Old points system GP results

[rikard5150]

1.  Bartosz Zmarzlik     120

2.  Fredrik Lindgren       103

3.  Maciej Janowski      101

4. Tai Woffinden              99

5. Artem Laguta              85

6. Leon Madsen              84

7. Emil Sayfutdinov        75

8. Jason Doyle                68

[waiheke1]

Nope. Pretty sure Tai and Freddie would have been tied for 2nd. Magic 4th

[IainB]

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	Total	Pts	+/-	%	Old Rank	New Rank	Rank Diff
Bartosz Zmarzlik	11	14	20	14	17	19	12	14	121	133	12	10%	1	1	0
Tai Woffinden	12	15	12	11	12	16	13	12	103	117	14	14%	2	2	0
Freddie Lindgren	10	11	14	17	9	15	11	16	103	117	14	14%	2	2	0
Maciej Janowski	17	19	8	9	6	10	16	17	102	107	5	5%	4	4	0
Leon Madsen	13	7	12	15	9	9	9	10	84	89	5	6%	6	5	1
Jason Doyle	5	3	12	16	13	12	9	9	79	87	8	10%	7	6	1
Artem Laguta	20	13	7	3	13	6	9	14	85	84	-1	-1%	5	7	-2
Emil Sayfutdinov	11	6	6	13	11	7	11	10	75	81	6	8%	9	8	1
Martin Vaculik	11	4	13	12	13	11	10	5	79	78	-1	-1%	7	9	-2
Max Fricke	2	8	4	8	8	7	16	4	57	64	7	12%	10	10	0
Matej Zagar	6	4	8	5	4	7	8	3	45	46	1	2%	11	11	0
Patryk Dudek	5	7	3	1	7	6	5	6	40	39	-1	-3%	12	12	0
Niels-Kristian Iversen	3	11	6	3	5	3	0	2	33	32	-1	-3%	13	13	0
Mikkel Michelsen	5	7	5	2	7	3	2	2	33	32	-1	-3%	13	13	0
Antonio Lindback	1	1	2	3	2	5	1	7	22	22	0	0%	15	15	0
Gleb Chugunov	6	8							14	16	2	14%	16	16	0
Jack Holder							6	7	13	12	-1	-8%	17	17	0
Anders Thomsen			4	6					10	10	0	0%	18	18	0
Vaclav Milik					0	2			2	1	-1	-50%	19	19	0

[IainB]

it all proved pretty academic in the end as Bartek finished 16 points clear of Tai where under the old system he would have finished 18 ahead. What it did add was real jeopardy in the final round making it more akin to a one off world final than a GP series. What it did show was that nobody really knew what was going on and who had to score what as the commentary team showed when trying to explain what would happen if Bartek didn't make the final, that it would depend who finished where in the semi-finals and then look back through the programme to see who had beaten who in which heat on count back, those of us watching on TV had the luxury of somebody trying to explain it to us... I bet if you were in the stadium you wouldn't have a clue who had actually won... fortunately Bartek made the final and won a well deserved 2nd title.

Edited October 4, 2020 by iainb

[racers and royals]

41 minutes ago, iainb said:

it all proved pretty academic in the end as Bartek finished 16 points clear of Tai where under the old system he would have finished 18 ahead. What it did add was real jeopardy in the final round making it more akin to a one off world final than a GP series. What it did show was that nobody really knew what was going on and who had to score what as the commentary team showed when trying to explain what would happen if Bartek didn't make the final, that it would depend who finished where in the semi-finals and then look back through the programme to see who had beaten who in which heat on count back, those of us watching on TV had the luxury of somebody trying to explain it to us... I bet if you were in the stadium you wouldn't have a clue who had actually won... fortunately Bartek made the final and won a well deserved 2nd title.

It’s hardly rocket science- i had the lowest 8 scorers GP points within a minute of heat 20 finishing and then in another 2 minutes had the top 8 sorted into which semi and which gate order pick. How ? I fill in a programme correctly as i have been doing for 52 years !!

[IainB]

2 minutes ago, racers and royals said:

It’s hardly rocket science- i had the lowest 8 scorers GP points within a minute of heat 20 finishing and then in another 2 minutes had the top 8 sorted into which semi and which gate order pick. How ? I fill in a programme correctly as i have been doing for 52 years !!

