participation or points, what matter more to you in a championship?

[StephenB]

Which do you prefer and why?

Currently the championships in the Northeast you must complete a certain number of events to be eligible. But at the same time you also get drops so that it isn't thought of as a participation championship. For example: "NERRC CLASS CHAMPIONSHIPS*are decided by total points accumulated in a class per the current scoring rules. *Drivers must entered at least 50% of the races to be eligible"

What are your thoughts and opinions?

I will be honest I can see it both ways. I want to go to the banquet with the people I raced with all year not just the person that showed up a couple times and did real well but at the same time that person probably deserves it... not sure how I feel about it.

Stephen

[team-gpracing]

How could you truly judge a driver's skill or a car's performance if they just show up 2 times and win. Maybe they drive really well in the rain, or maybe their car is only really fast at one track. I think you need the minimum competition rule to set the season winners apart from the race winners. Let the guy who shows up most brag about being champ, and let the guy with the best motor (or skills, setup, etc.) brag about winning races.

And just for the record, they should all come to the awards banquet for a beer.

[Matt93SE]

I agree on the participation thing.. It's one thing for a slower guy who tries harder and shows up all season with a mid-pack car vs. a local hotshoe in a retired World Challenge car that comes to 2 double-points races a season and walks away with the trophy..

[georgethefierce]

I agree on the participation thing.. It's one thing for a slower guy who tries harder and shows up all season with a mid-pack car vs. a local hotshoe in a retired World Challenge car that comes to 2 double-points races a season and walks away with the trophy..

which is better?

[ner88]

I guess it all depends on what one would consider a championship?
Often the winners is the guy with best attendance!
Not to long ago we also required and average car count per class.
We would have a guy attend every race, be the only one in his class and not win the championship. Why did he not deserve the championship?

[Andy Bettencourt]

championship. Why did he not deserve the championship?

Because every Region has to decide what they consider a Champion. If one guy goes to all races and never competes against anyone, he is not a 'Champion' IMHO.

I like the minimum participation. 50% of the races, or more commonly '1 more than half', is a way to drive participation and revenue of those with such goals but to also lend credibility to the Championship.

If you want to 'boost' credibility even more, you need to have a points structure that gives you credit for people raced against and then set up a minimum threshold to be eligible for the title.

[lateapex911]

I've always liked a points structure that rewards you for beating people. The more people that are in the class for that race, the more points you get for winning.

Then, the PTB can assign a minimum number of points to ensure reasonable participation levels, and also to make the winner actually be consistently better then his competition.

Show up a bunch and win a championship is lame,
And showing up but once or twice and winning ...does not a SERIES champion make.

[Drew M]

I liked how Pro-IT did the points when I ran it 2 years ago....even though I did finish out of the top 10.

[raffaelli]

I think points series are based on consistency and preparedness. I supoose that means that I agree with the minimum number requirement.

[Spa67]

At our level just making it to a bunch of races takes a lot of determination and effort.

One of the reasons people win or place high in championships is because the don't do stupid things that cause damage to their own car, or their own car and others. It's not like we have a back-up car waiting on the trailer.

The fewer drops allowed the better. That being said boy am I pissed our friends are getting married on labor day weekend. Don't tell the missus but if I'm in the hunt for a podium she might be going stag!

[RSTPerformance]

I don't think a amature racing champion is someone who can afford to attend every race either... There needs to be at least 1 weekend equivelant of dropped races (NER mostly runs doubles or triples so you need two or three dropped races).

I think the old NARRC series 5 or 6 + years ago had the best structure... A few drops, and bonus points for entering races as well as extra bonus points for running multiple tracks. That was a good enough "reward" for participation that made it so a champion most likely had to run at least 50% of the races. Also I am 100% in favor of a "double points" end of season championship, especially if is not on a holiday weekend!

Raymond "not sure I agree but its a valad argument that If someone races three times as much as someone else and still has less points, they are not a champion, they just entered more races" Blethen

[ner88]

Do drivers and I mean the majority, follow or chase traveling series or do they just pick the best events or tracks they want to compete on.
If I look at NARRC results it looks like very few are actually following the series compared to the overall number of entries.
Look at pro it, how many guys ran just half the races? Do we consider that a success?
Just askin!

[Greg Amy]

Do drivers and I mean the majority, follow or chase traveling series or do they just pick the best events or tracks they want to compete on?
I chased a couple series, but now for me racing is all about the individual events and venues. - GA

[steve b]

I completed every lap in the MARRS series except 1 this season (broken throttle linkage on the last lap of one race). I finished a distant second in two two-car races in Charlotte, and finished mid pack the majority of my other races. I did earn my first podium at a Summit Point race this season as well as a podium at VIR and Jersey, but they were all lowly attended races (by MARRS standards).

Aside from the 3rd place at Summit, the only other race I was proud of this year was finishing 9th out of 27 on Labor Day. (Hayes, any friend of mine who gets married on Labor Day weekend is no longer a friend...pick a fight with them to get uninvited)

While I am proud that I was one of only two cars that earned points in every MARRS sanction this season, I have mixed feelings about the fact that I earned second place for the season. I'll admit that I saw it as a possibilty about mid season and made it my goal at that point. However, the truth of the matter is that there was only a hand full of racers who actually attended enough races to be in consideration for the championship. The season champion was consistently above the rest of the field and had many wins and podium finishes...he clearly is and deserves to be the champion. However, if there was a driver who had more raw points than me but just didn't attend enough races to qualify for the award, I would not accept the award.

Winning by default is less than ideal, but being given the win because someone else didn't beat you often enough even though they beat you often enough to earn more points is just wrong. There should be no minimum entry requirement. (IMHO)

[Wreckerboy]

Similar to Steve, we competed in the MARRS series this year, and ran every race except the double in Charlotte. We completed every lap, and a quick glance at the results indicate that 15 of us were eligible for championship points, while averaging about 30 cars per race weekend. I finished fourth in points this year, my best finish in this series to date. I had two podiums and consistently finished in the top 5 all year.

Does this mean anything to me? Damn straight it does. We've won championships before in a less well attended series and those have less value to me than this does because we worked harder for this result, a lot harder. Which was the goal when I chose to race there - improve my skills by upping the level of competition.

I'm torn as to what my 2014 plans are. Do we chase the series again and try to improve, or is it destination track time? Frankly, my car, a WDCR SSM Miata is not going to be competitive elsewhere, so I'm not sure it will be as much fun, hard racing, so I don't know.

[CRallo]

Participation should go a long way. Someone that makes every weekend and finishes 5th each time should win over someone who shows up twice and wins twice.

Point distribution goes into this as does drops.

Also, I'm concerned less about being in a class with competition and more about attendance. If a guy wants to be a champion in a class of one or three, let him, but he better make it to events. I'd say 75%.



So don't give wins a huge point advantage. It isn't fair to those that show more and/or are more consistent. Also could cause more reckless acts that we can't afford...

[Eagle7]

Participation should go a long way......
But not too far. My first year racing I was slower than molasses. You had to sign up for the divisional championship (which I did, but not a great many others - maybe 6 or 8 in my class), and you earned points relative to only those in the championship. So when I finished last at nearly every race, I still got 2nd or 3rd place points. Some races were double points (incentive to come to a single-race weekend). The points leader blew up his engine before the last race weekend, and #2 broke his car on the test day. That last race, my engine blew up on lap 10 of 18, earning me 1st place double points and the season championship while dripping oil on pit lane. What a farce. I valued a couple of hard-fought battles for last place more than that championship trophy.