[simple simon]

After reading through several posts, I have heard several cries for a new points system in NASCAR .... and I think I may have come up with a plan that will satisfy many, and make each and every race much more exciting.

200 points for 1st place
175 points for 2nd place
160 points for 3rd place
150 points for 4th place
140 points for 5th place
120 - 50 points for the remaining spots .... broken down basically like it is now

I decided to slightly overly reward for a win so everyone actually tries to win ..... then also overly reward for the other top 5 positions as a top 5 finish is considered a bit of an accomplishment and I think it will make the racing that much better.

I'm not sure if I would still include the 5 bonus points for a lap led and most laps led.

[Robertdjr]

Originally Posted by simple simon

I'm not sure if I would still include the 5 bonus points for a lap led and most laps led.

I'd say forget the 5 bonus points for a lap led or most laps led, but use the most laps led total, which is accumulated as the year goes on, as the tiebreaker, in case 2 or more drivers have the same amount of points.

[kkfan91]

Or this 500 points for a win

100 points for 2nd

41 points for 3rd 40 for 4th and so on until 1 for 43rd

then winning is important

[Bob Tanner]

I love it when people come up with potential solutions for problems other say don't exist! (NA__AR and most of the media think Latford's formula for mediocrity is working just fine - it is. It's giving us bland points racing)

I would recommend the following amendments to your suggestion.
(1) Dumb the silly Mediocre Drivers Deserve Bonus Points Too Rule, for merely leading a lap. If a car can made the race, it can lead a lap, almost always under yellow when all the real racers are in the pits. Even a potential S&P'er can lead a lap if all the moons align.
(2) Keep the 10 points for most laps led. It takes performance to accomplish this.
(3) Cut the points off at 25th place. Why should a driver who S&P's get ANY points? If you feel that every starter "deserves" points, then give every finisher from 26th on back one or two points. Doing away with points after 25th would serve two purposes, as far as I'm concerned:

• It would cease rewarding drivers who aren't competitive. Yeah, I know. One of the "Big Guns" might wreck out on the first laps and go home sans points! Oh well. Some day you eat the lion; some days the lion eats you.

• It might go a long way to stopping the practice of the "Rolling Wreck" syndrome. The cars which have no business out on the track but are out there anyway, not racing but rather just motoring around, trying to not get in anyone's way and hoping some one else drops out and they can remain on the track long enough to collect more laps than the other DNF'ers.

Those are merely my suggestions.

[nascar_freak]

Here is a much simpler points system

1st - 43 pts
2nd - 42 pts
.
.
.
.
.
.
43rd 1 pt.

10 bonus points for leading the most laps.

This way the S & P's wont accumulate many points, and won't get bonus points for leading a single lap.

[disco stu]

Any merit in awarding some points for achieving pole position?

[kkfan91]

Originally Posted by nascar_freak

Here is a much simpler points system

1st - 43 pts
2nd - 42 pts
.
.
.
.
.
.
43rd 1 pt.

10 bonus points for leading the most laps.

This way the S & P's wont accumulate many points, and won't get bonus points for leading a single lap.

but this system rewards consistancy even more then the current one

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by disco stu

Any merit in awarding some points for achieving pole position?

Absolutely not !!!!! For the most part the car that qualifies and the car that races are two different cars. The prize for the pole position is just that .... you get to be first across the starting line and you get clean air. Points for it is insane since there is no actual race related issue involved.

[nascaraddict]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

Absolutely not !!!!! For the most part the car that qualifies and the car that races are two different cars. The prize for the pole position is just that .... you get to be first across the starting line and you get clean air. Points for it is insane since there is no actual race related issue involved.

I agree. If they give out points for getting the pole; it should just be called the Ryan Newman / Brian Vickers Award. Anyone else who gets it is a fluke anyway.

[Racer Duck]

I agree with Bob, except if the following becomes the norm: cars impounded after qualifying. then the pole becomes a worthwhile objective. Other successful series have an impound like deal (F1 for example) so why not "the premier stock car" series?

Except for a few races, NASCAR doesn't use impounding .. mostly 'cause the tracks can't sell extra tickets for practices and happy hours that come AFTER qualifying... Oh, yeah .. in case you didn't know, NASCAR (aka ISC) owns most of the tracks at which NASCAR events are run - so you know who gets the receipts for those extra ticket sales.

Simon, I like your points system .. and would like it more if it penalized every one who finished in the last 13 spots .. like 0 points. And if the "Chosen" rule were abolished, I could even go with adding another 10 spots to the 0 point list.


Now for something entirely wacky: what if points for all even place finishing cars were eliminated .. they'd get boosted prized money but no points. What do you guys think, of that scenario: race for points & less money or just money? And, how do you think it would change the racing?

[kkfan91]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

I agree with Bob, except if the following becomes the norm: cars impounded after qualifying. then the pole becomes a worthwhile objective. Other successful series have an impound like deal (F1 for example) so why not "the premier stock car" series?

Except for a few races, NASCAR doesn't use impounding .. mostly 'cause the tracks can't sell extra tickets for practices and happy hours that come AFTER qualifying... Oh, yeah .. in case you didn't know, NASCAR (aka ISC) owns most of the tracks at which NASCAR events are run - so you know who gets the receipts for those extra ticket sales.

Simon, I like your points system .. and would like it more if it penalized every one who finished in the last 13 spots .. like 0 points. And if the "Chosen" rule were abolished, I could even go with adding another 10 spots to the 0 point list.


Now for something entirely wacky: what if points for all even place finishing cars were eliminated .. they'd get boosted prized money but no points. What do you guys think, of that scenario: race for points & less money or just money? And, how do you think it would change the racing?

Well wouldn't that eliminate the very idea of the Champion? I mean with no points you'd just be racing yeah but for what purpose you would have no goal i realize yes that would call for winning more to make the most but other then that their is no reward

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

Now for something entirely wacky: what if points for all even place finishing cars were eliminated .. they'd get boosted prized money but no points. What do you guys think, of that scenario: race for points & less money or just money? And, how do you think it would change the racing?

I like the idea of impounding. Run the darn thing like they do every weekend at the local track, but just a bit broader. Come in the day before the race, in the early morning, and run them through tech. Have a one hour session of hot laps then qualify the suckers, followed with impounding. Open the garages 2-2½ hours prior to pushing them to the grid to warm the oil and whatever tweaks they feel are necessary.

But, all this will NEVER happen because, as you know, high-level stock car racing today is all about show biz and profit and racing and competition is secondary. As you are also well aware, this trait is trickling down to the local level, or at least it is at some of the little bull rings I've attended during the past couple of years.

I mad mention of using the winnings as a yard stick for determining a champion and was smite solidly by a couple of the Forum members. They gave Kenseth as an example. If we were to have used that measure at this moment, Kenseth would be in in first place.

Also, the various money plans differ from team to team, as evidenced by the amount won each race. Example: At Richmond Biffle started 24th and finished 13th, never leading a lap. He earned $95,225. Menard never got close to the front, started 42th and finished 28th. He took home $102,906? It's not important where you finish, it depends on whose decals you have on your fenders.

I like the winning measure but it would take as much tweaking to get it right as NA__AR has tweaked the Series in the past two decades and they STILL have that all screwed up!

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by kkfan91

Well wouldn't that eliminate the very idea of the Champion. I mean with no points you'd just be racing yeah but for what purpose you would have no goal? i realize yes that would call for winning more to make the most but other then that their is no reward

It sure would. What's the down side?

What purpose? To win a race. Isn't that enough?

This is one of the seasons NA__AR is in the competitive shape it's currently in. In 1971 RJR showed up and threw literally a ton of money at NASCAR and made the championship the main focus. Since then it's been a steady progression of strategy, team and points racing and has gotten us this ridiculous playoff system.

[kkfan91]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

It sure would. What's the down side?

What purpose? To win a race. Isn't that enough?

This is one of the seasons NA__AR is in the competitive shape it's currently in. In 1971 RJR showed up and threw literally a ton of money at NASCAR and made the championship the main focus. Since then it's been a steady progression of strategy, team and points racing and has gotten us this ridiculous playoff system.

why compete then? It be back where the drivers only care about big races and you'll have 19 car fields of Arca drivers running a cup race

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by kkfan91

why compete then? It be back where the drivers only care about big races and you'll have 19 car fields of Arca drivers running a cup race

I hate to sound like a broken record but what's the downside if they actually racing to win the race? I could care less what their names are as long as they're racing to win.

In my travels around the country I've probably seen 25-30 races, from California to Connecticut during the past 7-8 years. Plus I'm at one of my local tracks at least once a month each season. Without a doubt, the best actual racing I've seen has been at these small tracks and with the exception of my local tracks, I don't know a single one of the drivers!