Grand Prix changes

[RPNY]

10 minutes ago, mj82 said:

25 points for a gp win and everyone else keeps the the points they actually scored in the gp. To me this would of been better. 

Thats not a bad ideal at all

[DC2]

18 minutes ago, mj82 said:

25 points for a gp win and everyone else keeps the the points they actually scored in the gp. To me this would of been better. 

 

21 rather than 25 for me, so the rider that got lucky in the final, scoring 8 + 2 + 3 (13) gets just one more point that the runner up who was  on fire but missed the gate in the final,  scoring 15 + 3 + 2 (20).

[Grand Central]

2 hours ago, RPNY said:

The points changing doesn't really bother me. It's pretty much the same as 1996 and that went down to the last race of the entire series. The qualification is a little worrying. If anything should be 5 from GP Challenge and 3 wildcards. 

But again I definitely think track/stadia is the bigger issue.

Actually you're not quite right about the 1996 series.

Back in 1996 the points were awarded 25-20-18-16 .... whilst we get 20-18-16-14 in 2020.
In 1996 we did not have semi finals and finals; instead we had A B C and D finals.

It is true that at the year end just two points separated Hamill and Nielsen at the top. And if you use the 2020 scoring it is also the case that Hamill would beat Nielsen by just two points.
A close series either way.

But ... Interestingly if one looks back to the scoring in 1996 over the six rounds Billy Hamill and Hans Nielsen actually tied on 65 race points each on their heats 1-20 scoring.
And they both scored 9 points in the A finals they reached.
TIED if the 2019 system was used back then.
You cant get closer than that

On countback Hamill reached 5 A finals and Nielsen just 4 so positions unchanged.

Speedway at its best is about 3-2-1-0.
Dont mess with it.

Edited November 5, 2019 by Grand Central

[RPNY]

Impressive knowledge my friend! However if the scoring system was different then so would the dynamics of the situation and the mindset of the riders. So we dont know exactly how it would have finished up. For example Billy sat and got a third in his last race as he'd already qualified for the final. He was unbeaten other than that and I'm sure he could and would have one that race had every point counted. 

Mighty impressive research you did there do and quite interesting to see.

Edited November 5, 2019 by RPNY

[Grand Central]

3 minutes ago, RPNY said:

Impressive knowledge my friend! However if the scoring system was different then the dynamics and mindset of the riders. So we dont know how it would have finished up. For example Billy sat and got a third in his last race as he'd already qualified for the final. He was unbeaten other than that and Im sure he could and would have one that race had every point counted. 

Mighty impressive research you did there do and quite interesting to see.

Cheers.

You are absolutely spot on about how the dynamics might change.
As far as I can see you have just made a great argument AGAINST changing to this new system.

In general the race point system makes EVERY point in EVERY race of vital importance ... making for a better race meeting throughout.
Anything that takes that away even just a little - just like you say may have been in Billy's mind - is generally a very bad thing.
For the spectator.

[RPNY]

I hear you. Id say the only counter argument is that the last race becomes more important ans that is essentially what the organizers want.
Current scoring system with the winner getting 25 seems like the perfect medium to me (I'll admit I didn't think about that till I read it on here earlier. )

[Grand Central]

9 minutes ago, RPNY said:

I hear you. Id say the only counter argument is that the last race becomes more important ans that is essentially what the organizers want.
Current scoring system with the winner getting 25 seems like the perfect medium to me (I'll admit I didn't think about that till I read it on here earlier. )

I hear you too.
But as it is they have NOT made it a five point difference between first and second in the final which could really impact on outcomes; it is just 2 points.

And then again ... Have any of us ever thought that the prestige etc of winning a GP has been lacking so much that it requires a rejigging of points to increase the incentive ?

Leaving well alone seems just perfect to me.

Edited November 5, 2019 by Grand Central

[RPNY]

39 minutes ago, Grand Central said:

I hear you too.
But as it is they have NOT made it a five point difference between first and second in the final which could really impact on outcomes; it is just 2 points.

And then again ... Have any of us ever thought that the prestige etc of winning a GP has been lacking so much that it requires a rejigging of points to increase the incentive ?

Leaving well alone seems just perfect to me.

It was a good system for sure. I would like to see the man with the most points win the even thats all.

A guy Winning it with 13 points and a guy coming second on 20 seems as silly to me as someone scraping in the semi's and then getting 25. But thats just my opinion, I fully expect people to disagree!

