35 replies to this topic

[DrDomm]

I'm just posting this outside of the Runoffs thread because it is a bit off topic, but I think it's important how flawed the points system is for Nationals.

You can read how points are calculated at http://www.scca.com/...t.cfm?cid=45934.

The general idea is that the first 9 finishers get base points. Why 9? What's so special about finishing 9th, instead of 10th?

The top 9 each get bonus points then, according to how many cars they beat (up to 10). So finishing 9th, will usually get you 11 points in SM. The guy in 10th, gets zero.

Finishing 9th out of 10 cars will get you 2 points, and finishing 10th out of 30 cars will get you zero. I think we can improve upon this. Any ideas?

[James York]

Domm,

Before about 3 years ago, I can't remember exactly when it changed, positions 1-9 only received points with no bonus points.

meaning you got 12, 9, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1; and that all. To be invited to the Runoffs, you needed to be in the top 10 in your division. Period.

Then, they added the bonus point thing to the national scoring system to reward drivers that actually finished in the points but actually beat someone instead of just riding around and finishing. So if you beat someone, but finished 9th, you might get 19 points (just in the national point scores, division scoring unchanged)

In recent years, they have used the national point system for Runoffs invites as it is more inclusive than the old just top 10 in the division. Personally, I think it is way to easy now to get a Runoffs invite, but that is just my opinion and there is an entire other thread for that.

Why 9. Beats me. Could it be more, sure. I am not sure what the value would be to add more points scores except separate the pack of drivers that have scored zero points for bragging rights. But I guess the club could set up any scoring system that made sense. Score to 20 and do away with bonus points? (but you then lose the strength of event factor as someone who finshes 10th and last gets the same points as someone who finishes 10th out of 40. And that is a big difference in skill)

[Mike Collins]

The current points rule is STUPID!!! I stood on a chair and shouted about this to the BoD and they all sat there with a blank expression on their faces. The current points rule only effects SM, SRF and sort of FV..... I got the rule changed this year to top half of participants instead to top half of points earners but they still screwed it up.

Basically if you are in any other class than SM, SRF and FV you can go to the runoffs by just picking 4 national races to go to and you should fairly easily earn enough points. in 2010 only 24 total drivers in all classes combined in the country outside of SRF and SM did not make the cut off after participating in 4 events they all made it by the 5th race. 165 SM and SRF drivers had 4 races and did not make it.

I would be happy to go into detail or offer any number of viable solutions but they tend to fall on def ears. One particular BoD member was so profound to tell me that "you should have to beat someone to get into the runoffs". I went on to tell him that my father who NEVER finished in the top had beat over 100 cars. More than any formula driver in the country outside of FV beat that year and they ALL got to go to the runoffs.

[wheel]

The bonus points are really aimed at a class like SM, where you might beat 30 drivers and not score a point. Or, you finish ninth and receive 11 points 1 for 9th and 10 for the cars you beat. It was also why the Runoffs invitation was amended to include top half of class participants, not points scorers. Since the Super Tour racers get points for drivers they beat (up to 10) but the regular National drivers don't, that might be a place to start.
It, certainly, all needs to be simplified. All suggestions welcome.
wheel

Meathead posted at the same time, so I needed to add. In my 240 races in SCCA, ( a few in EP, a few in SM and most in ASedan) I have probably beaten about the same number of drivers that some SM racers beat over the course of three or four seasons. So, the "you have to beat somebody" argument - to which I have also been subjected - does not really apply. There are also some who want to go back to the day when only the top 3 in each Division are invited to the Runoffs. Basically, if you qualify for tow money, you get invited. Everyone else, stay home. That really makes no sense. My personal opinion is to invite everyone who finishes four National races - period. It still guarantees the best of the best, but also allows our core National racers the opportunity of racing against those guys. My first Runoffs, still one of the highlights of my racing career, I qualified 27th and finished 14th. I think Eric Curran won that race. (1999 at MidOhio). My point is that the experience should not be denied to anyone who supports the National racing program by participating.

[wheel]

PS
The 2013 Runoffs, the last under the current agreement with Road America, will be the 50th anniversary. This should be one where we bring everyone who wants to come, who have participated in nationals. Believe it or not, your BoD members will listen to your comments.

[Tom Sager]

Domm,

Before about 3 years ago, I can't remember exactly when it changed, positions 1-9 only received points with no bonus points.

meaning you got 12, 9, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1;

Why 9. Beats me.

I believe this was the points system used by F1 (or very similar) back in the '60's and 70's and SCCA adopted the same system back then.

[DrDomm]

I believe this was the points system used by F1 (or very similar) back in the '60's and 70's and SCCA adopted the same system back then.

No, you might be confusing a line from the movie "Grand Prix" where Louise Frederickson asks Jean-Pierre Sarti about his "first 9". That's how many points the winner got, but points only went down to 6th place. I love that movie.

Anyway, I think the points system should probably be class dependent. Meaning...SM gives points differently than GT3.

[James York]

Anyway, I think the points system should probably be class dependent. Meaning...SM gives points differently than GT3.

I am curious why?

