The winners
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
Sir,
I fear I find an element of bias in your presentation of “The Winners” on page 1574 of the December Motor Sport. I fail to see how 4 wins and 1 second place (Andretti) can be considered superior to 3 wins and 6 second places (Lauda), particularly as Andretti had what was undoubtedly the car of the year and the Ferrari proved distinctly difficult.
Short of awarding (say) 35 or more points for a win and 5 for a second place (which is ludicrous) there is no Method by which Andretti’s points can be made to exceed Landa’s. To score points in 12 races out of 14 (86%) is, to my mind, a feat greatly in excess of 8 out of 17 (47%).
Sporting Championships seem to me to fall into four categories: (a) those where there is a title holder who accepts challenges from others (e.g. Boxing) in single contests; (b) where the title is decided by a single event (e.g. athletics); (c) knock-out competitions (F.A. Cup); (These three include a large element of luck requiring peak performance on, effectively, a Single occasion.) and finally (d) those competitions such as the Football League or the World F1 Drivers Championship where the element of chance is reduced to a minimum and the winner is the one who produces consistently the best performances. I consider type (d) to be the most effective one.
Accordingly I am unable to agree With your views on the 1977 World Championship.
Edinburgh H. R. DUNDAS