The New Rule: It's Okay For Some in Formula 1

There has been a lot of discussion about the newly instated rule of most wins equals’ title winner.

There is not a huge opposition to it, although the news that Felipe Massa would have been rightful champion last season obviously has not gone down too well with Hamilton fanatics.

Indeed, had this rule have come into place two years ago, the rightful champion and driver of 2007, Kimi Raikonnen, would have won the title by two wins instead of by just the one point he edged out in bizarre fashion at the season's climax.

His car's reliability issues had nearly cost him the title in the first place, but karma in the end appeared to prevail.

Yes, the new rule will definitely encourage overtaking. Hamilton, Massa, Alonso and Raikonnen will look to fight like they have never fought before for precious wins, which could ultimately tally up to title glory.

In this respect, straight away the defence of this rule coming into place has a great deal of validity.

A driver who shows his dogged determination to win races will be aptly rewarded, as opposed to the driver who consistently but deliberately edges onto the second or third steps of the podium in a race they could have won, but instead settled for the reward of points that would keep the title race open.

There is however, one downside that I see to this rule, and the 2008 season shows a brilliant case in point. Felipe Massa and Lewis Hamilton, points wise, were the statistical top two drivers of the season last year, memorably culminating in the last-corner dramatics that were Hamilton’s title glory and Massa’s heartbreak.

But were their seasons the top two performances of the season as a whole? The simple answer is no. Lewis Hamilton was solid at points, but arguably a weaker version of his debut season self.

Felipe Massa also was stronger than he had ever been, much to the shock and amazement of his harsh critics, but still on occasions showed a lack of maturity and consistency in his driving.

On the other hand, two drivers shone throughout the season, outperforming their cars and showing immense speed and great tenacity as if there was no tomorrow.

Sebastien Vettel became the youngest winner in Formula 1 history, demolishing Kovalainen in Italy and elevating himself into superstar status.

Race after race, he tore up the form book for this Toro Rosso team and showed what an average car could do in the hands of professional talent.

Yet it was Robert Kubica’s performance which was by any stretch of the imagination, outstanding. Here was a driver who had survived a spectacular crash in the previous season, a crash which ten years previous would have left him six feet under, and left a driver who as a result appeared to come back ten times stronger with improved pace and driver quality.

The BMW was not a championship winning car; it could not compete with Ferrari and McLaren. 

Still, it showed a great level of consistency. Kubica himself outshone teammate Nick Heidfeld throughout to earn multiple podiums, which oddly left him at one point leading the drivers’ standings without a win to his name.

That win, albeit in extremely lucky circumstances, came to him midway through the season and gifted him the reward that he so truly deserved,.

If not for his team's insistence on producing an improved 2009 car, could have encouraged him to fight for more victories in the penultimate rounds of the season which would force him to become a surprise third candidate for title glory.

But if the same thing happened in the 2009 season, this new rule suggests that Robert Kubica would become irrelevant as a title contender, unless his team can produce a car worthy of greater pace.

So therefore it has to be said that this rule, which is good for some, is brutally punishing for the likes of Kubica and Vettel.

Both are among the best drivers in a field of celebrated talents, but if previous form continues into the new season, it would lose them any hope of a title challenge for the "drivers’" title.

Ultimately, it would be the teams' lack of pace which would cost him the individual title as opposed to their own talents.

The ultimate question here really is, should the drivers’ title come down to which car performs head and shoulders above the rest, or should it come down to who can actually get the most out of their car and outperform it to the greatest extent...and ultimately who would actually be the most deserving champion?