That's great for you and the mental work out is obviously part of watching the event for you... it's not for everybody though. I and many others don't sit at home watching it on TV filling a programme in, I don't even have a programme when I attend live so I rely on what the commentator or announcer is saying (or Speedway Updates when I'm at a track). Put yourself in the position of a floating watcher and imagine how it appears to them.

[Grachan]

I was ok with the scoring system in the early rounds, then started to have doubts about it, but thought it worked ok again last night.

The fact that Bartosz was having a slightly below par night in the heats made it a bit of a cliffhanger as to whether or not he would reach the final so it kept Tai and Freddie in the hunt. Then he proved himself in the money heats.

Amazing that Freddie and Tai were level under both methods.

[False dawn]

I did my own ongoing analysis of the old vs new points system.

However, such a comparison is not entirely valid. It has been pointed out several times that riders, particularly towards the top of the scoreschart, could afford to drop the odd point along the way and would therefore maybe settle for a second place rather than push hard for a win. It has even been suggested that riders could try out different settings with little or no risk to their semi final qualification. So, if the points system had been the same as last year, would riders scores have been the same? The argument that riders will push hard to get the best gate pick only returns me to the argument that it should be possible to make the gates more even. I listened carefully to Tai's interview last night and the stats don't really support his argument. The "best" gate can change radically at the same track from one meeting to another and suggests that the track surface/preparation is more critical than track geometry.

To return to the points system, much of the debate, both on here and in commentry reinforces the idea that no one could predict with any certainty what the overall twists and turns of the scoring system might lead to last night. The top 6 qualification and the potential run offs for the top spots were hard to predict until quite late on. I know. I do fill in a programme and it's on my laptop and it not only keeps the ongoing scores up to date, it projects forward to the see what the likely meeting end scores will be. I sat in Torun last year with the same software on my tablet and I could tell with absolute certainty what each race score meant. I certainly didn't have to worry about whether a tape exclusion from a 3 rider race counted more than finishing 4th as we saw in an earlier round. A trivial example you might say, but the 6th qualifying spot did get quite tight. Imagine if it had come down to that at the end of the day? We really might have been debating the maths for some hours.

And why did we change the scoring system? Because some "unnamed" folks disliked the fact that the winner of the final might not score the most points on the night. A spurious objection in my view and hey, it only happened once in 8 rounds this year.

[lucifer sam]

Interesting that the new system stretched out the field, particularly the top three from the rest.

Last night, it meant the championship wasn't decided until the first semi-final instead of earlier in the meeting. But it could very easily go the other way. If you look at this year's European Championship, it went down to the last race. Had points been awarded on finishing positions, it would have been over as a contest after three rounds and Madsen would have won easily. 

I still prefer the old system. Had Bart finished on 8 rather than 9 points last night, then Woffy and Lindgren (both already qualified on 10 and 9 respectively) would have been looking at ways on how they could have eliminated Bart from the semis. Under a system where every point counts, that kind of manipulation was much harder. But we were one point away from it happening last night.

Edited October 4, 2020 by lucifer sam

[mikebv]

Still think four finals is the way forward..

Meaning going into the last round of races riders could jump, or drop, several positions given what final they end up in...

It would also reward the top four qualifiers on the night with the biggest points scoring final and not allow riders in eighth on the night to win..

I would also allow the top eight into the following year with the other seven having to race off in the GP challenge against nine riders from the the various qualification meetings..

The top six qualifying to the GP's to be joined by the SEC winner and the local wild card..

This will mean to earn the GP position you must beat those who currently have it and those that have it get the chance to defend their hard earned ranking..

No need then for conjecture or political appointments, each permanent rider on view will have earned their place..

[Terry]

1 hour ago, mikebv said:

Still think four finals is the way forward..

Meaning going into the last round of races riders could jump, or drop, several positions given what final they end up in...

It would also reward the top four qualifiers on the night with the biggest points scoring final and not allow riders in eighth on the night to win..

I would also allow the top eight into the following year with the other seven having to race off in the GP challenge against nine riders from the the various qualification meetings..

The top six qualifying to the GP's to be joined by the SEC winner and the local wild card..

This will mean to earn the GP position you must beat those who currently have it and those that have it get the chance to defend their hard earned ranking..

No need then for conjecture or political appointments, each permanent rider on view will have earned their place..

