‘Most wins’ system confirmed for 2010

Posted on Author Keith Collantine

The world champion in 2010 will be the driver with the most wins
The world champion in 2010 will be the driver with the most wins

Contrary to what I wrote here yesterday, F1 will be using ‘most victories’ to decide the champion in 2010. Leahonard_e pulled me up for missing a crucial line in the new 2010 regulations:

The Formula One World Championship driver?s title will be awarded to the driver who has been classified first in the greatest number of races, all official results from the Championship season being taken into account. Points will be awarded to all drivers in accordance with Article 6.4 below and, in the event that two or more drivers win an equal number of races, the driver with the greatest number of points will be awarded the driver?s title.

Is the FIA doing the right thing by changing the F1 points system?

The rules for 2010 are starting to look a real headache. We’ve already got teams running to two different sets of technical rules depending on whether they’re competing under the budget cap or not.

And the FIA has confirmed the driver with the most points won’t necessarily be the world champion in 2010 – it will be the driver with the most wins.

It’s not clear from the regulations what the value of a win is in a shortened race. Was Jenson Button victory at Malaysia a ‘whole win’ or a ‘half-win’?

Will the new systen make much of a difference to the championship? And does it disprove the conspiracy theory that the FIA were never interested in introducing the ‘most wins’ system, and only proposed it to deflect attention from the budget cap?

133 comments on “‘Most wins’ system confirmed for 2010”

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3 6
  1. Disaster. Why doesn’t the FIA listen to the teams and the fans? At this moment, I wish all the teams formed a breakaway series, and refashioned F1 in the manner the fans and teams would like, not how obersturmfuhrer Max wants it!

    1. If McLaren and Ferrari wanted to, a lot of other teams would follow.

    2. Is Max Mosley on a vendetta against F1 or what? Someone stop this mad man now.

  2. Yorricksfriend
    4th May 2009, 9:19

    Not cool

  3. I think I am going to stop watching F1 next Year! This is absolutely ridiculous!! What is the FIA trying to do, kill off F1?

  4. Is it a joke?

  5. I’ve been quite a huge fan of F1 over 20 years. But Mosley is really doing everything that the sport I love so much, will be spoiled!
    Hopefully FOTA will create new serie! With Kimi, Massa, Alonso, Hamilton, Kubica, Vettel, actually all drivers from F1 would go, then who would like to watch that Mosleys F1, where would be racing second class drivers with second class cars?

    1. Exactly. If the big guns in F1 formed a series, who would watch the old F1? If you can think it, it can be done!

  6. scunnyman
    4th May 2009, 9:47

    Now Keith can you tell us all if FOTA have an option to challenge against having the most wins rule for 2010? Or is it going to be like some other FIA rules where they don’t even have a right to appeal a decision.

    Also Keith, and this is not a dig at you, Promise…, could there possible be some hidden rule you and others may have missed that FIA have made all the races from 2010 shorter? It wouldn’t surprise me if the FIA just brought in shorter races by the backdoor.

    It’s like the FIA/Max Mosley are determined to ruin the sport for the fans. Most of the new rules coming into the sport, i feel are going to make formula one a sport that is too complicated to follow easily.

    Formula 1 was running along fairly smoothly before 93/94. Why did it have to be messed with so much.

    I get the impression that Max Mosley wants to bury F1 as we know it and start a new series in it’s place that has his total rules and no-one elses. Basically his own personal true life scalextric.

  7. what the hell, do they now think that the week’s between race’s are for them to keep changing the whole structure of our sport.
    To hell with what we think , do as you’re told what next!
    Someone call Mr montezemolo and tell him to get the other series started.

  8. Although this version of the ‘most wins’ system is still unfavourable to many (and me), I much prefer it to the medals system… Glad to see at least some element of the points system still remains.

  9. HounslowBusGarage
    4th May 2009, 10:05

    So we will have a two-tier F1 next year, based on the nimber of wins for the Drivers, and the quantity of points for the Teams.
    So there will be-
    1. A World Champion Driver according to wins
    2. A Different World Champion Driver according to wins
    3. A Possibly Different Champion Driver From An Un-Capped Team according to points
    4. A Possibly Different Champion Driver From An Un-Capped Team according to wins
    . . . and so on and so forth. Same for the Constructors Championship, too.
    Mind you, I think I can understand what this is all about. It’s like the Nursery School Sports Day where everyone gets a prize so they don’t feel left out!

  10. Whewbacca the Cookie
    4th May 2009, 10:08

    So, under extreme circumstances a driver with a mere 20 pts (2 wins only) could be crowned Champion if all the other GPs are won by different drivers… Ridiculous at best.

    1. 1982 Rosberg senr. won title with one win!!

    2. Yes, and it gets really silly if one driver wins 2 races and fails to finish all the other races whilst somebody else has 1 win and 16 second places.

