I'm excited yet still sceptical. I think more points for the grand prix winner would have been better and maybe fairer. If this system does not work it will leave the FIA with even more egg on there faces.
All this chat of winning 2 and DNFing the rest is a lot more realistic this season too. Seeing as the pecking order is being shuffled a bit, we could see more drivers/teams winning races [2007 was the dullest season ever with only McMerc or Ferrari winning a race...] so say like driver won a couple of races each... it really could happen.
I disagree that 2007 was a dull season, was alot better than many previous years, and for the first time in a very long time, someone came from a good distance back to take the title. While its nice to have more than two teams winning races, Id rather it was that way than have tonnes of different winners and every one of them being a procession...
I can see Bernie's argument about drivers all striving to win and creating the extra incentive, but I believe consistency and reliability as a driver and team are also significant, and should be recognised by having points that contribute to a championship win. However, F1 has had many such 'points systems' and it will be interesting to see how it pans out - back in 1988 there was another system where Senna won because only the best eleven scores counted, and he had more wins, whereas Prost actually scored more points overall. I think it may be something quickly removed like the one lap qualifying if it proves detrimental. What I don't agree with is the budget cuts, which will change the face of F1 considerably, and not in a good way.