Nizer

Picking this up from discussion that was taking Schattenbaum thread off-topic.

From Rennpoints rules:

VII. Championship Totals: The best 8 race points totals for each racer in all points scoring races for the year will count toward the National Championship. Ties for the first three positions will be broken by the highest total in the 9th race then 10th race etc.

VIII. Points Races: Not all races in a race weekend will have points available. The final scheduled sprint race will have points awarded. If an enduro is offered, it will have points awarded. If an enduro is not offered, the penultimate scheduled sprint race will have points awarded. There will be two points races per class. For Example: Suppose a race event has three groups of races (red, green, yellow), and each of those groups have two sprint races and then the racers are regrouped and there are two enduro races (purple and pink run groups). In this scenario, the final sprint races for red, green, and yellow are the points scoring sprint races and both of the enduros are points scoring races. For purposes of figuring out which races are points races, the final schedule approved by the Steward prior to the beginning of the event will be used.

Based on the above it appears the goal is to incentivise racers to attend more events annually and to stick around for Sunday races. I get the motivation but wonder if there aren't better ways to achieve the same goals.

For example, doubling the number of races that count towards championship totals while at the same time making all races at a given race weekend points races would achieve the same end goal but allow those than couldn't commit to a full 3+ day event to still earn points.

In terms of getting people to stick around for Sunday, sprint vs enduro participation rates suggest that swapping sat and sun schedules for at least some events could achieve a similar goal.

Finally, why aren't 60 or 90 minute enduros worth 2-3x the points of a 30 minute sprint? Whether we like to talk about it or not, we all know there's a hourly cost to running our cars. If it costs 2-3x more to run an enduro vs a sprint race then it seems the points should reflect that.

Der ABT

First question is how do we propose changes to the current points system...can we even do that?

I would be happy with all races for points....and doubling the total that count..
Understand that its hard to weight races when some events have 3 races and a 60min sprint and others have 2 races and 90 min sprint..... and still some others are just sprint races.
so there is no real easy anwser but you could do something like each race weekend has X number of points available...
example .say 100 points avail for the weekend......60 for the enduro and 40 for the sprints (aka if 2 sprints then 20 each, if 3 sprints then 13.333333 each....etc etc etc.. or some mix like that.


also agree that endoro's should be more....how much more is where its hard to say....its takes more skill to drive hard for an hour, have to pit etc .....also you get more DNFs which leads to my next point

a big thing for me is, if a person takes the green flag you should get a point for finishing in front of them even if they break, dnf, whatever.....you beat them you deserve the point...


I think it works ok now but i see some changes that could make it better......and obviously it will always be better for one venue or another.....sebring vs caroline for example the attendence will be VERY different

Astroman

For at least the last two years, I have submitted the following for discussion/consideration. Evidently the rules proposal process is not the proper venue for this. But I'm not sure what is.

1) All races should be points races. Make it the best 10 races (instead of 8) to still encourage 4 race weekend participation. Or alternatively, we should be able to take our best finish from either of the two (or three) Sprint races as our own Sprint points race result. This would maintain fairness for races like Lime Rock that only have 2 (instead of 3) total races. As it stands currently, the first Sprint is pointless (pun intended) except to get a lap to grid for the second race.

2) Enduro races should count for more points. They are longer, more difficult, and more expensive. This would encourage more people to race the Enduro, and also would be less of a penalty for those of us who like to co-drive.

3) The bonus points system, especially in the larger classes, is flawed. As you know, it is not unheard of to have 25-30 cars in E class. As the bonus point system now stands, the person who finishes 8th will get the same amount of points as the person who finishes 20th in a 30 car field. The system is only effective for classes with 18 or fewer cars. Somehow, there should be a cut-off for the people who are eligible for bonus points, or a more quickly depreciating amount of bonus points available.

Streak

I submitted the same comments as to the field size bonus as that is very geographically dependent.

