I was thinking about point system and how it influence competition and drivers tactic. I remember 4 systems of scoring (before 97, 1997-2002; 2003-2009, and current). So if we compare it (If points for the win was more than 10 point I divided it to show better propotion) we have:

postition before 97 1997-2002 2003-2009 current
1st ... 10 ... 10 ... 10 ... 10
2nd . 7,5 .. 6 ... 8 ... 7,2
3rd ... 6 ... 4 ... 6 ... 6
4th ... 5 ... 3 ... 5 ... 4,8
5th ... 4 ... 2 ... 4 ... 4
6th ... 3 ... 1 ... 3 ... 3,2
7th ... 2 ... 0 ... 2 ... 2,4
8th . 1,5 .. 0 ... 1 ... 1,6
9th ... 1 ... 0 ... 0 ... 0,8
10th 0,5 .. 0 ... 0 ... 0,4

I really liked 1997-2002 points system - cause it forced drivers to fight for the win. The disadvantage of this system was that only 6 drivers was given points. If we want more manufacturer teams, system should reward eight or ten drivers. Current system is very similar to that which was before 1997. 2003-2009 system IMO had two little difference between 1st and 2nd position. I wonder how the rallies would be if 1997-2002 system returned. I had impression that in those time competitiors drives much more offensive, rallies was more exiting, and unpredictable. Of course it's mainly because of Loeb's dominance in recent years, but still I think some drivers (for example Latvala) could take advantage of old system, and it could do WRC more interesting. It think it wouldn't infulence final standings but the fight for the win in single rallies could be more interesting. I have to admit that I was hoping that Latvala become fast, spectacular driver, who could challenge Loeb, and with very agrressive and offensive style.. I think such a driver would make WRC more interesting.