[Twistedspeed]

Many ppl have voice their concern over the points system at 2ws.

I'm thinking about chainging it up.
qualifying points the same.
10 points for staging and 10 points to winner. This is same type system others are using. Need some feedbck..

 

[Twistedspeed]

Et points will remain the same...

 

[Bently]

Only thing I think needs changed with the points is that they actually pay something or gold card for the next season or something to make it worth even running every race for points. there's nothing driving most guys to run every race.

 

[Twistedspeed]

I thought about doing gold cards before and everyone just wanted the money instead.
Been thinking about doing a points fund we used to do it back in the day and got away from it.

 

[gsxr570]

:2thumbs:

Many ppl have voice their concern over the points system at 2ws.

I'm thinking about chainging it up.
qualifying points the same.
10 points for staging and 10 points to winner. This is same type system others are using. Need some feedbck..

 

[andyb]

Really hurts the comparative points for qualifying well. I'd have to do the math, but I'm guessing that (personally) I'd have done worse with the points this way.

But hell, if it brings people to the track, I'm for it.

(Especially if they're good at napping at the tree.)

 

[Twistedspeed]

Really hurts the comparative points for qualifying well. I'd have to do the math, but I'm guessing that (personally) I'd have done worse with the points this way.

But hell, if it brings people to the track, I'm for it.

(Especially if they're good at napping at the tree.)

In reality you should be reaward for going rds. Right now in theroy you can win over championshipsand not win a race

 

[andyb]

If that's the case, we may as well skip qualifying, as it's worth more to win a round than it is to beat everyone in qualifying. Could save time and ensure a better chance of getting all the classes run (i.e., see June 3). Also we'd eliminate the headaches of coming up with the ladder for the first round as well as having less "on track" time, so the tower/owners would be happy, and that'd be two less calls to the lanes to stand around for an hour in the heat, so the racers would be happy, right?

There isn't much strategy with the current system, i.e., qualify well and then go rounds = do well overall. Under the proposed system there's less strategy needed, i.e., "qualifying is just free practice" and then go rounds. Because going rounds would be more valuable than the ability to run near the index fresh from the trailer.

I can give a good argument for wanting qualifying to remain highly valued, but I'm clearly biased as I'm generally able to run pretty close to the index without any warmup to speak of. This gives me an advantage in qualifying, as I'm closer to dialed in than many of my class on the first pass. But I'll skip explaining all this, as it's going to just look like a power struggle to improve my own odds personally. What's worse is that had I made the final round on the last day and lost, I'd have had the highest points total for 10.50 on the year without winning a single day.

Instead, let's look at the bigger picture. A number of the days we had started with an iffy forecast. This can translate to a smaller turnout, because "it's going to get rained out and no one will show up and it's just a waste of gas to go". Having a guaranteed points payout (two entries? 25 points minimum for showing up and losing the first/last round!) means that it's worth showing up even if the weather is iffy. Under the proposed systems, the end of year totals will be higher, and the incentive to show up for a questionable day is reduced.

Instead, I'd rather see bonus points given to the winner of the event, or those who finish well. 25 for the win, 15 for getting to the final, 5 for getting to the semi's--something like that. (This would have definitely screwed me this year, incidentally!:cry22

Then again, it's worked this way for how many years? Why fiddle with it?

 

[Twistedspeed]

Qualifying is for position not to win championship. The new system is very similar to other sanctions.
I'll give bonus a thought personally never been fan. I think points should be rewarded for winning not just showing up.

 

[Bently]

If that's the case, we may as well skip qualifying, as it's worth more to win a round than it is to beat everyone in qualifying. Could save time and ensure a better chance of getting all the classes run (i.e., see June 3). Also we'd eliminate the headaches of coming up with the ladder for the first round as well as having less "on track" time, so the tower/owners would be happy, and that'd be two less calls to the lanes to stand around for an hour in the heat, so the racers would be happy, right?

There isn't much strategy with the current system, i.e., qualify well and then go rounds = do well overall. Under the proposed system there's less strategy needed, i.e., "qualifying is just free practice" and then go rounds. Because going rounds would be more valuable than the ability to run near the index fresh from the trailer.

I can give a good argument for wanting qualifying to remain highly valued, but I'm clearly biased as I'm generally able to run pretty close to the index without any warmup to speak of. This gives me an advantage in qualifying, as I'm closer to dialed in than many of my class on the first pass. But I'll skip explaining all this, as it's going to just look like a power struggle to improve my own odds personally. What's worse is that had I made the final round on the last day and lost, I'd have had the highest points total for 10.50 on the year without winning a single day.

