I've long been against fuel stops in Formula 1, in fact ever since that made their first appearance back in 1994.  The reasoning was simple - when cars are guaranteed to stop for fuel, why should a driver attempt to overtake on the track?

But lets look at it from the reverse angle.  What makes for a great race?  First we have to define a great race.  Uncertainty, dicing and overtaking.

All the "classic" races of recent times have pretty much come from wet races.  Who will be on the right tyres at the right time?  Once you take fuel load out of the equation, you get the uncertainty of how the tyres will perform.  Fuel burns at a known rate that's similar for all cars/drivers but how the tyres degrade varies between car setup and driving style.

The other great feature of wet races has been faster cars starting behind slower cars.  Now this probably won't happen in 2010 (unless there's a wet qualifying) because all the qualifying sessions will be on empty tanks.  However during the race (and this is the important bit) cars will find they have tyres in poor condition and need to stop for more.  When they come out of the pits they *will* be faster than the other cars because everyone will be on (almost) the same fuel load, but tyres in a worse condition.

Add the fact that this year cars have been ever closer (and is likely to continue next year with the rules continuity) and races are going to end up a game of tortoise vs hare, with the hares getting stuck behind the tortoises (so Trulli will be in his element).  Not knowing if the tortoises will stop, the hares will have to overtake if they're going to win.  It's this requirement to overtake and the fact that the race positions are real (not mixed up until the last fuel stops) that will make things exciting.

All it needs is an open an unlimited KERS rule and it'll almost be like back in the turbo days!