The 7 Generations of NASCAR Points Systems
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.พ. 2025
- NASCAR's history can be divided into 7 generations of point systems that decided the champion. Points related to money earned, miles, laps ran, a complicated one-year formula, the Latford system, the Chase, and elimination playoffs. Each system had it benefits and critics. This is a recap of the systems and the reactions people had to each.
Narrated by Brock Beard
Consider Supporting Brock on Patreon: / lastcaronbrock
Check Out Brock's Newest Film Series, Rise of the Field Fillers:
/ @lastcaronbrock
Buy Classic Racing T-Shirts on Teespring:
teespring.com/...
Follow Brock and I on Twitter:
nascarman: / nascarman_rr
Brock: / lastcaronbrock
Video Clips Owned by
NASCAR
CBS
ESPN
TNN
NBC
FOX
Music
Disposable Arms - Letterbox
Red Hot Son - JR Tundra
Keep it Real - Audionautix
#NASCAR
![โกดำ - วสันต์17 x ไม้เมือง [Official Music]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OUg2L4Sx1TY/mqdefault.jpg)
![จากรุ่นใหญ่สุดรวยในเกม FIVEM สู่การติดคุกแก๊งแตกในชีวิตจริง [สรุปแก๊งOREO]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Vjj8EX4qpiU/mqdefault.jpg)
The Chase explanation using the stacks of CDs and "Headstrong" by Trapt was the most 2004 thing I've ever witnessed.
what's even more funny is the comparison Dave Burns (Shoutout to him btw) made from the old points format to the new is like going from Vinyl to CD. it is a fitting comparison cause now, vinyl records are back on the market and CDs are basically gone. same with NASCAR, the New points is like a CD, Scratched and beaten up, and people want the old points format like how people went back to Vinyl Records
This does a great job of showing you can't please everyone. Doesn't mean I still wouldn't want it to go back to the 75-2003 system lol.
Imo it would be great if nascar would go back to 75-03, but award drivers points like in 2011.
@@kyleschafer6275 I'm all for that, but I would like to see the race winner get more points awarded as well. Anywhere from 5 extra points to 10. Somewhere in between.
The 2011 points system made the most sense. 2004 was fun as a fan to experience the chase. The next year was fun too. But after 2006 I was all ready to go back to the old points system.
@@kyleschafer6275 and incase my original comment was misleading. I do really miss the 75- 2003 system lol
The 75-2003 system seemed to abitrarily give out points for positions.
The points system would be better if there was about 200 points for a win or something along those lines.
Have any of you seen Slapshoes proposal in the 2nd half of this video? It seems like a good compromise
th-cam.com/video/p-GEmBSePLE/w-d-xo.html
That playoff explainer video with the drivers is absolute gold.
Matt Kenseth deserved to be 2003 Champion. The system wasn't flawed it was accurate and crowned consistency. In a sport that is based on team and driver performance. What more can you ask for?.
Yes, it was flawed. Most would argue the difference in performance between a win and 2nd place finish is much, much larger than the difference in performance between a 22nd and 23rd place finish, but those differences in the Latford points system were only 5 and 3 points respectively, which is unthinkable in almost any other points system. The 40-1 system made it even worse as the top 5 and top 10 no longer got even those extremely small bonuses to the point that the difference between 2nd and 3rd (pre-stage racing at least) is no more than the difference between 39th and 40th. NASCAR has always awarded way too many points to the middle of the field. I feel that a system like CART's or the IRL's did a better job of balancing consistency and dominance. And the driver who won the most races did not always win the title in those systems.
No shade to Kenseth though as he did clearly prove to be a dominant force in several other years like 2006 and 2013 so it's not like he didn't deserve a championship at some point for his overall accomplishments. I just think 2006 was clearly his peak season, not 2003.
Has anyone done a all time champions list since the first season using the Latford system? I'm curious how much would have changed.
@@mod134 The ones that would change are as follows:
1949: Lee Petty
1950*: Lee Petty
1951: Fonty Flock
1961: Rex White
1963: Richard Petty
1972: Bobby Allison
1973: Cale Yarborough
1974: Cale Yarborough
2004: Jeff Gordon
2006^: Matt Kenseth
2007: Jeff Gordon
2008: Carl Edwards
2010: Kevin Harvick
2011: Carl Edwards
2014: Jeff Gordon
2015: Kevin Harvick
2016: Kevin Harvick
2018: Kyle Busch
2020: Kevin Harvick
*Lee scored the most points overall, but lost all points scored in the first nine races due to competing in a five lap charity race that wasn't NASCAR sanctioned. This applies to both the Latford system and the system used at the time, and in either case handed the title to Bill Rexford.
^Under the full season points used that year, Johnson won by 4 points. However, this was a year with five extra points for race wins, so strictly using the 1975-2003 system gives it to Kenseth by 1 point.
Roger Penske: BuT nEwMaN hAd MoRe WiNs
I like how you pointed out the issues with every system. Doesn't make the video seem biased. I've seen so many of these videos which just praise the Latford format and trash on the chase/playoffs. This is why I love this channel.
The other mistake they do is often leave out the older playoff systems entirely like there was not NASCAR before the Winston Era.
Great, unbiased assessment of each format and variation. The current system isn't perfect but this shows how difficult it is to make everyone happy no matter what format is used.
