Who is the NASCAR GOAT?

gnomesayin said:
Interesting effort, though I'm definitely in the you can't reliably rank competitors from different eras against each other camp. Also:

1. Why is Richard Petty listed as having raced 70 seasons?

2. You used a formula but then arbitrarily made up a number of seasons for younger current drivers without making up a number of additional wins for them. This doesn't hold up even within the internal logic of your method. You may as well throw out all current drivers.

3. The way to assess greatness, if one is so inclined, is not to divide total accomplishments by the number of years it took to complete them. "Greatness" as it were is concentrated during the peak or prime of a career.

A driver (or competitor in another sport) wasn't less great during his peak because he held on for more unproductive seasons at the end, or more great because he called it quits earlier than others.
Click to expand...
Well yes, I'm aware of all these factors, which is why I said it isn't fool proof. Petty was 70 because I doubled the # of seasons of pre-modern era driver. Of course predicting seasons for younger drivers is arbitrary, it was the only way to keep it consistent.

I could have also left them completely out of it as well. I typed this up in 20 minutes, had some fun with it. I appreciate the feedback :)

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
jaqua19 said:
boo hoo. it's just a little bit of fun

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Can’t have fun in here on an off week. It might be more exciting to debate a plane crash even though I’d bet a months salary most on this board haven’t flown a plane themselves.But they’re still experts because they watched a YouTube video
 
Snappy D said:
though I’d bet a months salary most on this board haven’t flown a plane themselves.
Click to expand...
I have. Flew these a lot when I was a kid. :D

images
 
Johali said:
I have. Flew these a lot when I was a kid. :D

images
Click to expand...
Snappy D said:
I did too wasn’t good at it. At all. Still had fun building them though
Click to expand...
Talk about a throwback. I am now reminded of these things' existences. I was obsessed with planes as a kid, so anything aviation-related I could get in my hands would more than likely end up being mine. Those flimsy planes were the **** back then, lol.
 
jaqua19 said:
So this thread inspired to do something a little fun.

I typed up an Excel spreadsheet and created a formula to calculate/rank the top 30 winners of all time - my unofficial GOAT ranking. The formula is by no means fool proof, but what it is, is..

The mean of career wins and championships, minus the number of seasons raced, + the number of championships.

(Mean of wins& titles)-(seasons raced)+titles. To factor in the pre-modern era, I doubled the # of seasons for those drivers. Petty's win number made his calculated score a HUGE outlier.. so for him, I decided to make his score the average of the top 4 driver scores + the standard deviation of them.

It was a bit tricky for Kyle Busch, Keselowski, and Logano, champions who aren't very close to being finished. The nature of the formula relies on an almost complete career..using their actual season #s would put them at the top, so I took a guess at how many seasons they would be racing, and it placed them in a more appropriate area. Kyle Busch would maybe be a bit higher, but I'm satisfied with it. As wins and titles cumulate, the formula would bump their ranking score. Active drivers wouldn't be accurate represented until they are finished, or we have an idea of when they will be.

Harvick ranks above Kyle using this formula due to the seasons, but Kyle will only need a few more wins to pass him, and will continue to move up the list.

Edit, didn't realize the 84 typo for Johnson, his score would be 31.25, making him #2. unless he wins again.



Here!

Feel free to make suggestions / add points for non statistical factors, llike talent, competition, woulda coulda, influence etc
b283fef8d8258b3dd73fd6c174c47f91.jpg
bc76721202746809887785d35c6b0f27.jpg


Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Overall, not too bad. You came up with the same top five that just about everyone else comes up with, so you may not be that far off. Now for the critique; You shorted Rex White a championship, and Edwards and Kenseth are too high on the list in my opinion. Great drivers both, but Herb Thomas, Buck Baker and Ned Jarrett HAVE to be ahead of them. Thomas and Jarrett got a LOT done in what were very short careers by today's standards. Buck was around a LOT longer, but all of his success came in a similar sized window. I think Rusty is too high and Lee Petty too low too. Lee had two more championships and only one less win in a career less than half as long.
 
