The revised points system implemented in F1 2010 has been praised in part for helping to produce such a thrilling, fascinatingly unpredictable and fiercely-contested campaign in which five drivers entered the last two races in contention to clinch the coveted crown, and four of them stood a chance sti♔ll heading into the Abu Dhabi finale🐭 - but how much difference did the scoring changes really make?

Here at mahbx.com, we have got our calculators out and done our sums to determine what the pecking order would have been under the 10-6-4-3-2-1 format 𒀰that persisted from 1991 up until 2002, and under the extended s𒁏ystem that rewarded finishers as far down as eighth place from 2003 to 2009.

In 2010, of course, it was the top ten who troubled the scorers, with a greater margi🌳n between victory and second place than has be⭕en seen for the last eight years. So who benefitted from it, and who lost out?

Although the ultimate destiny of the laurels would have remained unchanged either way, there would h♕ave been a switch of positions amongst two of the other title protagonists under the 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 regulations.

Under both of the previous scoring systems, meanwhile, two of this season's top ten would have cꦉome off rather worse in r🔜elation to their respective team-mates than they actually did - highlighting the fact that many of their points finishes were in the very lower reaches and that big results were few-and-far-between.

To find🌃 out who we are talking about, just fol🎉low the links below:

For the points table under the 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1 format, 168澳洲幸运5官方开奖结果历史:click here

For the points table under the 10-6-4-3-2-1 format, 168澳洲幸运5官方开奖结果历史:click here

For the final F1 2010 standings, 168澳洲幸运5官方开奖结果历史:click here