Race winners could get 25 points in 2010

Button would stay champion under the new system - with 230.5 points

Button would stay champion under the new system - with 230.5 points

The FIA will vote tomorrow on a new points system for F1 proposed by the re-formed F1 Commission. The change looks radical on the surface with a winner getting 25 points instead of ten.

But on closer inspection the new points system will probably make little difference at all and only act to encourage drivers to settle for a lower position instead of trying to move up a place.

What do you think of the proposed new points system?

  • It's an improvement over the current one (35%)
  • It doesn't make much difference (31%)
  • It's worse than the current one (35%)

Total Voters: 1,795

Loading ... Loading ...

If it had been applied in 2009 the most significant change would have been moving Jarno Trulli up to seventh in place of Nico Rosberg.

The extension of points to cover ninth and tenth places means non-scorers Nelson Piquet Jnr and Kazuki Nakajima would have picked up points.

Proposed 2010 F1 points system

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Proposed 2010 points 25 20 15 10 8 6 5 3 2 1
Points as % of a race win 100 80 60 40 32 24 20 12 8 4
Current points 10 8 6 5 4 3 2 1
Points as % of a race win 100 80 60 50 40 30 20 10

The present points system, introduced in 2003, was criticised for making second and third place finishes more valuable compared to winning.

As the table above shows under the new system the difference between finishing second or third compared to winning remains proportionally the same. Second place still gives 80% of the points for finishing second, and third gives 60%.

It appears to be another attempt to ensure championships are decided as late in the season as possible, as it will be harder for a driver to amass a 25-point lead of a rival when you get ten points just for finishing fourth.

It is opposite in philosophy to the system FOTA suggested last year (12-9-7-5-4-3-2-1) which would have increased the relative value of a win.

What is truly strange about the proposed points system is that seventh place would be worth five points which is two more than eighth but one less than sixth. Surely it would make more sense for seventh place to be worth four points?

I’m not convinced by the perceived need to keep the championship alive until the last stages of the year. A good race is a good race regardless of whether the championship is it stake or not. One of the most popular races of the last ten years was the 2005 Japanese Grand Prix, after that year’s drivers’ title had already been decided.

I do think it’s worth extending the points further so that F1’s increased number of teams next year will have a greater chance of scoring points, making it easier for us to differentiate between their performance over a season.

On the other hand a driver who only needs a point to win the championship can go into the final round aiming to finish tenth.

I still feel wins are seriously under-valued by the present points system. If tenth place is worth a point, a win should be more like 50.

What do you think of the proposed change to the F1 points system?

Update: FIA confirms new points system in 2010

2009 F1 points under the new 2010 system

Pos Driver Points
1 Jenson Button 230.5
2 Sebastian Vettel 203
3 Rubens Barrichello 183
4 Mark Webber 175
5 Lewis Hamilton 120.5
6 Kimi Raikkonen 119
7 Jarno Trulli 78
8 Nico Rosberg 75.5
9 Timo Glock 63.5
10 Fernando Alonso 62
11 Felipe Massa 48
12 Heikki Kovalainen 46
13 Nick Heidfeld 44
13 Robert Kubica 44
15 Giancarlo Fisichella 26
16 Sebastien Buemi 16
17 Adrian Sutil 13
18 Kamui Kobayashi 8
19 Sebastien Bourdais 6.5
20 Kazuki Nakajima 5
21 Nelson Piquet Jnr 1
22 Jaime Alguersuari 0
22 Luca Badoer 0
22 Romain Grosjean 0
22 Vitantonio Liuzzi 0

Actual 2009 F1 points

Driver Points
1 Jenson Button 95
2 Sebastian Vettel 84
3 Rubens Barrichello 77
4 Mark Webber 69.5
5 Lewis Hamilton 49
6 Kimi Raikkonen 48
7 Nico Rosberg 34.5
8 Jarno Trulli 32.5
9 Fernando Alonso 26
10 Timo Glock 24
11 Heikki Kovalainen 22
12 Felipe Massa 22
13 Nick Heidfeld 19
14 Robert Kubica 17
15 Giancarlo Fisichella 8
16 Sebastien Buemi 6
17 Adrian Sutil 5
18 Kamui Kobayashi 3
19 Sebastien Bourdais 2
20 Romain Grosjean 0
20 Vitantonio Liuzzi 0
20 Jaime Alguersuari 0
20 Kazuki Nakajima 0
20 Luca Badoer 0
20 Nelson Piquet Jnr 0

