I'm merely stating what would have been the most appealing to the average viewer compared to the background story that many people probably do not realize.
Maul became one of the most well liked Sith of all time, how much more appealing to the public would it have been to have Maul appear in the 2nd film. You still could have had the death of Qui-Gon Jinn and that still could have allowed Dooku to run to Sidious' hand because of Jinn's death.
If you say pointless, in the EU (while not canon) Vader is tested many times by Sidious, if Vader were to die at the hands of another in hopes of becoming a Sith, it would have been allowed.
If Dooku had beaten Anakin in Episode III, Sidious' would not have been disappointed being that it proved he had the stronger of the two. Not to mention coming up in the Clone Wars, Ventress is craving becoming a Sith. If Ventress was to kill Anakin then destory Dooku, Sidious' would have gladly taken her as his apprentice... Again, proving that Sidious' wants the strongest at his side. Another example, look at Sidous telling Luke to finish his father, Vader, in ROTJ, he wanted the strongest!
So pointless? Absolutely not! It still could have been very relevant in the story and not to mention, add much more appeal. Dooku defeating Maul in the 2nd film for the right to be at Sidious' side would have been more appealing and could have been just as meaningful, as the story line would have been only slightly changed. Still allowing all of Dooku's name, wealth, and political contacts to play the same role they did. No matter which way you shake it, it still would have been awesome to see two Sith formerly battle it out.