GP2 Forum

Besides the shake-up of the points-scoring system, which it is hoped will be introduced this coming season, will hand the winner 12 points instead of the present 10 and is designed to give drivers a greater incentive to race for victory rather than settle for a points-paying position. FOTA have also re-affirmed their commitment to cut costs.

The proposal being that points are allocated

12-9-7-5-4-3-2-1

rather than the current

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

FOTA president Luca di Montezemolo said: "Our goal is that we have a budget saving from 2008 to 2010 of 50 percent - that's 50 percent in only two years."

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 23,00.html

And again: This is absolutely the wrong place for this thread!!

Anyway, I think a victory should be worth more (in points) again! So I would recommend the new system!

Good idea to change the allocation, in my opinion. Apparently, the teams would still like this to be applied to the about-to-start current season, for that, they would have to have very productive talks with FIA, and they in turn would have to have a quick process implementing this. But even if this 2010 stuff, I'm all for it, at least rather than the unintentionally funny medals system.

thread moved

I don`t like the new scoring system, what is this usefull for? To let McLaren and Ferrari gain more FIA bonus money for each point per race? I don`t see any use in this.

If they want to change it I think the winner should get a "nice" amount of points like 15 or something else, maybe a 15-12-10 for the podium and 8-6-5-4-3-2-1 for places 4 to 10. This would allow more teams gaining points, but on the other hand we are far away from 26 cars....so why don`t switch back to 10-6-4-3-2-1 for the top 6 drivers?

Personally I never saw what was wrong with the 10-6-4-3-2-1 system either, the only reason it was changed in the first place was so Minardi could tell prospective sponsors they'd scored a couple of points. Seemed a daft reason to change it to me.

"Excuse me Mr. Ecclestone, we aren't quick enough to score points on merit, can you extend the points-paying positions instead of us getting quicker?"

There should definitely be a sizeable gap between the points for first and second, otherwise what's the point of challenging for victory? The fact is there isn't enough of a premium put on individual Grand Prix wins these days. In the 50's they were more concerned about taking victories in races than taking championships, and that's the way it should be now. It irks me when drivers talk about "driving with the championship in mind". That's not racing. To my mind, if you set out to win every race then the championship will take care of itself.

Greyhead wrote:Personally I never saw what was wrong with the 10-6-4-3-2-1 system either, the only reason it was changed in the first place was so Minardi could tell prospective sponsors they'd scored a couple of points. Seemed a daft reason to change it to me.

"Excuse me Mr. Ecclestone, we aren't quick enough to score points on merit, can you extend the points-paying positions instead of us getting quicker?"

LOLWUT? ^^

It was changed in a (hurried) reaction to Schumachers dominance in 2002, y'know, to make the championship more exciting and not so one-sided.

Correct, that was why the gap between first and second was reduced, but that wasn't why it was extended to eighth place.