Points

E

eck1

I'm up there somewhere
OK, We hear all the time that UMP needs to change their point system. Lets get a list of ideas from everyone. Maybe Ump will see this and take some in consideration. But please, lets be realistic on the ideas.

To start, my idea is to leave the point system as is, except that only a certain percentage of a tracks wins can be from a certain driver. ex. lets say the percentage is 60%, if Highland ran 30 races (not including special races) a single driver could only win at most 18 races of the thirty. the rest of his points from that track must come from non-winning features, meaning taking 2nd or less on that track. I belive this motivates a driver that dominates a track to either move or lose.

I'm sure this needs some touching up but it is just a basic idea.
 
Doug had a great idea. Cars signed in for the night time 2 for the total amount of points available. Feature worth that total, deducting 2 points for each descending position.

20 cars signed in= 40 points for the win, 38 for 2nd, 36 for third.

That way the points are adjusted for the cars present.

I also agree with what was stated elsewhere, that UMP should be pill draw or qualifying at every track. Pick one, and make that uniform across UMP.


I think your proposal of only allowing so many outright victory points at a track is kinda unusual. Interesting, to say the least. But, seeing as how most drivers will not win the required 60% of features at one track before being penalized with scoring second place points, I think it could be a good way to score, and as you said, it would encourage a driver who is winning everything at one track to travel, in order to keep his title hopes alive.

And, even if he doesnt and wins it under your system, it is still quite a feat, since your feature win points get cut for 40% of the races you could possibly win, assuming you win every last feature for an entire season at one track. A possible drawback I see is that it could be kinda complicated for the average fan to understand, and I think fans want it simple enough for them to follow.
 
Neither idea as stated would not be better than the way it is now. Cutting down the number of nites that could count would help the normally and less well funded teams. Any weighted system should take quality into as much consideration as quantity, and I do not have a clue how to fairly asses weighted points per quality of cars. Like certain racers would count as 3 cars in the car count formula, others 2.5, some as 2 others 1.5 ect, or you could start it at .5 and some guys should only count as half a car in the weighted deal. I do agree that is not fair for a seventh place finish at a CoC race, with fourty something cars to give the same points as a last or next to last at someplace like MCS. I also do not think it is fair if you base it on car count for a guy racing against 15 good cars to get less points than a guy racing againt 3 good cars and 21 fair or week ones. Nobody makes much money from winning races or championships on a local level. The money comes from sponsors, car owners, and or buissinesses owned by racers, racers are going to go where their sponsors, owners, or families want them to. All you guys are going to successfully do if you ever get these ideas implemented is punish people for racing close to home or making thier sponsors happy.
 
t.nie said:
. A possible drawback I see is that it could be kinda complicated for the average fan to understand, and I think fans want it simple enough for them to follow.
Click to expand...

What THIS fan doesn't want is the bizzare Competition Performance Index decimal system that NAScrap uses. If I wanted to decipher the Dewey Decimal System, I'd go to the library.

I'd be happy if they just established a minimum average car count to maintain sanctioning--say something in the 14-16 range after throwing out the lowest 2 or 3 car counts of the season.
 
t.nie said:
20 cars signed in= 40 points for the win, 38 for 2nd, 36 for third.

That way the points are adjusted for the cars present.
Click to expand...

But where do u cap this at. Some special events may have 50 or 60+ cars show up.
 
Gentlemen, I am rarely ever for the status quo, but maybe in this case we should leave a good thing be. Just think doing away with the LM10 and LM30 may increase car counts everywere. If you take the sanctioning away from tracks that can't maintain a real good car count you may run them out of bussiness or cause them to drop Late Models all together, niether would be good for the sport. If they loose sanctioning those accused of cherry picking for points will leave if they really are points racers, thus hurting the track worse. I think we need less focus on points and points chasing, and more focus on racing for wins, fun, competing, sportsmanship, family involement, and comunity involvement in the sport. The focus shift would need alot of help from the press, announcers, and heavy posting fans, as those are the people who have driven the focus of the sport towards points racing, and away from pure racing. If this focus shift could start to occur everyone would stop getting so hyper of who races against who, and let us race for our families, sponsors, home town fans, and selves. It would still be huge honor to be be a track or national champion, but it would not keep the constant talk about "chery picker", "who did he beat though" ect...Sory aobut the book, and if I offended anyone I'm sory, but I don't see how on this one.
 
1. I think ALL racetracks that are UMP sanctioned must be mandated to run the entire UMP points schedule from the day the points starts to the day the points end. This alone will help most drivers at I-55 Raceway, they have never completed a UMP season.

2. Late model and modified points should have the same exact format. I think modifieds have too many "cherry-picking" tracks to choose from. If you take 2 nights this will be eliminated; you may find 1 "cherry" track; but it will be more difficult to find 2.

3. If a show has 50 or more cars it should be 1.25 points; if a show has 75 or more cars it should be 1.5 points; if a show has 100 or more cars it should be double points. This will make drivers really consider going to bigger shows with more cars for more points and seperate the "men from the boys".

4. Have a start date and an ending date, that's it. No throwing out a finish, and count 1 finish prior to season and all that other stuff; just start & stop at a particular date and make it the same for late models and modifieds.
 
I wish Mrs4J would have posted before I did, that is some ideas that if implemented without modification would work well. I agree that 25 or 26 nites is not enough to count for a two nite a week season, I wonder if 52 nites is too much.
 
Ok, well, the oakshade argument just further solidifies my argument. If you manage to win a feature against 60 other competitors, you get a whopping great 120 points to add to your haul. An excellent well deserved reward for beating a huge field. Beat 10 local guys, you get 20 points. No cap. The whole point is to make beating bigger fields more rewarding.

Maybe UMP should have its own "race for the chase" and then a final run of ten events to crown the champ. If you want to run for the championship, all you do for the first 16 weeks is run for points, and that will qualify the top 10 for a 10 race shootout. Make the 10 race deal a travelling show, make them all race at each others home tracks once. So really, no one will know going in what the title race tracks will be, but everyone gets home advantage once. If more than one guy in the final top 10 counts the same venue as his home track, then the track gets more than one race. i.e. Faust, Martin and Zobrist all run Highland, provided all three declared Highland their home track before the season, then Highland gets to hold 3 of the 10 UMP Big Ten series for the title. And the only races that count for the title are these last ten. Make them run against all the locals at these tracks too. Just an idea.
 
what about this problem

You say a driver can only run so many races at his home track and recieve
top points. Great idea until the next year the driver goes to his sponsors and
says hay how about so money to run this year. The sponsor said yes I'lll give you some money but it will be less that last year because you took off and ran out of the area alot more than years before. I gave you money to run at the local track and maybe a little outside that but I only do business in this area and don't need you out running around somewhere else.
Sponsors for local drivers are for local tracks not tracks across the midwest.

Thanks for you time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.




Back
Top