Read more: Final 2009 F1 championship standings

Image (C) Brawn GP

Advert | Go Ad-free


135 comments on Race winners could get 25 points in 2010

  1. As most people seem to be saying, there needs to be a bigger difference between 1st and 2nd than what we currently have. If you are good enough to win a lot of races and wrap the title up by halfway through the year, then congratulations. I’d be happy with 50-35-20-10-8-6-4-3-2-1 as suggested by others.

    Its getting too close to the crap system they have in V8 Supercars here in Australia, where this year the guy that had won 10 or so races still had to score points in the last round to win it while the guy coming second had only won 4 or so races yet was breathing down his neck. Close to the rubbish they have for NASCAR

  2. i can’t understand why people are harping on about the ‘career points tables’? we all know that nobody calibrated them for all the countless changes over the years. not to mention the fact that there were fewer races per season in the past. between 1950 and 1958 Fangio raced in 51 grand prix. 9 years racing in this decade would give a driver ~3 times as many starts, 3x the opportunity to score points etc.

    why can’t we go back to 10-6-4-3-2-1? i always thought that had a good balance to it. the proportions could be kept so 20-12-8… or 25-15-10-8/7-5-3/2…

    obviously that still only awards points to the top 6 which is not what they want. they could leave it well alone, we’ve had exciting seasons recently. the reasons for the boring years were due to ferrari dominance which was caused by the rules stagnating.

  3. Mike "the bike" Schumacher said on 10th December 2009, 23:39

    Hate the new system. Points records wont mean anything. Scoring points wont mean anything and Glock will end up with more points than Senna which just isnt right.

    Solution: Driver with most wins, wins but points still awarded for constructors champ and to seperate equal drivers points for Fasest lap and pole too.

    Points for win have been around 10 and have produced brilliant championship fights especially 2007,2008 for the last 59 years why change now.

  4. Ultimately the actual points system makes no real difference. Apply ANY of the point scoring systems of the past to ANY of the championship years and you get the same world champion (Ok there are a couple of minor exceptions, but it is 59 years and loads of different systems), it’s the lower orders that move around…. as Keith’s table shows. What is clear is that the best driver in a year always gets to the top. But there is a clear danger here that it will discourage risk taking…. it’s got to feel worse to loose 20 points for spinning off than 8….

    • Maciek said on 10th December 2009, 23:59

      Yes, but this isn’t just about math – the idea (if they did the right thing and awarded exponentially more points for the first three positions, especially the winner, as many have pointed out above) – is that bigger points differences near the top would stimulate drivers to not settle for 4th, 3rd, or 2nd. That’s the ideal, anyways.

      Anyhoo, what I mean is that just reassigning points to past championships isn’t necessarily a true reflection of what would have happened inside races, ergo in the championship, had a different points system been in place. Anyhoo, I’m not really arguing here, just thoughts.

  5. adz2193 said on 11th December 2009, 0:19

    What a pointless system. Probably over half of the finishers will score points which is just plain stupid, the incentive to win isn’t increased at all, as Keith’s table shows, and why would a championship contender risk losing 20 points when going for 25? Which means no-one will risk a move, especially not for the lead, and therefore the races will be duller.

    The only thing this system will do is promote the mediocre teams and drivers like Sauber and Glock above the true legends of Grand Prix racing in the points tables.

    Under this new system, Force India, for instance, would have had their first points I believe in Bahrain or Spain 2008, their 3rd race, in an absolute dog of a car with 2 unspectacular drivers.

    Do we want to see teams and drivers scoring points for building a competitive car and racing well? Or do we want to see teams earning points for not crashing or breaking down?

