oceans
Junior Member
Posts: 78
|
Post by oceans on Jan 10, 2012 13:33:51 GMT 12
With all due respect to Welly their second win was not against a "winning" team as was the Maulers who had to race an in form unbeaten team. Again you are devaluing the fantastic effort of the group winners, please note you win your group be gaining the most points overall. Thats qualifying. The format that was used is unjust and insults the four top qualifiers.
|
|
|
|
Post by acevantura on Jan 10, 2012 13:37:18 GMT 12
I don't recall this much criticism of the system in the supers when the GB team fought their way to 3rd place a couple years ago... from memory they got a huge well done and a seeding, or in fact a year later when Nelson destroyed Palmy and Palmy had to race off for 5th and 6th.
No System is perfect... that's why you race to the system, every team knew what they had to do to make the best possible result for them, as we did to get back up to third. I personally enjoy this format as its racing not only the apposing team, but the system as well, which is giving the race another dimension to think about and include in your team tactics.
before the semis, all four teams new the consequence if they lost their race, it was still a points race for the loser of that semi. Maybe if HB's race went differently, had a different tactic and got another car across the line or a placing higher up, they would have raced for 3rd and 4th.
Cheers
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Jan 10, 2012 13:43:46 GMT 12
I dont recall this much criticism of the system in the supers when the GB team fought their way to 3rd place a couple years ago... from memory they got a huge well done and a seeding, or in fact a year later when Nelson destroyed Palmy and Palmy had to race off for 5th and 6th. No System is perfect... thats why you race to the system, every team new what they had to do to make the best possible result for them, as we did to get back up to third. I personally enjoy this format as its racing not only the apposing team, but the system as well which is giving the race another dimension to think about and include in your team tactics. before the semis, all four teams new the consequence if they lost their race, it was still a points race for the loser of that race. Maybe if HB's race went differently, had a different tactic and got another car across the line or a placing higher up, they would have raced for 3rd and 4th. Cheers Mike Well said Mike |
|
|
|
Post by wayne on Jan 10, 2012 14:31:04 GMT 12
I dont recall this much criticism of the system in the supers when the GB team fought their way to 3rd place a couple years ago... from memory they got a huge well done and a seeding, or in fact a year later when Nelson destroyed Palmy and Palmy had to race off for 5th and 6th. No System is perfect... thats why you race to the system, every team new what they had to do to make the best possible result for them, as we did to get back up to third. I personally enjoy this format as its racing not only the apposing team, but the system as well, which is giving the race another dimension to think about and include in your team tactics. before the semis, all four teams new the consequence if they lost their race, it was still a points race for the loser of that semi. Maybe if HB's race went differently, had a different tactic and got another car across the line or a placing higher up, they would have raced for 3rd and 4th. Cheers Mike i did.The rebels totalled their cars in so called semi final trying to make the final and ended up dropping down.wheras the gb team raced the lesser teams and got as high as 3rd. it was silly comparing the points the rebels got in a so called semi final against a team thatl go into the final against the points gb got racing a lesser team of course they will get more points .they missed the top teams that inc palmy,nelson,rebels same with the stockcars in the weekend. |
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Jan 10, 2012 15:13:36 GMT 12
If you're going to play the "lesser team" card, on the second night, then you have to play fair and say that some qualifiers are only there because they faced "lesser teams" in their qualifying group than others!!! Which is a rubbish argument.........
If a promotion does totally seeded groups some people will have a whinge; they could also do totally random draws and others will have a whinge. Whatever draw, whatever format, it's not going to please somebody, especially after the final results have been posted. I sometimes wonder why the likes of Bruce even bother to put on such meetings........oh yeah, that's right, because we love them!!! Don't forget that part..........
|
|
oceans
Junior Member
Posts: 78
|
Post by oceans on Jan 10, 2012 15:22:17 GMT 12
Geeze Barry ;D its only an opinion that stimulates discussion, doesn't matter whether its before or after the event. Happen to have a differing opinion to yours and Bruce about this issue, not rubbishing him or you personally. Actually believe he is the best promoter in the country.