I too agree that the current enduro co-driver points should be revised. I get that you could hire a pro to drive for 80 minutes then drive it home a winner so maybe a time minimum should be imposed on drivers of shared cars. Sharing a car can be a lot of fun but at a loss of serious points for those taking the championship seriously.

cec3

agree all races = points - makes no sense to have a race without points (i like jack's pointless pun)

enduros count double or triple

more importantly, how do we get changed enacted? i included the above suggestions in the comment period this year but nothing is on the email walt sent out

Sean F

Welcome to your club, now get out

Streak

Truth

captdownshift

First of all I apologize for the delay in response as I’ve been on the road a bit this week. As you have hopefully realized there’s a bit of compromise in points systems in most sanctioning bodies that don’t have a set field of 43 cars at an event. The compromise is to balance the results to not penalize competitors who run in large events, or those who’s schedule and location find them able to compete at smaller events. The weighting is done so in a manner to ensure that there is a balance of value in attending each event. Many different points models were used using results over a multi-year span to ensure consistency and fairness before implementing the current system.
For example, look at the SPB entry numbers at TWS this year. If all 3 sprint races were counted and the points scale extended further down based on the class size the single race weekend would effectively determine your season champion based on a single event in March making all other competitions effectively worthless. It wouldn’t be sporting or in the spirit of nature of Club Racing to have all the marbles ride on one event. Just as it wouldn’t be to allow someone to “buy a championship” by going to lightly contested events in their class and earning 10 points for a first place finish for essentially a parade with no other cars in class, the bonus points for finishing for someone else finishing 3rd in an 8 class field of finishers ensures that they earn the same amount of points as the 1st place finisher at an event without any other competitors in class.
Regarding endurance points weighting, there’s no argument that and Enduro requires more resources, focus and effort, both physical and financial. However weighting them even say 50% more than a sprint race would likely significantly cut down on dual entry cars, or effectively allow someone to “buy” a championship in some close points chases late in the year by hiring a hotshoe to pilot their car for 70 minutes of a 90 minute enduro before hopping in. It would also devalue the sprint races and enable someone to travel around to more of the schedule collecting results in the higher weighted enduros without a co-driver to influence the perception of their results via seemingly robust point totals. Enduros are a great opportunity to share your car with someone who is considering building or purchasing a car to race in the class, which ultimately can lead to new competition within a class. Or it can be a chance to get a family member behind the wheel in the car in a race. Taking away that element and making it all that matters results wise in a season championship pointwise would kill the spirit of competition.
I’m confident that everyone realizes that the more entries in a class nationwide at all events leading to the greatest level of competition and variables in a season points standing.

Astroman

Thanks for your reply, Captain. You seem to be speaking from a position of authority on the matter, so we appreciate you weighing in.

The PCA Championship points system is a good one. But I think it could definitely be better and still be fair.

Of course there is a difference between Lime Rock (2 races) and TWS (4 races). I agree it would be unfair to get twice the points from TWS that are available from LR. So why not consider my proposal: Two points races per weekend (no change). One Sprint and the Enduro (no change). EXCEPT allow your best result from the available sprints (1, 2 or 3) to count. That way each Sprint "counts."

I don't know about "extending the points scale further down." But I don't think it makes sense to have 8th place and 15th place get the SAME points in a 25 car field.

You mean cut down on dual-entry cars even more?

Co-driving enduros used to be my favorite part of PCA club racing. But there is no doubt that the points system has reduced the number of co-driving teams. I argue that making the Enduro worth more points would actually increase the number of co-drivers, not make it worse than it already is. As it is now, there is too much of a penalty for anyone contesting a Championship.

"Buying" a championship by co-driving with a Pro is pretty weak. And obvious. I doubt many people would be impressed with that.

IMO, the Enduro race should be the "main event" of the weekend. Currently, it's almost an afterthought on Sunday that too many drivers have no problem bailing on (even after paying for it). I think the only way to make the enduro race more prestigious (and therefore more popular) is to make it more valuable.

Nizer

Interesting comment by Graham Rahal on the new points format at last weekend's VIR IMSA race:

"The new format that IMSA ran this weekend was much better in my opinion. Instead of the configuration they ran at Kansas, they decided to make both races count for points in each and then take the average of points from both finishes.

This would’ve made the Kansas weekend a lot better for a few teams, and it puts value on the result of the first race."

Appears we're not the only ones that think all races should be points races….