Honestly I dont support your Opinion of you liking the Current Playoff Format. Win and You're In is not the way to Go, so is One Race to Decide a Champion.
@@aldouscoroza :(
Eric btw, the Guy who you support in Matt Kenseth won in a Full Season format in 2003. And the BS Playoff Format that You support has not crowned a Fair Champion since 2014 (Except MTJ, Kyle Busch, and Kyle Larson). NASCAR should be about not just about winning, but consistency as well
@@SomeUsernameSomeoneElseTookIt Yup he Loves the Playoff Format
@@aldouscoroza yeah and i don't care if he loves the playoff format
My dad always said, "you can never please everyone all the time" However I think we can all agree that the "playoffs" system is a joke and only created for drama, rather than traditional racing. I would like to see a more consistency style points system like the pre '04 days, not one were you can literally win 35 out of 36 races and then blow a tire on the last lap of the last race and loose the championship.
That could have happened in the Latford system also if another driver finished 2nd and led the most laps in all those first 35 races.
That's true, but there would have to be some other driver that's also destroying the field every week. I think Latford system or the original chase were great ways to win the title. The only real issue with both of those is not rewarding the race winner enough.
@@arenasnow not post 2004 with the bonus points added for wins. Although we’re in the chase format at that point, the points were still getting closer to what people wanted. In my mind the winner should have been given 190 points compared to 2nds 170. This makes a 200 point day a possibility.
I don’t agree at all. Ive loved every point system NASCAR’s had, but there is no points system as exciting as the one we have now. No no, we can’t all agree.
@@ryanmorrison3699 Nope, You're just a Typical Stick and Ball Fan
For the fans (like me) watching, this really makes you ponder how Richard Petty and Jimmie Johnson both won 7 titles under what was basically 3 different point systems each. I started watching full time in 2001 (sporadically in 2000). Not only that but how often even under “headstratching” points systems how some drivers won titles when they had either less wins or top 5/10 than others.
Very good video. I wasnt aware of the amount of bickering over the points system pre 90s. BTW, 10:59 -Earnhardt had the most wins in 1990 but only won the championship because of Nascar's arbitrary 25 point penalty handed to Mark Martin that year.
Martin's 46 point penalty was the difference between the race winning 180 points, and 10th place, which was the finishing position of the first car 1 lap down at Richmond
@@danieljackett4193 From what I gathered, Mark got bopped harshly -- not because the engineers were cheating, but because they cut corners.
I'm not qualified at all speaking about such a complex topic here, but my take from this event is that NASCAR took a long, long time to spot what was originally believe to be a carburetor spacer (something that kind of looks like a restrictor plate, but you could dick around with it to draw more air in through the power of magic), but tests showed it had exactly zero of the device's benefits. Because NASCAR (like most organizations -- **and this next quip is likely the definition of irony, by the way**) -- lacks a reverse gear, they stuck with their side of the story and dug their heels in.
The punchline is that you can only get more power from it if you bolted it in or something. The engineers welded it in place because it was easier to build that way for some reason, and routinely passed tech inspection with this definitely-not-illegal technology... for at least a year. Year and a half? I'm not sure on dates, but suffice it to say it was a mixed weed for the Roush camp.
I never realized how often points systems were changed, and how many critics there ALWAYS were of each of them. Great video and good perspective.
I wish NASCAR would have at least went 3 years with a Latford system that rewarded a massive amount of points before switching to the Chase.
The current system only exists to prolong the championship battle through the final race because a subsect of fans believe the final races are uninteresting if the championship isn't on the line (which is a false notion that I'll get to). The Latford system could have been adjusted to create close championship battles on a more consistent basis, but the Chase was the only way NASCAR could guarantee it. The system could have expanded the points gap from P1 to P2. It could have made the gap between P3 and P4 so big that Top three finishes become an important stat. It could make the gap between P10 and P11 so big that no driver could afford a finish outside the top 10. There are a number of changes NASCAR could have made that would have improved the system, but NASCAR didn't necessarily want an improvement, it just wanted a 36-race points battle.
Here's the problem with the notion of races being uninteresting if the championship isn't on the line: Races ≠ games. Every race has 36+ drivers competing for a trophy, prize money and bragging rights over the rest of the series for that week. In some ways, races are mini-championships by themselves. Isn't that enough? You can come back with saying "strokers" disprove that, but I feel like changing the Latford system the way I proposed would address that. And with payouts not being what they were 20+ years ago, I think the "stroker" issue has taken care of itself. No one is making so much money today that they're content with what they had earned. Case in point: Kyle Larson winning 4 of the last 5 races in 2021. His win at Kansas was totally unnecessary, yet he won the race anyway. Plus, race teams 30 years ago weren't the enterprises they are today. Even if a driver is content with the money they earned all year, the car owner isn't.
I'm with you. Instead of 185 points for dominating and winning, up it to 200 or 250 points
I disagree, while it is true that races are mini-championships, the fact NASCAR needs the last races to be competitive isnt just a fan matter (even if i am one of those fans), its a broadcast money matter
With NFL season starting and MLB on its climax (Playoffs), NASCAR races need somethings to guarantee that all those last races become attractive to broadcasters, or else broadcasters would prefer get only the first half of season
@@superninja252Well now what do you say with ratings for the final races are in a further speeding tailspin
@@IrishmanGFS Short tracks are being a mess overal with the new car, also FS1
I’d honestly be fine with any of these systems as long as the champion isn’t decided in a single race. Any pre-playoffs system is fine with me.
