Double points ‘artificial and unsporting’ – Ferrari

2014 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Ferrari President Luca di Montezemolo has criticised the plan to award double points in the final race of 2014 as “artificial”.

"I can’t say I like this idea very much,” said Montezemolo, “as it seems rather artificial and not very sporting.”

Montezemolo wants F1 teams to have a greater say in the future direction of the sport.

“I think the time has come to all sit around the table with the other teams to discuss the overall approach to Formula 1 and, with that in mind, I want to organise a meeting in the second half of January, here in Maranello.

“I want to talk constructively, without discussing anything to do with competitiveness but putting forward proposals in a transparent manner, without any under the table agreements. There should be more dialogue between the teams when it comes to discussing the problems affecting Formula One.”

2014 F1 season

Browse all 2014 F1 season articles

Image © Ferrari/Ercole Colombo

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

37 comments on “Double points ‘artificial and unsporting’ – Ferrari”

  1. I thought Ferrari had a veto for this type of thing. Hopefully they use it

    1. He said in the same article that they wont use it for something like this because it is not important enough a thing to use the veto. They are calling a summit of team leaders to discuss it and perhaps then they may all agree that ferrari should use its veto.

  2. Who was representing Ferrari at the F1 Strategy Group meeting, then? A chimp?

    1. Why, did Ferrari vote for this at the F1 Strategy Group meeting?
      My understanding is the teams hold 6 votes out of 18 and unanimous decisions
      are not required.

      1. When the rule was put forward at the strategy group meeting it got unanimous support from all 6 team’s as well as all the FIA/FOM representatives so yes Ferrari did vote for it.

        In Luca’s own words-
        “”Maybe the best way is to do one year to find out. It was unanimous agreement to do it. We will look at it but in future we need to have more involvement of tifosi (fans), media, the stakeholders of F1. “

        1. Thanks for that @gt-racer
          I assumed Red-Bull and Ferrari voted against it because they came out recently to say that they thought the rule change was ridiculous.

          I guess they changed their minds since all the backlash?
          Hopefully they all will… (but I doubt it).

        2. we need to have more involvement of tifosi (fans)

          Nobody called me!!!!!!!!!!!

    2. A chimp? Good one. Of course he could blame Massa. What a politician, votes for it, now tries a 180, and saying come on over to my house “…without any under the table agreements”. Reckon that’s easy to say when you alone have the under-the-table agreement. What a chump.

  3. Ferrari being sporty and thinking about the well-being of F1 rather than their own self interest, as usual. :p

  4. I thought the strategy group voted it and they all agreed…

    Seems weird, but if Ferrari has more power than the other teams, this would be a nice time to use it, so they revert this stupid decision…

  5. Anyone wondering why the sudden change of heart should read the Autosport article which clearly states it was Bernie who pressurized the strategy group in voting in favour of this ridiculous plan. He claimed the television networks and race promoters insisted on a system which would allow the show to last until the last race.

    Luca doesn’t often make much sense but his words today have been music to my ears, calling all teams together to discuss the direction of the sport and to see what can be done about this without exclusion of the little ones.

    1. Yes, extraordinary isn’t it? I actually found myself agreeing with Montezemola.
      Reading the quote in the article and the quote that @gt-racer pulled up from the BBC article, it seems as though Ferrari and the other teams might have agreed to the sill points proposal perhaps reluctantly and possibly as an experiment for one year only. That certainly wasn’t how it was presented afterwards.
      But yes, it’s got to be good to have all the team’s talk together, as long as no one team has a veto over what’s decided . . .

      1. *sill = silly. Sigh.

  6. Now that’s what I’m talking about. Finally someone with real power and influence in F1 weighs in. With Ferrari against it, as well as the fans I am hiding a smile, confident that this silly rule will soon be removed

  7. I’m a Ferrari fan, but I don’t agree with the huge political influence that they can exert over the sport. However, if it came down to it I wouldn’t mind at all if Luca had one of his tantrums and leaned very hard on the powers that be to get rid of the double points abomination. It’s been a few months since Ferrari have threatened to leave the sport, they can trot out that ultimatum and hopefully get rid of this joke.

  8. I don’t think there is any need for a double points final race to attract fans. Personally i watch every single race regardless of who is winning or losing the championship and so do most of the F1 fans around the world.

    1. Quite possibly Bernie realises that when he is finished cost cutting F1 will be so boring that only a teen fanbase following their idols championship placing will keep viewer numbers up.

    2. I don’t think there is any need for a double points final race to attract fans. Personally i watch every single race regardless of who is winning or losing the championship and so do most of the F1 fans around the world.

      That’s the point. You are already a fan, so don’t need to be attracted to the sport. You will probably continue to watch it no matter what they do.

      On the other hand, they want to attract new fans viewers. These need persuading to watch the sport show. They need every race event to be exciting, and don’t want the drivers performers to win until the very end.

  9. Refreshing words from di Montezemolo? Well I never.

    Let’s hope this double points codswallop is given the elbow soon if the teams meet without any external pressure, so we have a fair finale. But say it is overruled, the FIA won’t be able to shake off this episode easily.

  10. I wish a transcript of the Strategy Group meeting that passed the double-points rule was available. The best explanations I can come up with for such a rule being voted on unanimously are (a) they had to choose something and the other choices were even worse, or (b) everyone was stupid-drunk and completely misunderstood what they were voting on.

