New Season Points Method?

[blacksheep-1]

Why don't you just give first place one hundred points PLUS the number of entries, second 95 (or 96 or 98) PLUS the number of entries and so forth. In this manner you won't be penalizing a new guy who's developing his/her talent but finished 5th, 10 minutes off the pace.
I'm using 100 points because that's what we used, it could just as easily be 25 or 40 or whatever as long as it is more than the number of cars. 100 is a constant across all classes, used all year.
BTW when is this slated to begin?

[Loren]

BTW when is this slated to begin?

New season starts in September.

[Native]

It's a cool method.
Seems like it would also do away with folks clinching class victories after only 5 or 6 events as has happened at times with the current system. Keeping more folks in the running seems more sportsmanlike.

[Loren]

Okay, here's another take. The break points are close to what I last posted on the high end, but a little more generous on the low end. I had to tweak around with it a little so that it looked like "enough" people were getting points in my sample data.

What I ended up with was: (points - index - time - difference)
9 - 1.000 - 45.000 - 0.000
8 - 0.995 - 45.226 - 0.226
7 - 0.990 - 45.455 - 0.455
6 - 0.980 - 45.918 - 0.918
5 - 0.960 - 46.875 - 1.875
4 - 0.920 - 48.913 - 3.913
3 - 0.880 - 51.136 - 6.136
1 - The rest

See attached for this applied to the last event.

The effects...
1. Some people who might have gotten a lot of points with the old system won't if their time isn't good enough. We can shift that a little and make it somewhat more lenient... but really, how far down do you want to go? 6 seconds is an eternity on an autocross course.
2. There is potential for good drivers who are in contention for first to get 7 or 8 points instead of the former 6. Those points are NOT easy to get by design. Gotta be within 4-5 tenths to get 7 and within about 2 tenths to get 8. I think that's appropriate.
3. The only thing not yet addressed is how many points to give an unopposed driver. I'd go with 5 or 6. It gives them some credit for showing up, but doesn't give them a huge points lead.

[Jeremy]

First and second place get large rewards for finishing in those places. But it goes both ways. Those same large rewards can make it easier for someone to catch up.

For example.

New Style
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,0 = 18
Driver 2 gets a 9,8,8,0 = 25

Old Style
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,0 = 18
Driver 2 gets a 9,6,6,0 = 21

So in this example the old style would actually make it a closer race. I am just not seeing a problem with the old style.
Maybe if you could point to specific examples in the points table and show me someone who is not in the hunt for a championship and deserves to be, I would understand it more. But just from looking at the season points. I don't see a problem.

Yes, the new style will make the points closer for people that come to every single event, but it's also going to make it impossible for people to catch up who miss a few events. So you are making the season championship even more of an attendance award than it already is.

This season 6 people attended every event. 7 people missed one. Those 13 people are going to get a huge bump up, everyone else will be out in the cold. Because instead of those people have 1's and 2's for their lowest event results, they are now going to be 4's,5's, and 6's, putting them even farther out of reach from everyone else.

Interesting that most of the people saying they support this idea are part of the 13 that would benefit the most.

[yamaha731]

stick with the original points system but give 2 throw outs and make the final race a dubble points race

[Loren]

stick with the original points system but give 2 throw outs and make the final race a dubble points race

Oh, so double-penalizing someone who can't make one PARTICULAR event is the way to go? Nah.

[Loren]

First and second place get large rewards for finishing in those places. But it goes both ways. Those same large rewards can make it easier for someone to catch up.

That's sort of the point, I think. People are perceiving that championships are often won 6 events into the season. (and if we were to drop half the events, that would certainly be even more true)

So in this example the old style would actually make it a closer race. I am just not seeing a problem with the old style.
Maybe if you could point to specific examples in the points table and show me someone who is not in the hunt for a championship and deserves to be, I would understand it more. But just from looking at the season points. I don't see a problem.

This is in response to grumblings I've heard from some people at events. I didn't really look at it from the perspective of "how is this going to effect people like Jeremy who only want to attend half of our events in a season and still win".

Yes, the new style will make the points closer for people that come to every single event, but it's also going to make it impossible for people to catch up who miss a few events. So you are making the season championship even more of an attendance award than it already is.

Okay, since nobody wants to start a new topic to discuss dropping events, first, let's all read this:
Prior discussion about dropping events from the points

For those who don't want to read that, it says that the majority of forum posters (which isn't necessarily always a strong cross-section of the club as a whole) supported a shift to dropping 3 events rather than 1. But, when it was put to vote at our annual membership meeting, the decision was made to stick with dropping 1 event.

Personally, I'd still support going to 2 or 3 drops. But, the discussion has been had (go ahead, read it, it's all there... lots of good points from both sides). And the decision was made.

