Championship Points System

[Micklegend]

Ok, so this one has probably been done to death in the past, but I havent seen the debate on 10/10ths for a while, so what are the current thoughts on the points system for the V8 championship?

In reality, since halfway into the year only 2 or 3 cars have had a chance of maintaining a position to actually win, given the averages of finishing positions, in my opinion its been a race for 3rd unless 888 have major catastrophic dramas in the final rounds.

We have seen glimpses of many teams getting a run but only being able to maintain a constant position on the ladder, so trying to overcome a deficit of 4-500 points is near impossible. Then you look at the defending champion, failrly well gone from any calculations since round 3, with bugger all chance of recovery.

When I look at the Nascar style of points, there have been a number of drivers that in one or two events have been able to improve their positions to be in contention, and the chase as it is right now is still a lottery.

So...a solution? Smaller point scores per round? Bonus points for leading laps or qualifying? There may be merit in racing for consistency but also rewarding passing.

Like I said, this topic has been debated before, but really for the fans, I think we would all like to see a bit more of a contest with 3-4 rounds to go than wondering who will come 3rd.

[JC Ohope]

To be fair to Team Vodafone an their drivers though, they really are the best V8SC team with the best drivers in the championship and it really would require a massive pile of luck (either bad luck for Team Vodafone or good luck for everyone else) for other teams to beat them with their current dominance.

Just imagine how far ahead CL & JW would have been at Bathurst if they hadn't had stacking and alternator issues.

It might be slightly optimistic, but I hope that with the upcoming CoTF it might result in a much closer championship as teams like HRT & Triple Eight won't have as much relevant technical info.

[formerf1champ]

Originally Posted by Micklegend

When I look at the Nascar style of points, there have been a number of drivers that in one or two events have been able to improve their positions to be in contention, and the chase as it is right now is still a lottery.

Mate, I don't know you or anything, so I don't want to have a major crack at you. But, why are you bothering? Why are you trying to find a points allocation that'll make for a close finish at the end of the year? The reason why the 888 cars are 1 and 2 is because they are the best driver/car/team/form combo, and the points should reflect that. The thread you'd have started, ideally, would be "What would be the most accurate points allocation?"

Nascar points? Please, Nascar is a joke! In the last year, before the chase, '03, Matt Kenseth won a 36 race series despite winning only one race, and Ryan Newman, that year, ended up 6th or something despite winning 7 or 8 races! Do you want that to occur? Because that could happen. Oh, did you mean you wanted the Chase system? Well, lets have a look, the first year in, Kurt Busch won it despite not being one of the top 3 drivers that year! Gordon or Johnson should've won it in '04. I think it was '07, Johnson won it, even though Gordon "should've" won it. Gordon, for 2 seasons, has scored the most points, and been a legitimate winner in doing so, and still not collected the trophy! Since the Chase, we've had a guy win 5 straight titles, when the next best was 3! Do you want that?

Originally Posted by Micklegend

So...a solution? Smaller point scores per round? Bonus points for leading laps or qualifying? There may be merit in racing for consistency but also rewarding passing.

Is there going to be any solution that'll satisfy you, though? On another thread, weeks/months ago, I suggested that we have the points as it is, then after the second last round, scrap them all and make the Sydney round a one-off title decider. That was taking the wee out of V8Community/Cochrane, but the way it's occurring, it may be the only way to "please the fans". The only other allocation I can think of is to reward 3 points for 1st-10th places, 2 points for 11th-20th places, 1 point for 21st-30th places, that should keep it tight!

Originally Posted by Micklegend

Like I said, this topic has been debated before, but really for the fans, I think we would all like to see a bit more of a contest with 3-4 rounds to go than wondering who will come 3rd.

Firstly, the fans should stop whingeing for a change! That is, all over the world! Secondly, there "should be" strong enough leaders governing all types of motorsport and they "should be" knowledgeable enough to create/develop an honest series. As far as "a bit more of a contest is concerned", in all the time I've followed motorsport, the best series, or periods, are the ones where constructors/manufacturers are fair dinkum and they really want to win, hence, taking into account F1 may be the highest level of motorsport, the '90s BTCC was the best series so far, even when the title wasn't a close contest.

[one five five]

Team Vodafone have dominated all year.

Under any points system they would be miles in front, not just the current one.

There have been no consistent challengers to them all year, it would be a farce if anyone else won the championship. (ie...something like a 'NASCAR chase' would be farcicial)

Points for qualifying or fastest lap is good in theory, but just gets confusing. What happens when the championship comes down to the last round, but the 2nd place drivers needs to win both races, score pole and get a fastest lap.... the minute he qualifies 2nd the thing is over, decided by qualifying.... points should only be awarded on finishing positions, for the sake of the fans if nothing else (and afterall, the whole point of a race weekend is the win the actual races, is it not?)

[Micklegend]

formerf1champ, why am i bothering? ask anyone who starts a thread here why they bother! This is a forum for debate, ideas and opinions last time I checked, thanks for sharing yours.