Want the playoffs? Fine, make it three rounds of 12, 8, 4 drivers, and 3, 3, 4 races
I want drivers to lose any bonus points they use to get past the next round. So if you have accumulated 25 bonus points and need 15 of them to advance in a round, then you only have 10 left to use.
I'm suprised this format doesn't get more traction than it does. I think we want to maintain consistency with the format of the playoffs, but if I had to make one change it would be that. If you want the elimination bracket style, have it go down to 8 drivers and have the last 4 races decide the champion. Nascar will still have no doubt close points battles, but it won't come down to random events late in a race changing the champion in an instant.
No other sport does that. The NFL doesn't host 3 rams vs Bengals games, best 2 out of 3. This isn't rock paper scissors
Yes, I would like a playoffs if they are going to be going into NFL and NCAA regular season that does not cut but uses the 2004--2011 system of no cuts but maybe extend it to 12 drivers like in 2008--2011. Maybe just a cut after 5 to say last 11 and 12 are out now, just to really spice it up and if there is a tie then go to regular season points in this case but if there is still a tie then do a 2 car single Bush style Shootout on the nearest track Next down from Cup or Cup they are racing at next but not that exact track they are racing at next for the two teams.
18:10 "We're gonna make the points system simpler and easier to understand", while adding a condition for the last 2 qualifiers that uses different rules. Multiple people looked through this multiple times and saw nothing wrong with that.
Personally I loved the Top 10 + 2 Wild Card Format. Tho What I would have done to the Wild Cards is the Highest in Points Makes it in
I remember back in the day we points geeks used to track Mr. Lead Lap, a theoretical driver who was the last one on the lead lap in every race. He would often make the Top 15 by year's end.
If it were me, I would scrap the “playoffs” and return to the classic Latford system, with the exception of awarding the winner 185 points, rather than 175. I’d keep the stage points, but lose the stage break. I’d also award points 10-1 for the Top 10 qualifiers, adding a 4-tire pit stop to the qualifying laps at events without heat races. I’d also award 1/10th of a point for every lap led under green flag conditions (i.e. lead 10 laps, get one full point, lead 100, get 10). I’d also ditch the green-white-checker rule and just say the last five laps must be completed under green.
Thanks for posting! Personally, I would like to see a revised version of the Latford system (no playoffs or Chase for the Cup), but with 1-point increments (40 pts. for a win, 39 pts. for second, and you get the idea). I would also bring back bonus points for leading laps (1 pt. for leading any lap and an additional 1 pt. for leading the most laps. Anyway, regardless of which points format NASCAR uses, there is no way to truly please everyone.
I agree, although I think the winner should get a few more points, maybe as many as 45.
I’m curious if a bonus point for Pole would be a good idea as well? That’s more of an open wheel and sportscar thing, but I don’t see why you shouldn’t be rewarded for a pole
@@psychlops924 I could get behind that. Sure, it could add a level of confusion for the “casual fan,” but I’ve NEVER been an advocate for the casual fan. When I was a kid, I would eat, sleep, and breathe NASCAR. But have since lost interest due to the points system.
You could award a point for poles, but, the pole sitter also has the advantage of first pick of pit stall selection. Would the benefit of one point for qualifying be worth the potential confusion? I don’t know. In the event of a rain-out, I think there’d have to be a point awarded for the qualifying order (to stay consistent in awarding points), but the driver did not “earn” from qualifying, rather being 1st in points.
I would seriously love to come up with a system to slightly tweak the Latford system. For a moderate increase in emphasis on wins so drivers give it their all, but also heavy emphasis on consistency so drivers don’t coast after they win a race or two and “they’re in.”
I could get behind the one point increments. The NASCAR purist in me likes the 5 pt difference between each place 1-5, 4 pt difference between 6-10, and then 3 for the rest. But, I can also get behind simplifying it! One point increments seems simple enough for die hard fans and casual fans alike to be able to follow.
I think a points system should be like a kiss: Keep It Simple, Stupid. The Latford system was, in my opinion, the best overall points system. Yes, it had its flaws. But it had far fewer than the other points systems. The ones who would complain about the Latford system would, generally, have it work out in their favor a year or so later.
I’m glad they don’t do the previous season’s champion gets first pick of the pit stall anymore. That gave Earnhardt a significant advantage in the 90’s, and resulted in a lot of back-to-back (or almost b-t-b) champions.
@@FastEvan47 I’m pretty sure in most series that award a points for qualifying, no points are awarded if qualifying is rained out. That shouldn’t be an issue
@@psychlops924 I gotcha! I wasn’t sure how that worked!
You've basically described the 2016 point scoring system.
The difference, of course, is that you get 3 extra points for winning a race meaning that you effectively earn 43 points for finishing 1st (44 in total for leading the last lap at least), However, championship 4 contenders are not awarded any bonus points, this would be the only time in which the race winner (given that they are also a championship contender) is awarded only 40 points.
Racing isn't about winning everything, it's about consistency and performance. You can't criticize somebody who did his homework throughout the season and played it safe at the end. He earned it.