    • adz2193 said on 11th December 2009, 0:23

      And in addition, it won’t even be easier to score points with a slow car.

      2008 rules – 8/20 cars – 40%
      2010 rules – 10/26 cars – 38.5%

  6. I think the current system can be adjusted to THIS:-

    If there are 26 cars in 2010…

    1st 10

    2nd 7

    3rd 5

    4th 4

    5th 3

    6th 2

    7th 1

    The idea that you give more than a 1/3 of the field points is rediculous, teams should not be in F1 just to get a couple of points to either earn money in other businesses or to pormote their comercial cars. They should be in it to get further up the time sheet and challenge for the title.

    • Gwenouille said on 11th December 2009, 10:44

      I like that… A win would still be 10 points, a 2nd place less interesting and the “ponits places” slightly extended.
      I prefer that than a major change.

  7. I think it’s simple and rational – they scaled all the top awards up by a factor of 2.5 in order to allow what are effectively fractions of points to lower placed drivers. It shouldn’t effect the championship too much except (as others have mentioned) consistent points finishes will be easier to come by.

    I think it’s a good idea, as it will give us a second championship of the new teams to follow, which would be a lot harder if we were just trying to track 9th/10th places.

  8. luigismen said on 11th December 2009, 1:19

    Did anyone notice that under the new system Ferrari would have beat Mclaren by half a point in the constructor championship?

  9. wasiF1 said on 11th December 2009, 1:40

    To me the new points system makes no sense,I would rather have the FOTA point system.The new system will still favor the people who will have a better car at the beginning of the season.

  10. mclarenproject4 said on 11th December 2009, 2:03

    Haha! Nelson Piquet Jr gets a point under the new scheme :P lol!

  11. Steve said on 11th December 2009, 2:29

    I always liked the fact how 1 world championship point was significant. I dont like MotoGP how hundreds of points are thrown around. Keep the old system, the new system wont make any change and will only dilute the importance of a Championship point. I do think that 1st place should reap an extra award and possibly bonus points for fastest lap or quali.

  12. F1NATIC said on 11th December 2009, 2:38

    the new points system has to better reward the winner. I liked the previous system in which the winner got 10 and second got 6. i think they should go back to the 66% margin over second place at least. I like to see drivers risk it all for the championship (remember raikkonen in the European Grand Prix in 2005 when he refused to hand over the lead).

  13. billatron said on 11th December 2009, 2:51

    am i right that since 96 every champ but Lewis would have won under the Medals system? regardless of points system wins will (normally) mean you win the Worlds Title – should be 12 9 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 for my two cents.

  14. theRoswellite said on 11th December 2009, 5:00

    Well, there is at least some good news about the new system. If you don’t like it, you won’t have to wait long till the FIA changes it again.

    And how can this be a system with Bernie’s blessing…he wanted the medal system…which would have the greatest gap between first and second possible. This one keeps the same relative relationship. Does he know this? Todt is supposed to be the mathmatical genius, has he pointed this out to Mr. E?

    Oh…sidebar…Keith, on your comment…

    It’ll just end up with people winning championships on Saturdays (when audiences are a fraction of what they are on race days)

    If you assume that part of the interest of F1 revolves around determining who is really the fastest driver, though driver/car is obviously more accurate, then it would be nice to formalize this into a direct points relationship. Plus, you mentioned that people would simply run a Q-set up on Sunday to get the……..single point for fast lap? Are they going to come into the pits and sacrifice their track position to go for FL? (I doubt the back half of the grid could get FL with any settings.)

    Fastest lap is a historical element of Grand Prix racing that has always had a special aura about it, think of Moss or Senna and how important the mantle of “fastest driver” has always been.

    You may be right of course, it might end up being an FIA adjunct that gets simply “lost in translation”…they have a recent record of such choices.

    Seems like a bit of fun to me though!

    And what if they did. I think it might add some extra interest to the

  15. theRoswellite said on 11th December 2009, 5:04

    Can we lose that last partial sentence please…thanks.

Add your comment

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

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.

Skip to toolbar