The Gp Points System

[manchesterpaul]

To be technical perfect you'd also need to come-up with a formula that over the course of the season ensured every rider had each gate the same number of times, as well as different combinations of heat line-up. It wouldn't necessarily be any fairer in reality though, as the best gates would vary from GP to GP, whilst injuries and replacement riders add in an additional factor.

 

Well the Football League had promotion and relegation playoffs in the late 19th century, before baseball got around to it. Even then, they only employed a solitary 'playoff' series between rival leagues to decide the best team.

 

So it's hardly American thinking..

 

Gee Humphrey i thought someone would take it further lol. I obviously mean to a 'reasonable' sporting extent. I'm surprised you didn't quote atmospheric conditions

 

Each rider meeting each other once is infintely better than employing a system such as in the UK Elite League where teams (competitors) don't meet each other an equal number of times. That's what i mean by it's as perfect as can be. One would imagine gate positions good and bad even themselves out over the course of a series.

 

I also thought someone would quote a sport using play-offs from yonks ago lol. However, i'm referencing them in the modern era of television sport. Surely you accept how football, speedway and many other sports have adopted them in relatively recent times. Possibly because of exposure to to the plethora of American sports on our tv screens these days. A lot of the UK sporting public became aware of play-offs when the NFL was introduced to UK tv and was very popular.

[Humphrey Appleby]

Each rider meeting each other once is infintely better than employing a system such as in the UK Elite League where teams (competitors) don't meet each other an equal number of times.

 

The 20-heat individual format is about the fairest you can get, but the league format isn't necessarily designed to be fair. 7 riders allows heats to be programmed so that riders don't need to take two on the trot, and in most cases they have at least two heats in-between (which was/is an important consideration for extra T/S and R/R). 8 would be better as it would allow for better balanced heats, but presumably it would also mean paying the travel expenses of an extra rider.

 

The original 13-heat format and its latter day derivatives is designed so that riders in equivalent categories (e.g. heat leaders, second-strings, reserves) generally ride against each other more often. Although quirky in places, it is quite cleverly formulated and unlike most things in speedway, has largely stood the test of time.

 

Possibly because of exposure to to the plethora of American sports on our tv screens these days. A lot of the UK sporting public became aware of play-offs when the NFL was introduced to UK tv and was very popular.

 

I don't doubt it, although playoffs are not as alien to British sport as people popularly imagine. For example, Rugby League employed playoffs in various forms from 1909 until 1973, and Minor Counties cricket had championship playoffs long before the NFL was screened in the UK.

[Eglese 19]

Incidentally, when you say "For me I would liven up the GP finals by making the winner the highest scorer" you surely don't mean to have a final heat and the winner of that gets the most points awarded? Or do you mean the highest over 20 heats is the highest scorer?

 

Well in my original suggestion I awarded them 5 points for the series on top of all other points so there would still be a possibility they wouldn't top score. However, for me, the point of a final is severely watered down currently in my opinion, so I would say yes currently I'd rather see the winner top scorer than the "extra heat" that the final is now. I know you disagree as do a lot of people and that's fine, I know my the point I'm making and it's a matter of opinion, I'm not wrong and neither are you, it seems the majority like it how is so that's fair enough.

[oldace]

Well, it seems to me from the newcomers I've tried to introduce to the sport that the idea of 5th place top scoring is embarrassing. I just don't see the point of semis and a final if we're just after the rider who is best throughout the year. A GP series has several GPs (the series is not a GP) and in most sports GP winners are rewarded the most from each GP.

 

For me I would liven up the GP finals by making the winner the highest scorer or would drop the semis and the finals.

 

Ah that one again is it. I take it these newbies loved the sport until this came up and have now vowed never to go again, like with guests, tactical rides or whatever argument the poster is trying to sell.

 

Over the years I have introduced many people to the sport who have either liked it or otherwise but their enjoyment, or lack of was purely to do with what they saw on track and wasn;t in anyway connected to any rules or regs.

 

Jeez just imagine having to explain an old world final. 81 for instance. Penhall is world champion and Carter isn't but Carter beat Penhall. Bet they would find it embarrassing and vow to never come again. Maybe they would go off and support Championship football were the team finishing 6th can be promoted at the expense of the team in 3rd

[Grand Central]

I now understand that 'problem' that is percieved by one or two here is just the simple straightforward fact that under the current system the winner of the final - and thus the GP - may not have the most points from the night to carry forward into the series.