Yes, but the Latford system was too biased towards consistency while other systems made a better balance between speed and consistency. Jeff Gordon and Terry Labonte had the same number of top fives and top tens in '96 and Gordon had 8 more wins but Labonte won the title because Labonte's bad finishes in the 20s were greater than Gordon's bad finishes in the 30s. As you can see by that example, positions in the back half of the NASCAR field awarded way too many points, which is the problem (you can argue Gordon wasn't even any less consistent than Labonte, but the points system didn't reflect that because more mediocre bad finishes awarded too many more points than worse bad finishes.)
@@arenasnow Fair enough, I won't disagree with you there. But to me the chase/playoffs are utter, irredeemable bullshit. You can't just throw away 2/3+ of the championship just to make the last few races exiting.
@@arenasnow You ain't wrong Honestly I'm not a Fan of Giving Out Points for 1st - Last Place. Thats Why the F1 Points Format is Perfect, because Its a Balance of Wins and Points.
My Ideal Points format is a Full Season Format where in The Top 25 out of 40 or 43 are the only Ones who score Points
growing up in both the Latford and Chase or Playoffs system the emphasis and strategy on the season for the championship contenders were drastically different. every fan has a different perspective on a points system so its all relative. I personally preferred the Latford system as it emphasizes importance of every race but I can understand why other fans prefer the Chase or Playoffs format...
Great video. I never knew much about all the different pre-1975 points formats, and while I found the points/mile idea interesting, most of what they tried sounded almost as complicated as what we have now (and I don't know what the hell they thinking in 1974 lmao)
I think with some tweaks the original chase format is probably the best of both worlds. The top 10 drivers will still get their points reset, but here are my tweaks:
1. Race Points - Drivers will be awarded 2003 winston cup points for every race, with two exceptions.
-The race winner will earn 200 points instead of 175, and second place will get 180 instead of 170. Third (165) on back will work exactly as in 2003.
-Secondly, in addition to 5 bonus points for leading a lap and another 5 for leading the most, the pole winner will receive 5 bonus points.
2. Chase Qualification - The top 10 drivers in points after 26 races automatically earn a spot in the chase, regardless of how many wins they achieved.
-However, if after 26 races any driver between 11th-20th in points has amounted 3 or more wins (*revised from 4 in my original comment), they will be added as a wild card, and their points will be level with 10th place.
-If no drivers from 11th-20th place meet this criteria, the field will remain at 10. This is supposed to be a rare occurrence, and allows the chase field to be expanded in a season with particular parity, or if a winning driver experiences a high DNF rate midway through in the season (Jeff Gordon 2005, Kyle Busch 2009, Bowman 2021)
3. Points Reset -
A. Base Points
10th place will be awarded 5000 points
9th. 5005 (+5)
8th. 5010 (+5)
7th. 5015 (+5)
6th. 5020 (+5)
5th. 5030 (+10)
4th. 5040 (+10)
3rd. 5055 (+15)
2nd. 5075 (+20)
1st. 5100 (+25)
with points increasing at 5 point intervals through 6th place, 10 point intervals for 5th and 4th, then increasing by five for 3rd (+15), 2nd (+20), and 1st (+25).
B. Bonus Points: The driver leading the standings after 26 races (who will be 1st in chase seeding) will receive
- 25 bonus points if their lead was greater than 175 points after 26 races
- 15 bonus points if their lead was between 100-174 points after 26 races
- 10 bonus points if their lead was between 50-99 points after 26 races
- 5 bonus points if their lead was between 25-49 points after 26 races
- No bonus points if their lead was less than 25 points after 26 races
- No bonus points will be awarded for wins, regardless of seeding
During the chase, points will be distributed exactly the same as in the regular season (200 for a win, 180 for second, 165 for third, 160 for fourth, etc.), and bonus points for winning the pole, leading a lap, and leading the most laps will remain the same.
I tried to make a system that was a more even mix between 2003 and 2004 points formats, and wanted to give winning some weight (in both the higher point margin over the field and a potential wild card spot), but without detracting from the points leader. I also think a tiered strategy of chase bonus points can help reward building a big lead early in the season. If one year the points leader had a 20 point advantage over 2nd place after 26 races, he shouldn't be awarded the same chase points as a points leader with a 190 point advantage the next season.
Let me know what you guys think!
This points format also assumes the elimination of stages, which I probably should’ve specified in the first comment. While I think stage racing is necessary to help the elimination format be *ever so slightly* less completely unfair, for any other points format it only serves to detract from the integrity of an individual race
Why four wins for a wild card? In the last 20 years, the only driver with four wins by race 26 who wasn't in the top ten was Kyle Busch in 2009. And adding an extra 15 points for each win would be just enough for him to squeak past Montoya for 10th. So it's about as unnecessary as the 400 point rule from the '04-06 chase system, which would have affected 2002, and no other year. Even three wins is a rarity, only applying for Gordon in '05 and Bowman this year. 2 wins for a wildcard sounds right to me, though it does unfortunately give an edge to guys who specialize in one thing (Stenhouse in '17 and Robby Gordon in '03).
I'm not opposed to the concept of rewarding drivers for running well during the race, I just don't like mandatory cautions and giving points for where you are on one specific lap. I'd give 10 bonus points to whoever ran in the top ten for the most laps in the race, with decreasing increments for the next nine. Less exciting perhaps, but fairer and less gimmicky.
