|
|
Post by Skorp on Jan 9, 2012 12:54:12 GMT 12
There was car racing long before paying public came along. Now you pay and dis the drivers by saying " who cares". As much as you pay to get through the gate, we pay that in fuel to race alone, add running costs and then repairs, travel, accomadation. I allowed $1000 for this weekend and next weekend at Rotorua will be $600 odd for one team race. It drivers/teams that care and spectators should care what is fair to us. i never said who cares, i said the guy was entitled to his opinion no mater where he sits. and yes, there was car racing before the paying public came along, but those days are long gone. with a paying public these days, i doubt it would happen. there might be a few tracks that could still keep going, but most of them would shut down. those paying spectators are why there is able to be prize money, and why you are able to get sponsors. im not trying to take away from the time, money and effort drivers and their crews put in to get to meetings, but at the same time you cant just say "**** the public, they dont matter", because we do. if there was no one there watching, sponsors wouldnt be interested, and i would imagine driver numbers would drop |
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Jan 9, 2012 13:06:53 GMT 12
The bottom line is, there are many groups within speedway that must co-exist and work together for the sport to even function, let alone improve. Slagging each other off does not help, despite the obvious frustration that occurs from time to time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2012 18:02:48 GMT 12
Is there prize money involved? Because that would definatley be wrong making the semis and getting paid out for 6th. Couldn't see that happening at the Aussie Open next week
|
|
|
|
Post by Regan O'Brien on Jan 9, 2012 20:15:56 GMT 12
Have been thinking about this format, and this is what i thought.
When you race at a NZ champs and qualify for the top 26 you stay in the final group, you dont get replaced from some one in the 2nd group cause you get a DNF.
So why should you race hard at teams and make group 1 and then loose 1 race and get droped and replaced by another team from group 2. As Blenheim had beaten Wellington on first nite they should not have raced them again over the weekend.
We the Maulers only lost 1 race and yea so did Wellington but we did the hard yards to get into the top 4 where they missed out so it seems a bit unfair that they are 3rd and get seated, sashes etc and Maulers & Blenheim missed out all together.
I just think the old format where you make top 4 is the better format of the 2.
|
|
|
|
Post by wal86 on Jan 9, 2012 20:20:03 GMT 12
top four teams race for the championship,the next four teams could race for a plate championship?
|
|
|
|
Post by sefroracing on Jan 9, 2012 20:44:44 GMT 12
top four teams race for the championship,the next four teams could race for a plate championship? exactly ! simple easy and effiective , and qualifying night on pointes system , there needs to be more of a buffer fro the winning team, its just plain studpid when the team wins the race and the loseing team gets 10 o 20 points less then them 1st 120 2nd 40 3rd 30 4th 20 5th 10 - only 5th if its a 5 vs 5 teams race yeah , my 50 cents |
|
|
|
Post by superford on Jan 9, 2012 20:57:16 GMT 12
top four teams race for the championship,the next four teams could race for a plate championship? I'm with you wal.... and Regan..... and the others - this system is just plain dumb. For all the clever persons involved with making Palmy Speedway as good as it is, this one leaves me thinking the clever jar has sprung a leak. The top four from Friday night are the top four. End of story. Blenheim and Hawke's Bay have been shafted by an idiots system. |
|
|
|
Post by tank11 on Jan 9, 2012 22:58:53 GMT 12
who realy cares.If you win both races on finals night you win if you lose a race on finals night then you dont win.its a championship to find the best team not the 3rd or 4th best This comment started the "who cares" debate. |
|
|
|
Post by Beatle on Jan 9, 2012 23:25:30 GMT 12
Keep up the feedback as I am sure Puk an Bruce are looking and listening to see what people think and enough feedback will make a difference,that's what good business people do.
|
|
|
|
Post by my2cents on Jan 10, 2012 0:30:24 GMT 12
IMO This is a NZ title so yes it should be on points for the first night, but if you make it into top 4 you stay in top 4. And no seeding for the next year
|
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Jan 10, 2012 7:22:17 GMT 12
Well my opinion is STILL that there's nothing wrong with the current points system OR the format. The thing with formats is, sometimes they work for you, sometimes they work against you (and what is required is the best one overall, not just based on examples of one particular year). Despite some good arguments for the Top 4 from the first night remaining the Top 4 seeds, I still think it's ridiculous that a team could, under that format, lose 3 of 4 races over the weekend and still be considered a Top 4 team whilst another Team that wins 3 out of 4 is not. The 4 seeded teams have certain advantages (not meeting another Top 4 team on the first night, and a bigger gap between their races), and the format many of you are suggesting could make it even harder to knock any existing set of Top 4-seeds off their perch, making it even more difficult for others to enter the inner sanctum.