Now, let's expand your example to a full season:
New Style with 1 drop
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 54 - 0 = 54
Driver 2 gets 9,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,9 = 72 - 8 = 66

New Style with 2 drops
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 54 - 0 = 54
Driver 2 gets 9,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,9 = 72 - 16 = 58

New Style with 3 drops
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 54 - 9 = 45
Driver 2 gets 9,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,9 = 72 - 24 = 48

In full detail, I can see your point. Maybe we do need to have more than 1 point of difference between first and second place. If change it so that 2nd gets 7 points: (and that's a really "hard to get" 7 points, we're not just giving it away)

New Style (7 for 2nd) with 1 drop
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 54 - 0 = 54
Driver 2 gets 9,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,9 = 74 - 7 = 67

New Style (7 for 2nd) with 2 drops
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 54 - 0 = 54
Driver 2 gets 9,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,9 = 74 - 14 = 60

New Style (7 for 2nd) with 3 drops
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 54 - 9 = 45
Driver 2 gets 9,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,9 = 74 - 21 = 63

Okay, I'm almost out of time here... but I'm seeing a trend.

New Style (6 for 2nd) with 1 drop
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 54 - 0 = 54
Driver 2 gets 9,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,9 = 66 - 6 = 60

New Style (6 for 2nd) with 2 drops
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 54 - 0 = 54
Driver 2 gets 9,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,9 = 66 - 12 = 54

New Style (6 for 2nd) with 3 drops
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 54 - 0 = 54
Driver 2 gets 9,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,9 = 66 - 18 = 48

After all of this... I'm concluding that the original system that I sort of emulated from another club (9 for 1st, 6 for 2nd with 2 drops) was a well thought-out system that worked. My original error was switching it to a single-drop, which "broke" it by actually making it easier on the regular attendee who makes all events. 2 drops makes things pretty fair. 3 drops rewards non-attendance too much IMO.

And if we're going to stick with 6 points for 2nd... the only thing we gain (?) by going with the new system is the ability to award 6 points to more than one driver. Every driver who finishes well enough to meet the criteria would get the points. I still sort of like that notion, but I could take it or leave it. It's not likely to affect first place for the season very much, but it could make the battles for 2nd and 3rd more interesting.

[Jeremy]

lol, your maths are way wrong.

or I am not following you or something.

[shakedown067]

Way too much math. It's waivering me to just stay with the current points scheme.

[Loren]

lol, your maths are way wrong.

or I am not following you or something.

If it's wrong, redo it. I was in a hurry.

[Jeremy]

New Style with 1 drop
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 72 - 0 = 72
Driver 2 gets 9,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,9 = 82 - 8 = 74

New Style with 2 drops
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 72 - 0 = 72
Driver 2 gets 9,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,9 = 82 - 16 = 66

New Style with 3 drops
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 72 - 9 = 63
Driver 2 gets 9,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,8,9 = 82 - 24 = 58




New Style (7 for 2nd) with 1 drop
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 72 - 0 = 72
Driver 2 gets 9,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,9 = 74 - 7 = 67

New Style (7 for 2nd) with 2 drops
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 72 - 0 = 72
Driver 2 gets 9,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,9 = 74 - 14 = 60

New Style (7 for 2nd) with 3 drops
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 72 - 9 = 63
Driver 2 gets 9,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,9 = 74 - 21 = 53





New Style (6 for 2nd) with 1 drop
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 72 - 0 = 72
Driver 2 gets 9,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,9 = 66 - 6 = 60

New Style (6 for 2nd) with 2 drops
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 72 - 0 = 72
Driver 2 gets 9,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,9 = 66 - 12 = 54

New Style (6 for 2nd) with 3 drops
Driver 1 gets 0,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,9,0 = 72 - 0 = 72
Driver 2 gets 9,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,6,9 = 66 - 18 = 48

I guess the results are still the same. Just not sure how you got 9 x 8 = 56

[Loren]

Get over it. I told you I was in a hurry.

[Jeremy]

Get over it. I told you I was in a hurry.

Huh? There is nothing for me to get over. I just didn't know if I was following you or not. You asked me to redo it, and I did.

Sorry for helping out.

[Loren]

You're bitching about my basic math error. "I don't know how you came up with..." Obviously it was a simple error that I made because I rushed through it.

[Jeremy]

Sorry man. I will try to be more sensitive to your needs in the future.

But you should be able to see how I was confused by 12 simple math mistakes on 18 equations.
Just like you confused my confusion with bitching.

[Loren]

Okay... my error did make a big difference.

Now it's back to where we started. With one dropped event, things are goofy and potentially not fair to the "faster driver" who misses more than one event. If we go to 2 or 3 drops, that problem goes away... and giving 7 and 8 points for "close finishes" doesn't hinder the faster driver.

Now that we've thoroughly confused everyone...

[Lava Speed 05]

Really not that much math, just showing various outcomes with different variables... but in the grand scheme of things I believe 9, 8 times, is 72 not 54... ;-) so that would change some of the results. I didn't add up all the other lines but definitely noticed that. I believe Loren was copy and pasting and just typo'd on the original line.

Sent from my DROID RAZR

[Lava Speed 05]

Woops, didn't see this whole other page before posting... that's what I get for living on my phone.

Sent from my DROID RAZR

[nc4me]

I still like having second at 7 points and rewarding the win. Plus we should just go to 2 drops.