[IainB]

How about the winner of the GP is awarded (or deducted?) enough points by winning the race to place them 1 point above the 2nd placed rider in the meeting...

I can't work out whether I'm joking or not 

[Grand Central]

18 minutes ago, iainb said:

How about the winner of the GP is awarded (or deducted?) enough points by winning the race to place them 1 point above the 2nd placed rider in the meeting...

I can't work out whether I'm joking or not 

Please don't have such musings in public.

The more ridiculous the idea ... The more likely that Armando will implement it.

[arnieg]

All sports have peculiarities when viewed from a distance.

 

Consider the following scenarios in a football match:

1  Player 1 sent off after one minute. His team are penalised by playing a man down for 89 mins.

2  Player 2 sent off in 89th minute. His team are penalised by playing a man down for 1 minute.

3  Review panel retrospectively rescind red card of player 1.

Player 1's team receive a penalty 89 times that of player 2 for the same offence and still receive that penalty in scenario 3 even though no offence has been committed.

The quirk of GP scores is not worth getting hung up about.

[Grand Central]

12 minutes ago, arnieg said:

All sports have peculiarities when viewed from a distance.

 

Consider the following scenarios in a football match:

1  Player 1 sent off after one minute. His team are penalised by playing a man down for 89 mins.

2  Player 2 sent off in 89th minute. His team are penalised by playing a man down for 1 minute.

3  Review panel retrospectively rescind red card of player 1.

Player 1's team receive a penalty 89 times that of player 2 for the same offence and still receive that penalty in scenario 3 even though no offence has been committed.

The quirk of GP scores is not worth getting hung up about.

Except .... I don't give a stuff about anything to do with football at all.

Whereas I have followed Speedway for 50 years,  travelled Europe and spent probably thousands of pounds watching (every) SGPs in person or on TV.

So forgive me for finding it important, even if you do not.

Edited November 6, 2019 by Grand Central

[Humphrey Appleby]

You could compromise by splitting the GP points between the qualifying heats and the knockout part.

Maximum 15 points for qualifying, then award 15-10-5-0 for the Final which would pretty much ensure the winner got the most points except in some strange circumstances.

[arnieg]

1 hour ago, Grand Central said:

Except .... I don't give a stuff about anything to do with football at all.

Whereas I have followed Speedway for 50 years,  travelled Europe and spent probably thousands of pounds watching (every) SGPs in person or on TV.

So forgive me for finding it important, even if you do not.

 I don't give a stuff about anything to do with football either

Whereas I have followed Speedway for 50 years,  travelled Europe and spent probably thousands of pounds watching (every) SGPs in person or on TV.

So forgive me for having a different opinion.

[TheReturn]

As anybody official actually come out and justified the reasons behind these changes?

[TheReturn]

They should offer an additional championship point for any rider that scores a maximum in the qualifying heats (to ensure some credibility to those final few races).

[Barrow Boy 2]

Based on giving the following:-

25 points for winning a final-20 points for coming 2nd-18 points for 3rd-16 points for 4th-14 points to each semi Final 3rds-12 points to each SF 4ths & all other riders keeping the points scored. The result of the 2019 series would have been :-

01-Madsen-179

02-Zmarzlik-175

03-Sayfutdinov-148

04-Lindgren-137

05-Vaculik-122

06-Janowski-107

07-Zagar-102

08-Dudek-99

09-Doyle-96

10-Iversen-93

11-Lindback-84

12-Laguta-80

13-Woffinden-73

14-Kolodziej-68

15-Lambert-48

 

[mothorsen]

On 11/5/2019 at 7:07 PM, Grand Central said:

 

Speedway at its best is about 3-2-1-0.
Dont mess with it.

Couldn't agree more.

[False dawn]

On 11/6/2019 at 1:30 PM, TheReturn said:

They should offer an additional championship point for any rider that scores a maximum in the qualifying heats (to ensure some credibility to those final few races).

How about 3 bonus points for winning a race, 2 for second and 1 for third?

[ytsejam]

On 11/5/2019 at 3:44 PM, mj82 said:

25 points for a gp win and everyone else keeps the the points they actually scored in the gp. To me this would of been better. 

Best post in the whole thread!! Castagna and his gang would then have an overall winner of the GP who gets the most points and all the other riders would get a fair return from their 5/6 races of the meeting and ensure that if you've just been unlucky with an E/F for example in the semi after winning all 5 of your heats, then you would still be fairly rewarded for your nights efforts. 

Far too simple an idea for those simpletons in charge of the sport!