Grand Central 2,654 Posted August 6, 2013 (edited) The guy that finishes fourth in the final still gets his two or three points he earned in the semi final. So he is being rewarded already. Why complicate matters by gifting another extra point for just finishing last in the final? Lets stick to 3-2-1-0. It just works. Sorry, great minds think alike BW. I was tapping away whilst you were posting the same point. Edited August 6, 2013 by Grand Central Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thatjim 8 Posted August 6, 2013 Personally I think they pretty much got it right to begin with, tweaked slightly for next season to reward the winner more. Should have left it at that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dave_minall 232 Posted August 6, 2013 Yeah I understand your points now and you're right, I withdraw the previous statement. How about 4, 2, 1 in the final perhaps? 1 extra point isn't' much but in the grand scheme of things could be a lot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SCB 0 Posted August 6, 2013 Lets be totally honest, extra point for the semis, extra point for the final, double points for the final. 5 points for the semis, 5 more for the final. It's all irrelevant. The top guys will still be the top guys, the bottom guys will still be the bottom guys. It might change the way some riders think and behave a little but the best 3 riders are still going to be the top 3 in the series. 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. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grand Central 2,654 Posted August 6, 2013 Lets be totally honest, extra point for the semis, extra point for the final, double points for the final. 5 points for the semis, 5 more for the final. It's all irrelevant. The top guys will still be the top guys, the bottom guys will still be the bottom guys. It might change the way some riders think and behave a little but the best 3 riders are still going to be the top 3 in the series. 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. Absolutely agree. In fact I always disliked the 4-3-2-0 option that gets used for pairs events. I just don't figure that finishing second and third in a race makes you the 'better' pair. It just means that in that race neither of you was good enough to win the race but at least you didn't come last. It's like getting a bonus for mediocrity. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
manchesterpaul 447 Posted August 6, 2013 I certainly hope we stay with the 3-2-1-0 that since the inception of the sport has been the overriding scoring system....it is so simple and especially to newcomers. Changing it is like changing the value of a goal in football depending on the competition or stage of a match. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eglese 19 19 Posted August 6, 2013 Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting a change of the heat scoring system, I'm suggesting a change to the GP points that would be accumulated through the season which is like changing the points garnered for a win in football, which happened. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MagicOctopus 1 Posted August 9, 2013 I agree with Eglese 19 that it is weird when the guy winning the GP isn't the one getting the most points from it. Do they get any financial incentive, that is, is there a monetary reward for winning a GP? I think this is a nice example of what I consider differences in "European" thinking vs. "American" thinking. Europeans want to know who is the best. Americans want to know who is the winner. This is why all major American (non-motor) sports have playoffs. It does not matter how you do during the regular season - as long as you get to the "tournament", you have a chance to win it all. This results in lots of excitement and drama, but it can also sometimes mean that the best might not win. If you increase the significance of single heats (that is, the semis or the finals), in some extremely dramatic cases this might result in the best racer not getting the most points from the GP. Personall, I would like a system where the winner of the GP to get the most points. I agree that the regular 3-2-1-0 system is simple to explain to new fans, but you still have to explain that "even though he won the GP the guy who came 5th got the most points, so really he won it", which is weird. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
barrow boy 119 Posted August 10, 2013 For a while now I've been getting quite irritated with the way GP's are scored, or rather the lack of a reward for reaching the semis, final or winning it. Personally, I don't like that the winner can be outscored by others in the meeting but given the nature of the GPs I accept that it's a possibility. It really did annoy me when Emil finished 5th earlier this year though and top scored. The way I see it winning the GP is not worth much at all right now, if you make the final then 2nd is just 1 point worse than 1st and if you've done better earlier in the meeting I feel the incentive just isn't there. What I would like to see maybe would be to keep the scoring for all heats as it is, no double points, but award a set amount of bonus points to riders who reach the semis, then the final and then the eventual winner. Maybe 5 points for reaching the semis, 10 for the final and 15 for winning it. Am I alone with this or does anyone else think that the current system isn't great? You don't have to agree with my suggestion obviously. The rider who wins the final should get 25 points. The rider who is 2nd in the final should get 20 points. The rider who is 3rd in the final should get 18 points. The rider who is 4th in the final should get 16 points. Both riders who are 3rd in the semi finals should get 14 points. Both riders who are 4th in the semi finals should get 12 points. All other riders should get the points they have scored. I would however allow any rider to keep his points if he has scored more than 12 points in qualifying for the semi finals. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
manchesterpaul 447 Posted August 10, 2013 (edited) The rider who wins the final should get 25 points. The rider who is 2nd in the final should get 20 points. The rider who is 3rd in the final should get 18 points. The rider who is 4th in the final should get 16 points. Both riders who are 3rd in the semi finals should get 14 points. Both riders who are 4th in the semi finals should get 12 points. All other riders should get the points they have scored. I would however allow any rider to keep his points if he has scored more than 12 points in qualifying for the semi finals. I think the idea is to keep it simple as in every point earned in every race is used. Even speedway fans would struggle to remember the above scoring, and tv newcomers wouldn't have a clue. No artificial changes to the sport's 3-2-1-0. Reward for reaching the semi-finals and final and not finishing last in either is extra points on a...yep...3-2-1-0 system. Edited August 10, 2013 by manchesterpaul Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grand Central 2,654 Posted August 10, 2013 The rider who wins the final should get 25 points. The rider who is 2nd in the final should get 20 points. The rider who is 3rd in the final should get 18 points. The rider who is 4th in the final should get 16 points. Both riders who are 3rd in the semi finals should get 14 points. Both riders who are 4th in the semi finals should get 12 points. All other riders should get the points they have scored. I would however allow any rider to keep his points if he has scored more than 12 points in qualifying for the semi finals. You have said what you feel each rider 'should' get. But not why. What is wrong with the current system that this method 'puts right'? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest David Telfer Posted August 10, 2013 Is there not something odd about a scoring system where a rider could theoretically win every GP round and still not be world champion? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grand Central 2,654 Posted August 11, 2013 (edited) Is there not something odd about a scoring system where a rider could theoretically win every GP round and still not be world champion? That is a hypothetical theory that is so unlikely to happen that it is pointless spending a moment of my life thinking about. None of the scoring systems that have been in place since the start of the GPs have even come close to producing such a bizarre thing. The nearest - but still different - anomaly is the Mark Loram win of 2000 where he did not win a GP but was champion by the end. None of the scoring systems put forward here can totally prevent a situation where year-long-consistancy can beat one-off wins by a variety of riders. Nor should it. . Edited August 11, 2013 by Grand Central Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paragon 8 Posted August 11, 2013 I think that the winner of the final should have the most points at the end. The system we have now is a joke, can you see the England winning the World cup in football because they scored more goals in the group stage. No other sport on the planet can have a competitor not even make the final and win the meeting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grand Central 2,654 Posted August 11, 2013 (edited) Well, I have put forward what I think. I just hope the FIM and BSI have the sense to keep things as they are. Edited August 11, 2013 by Grand Central 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