Last edited:
LewTheShoe said:
You talk as if the prior championship format with the Latford points scale was intended to crown the best team and always achieved that... which is ridiculous. The old format was intended to keep the championship close until the end. It systematically under-rewarded the most prolific winners/front runners and propped up the midfield cruisers. The "wrong" team was crowned multiple years under that system.

I don't support every detail of the current system, but I certainly don't miss the "cruise to collect" racing mentality that was incentivized by that Latford system.
Click to expand...

Throw in any points system you want that makes internal sense and see how different the championship becomes. It rarely changes unless the points race was super tight.
 
Privateer said:
Throw in any points system you want that makes internal sense and see how different the championship becomes. It rarely changes unless the points race was super tight.
Click to expand...

For those that don't like the Latford System, it was 1000 times better than most of the formats used before it. The only real flaw in the Latford System was that it didn't put quite enough emphasis on winning races. Now, we have exactly the opposite, and it is far WORSE in my opinion. The idea that winning ONE RACE is a guarantee of a playoff spot is totally absurd to me. Of course the idea that 16 teams qualify for the playoffs is even more absurd. Why the sports world insists on rewarding minor achievement is beyond me.
 
Here's the current points with the USAC late 1970s system (which divide by 10 and no points after 12th became the system CART used forever):

1st-200, 2nd-160, 3rd-140, 4th-120, 5th-100, 6th-80, 7th-60, 8th-50, 9th-40, 10th-30, 11th-20, 12th-10, 13th thru 16th-5, 17th thru 20th-4, 21st thru 24th-3, 25th thru 28th-2, 29th on back-1

200 for a win
triple digit score = top 5
double digit score = top 12

(To do a straight apples to apples comparison with the current points format, you'd have to remove from the current points everyone has all their stage points.)

1. Kyle Busch 2339
2. Denny Hamlin 2090
3. Martin Truex 1986
4. Joey Logano 1688
5. Brad Keselowski 1611
6. Kevin Harvick 1506
7. Erik Jones 1385
8. Chase Elliott 1296
9. Kurt Busch 1258
10. Kyle Larson 1066
11. Ryan Blaney 1065
12. Clint Bowyer 986
13. Alex Bowman 901
14. Daniel Suarez 695
15. Jimmie Johnson 675
16. William Byron 658
17. Aric Almirola 636
18. Matt DiBenedetto 571
19. Ryan Newman 557
20. Ryan Preece 297

I do like this system although 11th on back should have a more steady dropoff with larger fields. It rewards boom or bust versus steady 15ths (although that's the current NASCAR system in a nutshell, Austin Dillon does nothing all year, but hey it doesn't matter, in the playoffs because he won a crashfest at Daytona). This points system is not good for say a Ryan Newman type who has 12 top 12 finishes this year but it's mostly 8th to 12th place finishes. Contrast him to DiBenedetto who has only 5 top 12 finishes, but 3 of those are top 5's.

On the flipside, Justin Haley if he was paid points would be currently 27th in this on 202, ahead of full-timers McDowell, LaJoie, Tifft, Chastain, and Bubba. (Where different points systems do create major differences is with part-timers and guys that normally finish further back in the field, because the critical differences from one points system to another is if you get points for just starting, and if not, where does the payout of zero start at. There's also the multiplication factor. Under current NASCAR points, they say 1 35th place finish is the equivalent of 2 36th's.)

I'm doing the Lanford system in a spreadsheet, and I have 9 races left to convert. Like just about any other points system you can come up with, Kyle Busch is kicking ass.
 
Formerjackman said:
For those that don't like the Latford System, it was 1000 times better than most of the formats used before it. The only real flaw in the Latford System was that it didn't put quite enough emphasis on winning races. Now, we have exactly the opposite, and it is far WORSE in my opinion. The idea that winning ONE RACE is a guarantee of a playoff spot is totally absurd to me. Of course the idea that 16 teams qualify for the playoffs is even more absurd. Why the sports world insists on rewarding minor achievement is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Or the idea of how one race crowns a champion I’ll never understand that.
 