  11. Nick Caulfield
    4th May 2009, 10:08

    I’m disappointed because too many results are decided after the race by the stewards. Spa and Valencia last year have been done to death now but would have been a real problem if they had determined the title because both were controversial and if either had been different then Hamilton rather than Massa would have officially had the most wins.

    Also, Hamilton driving for 5th in Brazil was a better spectacle than almost anything I have seen in years. With Massa out in front and the official results to that point standing, Hamilton would have had nothing to drive for at the end of that race (yes, I know the argument that the season would have played out differently with all teams knowing in advance what they were racing for but such a situation could still happen).

  12. how dreadful. and here i was, saying all kinds of nice things about max. since he’s giving bernie his lame-ass medals, i wonder what he’s getting in return ???

  13. Stupid, stupid and more stupid.

    If it aint broke etc….

    1. well, it is broke. in 2008 liar lewis won the championship by 1 point even though he won 5 races to massa’s 6.

      In 2007 lost it by one point with 4 wins while kimi had 6. do you think it’s fair to give hte championship to a racer who comes second 17 times if he has the most points?

    2. Yes, Bob, because for the other races, Lewis’ consistency and brilliance earned him those points. If Lewis hadn’t had Spa snatched from him wrongly, he would have won more races than Massa in 2008. Imagine how tainted Massa’s championship would have been with Spa in everyone’s mind. And this year is showing who is the real champion driver: Lewis not Massa!

    3. what he said.

      we havent needed ‘most wins’ for 60 years. why now?

    4. Clare msj
      5th May 2009, 9:40

      I would hardly say ‘broke’ just because Lewis won the title with one less win than Massa. I was firmly in the Massa camp for the title last year, and I dont agree at all that if Massa had taken the title it would have been tainted by Spa, but there is no doubt in my mind that Lewis deserved it also. Both drivers had an excellent year, couple of mistakes for each guy, but overall they were quite evently matched. The fact Lewis had one less win is not really important – it was only one win less after all. Plus even if he had been say three or four wins short of Massa, to have won on points would have meant that over a season he was consistently at the front, rather than every now and then, therefore would be equally deserving. Had BMW not given up on the title so early last year, Kubica would have been as deserving also, even if he had won less races.

      Whilst wins should be rewarded, so should consistency – its no good being able to win a few, if you cant maintain a good performance over the season. Thats why the 12-9-7 system is perfect – rewards both. Really cannot see why they havent taken that idea – I think it is better than both 10-8-6 and 10-6-4.

      HounslowBusGarage – I agree with the point about the ‘different champions’ – what with the optional budget cap and the points/wins thing, whilst there will be an official winner, there will be debate about winners of four different scenarios. It will belittle the achievements of whoever takes the title unless they would have won with most wins and most points – would have been bad enough debate if Massa had won with the Spa thing last year, let alone when there is four options for debate!

      Also wary of the team orders thing too which is bound to happen if its winner takes all. Positions swapping at the front all over the place if teammates are 1-2!

      Cant beleive they sneaked this one in covered by the budget cap – brilliant job for noticing, because I certianly wouldnt have!

  14. Ugh The current system works and rewards consistency… A great shame.

    1. I agree fully with Clare msj; We need to go back to the 4 point advantage of a race win. It’s ironic that in 2004 I think it was the FIA moved away from that scoring system because Schumaker was winning all the races and would have won the championships before the halfway stage if they did not do something.

      But the 4 point gap from 1st to 2nd will encourage teams to go for the win more.

  15. A breathe a sigh of relief. The most-wins system should have been introduced for this season: there is no doubt it encourages the drivers to push for the win.

    1. Mussolini's Pet Cat
      4th May 2009, 10:48


    2. More points for a win would have been far better.

    3. Lol so your saying that drivers didnt aim to win and push to win in the first place?

  16. Another giant two fingers to the real fans that keep the sport alive.

    Cheers Bernie. The feelings mutual.

  17. While I strongly doubt this will have any impact in changing the results (judging by past seasons), I do find the concept sickeningly stupid, and I am not looking forward to it one bit. Hopefully we’ll get a U-turn before then.


    So, this season it would’ve been:
    3 – Button and 1 – Vettel so far. Barichello is irrelevant, despite often coming in second and having plenty of points.

  19. This point system makes sense with a capped budget environment (fixed money, lots of technical freedom).

    Teams can be encouraged to experiment solutions moving budget from reliability-related development to speed-related ones without fearing compromising their championship.

    Teams willing to be less conservative, drivers willing to be more aggressive (thanks also to the refuelling ban) lead to interesting races to me…

    And, Keith, I think a win is a win (no half-wins), and this is an example of how this system can really make things simpler (and funnier).

    1. I fail to see the funny side :(

  20. actually, part of my problem with the wins system being introduced this year was the refuelling. This might actually spice the racing up a bit as drivers will race on the track. Some may stay out on long shot tyres in order to win and we could well see some very dramatic final few laps.

    It will be interesting to see how it works out.

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3 6

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.