2003 V8 Points System

[BATHURSTFAN]

What are your thoughts on the 2002 V8 Supercar points scoring system, I think its a joke!!!

Goto www.v8supercar.com.au and click on 2003 Events and at the bottom of the table you'll seen the link to the points scoring system.

http://www.v8supercar.com.au/calendars/2003/V8SS20 03cal.htm

For 250KM RACES 1st 96pts, 2nd 93pts, 3rd 91pts all the way down to 32nd where you get 3pts.

THREE points splits every placing from 1st - 32nd.

Its double points for longer (300km) races. So its SIX points for every extra place gained.

And 100km races TWO points splits each position.

Why not Keep It Simple.

[brchi17]

Thats interesting, as I though i read in Auto Action that the points for 2003 would be the same regardless of the race.
I guess I'll put it in that box with AVESCO saying that they will not run repeat rounds during the championship series.
cheers.

[Grubby]

Brchi17

The points are exactly the same for every round. Max of 192 points.

If the round consists of 1 race then the winner gets 192 points. If it is 2 races then it is 96 points for 1st in each race - 192 in total.

For the 3 rounds that have 3 race 1st in each race gets 64 points - 192 in total for the round.

No round or race is weighted more heavily than another.

I am guessing that this will keep the points a lot closer for 2003.

Grubby

[jager]

Seems like the points will make the championship closer, but will it encourage better racing ?

Why would a driver in say 2nd place take a chance on a risky passing move on the race leader in the last 5 laps of a race if its only going to result in a lousy 2-3 extra points when the risk of a DNF would be a massive loss of points. To win the championship will require consistency more than ability. This will only make the races themselves less exciting - bad move (In My Opinion) !

[Dazz]

The new points system will favour mediocrity and consistancy more than the current one.

I don't think that the the points reward winners and encourage passing to any great extent at the pointy end of the field, and as for dropping the worst round from the scores this does not benefit those who do a good job all year round.

The V8 championship is becoming far too regulated to be called real racing anymore with points and results being manipulated to give an unrealistically close result.

If a driver is the class of the field all year he deserves to be way out in front and if people don't like this then they are not true fans of a sport which is based on competition.

The stupid thing is that in reality, the points will look closer, but once someone opens up say a 20 point gap it will be just as hard to catch up as a 100 point gap is now. So we will hear all of this AVESCO bulls#&t about it being the closest championship ever and that their efforts in changing things have paid off.

[brchi17]

Thanks Grubby,
maths has never been my strong point, if at the end of the day each round is worth the same points, then things might be better.
I can remember thinking back to the Adelaide street race & saying after Skaife won the round, "well the championships over"!!!
cheers.

[Dazz]

The funny thing is that perception plays a big part in things when it comes to such an emotional topic like the V8's.

Championship points at the end of the season stood as such...

Skaife 2227
Murphy 1569
Ambrose 1498
Bright 1459

Now Skaife scored 400 points at the Adelaide round compared to Murphy's 320, but even if Skaife failed to finish both races, his points would still have been 1827, and assuming Murphy scored maximum points he would be on 1678.

Now there is no doubt that this would have made the results close, but none the less, to say that Adelaide won the championship for Skaife, especially being the first round, is maybe a little bit of an extension of the true story.

[brchi17]

Daz,
As I said, it was my personal thoughts on the subject, while they may not be held by others, they were with me.

I didn't say that Adeliade won the championship for him, but that I felt after that round, that no one was going to get near him.

Perhaps it was his dominance in the way in which he won, but I just thought that he (& HRT) were in a league of their own & that he would not be beaten.

For the record, I'm not a Skaife supportor, far from it I might add.
cheers.

[BATHURSTFAN]

why not something like;

10pts for 1st,
7pts for 2nd,
5pts for 3rd
3pts for 4th
2pts for 5th
1pt for 6th

or something like that for EACH race, irrespective of how long it is.


Is it TEGA or AVESCO that have done this?

Glenn

[brchi17]

I would have though it was AVESCO that set those sort of things. Don't TEGA look after the technical etc..., side of things ?
cheers.

[Dazz]

brchi17, I actually agree with you about after Adelaide thinking that Skaife would take some beating, knowing how consistant he is over a championship, and how inconsistant others seem to be once the pressure is on to catch him.

I was simply putting the figures there to show others who might not be aware of the actual points situation, and thought it might be of interest to see that it was more than just one single round that wins a championship.

[brchi17]

Daz, I throughly agree with you.
Isn't it interesting that for the past two years that the winner of Adeliade race (relaying on my memory here) is usually the eventual champion.
It's such an important race(not that any arn't), which I hope (it's importance) isn't lost when the points are rationalised for each round in 2003.
cheers.

[Dazz]

Adelaide is definitely an important start to the championship, no doubt about it. I guess it allows the winner to go into the second round with a little less pressure and really concentrate on just picking up points rather than having to go all out to make up ground.

I just really disagree with being able to drop your worst rounds points as this had proved in the past to rob the true championship winner of the title if things are close at the end. I just don't see why someone who has a shocker of a round should be rewarded for it.

[brchi17]

Originally posted by Dazz
I just really disagree with being able to drop your worst rounds points as this had proved in the past to rob the true championship winner of the title if things are close at the end. I just don't see why someone who has a shocker of a round should be rewarded for it.

That is tending to be a common comment & I again agree with you. I read in AA, that Ambrose didn't like it because you may not end up with the right winner of the championship.

This nearly happened in the ARC this year, as they ran under the same 'drop a round' rules.

If past expirence is anything to go by, perhaps they should steer away from it.
cheers.