And I will add for consideration in your response that T&S is run by volunteers with very different levels of skill across the country. And should SRF have a unique scoring system? What about STL?

[dstevens]

There are a couple of ways to address the situation. Points for everyone based on crossing the finish at the checkered and/or a more graduated points structure that awards more for a win and awards at least a point to everyone that is considered a finisher. For example, 25 pts for 1st, 20 for 2nd, 19 for 3rd graduated down by a point until 2 pts for 20th and one point for everyone else. Instead of crossing the line, the points could be awarded for your finishing spot as long as you pulled into the scales/tech or were towed back. I've ran under all three or combinations of the three and they seem to keep the middle/back of the pack racers more motivated during the season.

[DrDomm]

I am curious why?

And I will add for consideration in your response that T&S is run by volunteers with very different levels of skill across the country. And should SRF have a unique scoring system? What about STL?

I'll start by saying I don't know the perfect system, but the one we have is pretty bad. It might work when you typically have 10-15 cars in a class. But when you have 20-30 cars at a National, and only give points to the top 9, a significant number of decent (not great) drivers don't get points. So, the point system should be based on the typical number of entries per class. SRF would have a system similar to SM, as would FV let's say. STL is still not as popular.

My point is obviously that you need points (or 8 finishes) to get an invitation to the Runoffs. That is important to some people, and some of us believe it should not be just for the top 20 in the nation. If not for the Runoffs, points are pretty meaningless.

In my particular case, finishing 10th at a National instead of 9th has dropped me 80 places in the Nat'l standings because 9th place got 11 points and I got zero. That is just stupid. You could finish 10th at 7 Nationals, and get zero points (and not get a Runoffs invite). That is just stupid. When races have as many cars as SM, more than 9 guys should get points. Even F1 gives points for 10th, now.

T&S has nothing to do with it.

[James York]

Domm,

You missed my point. I was not saying we should not change our scoring system due to T&S. I was trying to convey uniformity. T&S volunteers keep track of racers, tabulate points, submit data, etc. How many points systems do they need to work with? (Remember some volunteers, bless their heart, have trouble just working a computer....) You mention FV being an exception. In my division its not at all popular and is not bigger than STL. You have to look at this on a macro level, not just your division, not just SM.

I didn't say that the point system couldn't use an update, I only suggest it probably needs to be uniform for all classes. I am all for improving anything. I am sure the club can implement a scoring system down to 25 or so with bonus points of some kind so that a person finishing 25/25 gets fewer points than another placing 25/35. Write up something and send it in.

Not to get into who should be invited to the Runoffs, but I think the club directors are trying to make the Runoffs more open. I think wheel said something above about open entry (aka NASA type entry requirements), so points on a national scale might be meaningless anyway in the future. Just run whatever the number of races in support of nationals and you're invited. Simple.

Division champions, tow fund recipients can still be decided per division by the old 12, 9, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 scoring.

[wheel]

Two years ago Runoffs invitations went out to "4 and go", but that was changed. I am hoping to go back to that. But, please do not equate anything we do to that other group.
Thanks,
wheel

[DrDomm]

James, if T&S volunteers at the track are the ones calculating points, I wasn't aware of that. I agree that would then be one more headache for them. I assumed they just sent results into SCCA, and they calculated points.

My goal is fairness, not uniformity. No one compares their points in one class to someone elses in another class. You're right, if the Runoffs become more inclusive it doesn't matter as far as that goes. For division champion, it probably doesn't matter what point system you use. Champions are usually in the points no matter what.

FV might have been a bad example. My bad.

I'm not sure if different point systems is the best thing. It was just an idea. I "liked" the idea about giving points to more drivers, as well. I just wasn't sure if other classes would like that idea...trying to look at the "macro level".

I think if you give points back to 20th or 25th place, you probably don't need bonus points. By then, it doesn't really matter. Is 25th out of 25 so much better than 25th out of 35? I guess it is if you're 25th. (I finished 29/34 this year. I didn't deserve a point for beating anyone)

[James York]

Domm,

I am not sure how the points get rolled up to national. But I know the Division keeps track of regional and national points within the division.

At any rate, the points system I am sure can be improved.

Perhaps the top 1/2 of a division should get runoff invites, and just score people to 30 or so.

[Tom Sager]

It's hard for me to ponder an updated points system without thinking about how the overall program might be improved. We're very fortunate now to do what we do and have good organizations making it possible. Thinking about a different points system makes you think about things like participation, competitiveness and the events themselves. For me, adjustments that increase turnout, reduce cost and make each event as competitive and meaningful as possible are all good things to consider. Here are some thoughts...

1. More double national events. Make this more the rule and not the exception. There is a lot of overhead for workers, drivers and crew to get to the track. 2 races on a weekend rather than 1 is more fun and more cost effective. Why the June Sprints isn't a double is beyond me. All those cars, that big track, the great distance that many travel and it's already a 3 day event. Some regions have already proved that doubles can be held in 2 days.

