This post was published 2 years 10 months 24 days ago.
Information may no longer be valid.

Sometimes I think the FIA make rule changes just because they can. This time though, I have to say, it seems they thought about it and still made the wrong decision.

What are they thinking?

I’ve often supported the rule changes, being able to see the positive in things, but this just seems silly and counter-productive to what they have said they want F1 to be. You want to know? Well… The 2009 F1 Champion will be the person who has the most wins. So, theoretically if someone wins 3 times and fails to finish every other race, while the next best person wins twice, and finishes on the podium in every event, scoring 136 points (by the old system) more, they finish second. Nice, huh?

I just don’t get it.

If the 2009 F1 season produces the close competition the FIA want where multiple people get wins, you could have someone who only finished 3 events winning the championship!

How on earth is F1 now supposed to have a champion that is the best? It reminds me of a previous blog post I wrote where I felt that the A1GP series had shown me F1′s failures, where F1 simply was not a display of who was best, it was a display of who had the best car… Now, of course, it isn’t even a display of that!