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 (34%)

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. antonyob said on 11th December 2009, 11:16

    Football works so well because it rewards attacking play in goal difference as well as giving points for the win. In racing you get no points for pole, none for fastest lap and none for overtaking. You used to get a fastest lap point i think and that was when it was only 9 for a win so why not? God if 10th is enough for a reward then surely most overtakes deserves something. Broadly though i support the new points system and as the poll suggests its not a whole lot different but gives something for the new boys to aim for.

  2. three4three said on 11th December 2009, 11:27

    I don’t think this makes much difference and I agree that it’s a good idea to distribute more points as there will be more cars on the grid. However, I agree with Keith that a win should be a greater % of points compared to 2nd & 3rd.
    So I would propose the following:

    #1 – 20 (=100%)
    #2 – 15 (=75%)
    #3 – 11 (=55%)
    #4 – 8 (=40%)
    #5 – 6 (=30%)
    #6 – 5 (=25%)
    #7 – 4 (=20%)
    #8 – 3 (=15%)
    #9 – 2 (=10%)
    #10 – 1 (=5%)

    IMHO when the points haul gets too big (eg. 50 for the win) it all gets a little messy, so I capped the win at 20 points. With this system a driver would be awarded 25% less points for second; 20% again less for third; 15% again less for fourth, 10% again less for fifth, etc etc. Thus a win is worth more and from the first loser down the points diminish proportionally.
    Hope this makes sense!

    • three4three said on 11th December 2009, 11:36

      Or alternatively
      #4 – 7 (=35%)
      This would be to separate #1,2,3 from the rest of the top ten effectively recognising the prestige of the podium.

      #1 – 20 (=100%)
      #2 – 15 (=75%)
      #3 – 11 (=55%)
      #4 – 7 (=35%)
      #5 – 6 (=30%)
      #6 – 5 (=25%)
      #7 – 4 (=20%)
      #8 – 3 (=15%)
      #9 – 2 (=10%)
      #10 – 1 (=5%)

  3. Peter Rippon said on 11th December 2009, 12:01

    I also agree SUBSTANTIAL points for fastest race lap and POLE. Imagine the last 10 minutes of qualifying on empty tanks. Memories of Senna!

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 11th December 2009, 12:08

      Senna never needed a point for pole position – as someone said earlier, starting first on the grid is reward in itself.

      • Steph90 said on 11th December 2009, 12:58

        Agree completely with you Keith.
        You fight for pole to start at front and get out of chaos and lead the race. Right now most win from pole so why give them an extra point? In quali everyone is desperate to get it right as it is so important so it doesn’t need extra emphasis.
        Also, I have to vehemently disagree with points for fastest laps. They should be recognised more, maybe give an award for the one who has the most at the end of a season. However, if the championship has one point in it then just fuel the driver extra light, put on right tyres and there you go championship is his. Hardly exciting.
        I don’t really care if we watch a championship race or not but in the end the title should always be decided by the racing not by fixing results with the quickest lap.

        • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 11th December 2009, 13:04

          They should be recognised more, maybe give an award for the one who has the most at the end of a season.

          They do, actually, it’s sponsored by DHL and it gets very little coverage.

  4. Bullfrog said on 11th December 2009, 12:57

    Will this be used in other series – rallies, F2, GP2? It usually is whenever the F1 points system changes.

    I’m concerned it may prolong the career of drivers who aren’t good enough, but manage to bag a lucky 9th or 10th. It’s almost inevitable there’ll be a paying driver or two in a 26-car grid – even if people as good as Kovalainen and Heidfeld still haven’t been announced for 2010.

  5. antonyob said on 11th December 2009, 13:13

    well if one guy fuels his car light to get the fastest lap point then so can another. So you could have the other guys team mate also fuleing light to counter it. Its hardly less exciting than watching someone lolling round in 9th to get the requisite points is it? and to “vehemently disagree” is getting a little too excited non?

    if you say that a guy who gets pole normally wins then the extra point or 2 means that he does get rewarded more for winning which is what i thought Keith was saying was wrong with the new points system. i dont vehemently disagree with his point though.

    • Steph90 said on 11th December 2009, 13:35

      LOol I apologise I’m a bit grumpy after a row with the post office :P I have calmed down but I do still disagree with it. The cvhances are that it will be just one contender who simply needs one more point. It can bring some excitement but for a lap and that’s it then it’s over. I just don;t like the idea.

    • José Baudaier said on 12th December 2009, 15:17

      Don’t forget that there will be no refuelling next year, so no one would be able to fuel his car light, unless he knew he had no chance is scoring points and thus went for a chance of fastest lap and DNF with a empty fuel tank.

  6. ” My first year watching Jochen Rindt won with 45 points. As much as I love this sport I hate to see the sideshow it is becoming.”-Rampante

    All too true, my friend. It’s less and less about the racing, isn’t it?

    “Why does F1 have to constantly fiddle and change rules and regulations between seasons?”-CRM

    Same answer as to the question why do dogs lick their ********? Answer: Because they can.

    “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.”-theRoswellite

    Yes, I’d give this one, should it get voted in, a very short life.

    “The proposed points system is like painting an elephant black and yellow to make it look like a bee.”-Ariel

    This is by far the best line I’ve seen in a comment here. And VERY true. Keith, can we have an award for ‘Comment of the Month’ ? I’ll nominate Ariel right now.