Breaking it down by era is probably best.. but the question is who is the greatest of ALL TIME.. so going era by era doesnt really give any reasonable answers to the actual question.

If you take the drivers in question (Petty Earnhardt Johnson Gordon Allison Yarborough etc) and compare there stats as a percentage compared to their starts you get a final set comparable numbers which would show who wins. I dont plan on actually doing that.. but I think it's the only real way to determine who is the GOAT... personal opinion should not be a factor.
 
The pre 2004 Latford system sucks. If you're more impressed by Kenseth's 1 win championship than dominant titles won in the chase era then idk what to tell you. Neither the chase nor the playoffs are perfect, but I'd take either over what was in place for 2003 and prior. Finishing 2nd but leading the most laps earning the same amount of points as winning a race is inexcusable. 2004 and later 2007 actually bumped up the reward for winning to something reasonable.
 
LJ7201 said:
The pre 2004 Latford system sucks. If you're more impressed by Kenseth's 1 win championship than dominant titles won in the chase era then idk what to tell you. Neither the chase nor the playoffs are perfect, but I'd take either over what was in place for 2003 and prior. Finishing 2nd but leading the most laps earning the same amount of points as winning a race is inexcusable. 2004 and later 2007 actually bumped up the reward for winning to something reasonable.
Click to expand...

The Latford System had ONE flaw. Everything we have had since then has MULTIPLE flaws. The Latford System could have been fixed over a long lunch break. Always remember my NASCAR Action Flow Chart. 1) Ignore an issue. 2) Deny there is an issue. 3) Acknowledge that some people think there is an issue, but take no action. 4) Hint that some kind of action MIGHT be coming. 5) Over-react in a HUGE way to the issue. 6) When the action doesn't get the desired results, double down on it with an even bigger over-reaction.
 
LJ7201 said:
The pre 2004 Latford system sucks. If you're more impressed by Kenseth's 1 win championship than dominant titles won in the chase era then idk what to tell you. Neither the chase nor the playoffs are perfect, but I'd take either over what was in place for 2003 and prior. Finishing 2nd but leading the most laps earning the same amount of points as winning a race is inexcusable. 2004 and later 2007 actually bumped up the reward for winning to something reasonable.
Click to expand...

Jeff Gordon had one finish in 1996 outside the top 7 that wasn't a DNF. People still call Terry Labonte the champion.
 
Formerjackman said:
Overall, not too bad. You came up with the same top five that just about everyone else comes up with, so you may not be that far off. Now for the critique; You shorted Rex White a championship, and Edwards and Kenseth are too high on the list in my opinion. Great drivers both, but Herb Thomas, Buck Baker and Ned Jarrett HAVE to be ahead of them. Thomas and Jarrett got a LOT done in what were very short careers by today's standards. Buck was around a LOT longer, but all of his success came in a similar sized window. I think Rusty is too high and Lee Petty too low too. Lee had two more championships and only one less win in a career less than half as long.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was waiting for someone to bring that up. I think this better reflects the top 15. Edwards doesn't belong here, neither does Logano yet imo.

And yeah, that top 5 was kind of the baseline I based the formula off of. As for the rest of the critique, I won't dispute any of that all.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
Formerjackman said:
I think most people, myself included, put Darrell solidly in the second five. Not too shabby in my book.
Click to expand...
I think that's where Kyle Busch will end up. DW, Kyle Busch and Cale Yarborough will be their own little club..the GOATS of the non GOATS

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
SlicedBread22 said:
Breaking it down by era is probably best.. but the question is who is the greatest of ALL TIME.. so going era by era doesnt really give any reasonable answers to the actual question.