2. The very open and inclusive runoffs entry dilutes what happens during the season. I like the idea of an area championship to feed the runoffs entry. I posted this in the other thread and the silence was deafening. Didn't dream this up on my own. This is the same model used by AAU and USATF track and field. Those organizations have similar challenges. Lots of events (classes), participation all over the country, a desire to hold a championship. Time and geographic limitations confront many of the participants. They run local area meets, have regional qualifiers and a national championship. Only the national championship is by strict invitation through qualification. The other meets including the regionals are quite open and for those that can't commit the time and expense to travel to the championship, great competition and a very meaningful event occurs near the end of the season in several regions of the country.

3. Good Lord SCCA, go on a class diet. Get the damn car counts in poorly subscribed classes up. So many things get easier and better if this is accomplished. There is no doubt however that this is much easier said than done.

4. Push some classes to national status only and add some PDX sessions to regional events. There is a huge gap between "I think I'd like to try that" and actually getting in a race prepared car at a driver's school. Heck, add some crew and worker on-track sessions during regional events. Let more people give it a try. At my son's kart races they would have a "mechanic's race" from time to time. They filled the track every time.

5. Integrate poles and fast laps into the points system.

6. Take all the resources devoted to super tour, majors and triple crown programs and devote them to in-season divisional incentives and promotions. Make every event a bigger deal. Many regions need higher car counts at their events and anything the encourages more participation at every event is a plus.

[wheel]

Tom,
1. Divisions/Regions set their own race schedules. In Midiv we now have only double Rationals (one exception was Gateway which tried to do two R/N weekends)
2. Many drivers race for the Division championships and don't enter the Runoffs. On the other hand there are a lot of drivers, myself included, who love the Runoffs, whether I am a front runner or not.
3. The "class diet" work is well underway, with the Touring and SS consolidation taking effect in 2013 and the Sports Racer consolidation happening in 2014. And, yes, it is much easier said than done. Some classes may move from National to Regional, only, if they do not have enough cars/drivers to warrant staying in the National program.
4. See item 1. above. We have been doing combined events for years in Midiv. HPT, Gateway, MAM, etc. have done events that combine Racing, PDX, Solo, Vintage and Driver's Schools all on the same weekend.
5. Possibly
6. The Super Tour contract is still in effect and the Majors will be brought out next year nation wide, as the second step in trying to make National Racing a bigger event.

[Kevin Edens]

6. The Super Tour contract is still in effect and the Majors will be brought out next year nation wide, as the second step in trying to make National Racing a bigger event.

Can someone take a minute to explain to me how the Majors help a division? The one in our region caused us to skip two events and go out of region for a Double National (STL)

[davew]

Wheel, saying "the class diet is well under way" is no more meaningfull than my diet. We go from T1,2 and 3 plus SSB and SSC to T1234. Total weight loss, 1 class. Why have AS and T2? So we can have a carbureted champion and an injected champion?

Sports racers are going from CSR, DSR and S2000 to 2 classes (to be named later).

Please explain why we have FB, FC, FM, F1000 and FE? I really do know the difference, but why do we need all of them? And why do we race weed wackers?

Super tour meant nothing to anybody I have talked to. And I attended 3 of them. My guess would be the same for the majors program. Although I did not attend any of them.

I do believe in the triple crown. It is a single (some say special) National race, your local championship and a Runoffs win. I think it will be even more special if/when the Runoffs moves away from Road America.

SCCA is similar to our government. fat, lazy, slow to change, looking out for their own best interest, and not representative of the people they are supposed to serve. SCCA membership is; type a personalities, fast moving, quick to make a decision, very busy and highly motivated.

Any issues with car classes could/should be worked out with dinner of pizza and a few beers. Point system at breakfast and world peace for lunch.

Everybody says, do not critisize without having a solution

SM
T1 Vipers, Vettes etc
T2 Porshes, Mustang, Camaro and AS/STO cars
T3 Honda Kia etc
T4 B-spec, on probation before they even begin
GT1 as is
GT2 Nascar based stockcars, GTA. No more porshes, move them to T2
GT3 curent GT2 and GT3 cars with adjustments and STU cars
GTL, seems fairly popular, I could live with it
EProd, ok
Fprod, Ok
Hprod, OK
SR1 fast sports racers
SR2, less fast sports racers
SRF, slow sports racers
FV, they deserve themselves
FF, Ford, Honda who cares
FA, Atlantics are too fast to be bunched into anything else
F BEM1000. Load em all together
FW weedwacker. They at least show up in some numbers

That gets us down to 19 National classes in less than 10 minutes.

Who wants to help with world peace!!!!!!!!!!!

Dave

[DrDomm]

Is there really a desire for stockcars to be added to SCCA? Just curious. Otherwise, some of that GT realignment will happen, but the Porsches (Cup) are vital to GT. Some GT3 needs to move up to 2, and some down to L. Wait, this is a Miata forum...

At least you put SM at the top. Those damn weedwackers do keep showing up. You shouldn't be able to put your car on a tv dinner stand while at the track.

[LarryKing]

Is there really a desire for stockcars to be added to SCCA?

Not an addition. Some folks already buy used NASCARs and race them in GT-1, and I believe they are eligible in GTA.