Yes the format they used from 95-97 was still the best with every rider battling for their place. Riders like Gary Havelock and Sam Ermolenko would definitely be handed picks today. For some riders now it almost seems harder not to qualify!

[Fromafar]

I do think 4 Finals fighting for every  Point throughout the meeting Is a good option,it was there for everybody to see the Top men knowing 8/9 points would be enough for semi’s meant some conservative riding and picking up some easy points after a lap or so.

[szkocjasid]

If Doyle had beaten Laguta in the second semi final, Lindgren would've been world number two! It's stupid that a race between two riders not involved in the podium (Doyle & Laguta) can decide who finishes higher between two riders on the podium (Woffinden & Lindgren)!

[Mark]

On 10/4/2020 at 10:12 AM, racers and royals said:

It’s hardly rocket science- i had the lowest 8 scorers GP points within a minute of heat 20 finishing and then in another 2 minutes had the top 8 sorted into which semi and which gate order pick. How ? I fill in a programme correctly as i have been doing for 52 years !!

52 years experience and the system still takes time to work through.  Plus you understand the system to begin with.  

Scoring should be instant as fans in the stadium must know what is happening.  Which must mean keeping it simple.  This system to new or irregular fans is not simple.

 

[Mark]

7 hours ago, szkocjasid said:

If Doyle had beaten Laguta in the second semi final, Lindgren would've been world number two! It's stupid that a race between two riders not involved in the podium (Doyle & Laguta) can decide who finishes higher between two riders on the podium (Woffinden & Lindgren)!

Exactly why the system is rubbish.   How would any fan know this when watching live.

[False dawn]

On 10/4/2020 at 2:45 PM, Fromafar said:

I do think 4 Finals fighting for every  Point throughout the meeting Is a good option,it was there for everybody to see the Top men knowing 8/9 points would be enough for semi’s meant some conservative riding and picking up some easy points after a lap or so.

I think I could sign up to a 4 final formula. Top 4 from the 20 heats to the A final, the next 4 to the B final and so on. Then award WC points as per this year's system.
This would satisfy both arguments. Every race would count in that riders couldn't relax too much as the odd point could make a difference of 4 places or more. And the winner of the A final would always get the most points.
Also, someone crawling into the latter stages couldn't still win the meeting.

I think there's some real mileage in this.

[Mark]

2 hours ago, False dawn said:

I think I could sign up to a 4 final formula. Top 4 from the 20 heats to the A final, the next 4 to the B final and so on. Then award WC points as per this year's system.
This would satisfy both arguments. Every race would count in that riders couldn't relax too much as the odd point could make a difference of 4 places or more. And the winner of the A final would always get the most points.
Also, someone crawling into the latter stages couldn't still win the meeting.

I think there's some real mileage in this.

4 finals would give TV and paying fans a scoring system that is easy to follow.  Every heat would be meaningful.    24 heats instead of 23.  

[mikebv]

1 hour ago, Mark said:

4 finals would give TV and paying fans a scoring system that is easy to follow.  Every heat would be meaningful.    24 heats instead of 23.  

A Final 25, 21, 18, 16

B Final 15, 13, 12, 11.

C Final  10, 8, 7, 6.

D Final 5, 3, 2, 1.

Those who have done the best on the night head to head against everyone else gets rewarded with the "big points"..

And there is an extra reward in every final for winning it..

And the overall GP winner gets a decent amount over second but hopefully not enough to have the series over by half way due to an unassailable lead if he wins a few..

And, which will please the FIM,  the GP winner is the one who crosses the line first in the final..

And the fifth race for everybody would be crucial to their final points scoring as the vast majority of the field would still not be sure of which Final they will race in, meaning a tense last four programmed races ideal for TV..

Then you can add four finals with the most evenly matched quartet of riders from qualifying up against one another...

[Bavarian]

We had this system with the D, C, B, and A finals during the 1990s SGP Series. It was also used for a long time in ice racing, but I did not like it.

Last year's points system was the best we ever had in the SGP! Every point counted. 

 

[chunky]

4 minutes ago, Bavarian said:

We had this system with the D, C, B, and A finals during the 1990s SGP Series. It was also used for a long time in ice racing, but I did not like it.

Last year's points system was the best we ever had in the SGP! Every point counted. 

 

Even though there were flaws with it - there will be with ANY system - I agree with you...