If you take the drivers in question (Petty Earnhardt Johnson Gordon Allison Yarborough etc) and compare there stats as a percentage compared to their starts you get a final set comparable numbers which would show who wins. I dont plan on actually doing that.. but I think it's the only real way to determine who is the GOAT... personal opinion should not be a factor.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I did. See my earlier post.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
aunty dive said:
It's the culmination of a playoff system ... competitors are required to race their way into Homestead.
Interestingly, the rules are the same for everyone.
Click to expand...
Then why have the other 26 races? Shorten the schedule to 10, crown the champion after the winner take all race. I just don’t agree with Motorsports using a playoff system like stick and ballsports, it’s apples an oranges. I don’t want to derail this thread further my feelings on this have been made clear in the past, I just don’t agree with the way they Crown a champion. I know the rules are same for everyone but as a fan that doesn’t mean I have to agree or like it. IndyCar doesn’t use playoffs and somehow almost every year, their season comes down to the final race or two, and it’s very very exciting. Why is it so wrong to ask for something like that?
 
Snappy D said:
Then why have the other 26 races? Shorten the schedule to 10, crown the champion after the winner take all race. I just don’t agree with Motorsports using a playoff system like stick and ballsports, it’s apples an oranges. I don’t want to derail this thread further my feelings on this have been made clear in the past, I just don’t agree with the way they Crown a champion. I know the rules are same for everyone but as a fan that doesn’t mean I have to agree or like it. IndyCar doesn’t use playoffs and somehow almost every year, their season comes down to the final race or two, and it’s very very exciting. Why is it so wrong to ask for something like that?
Click to expand...
I suggested the regular season winner makes final 4.. second makes round of 8, 3rd, round of 12

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
jaqua19 said:
I suggested the regular season winner makes final 4.. second makes round of 8, 3rd, round of 12

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I just can’t get on board with one race crowning a champion, your way is a bit more fair in my estimation. If I have to go there...a true playoff is a competition between teams that had regular season success and those eliminated teams are no longer included in competition. So in my mind if I have to make the comparison to sports there should only be 16 cars competing on track for the championship. As the rounds move on more get eliminated until we end up with our final four, just 4 cars racing each other. Now I know this highly stupid and unrealistic but if the logic is used other sports do it this way then how come Nascar can’t? The Patriots beat the Rams in the Super Bowl...not the Rams, Saints and Bears in the same game.
 
LJ7201 said:
The pre 2004 Latford system sucks. If you're more impressed by Kenseth's 1 win championship than dominant titles won in the chase era then idk what to tell you. Neither the chase nor the playoffs are perfect, but I'd take either over what was in place for 2003 and prior. Finishing 2nd but leading the most laps earning the same amount of points as winning a race is inexcusable. 2004 and later 2007 actually bumped up the reward for winning to something reasonable.
Click to expand...

You are correct that the Latford points scale was way too flat and didn't properly emphasize winning or finishing in the top five, and instead overly rewarded mediocre consistency.

However, with stooge points it is now quite possible for a 10th-15th place finisher to outscore a race winner who comes back from a poor first half of the race. If 2nd + most laps led = 1st is inexcusable, I'm not sure how to convey how hair-brained that is.

It is fair to say there has never been a not significantly flawed championship system in place.
 
damn this thread was a mistake when I made it, it truely has descended down #$hit’s creek, lol damn we’ve had THIS Points discussion over and over I know that much at least
 
gnomesayin said:
You are correct that the Latford points scale was way too flat and didn't properly emphasize winning or finishing in the top five, and instead overly rewarded mediocre consistency.

However, with stooge points it is now quite possible for a 10th-15th place finisher to outscore a race winner who comes back from a poor first half of the race. If 2nd + most laps led = 1st is inexcusable, I'm not sure how to convey how hair-brained that is.