Instead, let's look at the bigger picture. A number of the days we had started with an iffy forecast. This can translate to a smaller turnout, because "it's going to get rained out and no one will show up and it's just a waste of gas to go". Having a guaranteed points payout (two entries? 25 points minimum for showing up and losing the first/last round!) means that it's worth showing up even if the weather is iffy. Under the proposed systems, the end of year totals will be higher, and the incentive to show up for a questionable day is reduced.

Instead, I'd rather see bonus points given to the winner of the event, or those who finish well. 25 for the win, 15 for getting to the final, 5 for getting to the semi's--something like that. (This would have definitely screwed me this year, incidentally!:cry22

Then again, it's worked this way for how many years? Why fiddle with it?

We drive almost 4 hours one way, why the hell would we come sit in the rain if the weather looks like shit when we get up in the morning? just to get some points I don't think so. and I'm sure others drive further. what do you honestly think will get the bikes back some points for showing up or a gaurnteed purse to win? I know what we will drive for and it sure isn't points. I understand that points get people fired up and can keep them coming back even if there's no points fund at the end, but for some it don't matter either.

 

[andyb]

So how will changing the points increase purses? We're all agreed that cash brings racers out. I'm just at a loss as to what's wrong with the points system as it sits, and unsure why there's focus there. Not broken, don't fix, etc.

I suppose if there was a sponsor willing to post a price for the points champ in a class or two, then people would become very interested!

 

[Twistedspeed]

So how will changing the points increase purses? We're all agreed that cash brings racers out. I'm just at a loss as to what's wrong with the points system as it sits, and unsure why there's focus there. Not broken, don't fix, etc.

I suppose if there was a sponsor willing to post a price for the points champ in a class or two, then people would become very interested!

The problem there isnt enough points awarded to the guys going further in rounds then the guy getting number 1 and losing 2nd rd...In reality you could win championship and never win a final.

 

[Franklin]

Well there certainly needs to be points awarded to the winner of each round. As it stands now if you win a race you only get either 3 or 4 points over the other guy in the finals next to you. There at least needs to be a points advantage to winning a race. If I'm not mistaken the crazy 8's champ never won a race and the guy that won 3 took second place. Not taking anything away from that but seems a bit off.

 

[Twistedspeed]

Well there certainly needs to be points awarded to the winner of each round. As it stands now if you win a race you only get either 3 or 4 points over the other guy in the finals next to you. There at least needs to be a points advantage to winning a race. If I'm not mistaken the crazy 8's champ never won a race and the guy that won 3 took second place. Not taking anything away from that but seems a bit off.

Correct and agreed..The same thing almost happen 9.50 a few years back..for record the guy won the class is ok with the new points system.

 

[Franklin]

Sam is a stand up guy and racer. Don't think he would have any issue with the changes.

 

[andyb]

Well there certainly needs to be points awarded to the winner of each round. As it stands now if you win a race you only get either 3 or 4 points over the other guy in the finals next to you. There at least needs to be a points advantage to winning a race. If I'm not mistaken the crazy 8's champ never won a race and the guy that won 3 took second place. Not taking anything away from that but seems a bit off.

Actually under the proposed system that's probably become even more of a problem. Currently, winning a later round is worth more than a early round. Under the proposed system, four round wins in the weekend will be worth the same no matter when they are (actually, you'd want to lose the final because there's no chance to stage after it). Current system rewards you more for winning a later round, admittedly not by much.

So other than the big reduction in qualifying's importance, actually the proposed system will work really well for people who don't get the win, but can consistently go at least a round or two, because each round is worth the same no matter when it is (relative to the final). The difference between the final win and loss is about half a round under the current system, and that wouldn't change under the proposed system.


If the concern is that there isn't a big enough gap between first and second, honestly I'd leave things as they are, and simply add a bonus to the final winner (probably equal to the number of entries, or 10 for staging in the "next" round).

 

[Franklin]

I typed up a response to this but there are so many things off with the logic here that I cant even see through it.

Jake, try it the new way and see what happens.

 

[nem1300]

I thought about doing gold cards before and everyone just wanted the money instead.
Been thinking about doing a points fund we used to do it back in the day and got away from it.

Imo....money and card would be great for the racers.

Racers should definitely get something "extra" for winning a championship.

 

[Twistedspeed]

Imo....money and card would be great for the racers.

Racers should definitely get something "extra" for winning a championship.

I'm trying to find a way to make it happen but most racers just want the extra money put into payout. Most don't know if they are going to make all the events.

 

[Bently]

I'm trying to find a way to make it happen but most racers just want the extra money put into payout. Most don't know if they are going to make all the events.

True, the money needs to be there for the payouts first, otherwise there won't be enough bikes to worry about the points IMO. for the life of me I can't figure out why guys want to go sit at the track all weekend to have only one race instead of coming to byron where there's full races both days.