In the other big news, while I am sad for Albon*, I am happy for Perez.  

Plus, Perez has experience of always getting the worse car in a team and not letting it affect his performance so, if that's why the non-Verstappen driver in the Red Bull has been underperforming, at least it won't be new to Checo and he will be able to cope with it.  I don't think that is what's been happening at Red Bull.  I think the non-Verstappen drivers have been performing as well as that car lets them, and Verstappen has been outperforming the car.  But that's based on gut feeling and how much better various drivers have been when they drove for Alpha Tauri, before and after driving for Red Bull, not on evidence.

I might try to write a more thorough/less unspeakably Ferrari-biased review of the year at some point, but the main thing on the to-do list from an F1 point of view is the number-crunch post I promised previously.

*OMG, the BBC F1 coverage read out one of my tweets where I pointed out the factual flaws in one of their meaner analyses of Albon's season.  I am both pleased, and wish they'd not have been so unnecessarily and inaccurately mean about Albon.

I also apologise for the lack of punctuation in the tweet, I was walking home from food shopping.

Ferrari Foul-Up Bingo - After the Sakhir Grand Prix

The important bit is a Checo win. Glorious, glorious Sergio Perez victory. 

He did significantly better than the idiots in red, who managed to get a fifth dab of "driver error" and a third dab in "pitstop disaster".

   

Ignoring one incredible lap in qualifying (which had to be incredible because after it, Leclerc was out of tyres), anything else that could go wrong did. 

There was Leclerc's mindless attempted bulldoze at the start - just ignore the part of me that feels so sorry for him while he's been on his apology tour this week. 

Then there was yet another bad pitstop which put paid to any hopes that Vettel had of even a minor points-paying position.  Yes, it wasn't the biggest pitstop howler of the week (welcome Mercedes to that spot of shame), but there's a reason every Ferrari fan agreed with this tweet.

Mercedes have just gone all Ferrari.

— Grand Prix Diary (@GrandPrixDiary) December 6, 2020

Twelfth is not good enough. Ferrari have not been good enough. I can't see it changing for the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix this week, and I can't see it getting better next season. They are so frustrating!

World Cup 2022 Qualifying Draw

 With 2020 being 2020 I had completely forgotten that this was happening.

The actual result of the draw for the UEFA teams is here:

Group A: Portugal, Serbia, Rep of Ireland, Luxembourg

Group B: Spain, Sweden, Greece, Georgia

Group C: Italy, Switzerland, Northern Ireland, Bulgaria

Group D: France, Ukraine, Finland, Bosnia

Group E: Belgium, Wales, Czech Republic, Belarus

Group F: Denmark, Austria, Scotland, Israel

Group G: Netherlands, Turkey, Norway, Montenegro

Group H: Croatia, Slovakia, Russia, Slovenia

Group I: England, Poland, Hungary, Albania

Group J: Germany, Romania, Iceland, North Macedonia

(Thank you Guardian for being the only news source that had it all in writing.  Dear BBC, some of us care about teams that are not the home nations.)

While this year's ceremony did serve the function of reminding me that the qualifiers were starting (as though international football ever stops any more, in between European Championships qualifiers, the European Championships, European Nations League games, World Cup qualifiers and the World Cup itself), the purpose of the draw to shake the teams up probably failed; several teams will be looking at their draw going "you again?!"

I wanted to see what the draw would look like done straight off the rankings, or straight off the rankings while avoiding prohibited clashes, excessive travel combinations and too many winter country combinations (official FIFA explanation here, significantly clearer Wikipedia explanation here).

I was then going to draw straight from the rankings, considering those rules, and the whole European Nations League finalists have to be in one of groups A-E and have a maximum of 5 teams in their group.

Done completely from the rankings, the draw looks like this:

If the prohibited clash, excessive travel and excessively cold country rules are applied, amazingly, only two sets of teams have to swap.  

The first is Estonia and Kosovo, as otherwise, there are too many "too cold" countries in group E, which already contains Ukraine and Norway.

The second pair that need swapping are San Marino and Gibraltar, as putting Gibraltar into Group G would force Kazakhstan to have too many excessive travel countries, as Iceland are already in there.

If the European Nations League rules are applied, it whips Italy into group D, but only one other knock on effects, Estonia and Kosovo didn't have to swap because Ukraine and Norway are now no longer in the same group.

See, so much less fuss than the FIFA method.

Bahrain Grand Prix

No bingo update, because after that crash, I am really not feeling it.  Don't worry, I have made a charitable donation in the hope that whichever divine providence was looking out for everyone realises that I am grateful and would like it if they continued to look after them all.

Ferrari Foul-Up Bingo - After the Turkish Grand Prix

Nothing on how awesome Hamilton's 7th World Championship victory is.  Other than it is an amazing achievement and he is awesome.  I think we've discovered that I am incapable of writing hot-takes.  Far better people than me have written articles about it.  So has the BBC F1 correspondent.

