Re: FAQ (Paxton Points)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Michael McGaha") wrote 


> While I, on the other hand, subscribe to the "I beat more people to the
> finish line this year so I win" theory :)

Let me repeat something here that was said earlier---it's a lot easier
to beat the guy who finished 12th than the guy who finished second.

Any which way you slice it, the objective for any race driver worth
his salt on each and every race day is to win the race.  When you can
win the championship with just one win in 36 races, the system needs
fixing.



> Even though Ryan Newman won 8 races there were only 6 times that he didn't
> win that he beat Matt to the finish line. there were 21 times that Matt
> didn't win but he still beat Ryan to the finish line. So in more than 3 out
> of 4 cases, when neither of them won the race, Matt beat Ryan to the finish
> line.

Sorry, I'm not impressed with that stat.  No matter what other stats
there may be, the scoreboard still reads Newman 8, Kenseth 1 in the
one stat that should matter the most.

Benny Parsons said something a while back to the effect that under the
current point system, the championship is lost on your bad days, not
won on your good ones.

He's right and IMHO, that's the wrong way to do it.



> 1. No winner points should be awarded for rained out races. the winner isn't
> really the winner of the race, he's just the guy that was leading the lap
> when it started raining and shouldn't gain winners points for pure luck.

Sorry, don't buy the pure luck thing here.  NASCAR has weather radar. 
Everyone knows that rain is coming and pretty much when it will get
there.  They all adjust their strategy accordingly.  A rain-shortened
race is a bummer for everyone, but the guy in front when it's called
didn't have a win handed to him by sheer random chance.



> 2. ditto winning under a caution. adjust the points accordingly. if they
> don't win under green, then they shouldn't gain as much as someone that DOES
> win under green.

Can you say green, white, checkers.




> 3: figure out a way to keep from penalizing people who are really taken out
> of the race through no fault of their own. like someone having a blowout
> right next to them and smashing into them. Give them their current average
> points. that way you can give them what they've proven they are usually
> finishing at

Think about it, do you REALLY want NA$CAr officials making those kind
of judgment calls?  Bad racing luck is just part of the game.

Again the solution is to have a point system that doesn't exact such a
devastating penalty for a bad day and that gives drivers a chance to
overcome their bad days with exceptionally good ones.  The current
system fails both of those criteria.




> 4: if someone takes another car out on purpose, give that guys points to the
> other car.

Nice theory, but way too subjective to put into practice.  Can you
imagine what would happen if a championship was lost this way?  That
could be a huge lawsuit.

If NA$CAr is smart, they'll leave this can of worms tightly shut.




> Don't you love it when I play devil's advocate?

Actually, yeah.



> Oh. and if anyone is interested, Matt Kenseth beat 1143 cars to the finish
> line this year. Ryan Newman beat 1011 cars to the finish line.

And Newman beat the guy who finished second eight times.  Kenseth beat
the guy who finished second once.




> PS: I don't want anyone to think that I don't like and respect Bob for what
> he's done. I do. We just believe different traits are more important in
> deciding who is best,

Which is precisely why NO point system will ever be universally
accepted as getting it exactly right, but it is fun to hear all the
different theories.