@@seannolan9857 rarity was what I was going for with the wild card rule, but I’ll admit I didn’t remember it being that rare. My main thought was, I didn’t want drivers who won often but also wrecked often to be necessarily excluded from the chase, but I also didn’t want a driver to win 4 races early on and then sandbag it because they were almost guaranteed a chase spot (which, I admit, is probably far from likely). I do still want to keep most of the emphasis on consistency (which was the focus of the 75-03 format) and keep the wild card as a built in exception: normally, the chase is 10 drivers, but every so often you’ll have a very competitive season, or a very fast driver with bad luck, and that year, the chase goes to eleven. Still, I agree changing it to two or three wins is the right move.
I’m also intrigued by the idea of giving points to drivers who run well, but the problem is it’s really hard to execute. The built in caution is probably what I dislike the most about stage racing, but even without it, as you point out you’re still rewarding drivers based on one rather arbitrary lap. I never though of bonus points for average running position. I think that could work, but I don’t think it’ll do much in avoiding the “I ran 5th all day then wrecked with 40 to go” problem, as the 35th or worse running position through those last 40 laps will probably be enough to push that driver out of the best running position spot.
On a somewhat related note, I hope nascar is in a position to revise their DVP rules sometime soon. There was always something cool and respectable about a team wrecking early but going above and beyond putting in the elbow grease to get back out there and finish under power, not to mention the ability to salvage even a single point is an opportunity any championship or owners points contender should have.
@@frankf2902 That's why I'd do it based on top ten laps, not average running position. If you were up there for 360 laps, you'll still have one of the highest totals, even if it fell apart in the end.
I agree on the DVP. Sure, raising the minimum speed requirement might be a good idea, and if a damaged car takes out a competitor ala Kenseth in 2015, they should lose the privilege of being allowed to return to the track for the next 12 months. But as long as you aren't causing issues, by all means try to make it to the finish.
@@seannolan9857 ahhhhh, I misread your first comment. Top ten laps makes a lot more sense!
Some of those real early points systems make the Playoffs look a God Send 💀
I just want a system in which every race matters yes winning matters but so does consistency
Awesome video, it breaks many of misconceptions about old NASCAR point systems and shows that there is more than meets the eye
Personally I would like to go back to either the 2004-2013 Chase for the Championship Format or go to a Full Season Points Format (F1 Full Season or IndyCar Full Season).
If NASCAR goes to a Full Season Format again, this is what I would do to the Points format to make every Race Exciting again, and how to make Points matter for all 36 Races again.
Here's the Catch, only the Top 25 Get Points.
With that out of the way, here is my NASCAR Cup Points format:
1st - 150 points
2nd - 125
3rd - 100
4th - 80
5th - 60
6th - 45
7th - 35
8th - 30
9th - 25
10th - 20
11th - 18
12th - 16
13th - 14
14th - 12
15th - 11
16th - 10
17th - 9
18th - 8
19th - 7
20th - 6
21st - 5
22nd - 4
23rd - 3
24th - 2
25th - 1
With this Points format, it encourages everyone to Race Well and Go for the Win
This Points Format is a Hybrid of the Latford Points Format, F1 Points (with only the Select Few getting Points) and IndyCar Points
Note:
• No Bonus Points for Leading Laps
• No More Stages
This point system works well, but would definitely work better if races were much shorter considering that there won't be any bonus points being awarded throughout the race.
Hello I also wanted to make similar format. The top 39 drivers are awarded with no points for last place. You get no bonus points for pole position or fastest lap or most laps lead (although this can be changed because i was thinking about +5 points for pole position.) There is also no stages.
1st - 100
2nd - 80
3rd - 60
4th - 50
5th - 40
6th - 38
7th - 36
8th 34
9th - 32
10th - 30
From 11th to 39th is 29-1 point
There are going to be a lot of people who are shocked to discover the points system they worship as "the original" or "the old system" didn't come into use until NASCAR had already existed for almost 30 years.
Its almost like having the most wins with best finishes should matter more than being a mid/back packer that always finishes worse than 30th
One thing is common... Someone's always gonna be mad no matter what.
No one can be mad if you score on average finish. That's the most fair system IMO
@@Yoshiman2024 true enough but I'm sure there'd be drivers who still bitched lol
@@KellieLeigh48 Yeah of course lol
That's how people are. Just saying that in these examples in the video, everyone can have a point somehow.
I’m a firm believer that we should combine elements of previous points formats into a current one instead of wholly getting rid of it. A points format I have formulated mixes the Winston Cup Format aspect of consistency through to Round 29. The top 12 in the Winston Format would do battle for 3 rounds and the bottom four eliminated. No points resets and any advantage is kept. Same for the supposed round of 8. This goes through to the final race as well. It is similar to the old format and resembles the current format but what was once gained in the regular season is not lost.
I also think we should have the win and locked in aspect regular season or not.
Anyways criticism is almost always guaranteed with any points format, but I believe this one is rid of all exploitations. For those that want to relax they would need to turn the wick up in the regular season not the final few races. For those that want to win they would need to get that out of the way almost immediately to build a lasting advantage. For those that want consistency there is disparity to get into the 12 spots.
Just an honest take on what NASCAR could try in the future.
One of my favorite ideas was to simultaneously use *all* the previous systems. Whoever wins under the most systems is the overall champion, but there'd still be other titles to fight for. Then, old school fans can be happy that every position in every race counts, and modern fans can be happy that we have a playoff format for added excitement. And everyone can be united in hating that 1974 points mean that Michael McDowell gets to hog one of the championships, lol!
Our current format is too complicated for people coming into the sport to even bother trying to understand
Not really?
@@CharlesB9496 It is complicated. You're just a Typical Stick and Ball Fan. You are not a real Motorsport Fan Asshole
1st few years of the chase to me was incredible!
Drivers when Nascar releases a new points format: Its not fair!
Drivers when they win they championship: Well, the points format is ok I guess.
This is the points system I've been recommending for years for NASCAR:
1. 200, 2. 160, 3. 140, 4. 120, 5. 100
6. 90, 7. 80, 8. 70, 9. 60, 10. 50
11. 45, 12. 40, 13. 35, 14. 30, 15. 25
16. 22, 17. 19, 18. 16, 19. 13, 20. 10
21. 8, 22. 6, 23. 4, 24. 2, 25. 1
26+. 0
Pole. 10
2 points for each 10% of the race led
This in my opinion correctly balances winning, dominance, and consistency. It also creates memorable point totals for the memorable positions (5th: 100, 10th: 50, 15th: 25, 20th: 10, 25th: 1) to make it easy to remember for the fans, which was apparently important when they adopted that really dumb 40-1 format. And I never liked how people took damaged cars back onto the track many laps down to collect more points, and this would have rendered that unnecessary. Yeah, the damaged vehicle policy took care of that I suppose but I still think this is a much better method at producing the same thing.
I like it...makes winning worth a lot more, I always hated hearing about points racing, it made drivers afraid of trying in fear of tearing up their stuff to protect their points...I think this plus stage points would be perfect.
That's a lot of points.
I'd prefer the 1975-2003 system.
And I personally enjoyed watching teams try and fix the car up as best as possible.
Not saying your idea is bad. Because no system is perfect. And at least you have suggestions and ideas, and aren't just complaining.
I just like the consistency game.
And yes it did have flaws. I will agree.
Thats It. I understand why the Latford Points format was criticized because it awarded Consistency too much over winning. Case in Point, the small gap between 1st - 5th, and Bonus Points for Leading Laps.
This is what I would do to my Points format:
• Award More Points to the Race Winner
• No Bonus Points for Leading Laps
• Dont Award Points to the Whole Field. Give Points to the Top 25 only (Cup only)
Heres my NASCAR Points Format
1st - 125
2nd - 100
3rd - 80
4th - 60
5th - 45
6th - 40
7th - 35
8th - 30
9th - 25
10th - 20
11th - 18
12th - 16
13th - 14
14th - 12
15th - 11
16th - 10
17th - 9
18th - 8
19th - 7
20th - 6
21st - 5
22nd - 4
23rd - 3
24th - 2
25th - 1
I wonder how different things may have been had Latford not passed away in 2003, as he may have pushed for tweaks to the format rather than a full reset
The biggest issue with the Winston Nascar points format is the gaps between drivers not being enough. It becomes clear once you make points a percentage of total points for the winner
The driver in 2nd would earn 97.1% of the points the winner got (or even equal with bonus points). Compare that to MotoGP (80%), Indycar (80%) or F1 (72%). This allows drivers who win a lot to have a big enough lead to have a bad race or 2, but still rewarding consistency
Had Nascar adjusted the gaps to similar levels they'd managed to reward winning more and keep an exciting, season long format. Instead we got the chase and the playoffs...
Personally I would like to go back to either the 2004-2013 Chase for the Championship Format or go to a Full Season Points Format (F1 Full Season or IndyCar Full Season).
If NASCAR goes to a Full Season Format again, this is what I would do to the Points format to make every Race and Qualifying Exciting again, and how to make Points matter for all 36 Races again.
Here's the Catch, only the Top 25 Get Points.
With that out of the way, here is my NASCAR Cup Points format:
1st - 70 points
2nd - 50
3rd - 45
4th - 40
5th - 37
6th - 34
7th - 31
8th - 28
9th - 25
10th - 22
11th - 20
12th - 18
13th - 16
14th - 14
15th - 12
16th - 10
17th - 9
18th - 8
19th - 7
20th - 6
21st - 5
22nd - 4
23rd - 3
24th - 2
25th - 1
Points for Qualifying:
1st (Pole Winner) - 10 points
2nd - 9
3rd - 8
4th - 7
5th - 6
6th - 5
7th - 4
8th - 3
9th - 2
10th - 1
With this Points format, it encourages everyone to Race Well and Run Up Front all throughout the Race, and it Encourages Pit Strategy as well
This Points Format is a Hybrid of the Lattford Points Format, F1 Points (with only the Select Few getting Points) and IndyCar Points
Note:
• No Bonus Points for Leading Laps, the Goal is to Win
• No More Stages (This aint the NBA, We dont need Quarters)
Not a NASCAR fan and I surely don't know enough about its racing but every other championship has a points system that rewards consistency. You can win half the races but if you are trash in the other half of the championship you can't say you deserve the title
My own theory on points:
• 200 Points for 1st, 175 Points for 2nd, and 3 points off for each position.
• Keep stage points but have a 20 point bonus for the race sweep.