If you knew me, you would know Im a Ford guy first, a fan of 888 because they are the best in the business and also a fan of the V8 series. I also follow F1 and Nascar closely, and also like to see a contest that isnt over half way through a championship.

Ask yourself these questions:
How exciting is a game of footy that is done and dusted at half time?
Are you thrilled to see a final point victory by a team who has made a comeback when the leaders are complaicent?
How do you feel when your team snatches a last gasp victory?
What do you think when someone drives from the back of the grid to win a race?
How much elation is there in a team that fights to get up front after a first lap failure?

In the same vein, why do some racers win multiple events but fail to win a championship?
Why was Bathurst so exciting this year?

Sport is about the contest, who is there to compete and also to see the effort of all competitors be rewarded, and those behind each team, the fans and sponsors.

We often debate the professionalism of the team, the cash behind the team and how that translates to results.

Im not saying that a points system akin to Nascar would change the landscape of our current years championship standings, but seriously, if you are plonking a few hundred grand into a team each year, wouldnt you like to know that with a run of good results, you may have a crack at finishing top 10 in the championship?

When our cars are separated by a single second in qualifying, shouldnt the reward for placings be also separated by equally small margins? Sure 888, HRT, SBR and FPR have the resources, but Id suggest these resources would be spread a bit further if the 'also rans" were nearer the top of the heap.

I appreciate your contribution.

[formerf1champ]

Originally Posted by Micklegend

formerf1champ...

You might remember, for the '03 season, in response to HRT/Skaife's dominance, the points allocation was changed so that a dominant runner could not blow out to a huge title lead. And it worked, the title came to the last round, but it wasn't a thrilling finish, just a formality because the gap was too hard to make up. I'll also point out, that season should never have gone to the last round anyway, Ambrose was a clear standout, and deserved to have won the title with a race or two to spare. It was a joke that Murphy was even in the hunt since he only had one good weekend that year. It was actually a super-awesome weekend but you know what I'm saying, and this is what it can create.

A tighter points allocation will also affect the racing, competitors will employ much more conservative tactics. An example of this is in '05, when Ingall "won" the series winning one round and running at 9/10ths, this then gave inspiration to Rick Kelly who "won" "06 despite winning one, short, heat at GC , none outright and running a 8/10ths! He wasn't even the best 3 drivers in the series, wasn't even the best driver in his team! Yet he still took the series, the only unworthy series champ in all top-level motorsports I'm aware of. This is what a tighter points will create.

Points allocation based on MotoGP is fine which, IIRC, is what the current points are based on. An example of this is in '06 when Hayden won it. Hayden won just 2 races, compared to 6 for Rossi (I think his bike broke down while leading another as well), also, incredibly, Troy Bayliss, competing in only 1 race, actually led more laps than Hayden! And yet, despite these stats, Hayden was a worthy champ, he was fast and solid all year, unlike everyone else (as opposed to the amateur he's been since).

Also when a result becomes obvious before it even occurs, the "fans" usually find another point of interest. OK, for you, third isn't a big deal but it's still a significant position, also most VGisbergen fans would be very interested in who comes third, since it'll be his best c'ship finish and, perhaps, a realisation that he may be becoming a star, as opposed to a star of the future, but not quite a star.

Looking at the footy questions, what works for one doesn't work for another, I don't barrack for either Geelong or Collingwood, but I can tell you, without any doubt, I wasn't hoping for a close game, I was hoping Geelong would smash Collingwood by halftime! These scenarios are only good when they happen naturally, the Rugby WC, despite being a low scoring, tight contest was awesome, because that's how the game evolved. It's never good when any comp tries to manufacturer a close result.

[SilverSpeed]

Ingall at WP in 2012 - confirmed.

...great way to loose Percat. Silly move. Would have just put Percat in the 3rd seat for 2012. He's going to learn more in the main game than the Development series you people who say "1/2 more years in the DVS". Percat can easily get a full time drive next year with a decent team (Like GRM).

[Just Do It!]

28 down to 1 for every race - Keep it close and ensure no one really gets away and everyone works for positions!

[Driver TBA]

As far as I'm concerned, any championship (with 20+ cars) should meet the bottom 3 criteria.

1: You should be rewarded for winning races. I don't care if it's 30 points or 30,000 points, the winner should take the spoils by a reasonable, but not over the top margin.

2: You should be Rewarded for finishing on the podium.

3: You should NOT be rewarded for finishing outside the top 10.


Having said that, I would like to see bonus points added for the following.

Pole.
Fastest race lap.
Most positions gained in a race.

[STEALTHY]

Motorsport is about the best team/driver winning, always has been, always will be.

Any championship that punishes this is a discrace to the sport.

Slower teams should pick up their game...

[porsche91722]

Originally Posted by Driver TBA

.............
3: You should NOT be rewarded for finishing outside the top 10. ..................

Absolutely.
Rewarding mediocrity is all that the present points allocation system does.

[yap]

Originally Posted by porsche91722

Absolutely.
Rewarding mediocrity is all that the present points allocation system does.

