What would the old points system look like right now?

kkfan91 said:
The one that gave fractions of points and were awarded based on prize money
Click to expand...
It is kind of funny looking back at the history of NASCAR's various points systems. It took them 10 tries over the first 24 years of existence to come up with a system that became the norm. That system, implemented in 1975 carried on for 29 years without a single change. Then someone came up with the bright idea of the Chase System. History then began repeating itself. We are now on our 6th version of the points since the Chase/Playoffs were created.

The system that was in place for 29 years without a single change remained that way for a reason. It worked. They should have never fixed what was never broken.

If you'd like to look back at all of the versions of NASCAR's points systems, check out this link to jayski.....

http://www.jayski.com/news/pages/story/_/page/NASCAR-Points-System
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
It is kind of funny looking back at the history of NASCAR's various points systems. It took them 10 tries over the first 24 years of existence to come up with a system that became the norm. That system, implemented in 1975 carried on for 29 years without a single change. Then someone came up with the bright idea of the Chase System. History then began repeating itself. We are now on our 6th version of the points since the Chase/Playoffs were created.

The system that was in place for 29 years without a single change remained that way for a reason. It worked. They should have never fixed what was never broken.

If you'd like to look back at all of the versions of NASCAR's points systems, check out this link to jayski.....

http://www.jayski.com/news/pages/story/_/page/NASCAR-Points-System
Click to expand...

I didn't read the link. However it seems to me there was some minute changes during those years. I am referring to scoring points at the 1/2 way point etc. The points system stayed the same but little changes on how you could score a point. I could be wrong, just the impression
I have.
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
The system that was in place for 29 years without a single change remained that way for a reason. It worked. They should have never fixed what was never broken.
Click to expand...
It worked to keep the points race close by propping up the mid-field cruisers and under-rewarding the best teams and drivers that did most of the winning. It was never designed to insure that the best driver won the championship. It was designed to keep the points race alive until the end of the season. A points scale that is nearly linear from first place to last place will *always* under-reward the winners and prop up the mid field.

In my opinion, it is the most egregious gimmick in the history of Nascar. I have hated that points system since I first learned how it worked in the late 1970's. And it has resulted in the championship being awarded to the wrong guy multiple times over the years.

IMO, the reason so many people look back fondly at that Latford Points Scale is that it was there for so long, and most people have not compared objectives and outcomes versus truly progressive rewards systems that more accurately reward the accomplishment of winning races.
 
LewTheShoe said:
It worked to keep the points race close by propping up the mid-field cruisers and under-rewarding the best teams and drivers that did most of the winning. It was never designed to insure that the best driver won the championship. It was designed to keep the points race alive until the end of the season. A points scale that is nearly linear from first place to last place will *always* under-reward the winners and prop up the mid field.

In my opinion, it is the most egregious gimmick in the history of Nascar. I have hated that points system since I first learned how it worked in the late 1970's. And it has resulted in the championship being awarded to the wrong guy multiple times over the years.

IMO, the reason so many people look back fondly at that Latford Points Scale is that it was there for so long, and most people have not compared objectives and outcomes versus truly progressive rewards systems that more accurately reward the accomplishment of winning races.
Click to expand...
Traded it in for stages, fake debris and playoffs.
 
Team Penske said:
I didn't read the link. However it seems to me there was some minute changes during those years. I am referring to scoring points at the 1/2 way point etc. The points system stayed the same but little changes on how you could score a point. I could be wrong, just the impression
I have.
Click to expand...
They used to pay out money for the leader at half way but I don't remember them ever paying out points at anything other than the end of the race under that system. This includes the drivers that led laps and the driver that led the most laps.

LewTheShoe said:
It worked to keep the points race close by propping up the mid-field cruisers and under-rewarding the best teams and drivers that did most of the winning. It was never designed to insure that the best driver won the championship. It was designed to keep the points race alive until the end of the season. A points scale that is nearly linear from first place to last place will *always* under-reward the winners and prop up the mid field.

In my opinion, it is the most egregious gimmick in the history of Nascar. I have hated that points system since I first learned how it worked in the late 1970's. And it has resulted in the championship being awarded to the wrong guy multiple times over the years.