It is fair to say there has never been a not significantly flawed championship system in place.
Click to expand...
Stooge or stage points??? Rick Allen gets my vote for unlimited stooge points, he’s the regular season and playoff champion
 
Snappy D said:
Then why have the other 26 races? Shorten the schedule to 10, crown the champion after the winner take all race. I just don’t agree with Motorsports using a playoff system like stick and ballsports, it’s apples an oranges. I don’t want to derail this thread further my feelings on this have been made clear in the past, I just don’t agree with the way they Crown a champion. I know the rules are same for everyone but as a fan that doesn’t mean I have to agree or like it. IndyCar doesn’t use playoffs and somehow almost every year, their season comes down to the final race or two, and it’s very very exciting. Why is it so wrong to ask for something like that?
Click to expand...
26 revenue opportunities for everyone who earns. Jobs and job opportunities among teams, tracks, manufacturers, vendors, journalists, shuttle drivers ... I could go on.

No-one said you had to like it, endorse it or agree with it and no-one said it’s wrong to wish for your own personalized version of how a champion in this sport should be crowned. The key word is wish.

It’s a business and its existence supports a large number of associated businesses. This is the manner in which those entities have chosen to operate.

Reality bites.
 
Snappy D said:
I just can’t get on board with one race crowning a champion, your way is a bit more fair in my estimation. If I have to go there...a true playoff is a competition between teams that had regular season success and those eliminated teams are no longer included in competition. So in my mind if I have to make the comparison to sports there should only be 16 cars competing on track for the championship. As the rounds move on more get eliminated until we end up with our final four, just 4 cars racing each other. Now I know this highly stupid and unrealistic but if the logic is used other sports do it this way then how come Nascar can’t? The Patriots beat the Rams in the Super Bowl...not the Rams, Saints and Bears in the same game.
Click to expand...
Tell it to the car owners, drivers, team members, suppliers and sponsors of the 20 cars that run a 26 race season rather than 36. Tell it to the track operators and the TV broadcasters.

Obviously, NASCAR racing is quite unlike any of the stick and ball sports. That’s reflected in the format used for playoff events.
 
aunty dive said:
Tell it to the car owners, drivers, team members, suppliers and sponsors of the 20 cars that run a 26 race season rather than 36. Tell it to the track operators and the TV broadcasters.

Obviously, NASCAR racing is quite unlike any of the stick and ball sports. That’s reflected in the format used for playoff events.
Click to expand...
aunty dive said:
26 revenue opportunities for everyone who earns. Jobs and job opportunities among teams, tracks, manufacturers, vendors, journalists, shuttle drivers ... I could go on.

No-one said you had to like it, endorse it or agree with it and no-one said it’s wrong to wish for your own personalized version of how a champion in this sport should be crowned. The key word is wish.

It’s a business and its existence supports a large number of associated businesses. This is the manner in which those entities have chosen to operate.

Reality bites.
Click to expand...
There were all the opportunities you mentioned above in the old points system. I’ve seen your posts on this before but never seen your preference do you yourself like the way the Champion is crowned?
 
Snappy D said:
There were all the opportunities you mentioned above in the old points system. I’ve seen your posts on this before but never seen your preference do you yourself like the way the Champion is crowned?
Click to expand...
I mentioned them because you’ve suggested they be taken away.

I’m a realist. When rules are changed, race teams study them and immediately start scheming about how best to make them work for themselves. I will guess that they complain about things they don’t like ... 2 days max. After that, get on with it.

I don’t mind this system. I didn’t mind previous points / championship systems. Run whatcha’ brung. In January, everybody is tied for the points lead. That hasn’t changed.
 
aunty dive said:
I mentioned them because you’ve suggested they be taken away.

I’m a realist. When rules are changed, race teams study them and immediately start scheming about how best to make them work for themselves. I will guess that they complain about things they don’t like ... 2 days max. After that, get on with it.

I don’t mind this system. I didn’t mind previous points / championship systems. Run whatcha’ brung. In January, everybody is tied for the points lead. That hasn’t changed.
Click to expand...
Well I realistically know all those things couldn’t be taken away I was highlight my point of the playoffs being a gimmick with hyperbole of only running 16 cars. That’s not realistic. I enjoy the simplicity of run what ya bring...the reality of which isn’t that simple
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom