Something's wrong with a system that.....

I don't give a rip what you or others think about the sport, but you have a point in that I know I'm getting real tired of reading the same tripe about the same thing. I get it. Most of you hate the Chase. Maybe the mods should make an area just for letting off steam about what everyone hates about NASCAR. I know it would be filled with Andy's threads, but it would give those of us who are tired of reading the criticism a way to skip the same old, same old.

What isn't filled with Andy's threads:rolleyes:
 
What isn't filled with Andy's threads:rolleyes:

biteme.gif


:smile:
 
Hopefully , the cream will rise to the top and the best driver will win. In spite of Nascar's various attempts at window dressing for TV ratings. Personally , I could live with any of the top five as champion.
 
Since they instituted this Chase format, I have always rooted for the driver that scored the most points for the entire season to walk away with the hardware. Old habits are hard to break, for some of us anyway.
 
It was confusing as all get out AND encouraged back markers to stay out and just motor around, not even trying to race. A big problem with the system developed about almost through the season when some middle-pack driver (Elmo Langley of Jim Vandiver?) was ahead in the points but hadn't finished better than second or third but had run every race. Richard Petty and Bobby Allison had won something like half the races and had beaten the leading driver in every race they had run together.

Wasn't that when they ran over 50 races a year and some guys ran more races than others?
 
Let's face it, something like The Chase was bound to come around sooner or later. Today's generation have a different take on the sport from previous generation. Previous generation was about the driver, the hardware, it was about seeing who was the best driver and who had the best car.

All of that has changed now, it changed when Nascar started getting big name drivers. It became less about the drivers ability and their cars and more about the storyline that went along with the driver. That what people want, they want a good storyline. They want every race to be like ?Days of Thunder" with the underdog or the favorite to win.

I mean you only have to look at Earnhardt Jr. popularity to see what I mean. People don't care about his driving ability (or lack of) or how good his car is. They just care that he has the name "Earnhardt" and they want to see him bring back the good ol days of the black #3.

Nascar realize this, so that's why we have The Chase.
 
Wasn't that when they ran over 50 races a year and some guys ran more races than others?
No, as I recall (and again, I might be off a year or so) the last time they ran anything like 60 races was 1968 pr 1969. They ran less than 50 in 1971.

Yeah, 1971 was a year when only a handful of drivers drove all the races. It was the same in 1972. Bill Sr. tried to end that plan by (1) cutting out all short (low paying) races in 1972 - no more 100 and 150 milers, and (2) Implementing the granddaddy of the currently blatantly unfair and just plain WRONG Chosen 35 Rule (Of all of NA__AR wrong-headed rules, this one bothers me the most). Bill Sr. called it the Championship Circle and it gave extra money to every team which entered a car in every race of the season.

No, believe me, you don't want anything to do with any points-per-lap system. I remember the 1972 point system well and it was a mess. If you think this current point system is FUBAR, a points-per-lap system would really make you pull your hair out!
 
I wonder how it would be looked at if a driver were to win the Chase without a win for the entire season? 5 of these guys have a chance to do so.
 
I wonder how it would be looked at if a driver were to win the Chase without a win for the entire season? 5 of these guys have a chance to do so.

It could happen. If one driver finished second in the last ten races the trophy would be his.

That is one reason I do not like the current points structure. A driver could finish second in the first twenty six races and be a thousand points in the lead at the end of the regular season. That same driver could end up starting last in the chase if the other eleven drivers had just one win each.
 
It could happen. If one driver finished second in the last ten races the trophy would be his.

That is one reason I do not like the current points structure. A driver could finish second in the first twenty six races and be a thousand points in the lead at the end of the regular season. That same driver could end up starting last in the chase if the other eleven drivers had just one win each.

How about if a driver make a run of 2nd, 18th, 2nd, 4th, 25th, 2nd, 9th, 6th, 4th, and finally 15th over the final 10 races? At first glance, certainly not. Except that it did happen in 2005. Stewart won the title with no wins in the Chase. Who knows what may happen this year?
 
How about if a driver make a run of 2nd, 18th, 2nd, 4th, 25th, 2nd, 9th, 6th, 4th, and finally 15th over the final 10 races? At first glance, certainly not. Except that it did happen in 2005. Stewart won the title with no wins in the Chase. Who knows what may happen this year?
I thought Tony won Martinsville that year. Maybe Gordon won, but Tony held off Jimmy for 2nd.....terrible I don't know that..:confused:
MoMike
 
I thought Tony won Martinsville that year. Maybe Gordon won, but Tony held off Jimmy for 2nd.....terrible I don't know that..:confused:
MoMike

Your maybe is exactly correct and yes, you did know.

I was simply trying to show that it certainly is possible. Probable, no. But you never know.....
 
You know, if we're going to do any change to The Chase format, I think they should at least do the following.

Give the regular season points leader recognition for being the point leader up to The Chase, kinda like the NFC/AFC Champion type deal.

Race at different types of tracks at The Chase. It seems like this year the majority of tracks lined up for The Chase are the cookie cutter tracks, which sucks and doesn't test the driver's abilities. Here is a track line up I'd like to see.

Martinsville
Watkins Glen
Bristol
Talladega
Pocono (simply for the fact it has 3 turns at different angles, it's a challenge to set up for)
DuQuoin State Fairgrounds Racetrack (Yes, a dirt track. Com'on, don't tell me these boys has forgotten how to race on dirt!)
Lowe's Motor Speedway (It'll always be Charlotte Motor Speedway to me though)
Darlington Raceway (for the same reason as Pocono)
Rockingham
Homestead (mainly because it's tradition to finish at Homestead)
 
You know, if we're going to do any change to The Chase format, I think they should at least do the following.

Give the regular season points leader recognition for being the point leader up to The Chase, kinda like the NFC/AFC Champion type deal.

Race at different types of tracks at The Chase. It seems like this year the majority of tracks lined up for The Chase are the cookie cutter tracks, which sucks and doesn't test the driver's abilities. Here is a track line up I'd like to see.

Martinsville
Watkins Glen
Bristol
Talladega
Pocono (simply for the fact it has 3 turns at different angles, it's a challenge to set up for)
DuQuoin State Fairgrounds Racetrack (Yes, a dirt track. Com'on, don't tell me these boys has forgotten how to race on dirt!)
Lowe's Motor Speedway (It'll always be Charlotte Motor Speedway to me though)
Darlington Raceway (for the same reason as Pocono)
Rockingham
Homestead (mainly because it's tradition to finish at Homestead)

Its back to being Charlotte it has been all year
 
Race at different types of tracks at The Chase. It seems like this year the majority of tracks lined up for The Chase are the cookie cutter tracks, which sucks and doesn't test the driver's abilities. Here is a track line up I'd like to see.

Martinsville
Watkins Glen
Bristol
Talladega
Pocono (simply for the fact it has 3 turns at different angles, it's a challenge to set up for)
DuQuoin State Fairgrounds Racetrack (Yes, a dirt track. Com'on, don't tell me these boys has forgotten how to race on dirt!)
Lowe's Motor Speedway (It'll always be Charlotte Motor Speedway to me though)
Darlington Raceway (for the same reason as Pocono)
Rockingham
Homestead (mainly because it's tradition to finish at Homestead)

OK..... you had me until DuQuoin. While that would be great to see. I can't see this every happening. Oh, and it is Charlotte Motor Speedway. Lowes was gone a while ago so you can rest easy again. :beerbang:
 
OK..... you had me until DuQuoin. While that would be great to see. I can't see this every happening. Oh, and it is Charlotte Motor Speedway. Lowes was gone a while ago so you can rest easy again. :beerbang:

Yea, DuQuoin may not get the viewership Nascar likes to see, on TV and at the tracks. However it'd still be awesome to see some dirt track racing at the top tier of Stock Car racing. At least it'd prove that the contenders of The Chase can race at any track and still be competitive.
 
Yea, DuQuoin may not get the viewership Nascar likes to see, on TV and at the tracks. However it'd still be awesome to see some dirt track racing at the top tier of Stock Car racing. At least it'd prove that the contenders of The Chase can race at any track and still be competitive.

I sure agree but I'm still holding my breath for the road course in the Chase first. :D
 
DuQuoin and Rockingham won't happen.

Rockingham can't even get 1,000 people to show up for a nationally televised ARCA championship race... no way they'll fill it up for NASCAR.
 
Interesting article about the Chase @ ESPN.....

Imagine how much fun it would be if this Chase really did produce a winless Cup champion.

Think about that: a winless champion.

What a hoot. Think of the stir. The uproar. The national guffawing. We'd be talking abut it all winter.

NASCAR would come under the mainstream spotlight again. Not the best light, mind you, but plenty of attention.

So David Letterman has the champ on as usual, see, but as the guy takes a seat on the set, Dave says:

"So let me get this straight. You didn't win a single race this season, but you are NASCAR's 2010 champion? How does that work, for gosh sake?"

Dave knows, of course, but he just wants his audience to hear this.

In any other sport, "winless champion" is an oxymoron. Not in NASCAR. It has never happened, but it is possible.

Although it's still improbable for an oh-for-36 season to yield a Cup, it seems more possible now than ever.

And maybe it needs to happen, to expose NASCAR's championship points system for the anachronism it is. Maybe the public outcry would pressure NASCAR as never before to change radically, to do what it has never done adequately: reward winning.

Going into the Chase opener Sunday at Loudon, N.H., five of the 12 Chasers are winless this season.

The top seven are where they are because they've won, and received seeding bonuses for their wins.

But now the seeding bonuses cease, and the original intent of the NASCAR points system -- rewarding consistency -- kicks back in, full force.

So let's look for sheer consistency in how these guys are running.

Over the past 10 races, the winless Chasers have a better cumulative average finish, 10.56, than the winners, 14.57.

Ah, you say, but the winners have been getting ready for the Chase, experimenting. Well, so have the winless.

Over that period, top seed Denny Hamlin (six wins this year) has an average finish of 18.3. Second seed Jimmie Johnson (five wins) has an average of 17.0

Winless, ninth-seeded Carl Edwards has an average of 7.5.

And the four other winless drivers all have better averages than both Hamlin and Johnson: Jeff Burton 10.4, Clint Bowyer 10.9, Jeff Gordon 11.2 and Matt Kenseth 12.8.

What's that? There's no road course in the Chase, you say, and the past 10 races included one, Watkins Glen?

Well, let's go back the past 12 races and throw out the Glen and Sonoma, to include only the past 10 oval races.

That way, the winless have an average finish of 10.14, and the winners 13.99. Again, all five winless drivers averaged better than Hamlin and Johnson. Edwards in particular averaged 7.0 to Hamlin's 14.7.

Now you say it only stands to reason that the winless have been more consistent lately -- otherwise they wouldn't have made the Chase at all.

But from here on out, it's all consistency, just like in the old days before the Chase began in 2004.

Johnson's blitzing through the Chase with multiple wins in recent years has made even his competitors believe you've got to win Chase races to win the Chase.

But in 2005, the year before Johnson began his run of four straight championships, Tony Stewart entered the Chase with five wins but won nary a Chase race. Winless in the Chase, Stewart won the Cup.

Consistency.

In the inaugural Chase, in '04, Kurt Busch won only one playoff race, the opener at Loudon, but still beat Johnson, who won four of the last six, for the championship.

Consistency.

I never have liked rewarding consistent also-rans more than winners, yet here NASCAR is in the seventh year of a playoff format, and consistency is still the key.

Formula One's points system features a whopping 28 percent dropoff between winning and second place, as it should. Even IndyCar has a 20 percent dropoff, 50 to 40.

NASCAR in 2007 did give a token bump to the reward for winning, from 175 points to 185, keeping the second-place award at 170. Any winner actually gets at least 190, counting the five-point bonus for leading a lap, and up to 195 if he leads the most laps.

But 195 to 170, the widest margin between first and second possible in a race, is only a 13 percent dropoff.

Many, including me, advocate a 50-point spread between first and second for NASCAR, or a 23 percent dropoff, which is more in the ballpark with the other racing leagues.

But NASCAR has crept along, all these years, afraid to put some real action into a system originally developed largely to pressure teams to show up at tracks they otherwise wouldn't go to.

Four times in its history, NASCAR has narrowly avoided the embarrassment of a winless champion.

The first two times a one-race winner won the title -- Bill Rexford in 1950 and Ned Jarrett in '61 -- NASCAR wasn't on the national map enough for it to matter much.

The third one-win champion, Benny Parsons in 1973, was a feel-good underdog story. Parsons was so well-liked that after he crashed in the final race of the season, at Rockingham, N.C., crewmen from most of the other teams came to his aid in the garage area. They helped him patch together enough of a car to go back out and secure the title.

But after Matt Kenseth won the title with one win in 2003, the Chase system was implemented for the very next year.

With the need for rewarding winning more, and the need to put the Chasers in their own points system, separate from the others, during the playoffs … and with the fun we'd have all through offseason … well …

Here's hoping NASCAR doesn't dodge the bullet of a winless champion a fifth time.

Article here.
 
Here's an idea I've been kicking around for awhile, it is a little radical, but kind of cool. Instead of the Chase guys running with the rest of the field, lets have them run a seperate race, 100 laps after the the other non chase guys. Maybe increase the number of Chasers to 14 or 16. They run their 100 lap feature, after the non chase guys run a race shortened by a 100 laps. Say it is Martinsville the non Chcase guys run 400 laps followed by a 100 lap "playoff" race. Points are kept seperate for non chasers and awarded accordingly. Having a 100 lap sprint race for the Chase guys would create a lot of drama. Just and Idea, that way it truly is a playoff type scenario, because they are seperated.
 
Back
Top Bottom