I was glad to see the Turkish Grand Prix back because it's my favourite of the Herman Tilke-designed tracks.  And the race delivered.  Well, the first half did, and then they turned on the DRS "go faster" button and it all became boring.  

I do not like DRS.  I know why the brought it in, and I support the attempt, but DRS does not increase racing, it just makes it easier for the better cars to overtake the worse cars.  It's almost impossible to defend from a DRS overtake, so it really isn't racing that we see with it, racing needs both attack and defence.

I am ridiculously happy with the result.  It's amazing how well Ferrari do when the race removes the disadvantage of that cow of an engine.  Even Vettel seemed re-energised (possibly because he will be in the pink Mercedes/Aston Martin next year and if it's as good as this year's Racing Point it will be a good car.  I have to admit that the idea of Vettel in a good car excites me a lot).

Because of the result, I feel bad about dabbing both the "driver error" and "pitstop disaster" squares again, but truth is truth.

However, to make up for it, and in honour of both the result and correct tyre choices throughout the weekend (Red Bull seem to have caught Ferrari's poor tyre choices), I present Ferrari with two cookies of competence.

Next year, hopefully it will be more cookies than dabbed squares.

No-ronto: Wolfpack repeat errors of previous expansion teams

I want to preface this by stating that the RFL and Super League really did not help the Toronto Wolfpack situation and letting the other Super League teams vote on Toronto's future was asking for trouble.  It was also an abdication of responsibility by Super League and the RFL.

I also don't bear Toronto Wolfpack any ill-will (my feelings about Brian McDermott are a different matter and he can continue to take a long one off a short plank).  I wanted them to succeed, and I did my best to promote their cause to the unknowing.

That being said, was anyone actually surprised when it all went wrong?  I know the original ownership are blaming COVID, but I suspect something similar would have happened anyway.

I suspect this because I am old enough to remember the failures of Paris Saint Germain and the Celtic Crusaders, and the successes of Catalan Dragons and the London Broncos (note, success here is defined as 'still a going concern').

What raised alarm bells with Toronto?

 - A team plonked in an area with no pre-existing rugby (league) bedrock.  This was true of PSG and Crusaders, it was not true of Broncos or Catalan.

 - The players brought in were established stars, moving towards the twilight of their careers.  I get why - name recognition, known pedigree, etc - but it means there's an increased risk of longer injuries and high wage costs, which put together means the team might not have the funds or other resources to cover when the players get injured.  (This failing is not limited to expansion teams, established teams determined to reach the Super League have also done this.  Looking at you, Leigh!)

These two combine to ring a third alarm bell.

 - No local players, and no obvious sign of attempting to grow them.  There were no Canadians on this team, even PSG had French players!  Rugby league has very lenient nationality rules*, but they couldn't even find a single Australio-Canadian to play for them.

Having local players is helpful to a new team for a couple of reasons.  If we assume a new team is not going to do well in its first few seasons, it needs something else to bring in the punters.  Having a pre-existing local base of interest helps with that, in that situation people are already interested in rugby league, you need to do less convincing/converting.  If you haven't got that but do have a local player, you can use them to build up interest.

Where expansion has worked, there have been established amateur teams.

If International Rugby League really is serious about bringing the Canadians into the rugby league fold, I think throwing them in the second-deepest end was a bad idea.  There is already a US League, and adding a Canadian team or teams to that would have been a good first step.  It would have prepared the ground, and allowed Toronto to build itself up.

A lot of the noise around a possible New York expansion worries me, because it's very similar to the buzz around Toronto, and it sounds like no lessons have been learnt.

*A discussion for another time, but I like this leniency and I think it's probably one of the best thing that International Rugby League the organisation have done to spread the game.

Ferrari Foul-Up Bingo - After the Emilia Romagna Grand Prix

 I don't know why it wasn't called the San Marino Grand Prix, I am presuming it's something to do with copyrights and deals, or that someone finally spotted that Imola is not in San Marino.

I also don't know what Ferrari were playing at.  It had all been going, not well, but better, I even gave them a cookie, and then *that* horror show happened (any time that Mercedes win the Constructor's World title at Imola is a horror show).  Only one new square has been dabbed and that square is pitstop disaster.  A 13 second pitstop definitely counts as a pitstop disaster.

Vettel also somehow managed to screw up Bottas's race, which ... yeah, Bottas is suffering from Mark Webber's old luck.  That bit of debris from Vettel's car was ridiculously big and of course, Bottas got it caught underneath his car! 

Istanbul next, and mostly I'm just happy to see it back because it is my favourite of the Tilkedromes.  I don't expect anything good from Ferrari, but hope springs eternal.