•5 point bonus for laps led.
•Maximum points to win: 255.
That's perfect!
@@PaperBanjo64 I got an even better system get rid stage stage racing.
@@skatewithnomercy that would be great if NASCAR could get rid of the infamous "phantom debris" cautions to bunch up the field they had prior to stage racing.
The "vinyl to CD" comparison for the move from the Latford Format to the Chase Format is apt, in an ironic sort of way. In particular, CD audio (and digital media in more broadly) is frequently criticized by audiophiles due to the ease with which it can be manipulated, especially the use of waveform compression to make a given audio file louder than it would naturally be in an unmastered state. A fitting analogy to the way in which the postseason concept is often accused of existing to manufacture drama and/or justify the existence of second dates at many tracks, especially those that host weekends in competition with the NFL season.
Those same audiophiles also avidly pursue vinyls because that format, and analog audio formats more broadly, are more resistant to the above-mentioned methodologies of audio manipulation (e.g. trying to compress vinyl audio past a certain point can and often does result in a vinyl disc that will either destroy the needle prematurely or spontaneously eject the needle from the groove), much like many fans insist that reverting back to the Latford Format is the only, or at least most, viable solution.
The description of how the format works is even comparable in some ways to waveform audio compression, especially equalization (which simultaneously fills in the valleys of the raw waveform while knocking the peaks off and significantly boosting the overall volume of the signal).
Wow .. Thank you for doing this video. I am 55 years old and have followed the sport for decades and I had no clue about all of this.
Interesting to see how the constant arguments and fighting over what championship format works best and putting dominance over consistency has lead to the "Final race winner takes all" farce that we currently have today.
Perhaps some drivers just call out on the format because they're jealous that they didn't win the cup.
But what grinds my gears is that no other major motosport orginisation (or atleast that I know off) decides thier champions the way Nascar does. Right now it seems like Nascar is the only one that decides it's champion based on anything but a full season worth of points with no resets.
The chase/playoffs may have given Nascar short term success, but in the long run, it failed. TV ratings have declined, statistically mediocore and winless drivers have been eligible for championships with some even winning them. I don't blame any of these chase champions since everyone had to play by these rules, I blame the people behind the current format for where we are now.
A full season long format won't bring back the numbers they've lost, but it can help slow the bleeding.
edit: the point is that people complain and don't appreciate what they have until it's gone.
I know you can't really compare but the Monster truck Champion every year gets decided in a single event.
15:05 - the "it's like going from vinyl to CD" comparison is _hilarious_ when you consider that not even a decade later music fans started drifting back towards buying vinyl as their primary physical music...
To me the driver who deserves to win the championship is the one who is the most consistent. All of the complaints about the guy with the most wins not winning, well then be more consistent in your other races and it would not be a problem. To me a driver with 25 top 10s and 3 wins deserves the title more than a guy who wins 8 races, but only has 15 top 10s.
It's just a matter of preference. I don't think of a champion as someone who just plays it safe all the time. Riding around the track all day where your top focus is just to make sure you don't push too hard is just lame and boring. If there are other guys who are being aggressive and, heaven forbid, trying to win a race that day, then nooooooo sir....I'm too scared to get involved in all that! You guys just go ahead and pass me and maybe wreck while I tortoise my way to a championship.
@@jek4837 It really isn't a matter of preference. Constant aggression wins hearts, but it also wrecks race cars.
Not everyone can have a winning day every week. Making the best of a setup that is less than ideal, a track that doesn't play to your car's strengths, or a day full of sheer bad luck is how champions are crowned. Dragging a 20th place car to 9th may not be glamorous, but to suggest that such drives aren't the hallmarks of a true championship-caliber driver is absurd. ESPECIALLY as such skill is usually necessary to perform the same feats of absolute domination that everyone THINKS is the only hallmark of a champion.
Nobody's scared. Racers wanna race. Sometimes 9th is just the best a fella can do, and if their rivals keep wrecking or finishing 20th on their worst days, guess who deserves to be champion...
@@mitchell-wallisforce7859 It's 100% a matter of preference. I know that not everyone has a winning car each week. On the 1-2 mile tracks, there's usually only a handful of cars in the field that are capable of winning the race outright on any given day (without a fuel mileage finish or other incident). And I absolutely love seeing a driver with a 20th place managing his way to fight up to 9th somehow whether it be on strategy or just pure racing. Nobody is saying that if a driver didn't push all out to win then he's a failure. Points racing all the time is just boring. And it's a severe disservice to the fans and tracks at the end of the schedule when the champion had already been determined a couple races before the season was even finished.
@@jek4837 Firstly, pushing to finish 9th in a 20th place car _is exactly what "points racing" is._
Secondly, it's a sport first. If the champion is crowned before the last round of the season, then they obviously beat the pants off of everyone else and richly deserve it. Plus, the fact that championships end that way makes the title fights that go to the last round so much more special to watch. If it happens every year because the format forces such endings, then the endings cease to be special.
