|
|
|
2015 SOAR Rulebook including Ontario & Quebec Championship Point Structure
- Thread starter kneedragger88
- Start date
I really don't understand the points payout structure for top 5.
40 then 37 points with a potential 5pts in qualifying. It still means the race winner won't always take home the most points and if you have one bad race result your shot at a championship is pretty much gone.
Oh well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
40 then 37 points with a potential 5pts in qualifying. It still means the race winner won't always take home the most points and if you have one bad race result your shot at a championship is pretty much gone.
Oh well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Points structure was designed by RACE we accepted it as proposed. Seems pretty decent to me. Win both qualifier and race. Problem solved.
Yes classes and points will be same. Endurance uses these points as well
Yeah pretty much all of them.
I'm surprised that it's a bit different than the CSBK rules as far as the modifications allowed. RACE previously had the same rules as CSBK.
Shouldn't the regional series be a stepping stone of sorts to nationals? Not that everyone is going to pony up for aftermarket forks and calipers or go to nationals.
Based on my previous thoughts on the old points structure the new payout structure is a move in the wrong direction IMO.
In my AM Superbike season with Tony I had a DNF in round 1. No points. I had to be perfect the rest of the season but I could have won the championship by two points.
Entering the same scenario into the new points payout I would not have won, I would have been 17 points behind. It seems very strange to me. This points structure discourages taking risks.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In my AM Superbike season with Tony I had a DNF in round 1. No points. I had to be perfect the rest of the season but I could have won the championship by two points.
Entering the same scenario into the new points payout I would not have won, I would have been 17 points behind. It seems very strange to me. This points structure discourages taking risks.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I also found it odd to see the first 11 positions equally spaced for points (40, 37, 34 etc). The difference between winning a race and placing second should be larger than the difference between, say 9th and 10th...or even 2nd and 3rd.
I'm not familiar with the points structures of too many different racing series, but F1 looks like this:
1st : 25 points
2nd : 18 points
3rd : 15 points
4th : 12 points
5th : 10 points
6th : 8 points
7th : 6 points
8th : 4 points
9th : 2 points
10th : 1 point
So, the difference between a win and second is just over twice the difference between 2nd and third. In a close points battle that can make the final race pretty exciting. Probably that big a spread is too big for a series like SOAR with only 6 rounds, but it really could be more progressive than what is in the 2015 rules.
Not complaining - I'll come out and race under any points structure and do my best every round. But like Tim says it would be more exciting if a spectacular finish could do more to erase the effects of a DNS or DNF in a prior round. This points structure really favours those people who show up for every single round and reliably go round and round in circles without crashing and are lucky enough to not have mechanical problems. Too many marks for "participation", not enough for being faster than other people.
I'm not familiar with the points structures of too many different racing series, but F1 looks like this:
1st : 25 points
2nd : 18 points
3rd : 15 points
4th : 12 points
5th : 10 points
6th : 8 points
7th : 6 points
8th : 4 points
9th : 2 points
10th : 1 point
So, the difference between a win and second is just over twice the difference between 2nd and third. In a close points battle that can make the final race pretty exciting. Probably that big a spread is too big for a series like SOAR with only 6 rounds, but it really could be more progressive than what is in the 2015 rules.
Not complaining - I'll come out and race under any points structure and do my best every round. But like Tim says it would be more exciting if a spectacular finish could do more to erase the effects of a DNS or DNF in a prior round. This points structure really favours those people who show up for every single round and reliably go round and round in circles without crashing and are lucky enough to not have mechanical problems. Too many marks for "participation", not enough for being faster than other people.
Well said
Finishing positions, Rounds 1 to 6:
Fred: 3rd, 3rd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 4th
Bob: 1st, 1st, DNF, 1st, 1st, 1st
And Fred just squeaks out the Championship with 201 points, 1 point more than his nearest rival, Bob! Hooray for Fred!
Fred: 3rd, 3rd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 4th
Bob: 1st, 1st, DNF, 1st, 1st, 1st
And Fred just squeaks out the Championship with 201 points, 1 point more than his nearest rival, Bob! Hooray for Fred!
Yep, trying to win a championship and have a crash? Save your money and pack it in
No different than AMA in 2013 when Herrin won because Hayes had a DNF at Daytona.
Plus you don't score 0 points for a DNF if you started the race, so it's a moot point.
If you don't show up for a round, sure it will hurt your chances. But that applies to any motorized championship in the world.
You do if there are 31 bikes on the grid!
Did herrin have zero race wins?
|
|
|
|
|