    “All this talk about drivers needing more incentive to win is absolute rubbish.
    Keep in mind that the issue keeps being raised by Ecclestone who failed as an F1 driver.”-Accidental Mick

    Now, now, Mick, let’s be accurate about this. In truth, Bernie failed more as an F1 Qualifier than race driver. (Tongue planted firmly in cheek. :) )
    ]

    And last of all, a word to FiA, as though they’d read this or even consider my remarks, but heck it makes me feel better. I see in the FiA statement (Keith’s link in the article) that a new sub-committee, the Sporting Working Group, has been created within the newly re-formed F1 Commission. The SWG mandate is to “improve the show”. I can’t WAIT to see what this brings. I can only imagine they are sending out even now for some black and yellow paint, specially if the vote is “Yea” on the new points schedule.

    FiA, please remember, it is supposed to be about the racing. Not the “Show” or the “Spectacle” ….. hell, we could have teams of miniature ponies with their tails & manes dyed in team colors and great tall plumes as head-dresses tow the cars to the grid, and that would certainly be show and spectacle. But remember, at long last, it is supposed to be about the SPORT, about the RACING. I have been following Formula 1 since there WAS such a thing, went to my first F1 race at Silversone in ’56, and some of the things I’ve seen in F1 recently have truly brought tears to my eyes. FiA, or F1 Commission, whichever is to actually run the sport now, please remember it was, is, and always should be about the racing. Not the multi-million dollar hospitality suites(ya listening, Bernie?), or the exotic locales, or even about the historic tracks cause even the best history on a dull track brings a bad race. Please keep in mind that you should take premier care of the racing, and everything else will take care of itself.

    Rant over, thanks for reading. And those of you napping can wake up now.

  7. Now the record books are going to be broken for sure. All of the “most points scored in a season without a win”, “most points for runner up”, all of those are going to be broken because of the increase of points. Why can’t they just leave it alone? I guess it will make it just a bit more interesting for us spectators…

  8. What I like is that more drivers are rewarded with points i.e. to tenth place. I like this because we are told points means cash for the teams and I think that those further down the grid can do with as much help as possible considering the obvious disparity between those at the top of the grid and those at the bottom.

    As for the actual points allocated per placing, well I’m not very good at maths, so I’ll have to mull it over for a little longer and if not see how it plays out through the season…

  9. Button says he is in favour of the new points system

    “It’s a great idea,” Button told BBC Radio 5 live. “It’s nice that you get five points over second for winning.
    “That’s important because we all love winning races. I won six races this year and I got just two more points.”

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8408151.stm

    I think someone needs to tell him that second is still worth 80% of a win, or perhaps just point him in the direction of this site.

    • LOL – Button you dumb ox! Guessing math was not his forte at school. Wow – Great news Jense – revised point system for 2010. One million points for a win, that’s two hundred thousand more than second place!!

  10. antonyob said on 11th December 2009, 14:07

    I think some people are missing the point . yes first is only 20% more than 2nd and that is the same ratio but if you finish 1st next season you will get more than 3 x as many points as the 5th place man wheras now its 2.2 x. seems to work to me.

    I still think the idea of battling out for fastest lap to gain an extra point adds a layer of intrigue. you are allowed to disagree, that is the point of a blog but you seem to believe that a fastest lap is set and then that is it. its only it when the chequered flag falls so its like a race within a race. Add that to a for and against column in overtakes and grade guys on the same points by that.

    All systems and rules are imperfect, thats why we watch sport.

  11. luigismen said on 11th December 2009, 14:46

    15-12-10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1

  12. While it does rankle with me that 2nd is worth 80% of the 1st place points haul, it has produced longer seasons in terms of race relevance. Mickey the Shoe really was THAT good!

    I guess with the additional teams, they had to do something for next year. Could end season with 3 or 4 teams without a single point and thus, no fair way to compare them – still might happen, but with 19 rounds, fairly unlikely. If one team does turn out a complete dog of a car next year, which fails to finish a single race, should a team that has only just missed out on points be ranked alongside them?

    If cornered, guess I favour 20 15 12 9 7 5 4 3 2 1. Rewards top 3 and gives the extra incentive to push for the win. Can’t agree with your system Keith. Feel 50 points is too big a number to dish out by comparison to 1. Is 10th out of 26 cars really only worthy of 2% of the winners haul? Bit harsh methinks.

    Oh and the 7th place point thing? Surely a screw up on their part, can’t believe they would publish this tosh. Bunch of amateurs LOL.

  13. The whole point of the new medal system isn’t to revolutionize the value of the points in correlation to each other. Its to allow the new/backmarker teams a better chance at scoring a point. People are looking at it the wrong way if they think that it is meant to be a better system in terms of the winner having more value. Thats not the intent.

  14. I completely agree with the baffling 7th place that gets 5 points, it should be 4 as Keith suggested. This points system doesn’t change much and is annoyingly inconsistent. I’m a bit scared of the 50 pts I don’t know maybe it’s just the size of the number.. I like David A’s suggestion of:

    15-12-10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1

    Or we can increase the value even more from 1st-2nd and from 2nd-3rd, after all 3rd is a podium finish and I think it’s worth more points than 4rth position, which would like something like this:

    18-13-10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1

  15. David Watkins said on 11th December 2009, 22:21

    2008

    L Hamilton 240
    F Massa 239
    K Raikkonen 188
    R Kubica 180
    N Heidfeld 144
    F Alonso 140
    H Kovalainen 124
    S Vettel 79
    J Trulli 72
    T Glock 61
    M Webber 53
    N Rosberg 48
    N Piquet 45
    D Coulthard 27
    R Barrichello 26
    K Nakajima 22
    S Bourdais 12
    J Button 9
    G Fisichella 1

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.