T
TonyB
Guest
NASCAR.com
By Marty Smith
Being inestimably more adept verbally than I am mathematically, I've made a concerted effort over the past several years to surround myself with numerically inclined individuals.
I have a financial investment guy. I have an insurance guy. I have a tax guy. Hell, my best friend is a chemical engineer.
I can't so much as balance my checkbook without fancy computer software. Hence, you can imagine my apprehension upon receiving hundreds of requests to mathematically determine the varying outcomes of NASCAR's championships under the new 26/10 points format.
Honestly, I assumed such pleas could never be fulfilled. I'm just plain incapable of the comprehending the math involved.
Enter my stats guy. He's unstumpable. He scoffs in the face of applied multivariate analysis. He'd rather study matrix theory than watch The Matrix Reloaded. Give him an equation and 60 seconds and you'll have a correct answer.
What this guy can do with an Excel spreadsheet and a few random integers would make Gracie Hart melt. In a matter of hours - would have been less were he not tied up with Democratic primary analysis for CNN -- the spreadsheet was complete.
The following is precisely what you ordered, courtesy of .com statistical chef Brad Morris. I am merely the waiter.
All said and done, half of the 28 seasons between 1975 and 2003 would have produced different champions under the new system. The first five during that span, from 1975 to '79, remained the same, with Richard Petty winning twice and Cale Yarborough three times.
The 1980 season, however, would have produced a different champion. (The Earnhardt Nation is already ticked off).
Dale Earnhardt defeated Yarborough by 19 points in 1980 to win his first championship. But under the new system, Yarborough would have scored 6600 points to Earnhardt's 6568, thus earning Yarborough his fourth championship in five years and leaving Earnhardt to wait six long years to claim his first title.
Earnhardt, who joins Petty as the only drivers in history to claim seven championships, would have won just four -- 1986, 1990, '94 and '95 -- under the new format. (The Earnhardt Nation has officially stopped reading).
And Earnhardt's not the only driver so drastically effected. Four-time NASCAR champion Jeff Gordon would only have two titles.
Gordon won the '95 championship, finished second to teammate Terry Labonte in '96, won back-to-back championships in 1997 and '98 and also won the 2001 title.
Under the new system, he'd have finished fourth in 1995 behind Earnhardt, Rusty Wallace and Labonte, won in '96, finished second to Dale Jarrett in 1997 and won '98. (As if there was any question about '98. He had 13 friggin' wins that year).
And 2001? Gordon would've ranked third behind Sterling Marlin and Tony Stewart.
The following is a quick peek at the 14 seasons that would have produced alternate champions, and where those that did win the title under the old system would have finished in the Chase:
1980 -- Yarborough instead of Earnhardt, who finishes second overall by a 14-point margin.
1983 -- Darrell Waltrip instead of Bobby Allison. The margin between them is nearly 200 points.
1984 -- Harry Gant over Terry Labonte, who falls 15 points short.
1987 -- Bill Elliott over Earnhardt, once again by 14 points.
1991 -- Gant over Earnhardt, who finishes second, by 152 points.
1992 -- Kyle Petty over Alan Kulwicki by 79 points.
1993 -- Wallace over Earnhardt by 259 points.
1995 -- Earnhardt rather than Gordon, who finishes 265 points behind Earnhardt and fourth in the overall standings.
1996 -- Gordon over Labonte, who finishes fourth overall, by 107 points.
1997 -- Dale Jarrett over Gordon by 139 points.
1999 -- Bobby Labonte over DJ by 114 points.
2001 -- Sterling Marlin rather than Gordon. Gordon finishes 75 points short of Marlin, but is third overall behind Marlin and Tony Stewart.
2002 -- Kurt Busch over Stewart by 64 points.
2003 -- Jimmie Johnson instead of Matt Kenseth. Kenseth finishes a distant sixth, 401 points behind Johnson.
I need a T-O. That required entirely too much subtraction on my part. Brain overload. And I had a calculator.
So, under the new system Gant would be a two-time champion, and he never won one the old way. No wonder he's popping up in Charlotte-area commercials again. Marlin, Busch and Johnson would all be champions, too, and Richard and Lee wouldn't the only Pettys to have hoisted the Cup.
On the flipside, Wisconsin wouldn't have a title to its name. Neither Kulwicki nor Kenseth -- both native cheeseheads -- would have won their respective championships under the new format.
Moreover, the difference between Kenseth's championship status under the old system and his sixth-place rank in the new format is the most significant in the sport's history.
In other words, early-season dominance means nothing anymore.
Tony Stewart wouldn't have claimed the 2002 championship. Heck, he wouldn't have even qualified for the Chase for the Championship last year.
And you thought Kenseth's fortunes were bad.
Hopefully, this somewhat satisfies your insatiable desire to know who'd have done what under the new championship format. That said, it's fun to compare, but it's not necessarily accurate.
It's impossible to decipher how teams would have approached competition differently, given different circumstances. The outcomes may have been entirely different.
And not even stat boy can write an equation for figuring that one out.