|
|
|
|
Post by Regan O'Brien on Jan 10, 2012 10:07:32 GMT 12
I still think it's ridiculous that a team could, under that format, lose 3 of 4 races over the weekend and still be considered a Top 4 team whilst another Team that wins 3 out of 4 is not
That's what has happened to us this year Barry, we made the top 4 and won 3 out of 4 races over the weekend and ended up 5th where welly didn't make the top 4 and ended up 3rd, how can that be fair??? we qualified they didn't that's the part that rips us of. We would of been better of to loose a race on Friday and get a easy race and run off for 3rd - 4th but that's just my thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Jan 10, 2012 10:40:39 GMT 12
I still think it's ridiculous that a team could, under that format, lose 3 of 4 races over the weekend and still be considered a Top 4 team whilst another Team that wins 3 out of 4 is not
That's what has happened to us this year Barry, we made the top 4 and won 3 out of 4 races over the weekend and ended up 5th where welly didn't make the top 4 and ended up 3rd, how can that be fair??? we qualified they didn't that's the part that rips us of. We would of been better of to loose a race on Friday and get a easy race and run off for 3rd - 4th but that's just my thought. Can see your point Regan. Maybe neither format is the answer  |
|
|
|
Post by Crow on Jan 10, 2012 12:29:45 GMT 12
I still think it's ridiculous that a team could, under that format, lose 3 of 4 races over the weekend and still be considered a Top 4 team whilst another Team that wins 3 out of 4 is not
That's what has happened to us this year Barry, we made the top 4 and won 3 out of 4 races over the weekend and ended up 5th where welly didn't make the top 4 and ended up 3rd, how can that be fair??? we qualified they didn't that's the part that rips us of. We would of been better of to loose a race on Friday and get a easy race and run off for 3rd - 4th but that's just my thought. Can see your point Regan. Maybe neither format is the answer I think the old system is fairer.Something needs to change , no one I know or talked to liked how the system worked on Saturday. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 12:34:45 GMT 12
That's what has happened to us this year Barry, we made the top 4 and won 3 out of 4 races over the weekend and ended up 5th where welly didn't make the top 4 and ended up 3rd, how can that be fair??? But Welly won 3 out of 4 races over the weekend too, and only finished second in their group on the first night by 5 points. There is no perfect format, but the one that was used does mean that if a good team has a blip and narrowly loses a race, they still have something to race for on the second night. |
|
|
|
Post by Crow on Jan 10, 2012 13:05:42 GMT 12
That's what has happened to us this year Barry, we made the top 4 and won 3 out of 4 races over the weekend and ended up 5th where welly didn't make the top 4 and ended up 3rd, how can that be fair??? But Welly won 3 out of 4 races over the weekend too, and only finished second in their group on the first night by 5 points. There is no perfect format, but the one that was used does mean that if a good team has a blip and narrowly loses a race, they still have something to race for on the second night. Being beaten isn't a blip and most teams and drivers know that it means you have been beaten by a better team. A second chance in my opinion isn't deserved or warranted. |
|
oceans
Junior Member
Posts: 78
|
Post by oceans on Jan 10, 2012 13:07:57 GMT 12
Thats nonsense "if a team has a blip" for goodness sake this is a NZ Championship not a school competition. Imagine if the Rugby World Cup was run along these lines, did Aussie have a blip ? If you are not good enough to qualify in the top four you compete in a plate competition like the real world does. Has this country gone PC made !!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by theothermikeyb on Jan 10, 2012 13:16:07 GMT 12
As an alternative (assuming 12 teams though the idea could be modified for other numbers). No pools and seeding could be a part of the initial draw but not necessarily.
6 races are held with 6 winners and 6 losers found.
The 6 winners race off and the 3 winners (now with 2 wins) go through to the semis.
The 6 losers race off and the 3 losers are dropped.
You also now have 6 cars with a win and a loss. In my mind these are the 6 who compete for the last spot in the semis.
3 races pitting the win loss group off against the loss win group and you are down to 3 teams.
END OF NIGHT ONE!!!
Start of NIGHT TWO
First step is to get the 3 teams down to 1. Whats a better way to do this? A 3 team race or have 3v3 races and they all race each other? With the 3v3 idea you must use your entire team over the 2 oppositions.
Once you are down to 1 then you have your last semi finalists.
The negative side to this I suspect is that one team in the semis is having 2 races more than normal which has to be pretty tough on car and body. Clever use of the 7th driver may help. Mind you noone could begrudge them a place in the top 4 that way!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 13:22:22 GMT 12
Fair points, but Welly still won 3 out of 4 races over the weekend, as did Meeanee whereas Blenheim won 2 out of 4.
This is an NZ Championship as oceans and Crow said, and the champions were found fair and square - unbeaten over the weekend.
'Having a blip' means you can only finish 3rd at best, not go on to win the comp.
The plate method tends to mean more 'nothing' teams races, and then we'd have some people whinging about the lack of action on the second night.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 13:25:22 GMT 12
Imagine if the Rugby World Cup was run along these lines, did Aussie have a blip ? If you are not good enough to qualify in the top four you compete in a plate competition like the real world does. Has this country gone PC made !!!! Aussie did have a blip in pool play during RWC didnt they? But then still made the finals and had a chance to make the final and win the comp, unlike the method used on the weekend. |
|