|
|
|
|
Post by my2cents on Jan 10, 2012 15:31:54 GMT 12
I dont recall this much criticism of the system in the supers when the GB team fought their way to 3rd place a couple years ago... from memory they got a huge well done and a seeding, or in fact a year later when Nelson destroyed Palmy and Palmy had to race off for 5th and 6th. No System is perfect... thats why you race to the system, every team new what they had to do to make the best possible result for them, as we did to get back up to third. I personally enjoy this format as its racing not only the apposing team, but the system as well, which is giving the race another dimension to think about and include in your team tactics. before the semis, all four teams new the consequence if they lost their race, it was still a points race for the loser of that semi. Maybe if HB's race went differently, had a different tactic and got another car across the line or a placing higher up, they would have raced for 3rd and 4th. Cheers Mike I dont have a problem with this format for the Superstock Teams Champs in Palmy. I think we are talking about NZ Stockcars Champs. And as such it needs a simple winners and looses format. Top 4 on points the first night qualify for semis on the second night then its just a straight knock out for final. My reasons are 1 This is a SNZ New Zealand reconised title, e.g NZ stockcar champs format = top 26ish cars qualify for final, then top car on points after 3 heats WINS........Simple.....There is no "car X" won two out of three races 1st night and won one race second night but dnf other two races so they get bonus points and then become 1NZ 2 The winner of the NZ Stockcar Teams host's the Champs the next year and if they use a different format then the previous years track. This board will be full of "2010 team winner is better then 2012 team winner because of the format used in 2012 disadvantaged "X team" who would have won under the old format. |
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Jan 10, 2012 15:34:05 GMT 12
Geeze Barry ;D its only an opinion that stimulates discussion, doesn't matter whether its before or after the event. Happen to have a differing opinion to yours and Bruce about this issue, not rubbishing him or you personally. Actually believe he is the best promoter in the country. Merely commenting that most of the flack has come out after the result oceans, not before, although I accept most of the the Stockcar boys probably haven't come across it before even though it's not new. As others have stated, it hasn't drawn the same amount of feedback from Superstock fans/drivers. "After the fact" sounds more like whinging than if stated before, but as above, the Stockcar boys may not have even realised the ramifications of it in advance. Welly team members stated early on they didn't like it, but after it worked for them they probably kinda changed their minds a little haha. As has also been said previously, formats can work both for and against you on any given Saturday night, and have no concerns that you disagree with it at all. |
|
|
|
Post by percy on Jan 10, 2012 17:14:09 GMT 12
I think the current format could do with a tweak.
That being both the semi-final losers meet the last chance winners for the final two seeding places.
|
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Jan 10, 2012 17:57:48 GMT 12
I think the current format could do with a tweak. That being both the semi-final losers meet the last chance winners for the final two seeding places. Not bad.......... |
|
|
|
Post by justafan on Jan 10, 2012 18:55:33 GMT 12
so percy do you mean the 2 semi final losers race off for 3rd and 4th?
If so then that would seem fair to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Jan 10, 2012 19:05:41 GMT 12
so percy do you mean the 2 semi final losers race off for 3rd and 4th? If so then that would seem fair to me. No he doesn't - he means the two losers from the Tier 1 Semi-Finals race of against the two winners from the Tier 2 competition. Could then just toss a coin as far as who gets slots 3 and 4 for the Top 4 seeds the following year. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 20:21:40 GMT 12
Is there any prize money involved?
|
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Jan 10, 2012 21:51:15 GMT 12
Is there any prize money involved? Not sure.........but I'm sure anything could be overcome. |
|
wilber
Junior Member
Posts: 70
|
Post by wilber on Jan 11, 2012 15:40:56 GMT 12
No Much of an oppossition 2 Wellington cars finished to 3 Titians. Wellington had to pass on in field to win real sporting!! Why did Zac attack keep going to the infield on the first night in the Blen v Wellie race on the grandstand straight when he had had no contact to put him on the infield, and i don't just mean a little onto the grass, he would do a big loop from half way down the straight and come back on at the start of the straight again. Not that sporting either really. I find this worse than the leader of the race perhaps ending up on the infield from a sodden race track. Just what I saw on the night and thought, that can't be allowed? |
|
|
|
Post by Regan O'Brien on Jan 11, 2012 20:22:20 GMT 12
haha the only reason i commented on it after the meeting as i didn't really understand it before the meeting. But now i understand it its not that great, but hey i guess we have to go with what the track wants to run.
|
|
|
|
Post by HIGHWAY45 on Jan 11, 2012 20:47:46 GMT 12
People, both drivers and spectators are commenting now, after the meeting because they have seen the points system used in action and seen its faults and loopholes first hand. Barry do you have anything to do with the setting of the chosen points or scoring system?  / |
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Jan 12, 2012 8:07:06 GMT 12
People, both drivers and spectators are commenting now, after the meeting because they have seen the points system used in action and seen its faults and loopholes first hand. Barry do you have anything to do with the setting of the chosen points or scoring system? / No. The points used have been the standard teams racing points like forever (well many many years anyway) and the format has been used for the Superstocks at PN for a few years now from memory. |
|
/