By Marty Smith
Being inestimably more adept verbally than I am mathematically, I've made a concerted effort over the past several years to surround myself with numerically inclined individuals.
I have a financial investment guy. I have an insurance guy. I have a tax guy. Hell, my best friend is a chemical engineer.
I can't so much as balance my checkbook without fancy computer software. Hence, you can imagine my apprehension upon receiving hundreds of requests to mathematically determine the varying outcomes of NASCAR's championships under the new 26/10 points format.
Honestly, I assumed such pleas could never be fulfilled. I'm just plain incapable of the comprehending the math involved.
Enter my stats guy. He's unstumpable. He scoffs in the face of applied multivariate analysis. He'd rather study matrix theory than watch The Matrix Reloaded. Give him an equation and 60 seconds and you'll have a correct answer.
What this guy can do with an Excel spreadsheet and a few random integers would make Gracie Hart melt. In a matter of hours - would have been less were he not tied up with Democratic primary analysis for CNN -- the spreadsheet was complete.
The following is precisely what you ordered, courtesy of .com statistical chef Brad Morris. I am merely the waiter.
All said and done, half of the 28 seasons between 1975 and 2003 would have produced different champions under the new system. The first five during that span, from 1975 to '79, remained the same, with Richard Petty winning twice and Cale Yarborough three times.
The 1980 season, however, would have produced a different champion. (The Earnhardt Nation is already ticked off).
Dale Earnhardt defeated Yarborough by 19 points in 1980 to win his first championship. But under the new system, Yarborough would have scored 6600 points to Earnhardt's 6568, thus earning Yarborough his fourth championship in five years and leaving Earnhardt to wait six long years to claim his first title.
Earnhardt, who joins Petty as the only drivers in history to claim seven championships, would have won just four -- 1986, 1990, '94 and '95 -- under the new format. (The Earnhardt Nation has officially stopped reading).
And Earnhardt's not the only driver so drastically effected. Four-time NASCAR champion Jeff Gordon would only have two titles.
Gordon won the '95 championship, finished second to teammate Terry Labonte in '96, won back-to-back championships in 1997 and '98 and also won the 2001 title.
Under the new system, he'd have finished fourth in 1995 behind Earnhardt, Rusty Wallace and Labonte, won in '96, finished second to Dale Jarrett in 1997 and won '98. (As if there was any question about '98. He had 13 friggin' wins that year).
And 2001? Gordon would've ranked third behind Sterling Marlin and Tony Stewart.
The following is a quick peek at the 14 seasons that would have produced alternate champions, and where those that did win the title under the old system would have finished in the Chase:
1980 -- Yarborough instead of Earnhardt, who finishes second overall by a 14-point margin.
1983 -- Darrell Waltrip instead of Bobby Allison. The margin between them is nearly 200 points.
1984 -- Harry Gant over Terry Labonte, who falls 15 points short.
1987 -- Bill Elliott over Earnhardt, once again by 14 points.
1991 -- Gant over Earnhardt, who finishes second, by 152 points.
1992 -- Kyle Petty over Alan Kulwicki by 79 points.
1993 -- Wallace over Earnhardt by 259 points.
1995 -- Earnhardt rather than Gordon, who finishes 265 points behind Earnhardt and fourth in the overall standings.
1996 -- Gordon over Labonte, who finishes fourth overall, by 107 points.
1997 -- Dale Jarrett over Gordon by 139 points.
1999 -- Bobby Labonte over DJ by 114 points.
2001 -- Sterling Marlin rather than Gordon. Gordon finishes 75 points short of Marlin, but is third overall behind Marlin and Tony Stewart.
2002 -- Kurt Busch over Stewart by 64 points.
2003 -- Jimmie Johnson instead of Matt Kenseth. Kenseth finishes a distant sixth, 401 points behind Johnson.
I need a T-O. That required entirely too much subtraction on my part. Brain overload. And I had a calculator.
So, under the new system Gant would be a two-time champion, and he never won one the old way. No wonder he's popping up in Charlotte-area commercials again. Marlin, Busch and Johnson would all be champions, too, and Richard and Lee wouldn't the only Pettys to have hoisted the Cup.
On the flipside, Wisconsin wouldn't have a title to its name. Neither Kulwicki nor Kenseth -- both native cheeseheads -- would have won their respective championships under the new format.
Moreover, the difference between Kenseth's championship status under the old system and his sixth-place rank in the new format is the most significant in the sport's history.
In other words, early-season dominance means nothing anymore.
Tony Stewart wouldn't have claimed the 2002 championship. Heck, he wouldn't have even qualified for the Chase for the Championship last year.
And you thought Kenseth's fortunes were bad.
Hopefully, this somewhat satisfies your insatiable desire to know who'd have done what under the new championship format. That said, it's fun to compare, but it's not necessarily accurate.
It's impossible to decipher how teams would have approached competition differently, given different circumstances. The outcomes may have been entirely different.
And not even stat boy can write an equation for figuring that one out.