  11. Please, use your power Ferrari – for once it may be constructive.

    1. Oh, there’s still political gain to be had. Ferrari have been criticised for their tight relationship with the FIA and their veto in the past, but Luca says they won’t use it over something this small. So if he can rally the teams to get rid of double points, he proves that Ferrari don’t need a veto to get their way. It will also establish the team as someone the non-SWG teams can approach to voice their concerns.

      So there is a lot of political power to be gained here. Removing an unpopular rule is just a means to an end, and to be blunt, a double-points finale might be a lesser evil than Ferrari gaining too much political power.

  12. With all this talk about the veto power that Ferrari has, does anyone know how often can Ferrari use this veto power? I mean, I read somewhere that they have this power till 2020 but can they use it only once till then or for once in year or as much they want for whatever they want?? Anybody?

  13. Call me crazy but… I still can’t help but feel this is all for PR, and by the time the season starts it will be abolished, I’d be very surprised if it actually happens next year…

    1. That’s still the way I feel, although I feel crazier with each day that passes and I don’t see an article saying that the idea has been scrapped.

  14. I’d be interested to know if any team will think about the double points and how to strategically get the most of it? One thing that I thought of, is that many teams have cars that suit certain track styles/types better than others, e.g. some cars are faster at Monza on a low down force setup. I wonder if any team will actually now focus on changing their designs for the last race at Abu Dhabi?

  15. Great idea Monty, get all the teams together to talk. You could give this group a name, maybe “Formula One Teams’ Association” or “FOTA” for short, oh wait a minute….

  16. I think the most refreshing thing about Ferrari coming out and saying this, is that they didn’t come out saying that with this rule, they could have won Championships in two of the last four years. Instead, they are hopefully using some of their political power to make a positive impact on the sport. All we need is a few more veteran drivers and teams to rally around and push the sport in the right direction, even if it’s just by starting with this silly rule.

    You’re up next McLaren/Red Bull

    1. Vettel and Ricciardo have spoken out against it so it’s safe to assume Red Bull are too, but Perez supports it, so I doubt you’ll get McLaren so willingly on-board.

      Red Bull and Ferrari agreeing on something would be enough to make anyone reconsider though, even Ecclestone!

      1. Perez is with Force India now not McLaren

      2. Perez’s opinion might have had nothing to do with McLaren mind. Or Force India for that matter.

  17. Reading and seeing this article was wonderful. I was really beginning to think that the double points decision was becoming irreversible. Kudos to Luca for saying these words, agree with everything he has said on this subject. Hopefully his words are heard and Formula 1 is being thrust into a better future through constructive talks.

  18. Wait I agree with both LDM and Irvine over something? This double points is worse than I first thought…

  19. Give all the the criticism, I think this rule would go away, like those stupid rules they tried to implement a few time ago, that they wanted to make champion the driver with most wins, not with most points

    1. Give all the the criticism, I think this rule would go away, like those stupid rules they tried to implement a few time ago

      Like the current DRS implementation, for instance?

  20. I believe there are three areas that need to be addressed with respect to points allocation, and to single out the last race of the year for the award of double points as likely as not is going to be a pointless exercise. Besides there is no more validity for double points in the last race as the first or middle race of the season. If a different points schedule is to be introduced it makes more sense to do this perhaps for a mid season race with a different format, perhaps a race that is longer than usual and requires a change of driver as well as a single refuelling, introducing some different challenges for the teams.

    Perhaps there should be some points bias for a wet race, which after all introduces some significant driver and team performance challenges and crucial decisions that often need to be made at strategic points and times of a race ought to be rewarded, as opposed to points awarded for results on a relatively run of the mill dry, warm/hot race day, which is the common situation.

    As things stand a tremendous effort goes into practise and qualifying, and I believe it would not be inappropriate to award some points for the final practice session, and for qualifying.

    The differential between first place points and second place at the very least seems too wide, and creates a situation where a driver who wins a number of races and also has a number of disqualifications, or DNFs could win the season over a much more consistent performer who merely does not actually win any races.

    Finally, awarding the same points to the team as are awarded to the drivers may be convenient, but this mimicry hardly reflects all aspects of the constructor teams, and is a quite unimaginative system of awarding points. A driver who does not score many points in a season but finishes every race reflects a significant team achievement, and this should merit some reward beyond mere media acknowledgement. The argument surrounding the differential in points between 1st and 2nd place points (at least) also applies to the constructor points awarding system.

    A case can also be made for some points awards for consistency both by drivers and teams. An example of this would be a string of consecutive top ten finishes, as opposed to merely viewing every race as a stand alone race and unrelated to any previous or subsequent performance.

    A system that considers all these aspects of the season as a whole, as opposed to say 20 separate and in some ways unrelated events would obviously result in a more complex scoring system, but also a much more interesting and competitive one in which teams and drivers receive credit for aspects of performance on a more extensive and representative basis than a mere win or lose points system.

  21. Normally I have no patience for Montezuma, but in this case he’s right. If the FIA wanted extra points for one race, it should have made Monza a 500km race. It’s a track that would allow for a longer race and greater spectacle, and being mid-season it could or would upset the driver’s table without ruining the season. Drivers would still have time to fight back.

    But a better solution is going back to the old system of totalling a driver’s best results, say 10 out of 20 races. A last race DNF by a driver leading the standings can turn both driver and constructor championships upside down, moreso the latter.

Comments are closed.