Championnship Points Systems

likebikes · 10-04-2006, 09:07 PM

After watching the way the FX championship played out I want to ask you all what you think about the way the points system works.

Basically it rewards consistency above winning. For example, Eric Bostrom won 6 of the 11 rounds and had one bad race where he finished 22nd and in the other races he was on the box except he finished 4th once. Josh Hayes won 3 races, had one 4th place, and was on the box the rest of the time and won the championship.

I'm more a fan of rewarding wins. That's what makes a champion to me. Besides, if the bike craps out in one race then the rider is hurt in the championship too much.

What do you think?

Philbie · 10-04-2006, 09:21 PM

I take it your not a Nicky Hayden fan. Consistancy wins championships. Last year with Rossi and this year with Bayliss they simply dominated and won by a landslide. Can kinda make watching the races less interesting.

Fargin_Bastige · 10-04-2006, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by likebikes

After watching the way the FX championship played out I want to ask you all what you think about the way the points system works.

Basically it rewards consistency above winning. For example, Eric Bostrom won 6 of the 11 rounds and had one bad race where he finished 22nd and in the other races he was on the box except he finished 4th once. Josh Hayes won 3 races, had one 4th place, and was on the box the rest of the time and won the championship.

I'm more a fan of rewarding wins. That's what makes a champion to me. Besides, if the bike craps out in one race then the rider is hurt in the championship too much.

What do you think?

Winning should be rewarded, but not at the expense of consistency. One of the parts of wining a championship is longevity or durability. Why should someone win a championship if they break down or crash a third of the time?

Championships are a long haul and those who can show decently for the entire time should be recognized for that.

likebikes · 10-04-2006, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philbie

I take it your not a Nicky Hayden fan. Consistancy wins championships. Last year with Rossi and this year with Bayliss they simply dominated and won by a landslide. Can kinda make watching the races less interesting.

I'm a fan of good close racing at the front, for wins. I just want to see guys battling.

One of the major problems with the consistency system is that if someone gets an early lead then they have a tendency to play protect instead of going for wins.

I haven't really paid much attention to MotoGP but it appears that the points system might be better than the AMA's. Rossi winning and finishing ahead of Nicky has allowed him to catch up.

In the case of FX it just seems, to me, that if a guy wins 6 out of 11 races and is on the box 3 out of the other 5 he should win the championship.

Philbie · 10-04-2006, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by likebikes

In the case of FX it just seems, to me, that if a guy wins 6 out of 11 races and is on the box 3 out of the other 5 he should win the championship.

Unfortunately the points system says otherwise. And watching a rider dominate a race isn't much fun to watch, that's for sure.

Fargin_Bastige · 10-04-2006, 10:07 PM

HTML Code:

AMA Points
1st 36 16th 15
2nd 32 17th 14
3rd 29 18th 13
4th 27 19th 12
5th 26 20th 11
6th 25 21st 10
7th 24 22nd 9
8th 23 23rd 8
9th 22 24th 7
10th 21 25th 6
11th 20 26th 5
12th 19 27th 4
13th 18 28th 3
14th 17 29th 2
15th 16 30th 1

usually, there is about a 4 to 5 point spread from 1st to 2nd and 6 to 3rd. The fact that the AMA pays points down to 30th is kinda weird, though.

HTML Code:

MotoGP Points
Pos. 	Points
1 	25
2 	20
3 	16
4 	13
5 	11
6 	10
7 	9
8 	8
9 	7
10 	6
11 	5
12 	4
13 	3
14 	2
15 	1

Philbie · 10-04-2006, 10:14 PM

The club we run tries to reward winners based off grid sizes. Unfortunately this doesn't do much good when the grids are constant sizes.

How points are awarded:
1st = 35pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind.
2nd= 31pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind.
3rd= 28pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind.
4th= 25pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind
5th= 23pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind
6th= 20pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind
7th= 18pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind
8th= 16pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind
9th= 14pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind
10th= 12pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind
11th= 10pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind
12th= 8pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind
13th= 6pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind
14th= 4pts + 1 point for each rider who finished behind
15th= 2pt + 1 point for each rider who finished behind
All other positions= 1point for each rider who finished behind

likebikes · 10-04-2006, 10:22 PM

Thanks Fargin, I couldn't find that info on the MGP site. Not a great site.

MGP does look like a better system. Do you know if they give points for pole and leading the most laps?

GSXR RACER MIKE · 10-04-2006, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fargin_Bastige

Winning should be rewarded, but not at the expense of consistency. One of the parts of wining a championship is longevity or durability. Why should someone win a championship if they break down or crash a third of the time?

Championships are a long haul and those who can show decently for the entire time should be recognized for that.

I absolutely agree with this, wins are for those who concentrate on one event, championships are for those who concentrate on a whole season.

I compare it to a war, which is comprised of many battles. It's not about how many battles you win, it's about who wins the war, plain and simple! If that means giving a little during the individual battles in order to win the war then that's how it works, there will always be plenty of others who are focused on the individual battles instead of the war. But if you focus on trying to get ALL the glory and not only win the war, but all the battles as well, your chances of being wouded are much greater. Deciding what route they want to travel is a CHOICE each rider/team must make for themselves.

I consider winning individual races and championships as 2 totally different things which ultimately adds excitement by having 2 different types of strategies going on in the same races. Few have been able to pull off constant wins and still win championships, most either end up crashing or some other DNF which causes them to blow their chances at a championship. The racers who have been able to pull off numerous wins in a season and still win the championships while doing it (Mladin, Rossi, Doohan, etc.), then doing it for a number of seasons on top of it, are prime examples of what a true champion is all about.

Fargin_Bastige · 10-04-2006, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by likebikes

Thanks Fargin, I couldn't find that info on the MGP site. Not a great site.

MGP does look like a better system. Do you know if they give points for pole and leading the most laps?

I don't think they give points for pole or most laps, at least it doesn't say it anywhere.

I think WSB does give points for superpole.

We have a press login

whitman · 10-05-2006, 12:38 PM

seems kinda silly to pay points back to 30th place..............so what I show up on a 250 ninja and finish 20th because they only have 20 riders and I get more points then the guy who is 15th in gp ..................NO WAY.....

endoracing · 10-07-2006, 02:01 AM

Quote:

The fact that the AMA pays points down to 30th is kinda weird, though.

Quote:

seems kinda silly to pay points back to 30th place

eh, I think it makes sense. When riders go down and come back in way in the back they just hit the pits and call it a day. If one of the top guys wads it up and then gets back out, a few points is worth staying out for. Beats the hell out of losing the fastest/most fun to watch guys early in a race in my opinion.

Who knows what the real logic behind it is ... thats just my best guess..

Fargin_Bastige · 10-08-2006, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by endoracing

eh, I think it makes sense. When riders go down and come back in way in the back they just hit the pits and call it a day. If one of the top guys wads it up and then gets back out, a few points is worth staying out for. Beats the hell out of losing the fastest/most fun to watch guys early in a race in my opinion.

Who knows what the real logic behind it is ... thats just my best guess..

That's not fair to the racers who stayed up. If the difference comes down to one point and the guy wobbled his was around in 30th place, then he shouldn't be given a point for that IMHO.

If they wanted to pay points to privateers, then pay them to a privateer championship. This is how BSB and BSS do it and it makes sense to me.