They are vexed by it and feel it fundamentally wrong.

They find it embarrasing or a joke.

I am entirely comfortable with it.

 

I think we are all aware that the night ending with semi-finals and finals is to create a dramatic climax for all spectators via TV or at the venue.

And they do that brilliantly.

 

I am more surprised by people trying to advance the argument that the GPs they've taken people to haven't had exciting enough climaxes.

And that a few more points thrown at the last race would make all the difference.

That's just bizarre.

 

 

.

Edited August 12, 2013 by Grand Central

[manchesterpaul]

I know you disagree as do a lot of people and that's fine, I know my the point I'm making and it's a matter of opinion, I'm not wrong and neither are you, it seems the majority like it how is so that's fair enough.

 

It's very welcome and excellent to have a contributor who can calmly put forward their opinion or counter-argument without having to attack posters or ridicule their views.

 

I've not been particularly aware of seeing your name before, then again on the whole i do tend to read the post and not look to see who's posted. But if i see a good post and well constructed i might glance to see who wrote it.

 

The 20-heat individual format is about the fairest you can get, but the league format isn't necessarily designed to be fair. 7 riders allows heats to be programmed so that riders don't need to take two on the trot, and in most cases they have at least two heats in-between (which was/is an important consideration for extra T/S and R/R). 8 would be better as it would allow for better balanced heats, but presumably it would also mean paying the travel expenses of an extra rider.

 

The original 13-heat format and its latter day derivatives is designed so that riders in equivalent categories (e.g. heat leaders, second-strings, reserves) generally ride against each other more often. Although quirky in places, it is quite cleverly formulated and unlike most things in speedway, has largely stood the test of time.

 

 

Sorry to 'muddle' the waters, i wasn't referring to the heat line-ups regarding the Elite League but rather the fact that each team doesn't meet each other equally and transposing that on to an individual meeting referring to riders rather than teams.. I was going to add a bracket to clarify that at the time.

[Guest David Telfer]

"The sport has always run races on a 3-2-1-0 basis which is a great example of something being simple, very easy to remember and wouldn't befuddle a potential newcomer to the sport".

 

I accept your argument in principle ManchesterPaul but why should a newcomer to speedway be befuddled to find out that the winner of a Grand Prix was awarded the most points? Is it not more likely that a newcomer would be confused as to why the winner got fewer points than the runner up?

[Guest David Telfer]

Perhaps we could all meet somewhere in the middle if the GP format was altered to 23 heats instead of 20 heats, two semis and a final. Then the top eight scorers after 20 heats had been run would go on to heats 21 and 22. The top scorers after heats 21 and 22 had been run, who may not necessarily be the first two in each race, would go forward to heat 23. The rider with the most points after heat 23 had been run would be declared the winner. Much like the old one off final but with 3 extra heats.

[Paragon]

The thing is that the qualifying heats are very much dependent on the draw. We saw Covati beat Emil in the heats which was down to the draw. Riders are much less likely to have a real go for 1 extra point where they might got an extra 5.

[bigcatdiary]

Fiddling for fiddling sake just seems a waste of time to me. Speedway is 3-2-1-0 points sport, leave it at that. Keep it simple. "How many points did he score in that race mate?" It'll always be "three" if he won it.

 

Have to say I agree, as it stands every point has to be earned and finishing first or second in the semi finals gives everyone the chance to gain more in the final.

And no more big gaps between riders in the overall totals, keeps the series alive for longer.

 

 

[Grand Central]

Perhaps we could all meet somewhere in the middle if the GP format was altered to 23 heats instead of 20 heats, two semis and a final. Then the top eight scorers after 20 heats had been run would go on to heats 21 and 22. The top scorers after heats 21 and 22 had been run, who may not necessarily be the first two in each race, would go forward to heat 23. The rider with the most points after heat 23 had been run would be declared the winner. Much like the old one off final but with 3 extra heats.

 

Sorry but I pressed the Like button for this by total accident!

I HATE this idea.

 

Is there a way of removing a 'like' from a post?

 

[Guest David Telfer]

The format I suggested of 23 heats was more than slightly tongue in cheek. Apologies if it confused any posters. At the end of the day all I am saying is that I personally prefer a scoring system where the winner gets the most points. I have no problem with anyone else who disagrees.

As a Forum newcomer I would also be grateful if anyone can please explain to me how to copy and paste a quote from another poster.