IMO, the reason so many people look back fondly at that Latford Points Scale is that it was there for so long, and most people have not compared objectives and outcomes versus truly progressive rewards systems that more accurately reward the accomplishment of winning races.
Click to expand...
We definitely look back on that system differently but that's okay.
 
LewTheShoe said:
It worked to keep the points race close by propping up the mid-field cruisers and under-rewarding the best teams and drivers that did most of the winning. It was never designed to insure that the best driver won the championship. It was designed to keep the points race alive until the end of the season. A points scale that is nearly linear from first place to last place will *always* under-reward the winners and prop up the mid field.

In my opinion, it is the most egregious gimmick in the history of Nascar. I have hated that points system since I first learned how it worked in the late 1970's. And it has resulted in the championship being awarded to the wrong guy multiple times over the years.

IMO, the reason so many people look back fondly at that Latford Points Scale is that it was there for so long, and most people have not compared objectives and outcomes versus truly progressive rewards systems that more accurately reward the accomplishment of winning races.
Click to expand...


People look upon it fondly because it WAS so much better than what came before it, and it DID work for rewarding the most consistent team over a WHOLE SEASON, not just catching fire for a short period of time. While I do agree that it did not properly reward winning, the current system puts FAR too much value in winning a single race. (See Kasey Kahne and Austin Dillon). The idea that somebody gets the right to compete for a championship for no other reason than a win fell into their lap one week is absurd and offensive to me. The Latford System was not perfect, but I would take it every day of the week and twice on race day compared to the farce we have now.
 
Formerjackman said:
While I do agree that it did not properly reward winning, the current system puts FAR too much value in winning a single race. (See Kasey Kahne and Austin Dillon). The idea that somebody gets the right to compete for a championship for no other reason than a win fell into their lap one week is absurd and offensive to me.
Click to expand...
For sure I would design the playoff system differently if I were the king of Nascar, but Kasey Kahne and Austin Dillon merely gained admission to the round of 16 with their single wins. And they brought little ammo with them. The teams who had sustained excellence during the regular season brought a lot more ammo (i.e. more playoff points). If Kasey Kahne won at Indy, and then added wins at Chicagoland, Charlotte, Martinsville, and Homestead... well, we would have a different opinion of his 2017 performance. But he didn't, so no harm, no foul.
 
LewTheShoe said:
It worked to keep the points race close by propping up the mid-field cruisers and under-rewarding the best teams and drivers that did most of the winning. It was never designed to insure that the best driver won the championship. It was designed to keep the points race alive until the end of the season. A points scale that is nearly linear from first place to last place will *always* under-reward the winners and prop up the mid field.

In my opinion, it is the most egregious gimmick in the history of Nascar. I have hated that points system since I first learned how it worked in the late 1970's. And it has resulted in the championship being awarded to the wrong guy multiple times over the years.

IMO, the reason so many people look back fondly at that Latford Points Scale is that it was there for so long, and most people have not compared objectives and outcomes versus truly progressive rewards systems that more accurately reward the accomplishment of winning races.
Click to expand...
I miss the Winston Cup points system that was used up to 2003, I never thought about it like how you are saying though which makes sense. I would like to see the playoff system dumped in favor of the full season Latford system with more points emphasis on winning races (25 point advantage over second for winning a race) leading laps (say 10 points for a lap led), 15 points for most laps led and 5 points for a pole. But..the Playoffs are here to stay, id be surprised over my life time if it went back to the way it was. NASCAR doesn’t really admit to mistakes.

dpkimmel2001 said:
It is kind of funny looking back at the history of NASCAR's various points systems. It took them 10 tries over the first 24 years of existence to come up with a system that became the norm. That system, implemented in 1975 carried on for 29 years without a single change. Then someone came up with the bright idea of the Chase System. History then began repeating itself. We are now on our 6th version of the points since the Chase/Playoffs were created.

The system that was in place for 29 years without a single change remained that way for a reason. It worked. They should have never fixed what was never broken.

If you'd like to look back at all of the versions of NASCAR's points systems, check out this link to jayski.....

http://www.jayski.com/news/pages/story/_/page/NASCAR-Points-System
Click to expand...
Yes I thought Jayski does this weekly I haven’t even checked in a long while, would be hard to see how Truex wasn’t in 1st though
 
Snappy D said:
Yes I thought Jayski does this weekly I haven’t even checked in a long while, would be hard to see how Truex wasn’t in 1st though
Click to expand...
Racing-reference.info still shows you after each week. I think the points are simply based on there not being a Chase/Playoff system involved. I looked back a couple weeks ago and saw that Truex had over a 100 point lead on 2nd place. Points the way the ought to be..... IMO
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
Racing-reference.info still shows you after each week. I think the points are simply based on there not being a Chase/Playoff system involved. I looked back a couple weeks ago and saw that Truex had over a 100 point lead on 2nd place. Points the way the ought to be..... IMO
Click to expand...
I can’t like this enough ha ha no stages no gimmicks. I’ll check out Racing reference though didn’t know they did that. Thanks
 
LewTheShoe said:
For sure I would design the playoff system differently if I were the king of Nascar, but Kasey Kahne and Austin Dillon merely gained admission to the round of 16 with their single wins. And they brought little ammo with them. The teams who had sustained excellence during the regular season brought a lot more ammo (i.e. more playoff points). If Kasey Kahne won at Indy, and then added wins at Chicagoland, Charlotte, Martinsville, and Homestead... well, we would have a different opinion of his 2017 performance. But he didn't, so no harm, no foul.
Click to expand...

Even five wins coupled with the putrid rest of the season Kahne has had is NOT a championship season in my opinion. Look what Newman was able to do by not even scoring a top five until the Chase started. It's not out of the question that Chase Elliott and or Jimmie Johnson could go to the final four. While I would personally like to see that, it would be a travesty to the teams that ran MUCH better all season. I long for great authentic championship battles like 1984 where Harry Gant had something like three wins and 15 straight top ten finishes and narrowly lost to Terry Labonte who had a win and 16 straight top ten finishes. Or, 1998, where Jeff Gordon's 13 wins was super impressive, but what was REALLY incredible was the 17 straight top FIVE finishes and 19 out of 20 to finish the season.
 
I didn't like the old points system because the championship was pretty much over by Labor Day; it was usually down to two maybe three drivers. I didn't like the Chase system because consistency didn't count and one bad race in the playoffs and you were done. I kinda like the current system because the drivers who do well during the season have a better chance of advancing. Playoffs are an artificial way to generate excitement, imagine other sports without a playoff system. Historically in NASCAR, the teams with the best funding (money = speed) tended to accumulate the most points.
 
Zerkfitting said:
Playoffs are an artificial way to generate excitement, imagine other sports without a playoff system.
Click to expand...
Exactly correct. In almost every sport, there is no sporting reason for any playoff, only commercial and marketing reasons. NBA, MLB, NHL... these could easily and legitimately crown a champion at the end of a regular season... every team plays against every team... and the one with most wins grabs the big trophy. (NFL with 32 teams needs two divisions... two division winners advance directly to the super bowl.)
 
LewTheShoe said:
Exactly correct. In almost every sport, there is no sporting reason for any playoff, only commercial and marketing reasons. NBA, MLB, NHL... these could easily and legitimately crown a champion at the end of a regular season... every team plays against every team... and the one with most wins grabs the big trophy. (NFL with 32 teams needs two divisions... two division winners advance directly to the super bowl.)
Click to expand...
At least NASCAR did fix the one glaring difference between their playoffs and the stick-and-ball playoffs....seeding. Unlike 2014-2016, the regular season actually meant something this year which was a huge improvement. NASCAR's playoffs this season aren't nearly the lottery they had been the last three years.
 
LewTheShoe said:
Exactly correct. In almost every sport, there is no sporting reason for any playoff, only commercial and marketing reasons. NBA, MLB, NHL... these could easily and legitimately crown a champion at the end of a regular season... every team plays against every team... and the one with most wins grabs the big trophy. (NFL with 32 teams needs two divisions... two division winners advance directly to the super bowl.)
Click to expand...
And those commercial and marketing reasons seem to work for all those other sport you mention. Interest peaks during the post season for those sports. Something that doesn't happen in NASCAR?
 
Racing is just different. Instead of always trying to be like other sports, NASCAR should do more to promote the fact that it IS different. Until they actually eliminate cars from competition completely (never going to happen) all NASCAR is doing is a half assed version of playoffs anyway. Auto racing just does not lend itself to choosing a champion the same way other sports do.
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
And those commercial and marketing reasons seem to work for all those other sport you mention. Interest peaks during the post season for those sports. Something that doesn't happen in NASCAR?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately these schemes and faux play off scenarios lead to structural prejudices both for and against certain drivers or teams. The whole playoff diatribe is more akin to the WWF than the NFL as there are definite lines placed in the sand for those destined for the playoffs and those outside of it.

How many times does an announcer make a comment about a non playoff driver racing a playoff driver that is negative to the non playoff driver. Wonder what would happen if some non playoff driver take out a play off driver...

oops...me bad...that has happened...major penalties for the non...nothing for the other though, even though they teamed up on the non.
 
If anybody other than Truex, Kyle Busch or Kyle Larson wins the title it is a joke simple as that. Kes, Elliott, and Johnson have all had good years, but the others have been slightly better no denying it.
 
Formerjackman said:
Even five wins coupled with the putrid rest of the season Kahne has had is NOT a championship season in my opinion. Look what Newman was able to do by not even scoring a top five until the Chase started. It's not out of the question that Chase Elliott and or Jimmie Johnson could go to the final four. While I would personally like to see that, it would be a travesty to the teams that ran MUCH better all season. I long for great authentic championship battles like 1984 where Harry Gant had something like three wins and 15 straight top ten finishes and narrowly lost to Terry Labonte who had a win and 16 straight top ten finishes. Or, 1998, where Jeff Gordon's 13 wins was super impressive, but what was REALLY incredible was the 17 straight top FIVE finishes and 19 out of 20 to finish the season.
Click to expand...
What was impressive to me that season was that Mark Martin hung with Jeff most of the year, that was a fun full season battle.
 
Snappy D said:
What was impressive to me that season was that Mark Martin hung with Jeff most of the year, that was a fun full season battle.
Click to expand...

Poor Mark. Just about ANY other year, that would have been a championship, but he ran into a buzzsaw with a 24 on the side. It sucks when you put up your very best and it coincides with someone putting up a better best.
 
Formerjackman said:
Poor Mark. Just about ANY other year, that would have been a championship, but he ran into a buzzsaw with a 24 on the side. It sucks when you put up your very best and it coincides with someone putting up a better best.
Click to expand...
I’ll tell ya that year it’d feel like the 24 would win 3 or 4 in a row, then Mark would rip off a win or two to stay with them but while Jeff was winning Mark was almost always top 5. One of my favorite seasons ever.
 
Formerjackman said:
Poor Mark. Just about ANY other year, that would have been a championship, but he ran into a buzzsaw with a 24 on the side. It sucks when you put up your very best and it coincides with someone putting up a better best.
Click to expand...
That’s what’s missing now, authentic full season points battles. In 1995 Jeff vs Dale Earnhardt was awesome, 1996 Jeff vs Texas Terry vs Dale Jarrett, 1997 Jeff vs DJ vs Mark and I’m sure I’m forgetting others but IMO that’s what’s missing every race from February on was it’s own unique playoff race.
 
Formerjackman said:
Poor Mark. Just about ANY other year, that would have been a championship, but he ran into a buzzsaw with a 24 on the side. It sucks when you put up your very best and it coincides with someone putting up a better best.
Click to expand...
That's why I was always a Mark Martin fan........ he hung in like a hair in a biscuit from the time he joined Roush till he quit driving... 5 second place finishes for the Cup..... he may have never won a Cup..... but..... 5 second places is nothing to be sneezed at..... and..... during all those years.... I never heard him complain or snivel about any of them.... he took the 46 point penalty on the nose in '90....... The only time I ever heard him question anything was the '07 Daytona race..... all he said was... ''With all the wrecking.... I thought they would throw the caution''.......
 
Snappy D said:
That’s what’s missing now, authentic full season points battles. In 1995 Jeff vs Dale Earnhardt was awesome, 1996 Jeff vs Texas Terry vs Dale Jarrett, 1997 Jeff vs DJ vs Mark and I’m sure I’m forgetting others but IMO that’s what’s missing every race from February on was it’s own unique playoff race.
Click to expand...
You are correct in every way..........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom