Club Formula Ford Points

[goughy]

I’m after a bit of clarification with how the Club FFord championship points work. I understand that there are individual class champions which is fair, but how does the overall championship work.

Surly, the overall champion should be judged on race finishes rather than class position. What’s thrown me is the NW champ points on the FF1600 website and also the official points released by the BRSCC. On the basis of this, the overall champion is judged on class points, so in essence the overall champion can come from any class, even more bizarre to figure out why it is done this way is when you could loose the championship to a driver you would have never raced against (eg a Class D driver).

In our case where we are aiming for the overall title, where would be the incentive later on in the year to risk battling with all the Class A drivers for an overall win when Ian could sit back and make sure he is taking max points for Class B. If this points system is correct then we are going to loose fantastic championship battles of the like of last year with Neil Boardman and Johnny Lang, drivers in different classes, still had to beat one another on the track to win the title.

I hope I am wrong and the overall champion is based purely on race finishes irrespective of class.

[diz]

Stuart,
The points this year are different to last years. This year there is only points per class and the highest class points scorer in A + B is the Post89 champion. Likewise the highest class points scorer in C, D + E is the Pre90 champion.
Last year had a dual points system for overall and class positions - i.e. two points tables.
For 2006 the points scoring is clearly defined in Section 1.6 of the Championship Regulations.
I've just had a long chat with your dad about this subject.

[kartingdad]

Personally, I think it's a poor state of affairs. a rapid class B driver is either racing rapid class A drivers or he isn't.

In real terms a fast class B driver has no need to mix it at the front and risk his car. There is absolutely no benefit to putting the car on overall pole, getting an overall fsatest lap and a win as the beaten class A cars will get exactly the same points - as if the class B car never existed.

How very motivational.

Just what is the rationale behind this structure? Presumably there is one?

[Ian Sowman]

I'll be penning an editorial on this subject shortly, it was already in mind last night... This kind of structure works quite well in a genuine multi-class championship, for example for one-make saloon cars of different states of modification, but less so when cars from different classes can run together very effectively, as in FF1600.

As you will have seen, we will be maintaining an unofficial points table on the website based on the 2005 system (which wasn't perfect, but was better than this). Perhaps this could be for the Harry Potter Shield, or similar.

[Ian Sowman]

Originally Posted by diz

Stuart,
The points this year are different to last years. This year there is only points per class and the highest class points scorer in A + B is the Post89 champion. Likewise the highest class points scorer in C, D + E is the Pre90 champion.
Last year had a dual points system for overall and class positions - i.e. two points tables.
For 2006 the points scoring is clearly defined in Section 1.6 of the Championship Regulations.

Diz, you are right in saying that the regulations are quite clear on this. However the regulations don't make any provision for separate Pre 1990 and Post 1989 champions, only divisional champions (and indeed an overall champion). So where does this come from?

[goughy]

Well I have got to say the new point’s structure is totally rubbish to put it bluntly. You want to feel you are the champion because you were the best driver out there, not just the best driver in your class. I think this just one of the problem’s when the BRSCC take total control of our championship. I think it was Kevin Shortis who said this is what they use in their other championships. Well Kevin, if it works for the Alfa challange you had best apply it to Formula Ford. As proved Formula Ford's level playing field allows drivers from any class to win outright so this new point stucture falls on its arse somewhat. I know they may be an argument this has been done to prevent people feeling that they need to be in a class A car to win the title had the old points table remained, but as evident by the performance of Peter Dempsey, Neil Boardman and Tim Reynolds that is a argument that has little creditability.

[goughy]

Also, in the NW series I can see that there is a real chance towards the end of the season we will end up with a series of non-racing races. For example, lets say the title is between a Class A and a Class B driver who both have the pace to win races but also both really want to win the overall championship. Where is the incentive for these two to race themselves, won't they will just follow each other round taking zero risks?

I'm starting to think it may be more of a challenge for us to forget a championship bid and doing the whole NW championship and go and take in races at Combe (where they have the points structure spot on) and MS, where we can race for victory without the need to sit behind a Class A car and protect our overall points.

[kartingdad]

I don't suppose the BRSCC could design an amendment to the regs to remove this anomaly.

Actually, thinking about it,I'm sure they wouldn't, as that would show they had got it wrong.

[goughy]

.

[goughy]

Found a great quote from Kevin Shortis on his views of the 2005 points stucture;

"I think the basic ingredients are still there. For me, looking at the 2005 regulations it seemed rather difficult to work your way through the points permutations. I read them 20 times - and I mean 20 times - and someone said to me 'how to the points work for Formula Ford?' and I said 'well, I will have a stab...'. I defy anyone to be able to say 'this is what happens' - it is too difficult, unwieldy and as an organiser, when you sat down at the end of a race meeting to do the points I would have wanted to run a mile! I didn't like it, so we have simplified it."

Simplified them enough to remove a huge element of competition-Top marks. Kevin may not have liked it, but did he consult with the people involved in Formula Ford-doubt it.

[kartingdad]

Theres another way to win the championship that involves close racing.

Top class A and B cars are equal on points with nobody likely to be fast enough to take points off them.

How to win the championship - do it the Senna and Schumacher way- knock the other guy off in a 'racing accident.'

Formula Ford at GP level. No thanks.


Any response to Mr Sowmans earlier comments Diz?

[JnrJnr]

Visit

http://www.ff1600.co.uk/index.php?id=1044

What Ian has written makes perfect sense and sums up the prolem we are now faced with. To say I am hugely disappointed by this change in points structure, by someone who perhaps does not understand the series as well as he should, is an understatement.

A review of this points scoring system is needed with immediate affect.

Im sure it would get backing from competitors, fans and spectators alike. The only people who may not like it is the organisers, becasue the math is too hard. It's about time the BRSCC had a reality check.

[Hutch]

How the championship is scored will always be an area for debate and whatever they decide some people will see it as wrong. I dont believe that if left as it is drivers would spend c.£10,000 to not go racing just to win a plastic cup, if any one wants a cup for not winning they could go and buy one and get change! However they score it we are (all through the grid) probably only racing 3 or 4 people for positon both race by race and for overall championship position, so it is pretty clear to judge your performance. People dont like change and I still talk class A or B which comes from my racing at combe class A 90 onwards class B pre 90. I personally believe this would do even now but there will be people with odd cars who will argue it would make their car worthless which is probably the only driving force behind multiple classes.
The truth is a new set of tyres, better engine, set up, miles testing and the driver all make more difference (Andy Merick) than age of chasis (infact at a tight circuit or in the wet an older car is usually quicker) so why should we put so much emphasis on the chasis we are in a unique formula with enough set regs to make it competitive without having to mess about with it.
The bottom line is it did feel wrong to get a winners hat for coming a distant 2nd! but if left as it is I dont think it will effect the racing. At the last round had I not had a missfire and had Justin driven Oulton before we would have given Ian more of a race but I dont believe he or any of us would have moved over for a comfy class win!
... but if a change is needed my vote would be just 2 classes pre and post 89

[Ian Sowman]

I'm inclined to agree with your last point John - I don't think any of the current 'class B' cars have been rendered worthless by 'class A' machinery. There would probably be more discussion, and more resistance, from the Pre 1990 brigade, where the matter is less clear cut.

And of course you are right that every driver will still very much want an outright win, but in particular as the season comes to an end there may be some conservative driving.

[FranksWilde]

[QUOTE=Ian Sowman]There would probably be more discussion, and more resistance, from the Pre 1990 brigade, where the matter is less clear cut.QUOTE]

Why is the matter less clear cut with the "PRE 90 brigade" Ian?

By the way, Blimey Hutch I didn't realise you could be so eloquent.

[kartingdad]

Neither did he!


1st post since 2003.

Can't shut the blighter up

[Ian Sowman]

Originally Posted by FranksWilde

Why is the matter less clear cut with the "PRE 90 brigade" Ian?

There is less persuasive evidence that there is no significant difference between Class D (and E) and C cars than between Classes A and B. Also, when this kind of thing has been raised before, that is the kind of feedback that has come back (and incidentally, those that raised issues generally found that they failed to materialise!).

Of course, you could just go for the heat and a final idea, covering all cars irrespective of age, which still appeals to me!

[dhart]

Jnr Jnr,
lot to be said for reading the regs before the start of the season......you are only leading alphabetically , a rule i cant find in the regs LOL

Simple solution! use my class E car in the pre 90 race ,If you win the class in the remaining rounds (and set f/lap and pole) you could pip yourself to the title!!!

If recent history is anything to go by (cranks/weight etc) only an act of parliament can now change the regs. Regs you have already agreed to adhere to by entering the series (£100).


FOOKIN FARCE

[dhart]

[QUOTE=Ian Sowman]

Of course, you could just go for the heat and a final idea, covering all cars irrespective of age, which still appeals to me


Beat me to it ...the best solution by far! one winner!

[kartingdad]

Trouble is that once again the rules demonstrate a lack of feel and respect for a thriving one make, one size engine championship that has a common set of manufacturers technical regulations.

The only reason for the change was to make it a bit easier (as quoted earlier) for the overworked and underpaid(or should that be the underworked and overpaid) BRSCC to understand.

If only they had asked, it would have been a 20 minute task with an Excel spreadsheet to make the points calculation a matter of just entering the finishing positions onto the spreadsheet.

The Castle Combe series, apart from the travelling, looks quite attractive actually.

As you say DHart - heats, finals and a proper winner that sponsors and spectators can understand. Just look at the WHT - everyone can mix it together and with such variables as the weather thrown in, can produce some entertaining and unusual racing.

[JohnMiller]

FF1600 should have two classes - old ones and new ones. Split say 1989. All in one race with heats and finals (and consolations if enough enter) is how it should be.

Every time they tinker with it it gets worse. This isn't Ford saloons where Class A has 650 bhp and Class Z has 65 bhp.

An FF1600 is an FF1600, and an 89 could win outright if well prepped and driven.

[youngoldy]

Do we have a reason from the BRSCC as to why they have had to faff about with regs? Seemed fine to me last year. Easy to work out at home, or in your head, any for the spectators. Now if the regular spectators travel to each race, they (like the timekeepers would it be?) have to write out each driver and points scored in each class in each race.

Its just stupid. Just have it out right points, pole points and fastest lap points for each class (i.e. Post 89 and Pre 90 before anyone says).

If the reason this is done is to help drivers in the 'older cars' have more of a chance of winning the championship, then in my view, its their choice in which class (post 89 or pre 90) they chose to enter. No need to have their Raynard 88 points alongside class A 2004 Van Diemen points fighting seperatly for the championship. Its a head to head sport for the big prize.

Perhaps as Diz's signiture says, get Carlsburg in as the race organisers to sort it out

[JnrJnr]

Yes we do have a reason-It was too time consuming and complex to work out the points under the 2005 stucture so much better to introduce an anti-competiton points structure, which if nothing else is easier for the BRSCC to work out. Complex things these race points!

[youngoldy]

J'worths

[JohnMiller]

K'heads