Couldn't agree more, but I would perhaps make it the top 15 that get points

So that we see some action down the field if say #16 and #17 have to get past #15 to get points

[Driver TBA]

Originally Posted by yap

Couldn't agree more, but I would perhaps make it the top 15 that get points

So that we see some action down the field if say #16 and #17 have to get past #15 to get points

I'm a fan of points for the top 10 only (even top 8), make them valuable like gold.
Remember when F1 had points only down to 6th and when the minnows got into the points it was a big deal.

At least then the press release for the team who finished 10th has a bit of cred. Instead of "it was a disappointing day finishing 26th, but at least we got a bag full of points and extended our championship lead"

[ForumNick]

Originally Posted by Driver TBA

I'm a fan of points for the top 10 only (even top 8), make them valuable like gold.
Remember when F1 had points only down to 6th and when the minnows got into the points it was a big deal.

IIRC - once a team scored 1 championship point, F1 paid all their traveling costs for the year.... so, yeah it was a big deal!

[SilverSpeed]

Just use the 2007 system. That one was actually half decent

[peckstar]

and there is me thinking the points leader had swapped at the last two rounds

at the end of the day this year two cars have dominated and even when they havent won they have been in the hunt, no one else can say that

and it wouldnt matter what point system you had, the reigning champions title hunt would be over after 3 rounds

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by Micklegend

I think we would all like to see a bit more of a contest with 3-4 rounds to go than wondering who will come 3rd.

Manufacturing points systems to make up for a competition deficit surely cheapens the 'contest' and thus creating an artificial one

[Micklegend]

[QUOTE=D.R.T.;2981812]Manufacturing points systems to make up for a competition deficit surely cheapens the 'contest' and thus creating an artificial one[/QUOTE

Im not talking about manufacturing a points system, just putting one in that keeps the competition close during the series. The cream may still rise to the top, but the gap to "the rest" may not be so substantial.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by Micklegend

Im not talking about manufacturing a points system, just putting one in that keeps the competition close during the series. The cream may still rise to the top, but the gap to "the rest" may not be so substantial.

Might just be me but if we are relying on finding a points system that keeps the competition close rather than relying actual competitiveness of other cars - we have missed the point of sport.

888 are leading by such a margin because they have been that much better and have done the majority of the winning - why does anyone else deserve to be any closer?

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

Might just be me but if we are relying on finding a points system that keeps the competition close rather than relying actual competitiveness of other cars - we have missed the point of sport.

888 are leading by such a margin because they have been that much better and have done the majority of the winning - why does anyone else deserve to be any closer?

Totally agree - any points system is going to reflect what has happened on track - to try & manufacture a points system that does anything else is foolish & would likely devalue success.

[peckstar]

so mick, what your saying is you want Rick Kelly to win the championship by being consistent and not actually winning races,

i think your idea sux big time

a better idea is ways to equalise the competition, so that more people can be at the front regularly, but that may be a bit extreme also

it appears DRT and i agree

[peckstar]

why not?

[Micklegend]

Some good points here, and I appreciate that 888 have done a mammoth job in their performance this year to justify their position. Im looking at other things that may be good for the sport.

There has been a lot of talk in various forums about whether the enduros should be included, whether the GC race should impact a championship. There are so many variables to make up a championship and as we have seen, the lead has changed through luck or circumstance as well.

My point is that I feel that for those chasing a championship, there could be a better chance at reaching the lead than is currently available. This may make the 888's of the world beatable on the day, when it matters.

If you draw a comparison to NRL or AFL, some here would say that you may as well call an end to the comp at the end of 26 rounds, because who would need a finals series? The Chase is much the same in Nascar.

Where our sport is as much about entertainment as it is competition, it also has to be commercially viable to encourage money into the sport for teams that need to raise extra resources to compete at a higher level. Some sponsors probably want their name on the door of Team Vodafone, but instead spend their money in a place that potentially never has a chance at winning.

Changing up a few things could see some improvements in a number of these areas.

And for the record....I dont want to see Rick Kelly win by accumulation...he has done that once already!

So yes...reward race wins with bonus points, reward good qualifying, and reward strategy with points for most laps lead.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by Micklegend

My point is that I feel that for those chasing a championship, there could be a better chance at reaching the lead than is currently available.

What better way is there than winning races?

The current points system rewards winning, if they want to reach the lead in the championships the answer is already there - win races. If they can't do that they shouldn't be close to the championship

[F J Nedos]

I still think the MotoGP points system is the best. Followed by F1.

It's been said here before, but the points system wouldn't (and shouldn't) change this year's standings.

If the other teams aren't at the pointy end, it should be up to them to catch up. These are teams who do have the resources to do it too, FPR, SBR, HRT.

Sucess shouldn't be penalised. If there is a team salary/budget cap (which I vaguely remember there is), then Triple 8 are simply doing the best job within a resource framework. A framework applicable to all.

At least their two drivers are fighting it out for the championship - we don't know who will get it.