Having watched for 30+ years, I have to say I do like this current point system, as the old Latford system had devolved into the "good points day" stroking as mentioned in the vid. This system rewards winning and the accrual of playoff points keeps dominant drivers at an advantage to advance, but still requires them to perform. One primary tweak I would like to see is the elimination of the "winner take all " race as it can be really punitive for one bad race to decide the championship and can heavily favour one driver depending on the track it's held at. A 3-5 race championship round with everything all level at each of a short track/road course/intermediate would be a great equalizer at the end. I would also like to see non playoff drivers have their points reset and a "B' division champion decided among them so they have something to race for in the final part of the season
3 4 3 playoff system would be fun, specially if there is a way to make the drivers be competitive in ALL 3 RACES preferably on front
I wish the current Playoff format would've been the original Chase format. I think fans got so tired of seeing the system constantly change that now when we have a system that checks all the boxes of the original Chase's intentions, nobody likes it because of how tired people are.
Personally, I think what we got now is just right and eliminates all holes of every other format NASCAR has had. I do wish they had tried giving the winner more points in 2004 (let's say 210 points for a win; 170 for 2nd; min. 30 point advantage, max. 50 point advantage), instead of totally changing the format.
After watching all these old interviews and complaints you can see exactly how we got where we are now. I actually feel a little better about the current system knowing that even what people think was the golden era points system had just as many issues and complaints
The big question is how to balance the line between sport and entertainment. Too far in either direction is bad overall for growth.
In my opinion, the full-season should count, but with more focus on top performance than before with Latford’s system. There should be at least a 15 point gap from first to second, and graduated to where last place gets 1 point rather than 46, with the graduation skewed more in the top 15 than the bottom 25. Maybe 5 for a pole as well.
I understand why the Latford Points format was criticized because it awarded Consistency too much over winning. Case in Point, the small gap between 1st - 5th, and Bonus Points for Leading Laps.
This is what I would do to my Points format:
• Award More Points to the Race Winner
• No Bonus Points for Leading Laps
• Dont Award Points to the Whole Field. Give Points to the Top 25 only (Cup only)
Heres my Cup Series Points format:
Note: Its a Hybrid of F1 Points, and the Latford Points Format
Qualifying Points:
1st (Pole winner) - 10
2nd - 9
3rd - 8
4th - 7
5th - 6
6th - 5
7th - 4
8th - 3
9th - 2
10th - 1
Points After a Race:
1st - 70
2nd - 50
3rd - 45
4th - 40
5th - 37
6th - 34
7th - 31
8th - 28
9th - 25
10th - 22
11th - 20
12th - 18
13th - 16
14th - 14
15th - 12
16th - 10
17th - 9
18th - 8
19th - 7
20th - 6
21st - 5
22nd - 4
23rd - 3
24th - 2
25th - 1
All of your content on this channel and your other channel is just solid. Great stuff.
Very good video, as a non NASCAR regular this was helpful to understand it.
I find it funny how DW complained in 1984 that the champion should be the driver with the most wins and most prize money, yet the very next season (1985), he got the title over someone who won 11 races (Bill Elliott)
Slapshoes idea for a points system is perfect IMO. It rewards good finishes but also running up front the whole race instead of just certain times. As well as adding bonus points for leading a lap, leading the most laps, the fastest lap of the race and the fastest 4 tire pitstop of the race.
Fun fact: Denny Hamlin would be the 2021 champion with the 1968/1971 system.
Odd to see Darrell angry about the Latford system. I'd love to go back to it, but would also be about 90% as happy if we went back to the 04 style Chase. It was a whole lot closer than what we have now...
I would say the current setup is the least rewarding minus the last race. You could win every race and be horrible at the last track and finish 4th. Newman almost won the championship without winning a race a few years back
Hearing Brian France talk makes me visibly upset.
If nascar wants to save the teams parts due to the supply chain, maybe something similar to the F1 points system would do well, where cars 21-40 dont get any points and get rid of the crash clock.
Thats It. I understand why the Latford Points format was criticized because it awarded Consistency too much over winning. Case in Point, the small gap between 1st - 5th, and Bonus Points for Leading Laps.
This is what I would do to my Points format:
• Award More Points to the Race Winner
• No Bonus Points for Leading Laps
• Dont Award Points to the Whole Field. Give Points to the Top 25 only (Cup only)
Heres my Cup Series Points format:
Note: Its a Hybrid of F1 Points, and the Latford Points Format
1st - 100
2nd - 80
3rd - 65
4th - 55
5th - 45
6th - 40
7th - 35
8th - 30
9th - 25
10th - 20
11th - 18
12th - 16
13th - 14
14th - 12
15th - 11
16th - 10
17th - 9
18th - 8
19th - 7
20th - 6
21st - 5
22nd - 4
23rd - 3
24th - 2
25th - 1
My Favorite will always be the '04 - '13 Chase Format, the '75 - '03 Full Season Format, I kinda liked it
I want the season champion to be the driver who performed the best all year and not a playoff system where the winner takes all. Playoffs work in other sports and while I am glad NASCAR "tried to improve the product" by switching it up I just don't think it works here. Every single race should matter. This is why so many people only like watching playoff baseball, because the entire rest of the season doesn't matter at that point. So they watch a handful of games at the end and that's it. Not a great way to get new fans locked on every weekend if nascar wants to improve viewership and create a larger fanbase. My 2 cents...
You mean….. LIKE IT USED TO BE?…. :)
@@frankfarms83 mmhmm
I disagree with that , you still earn playoff points and there is seeding. starting 16th in the playoffs is a lot worse then starting 1st, the leader has some wiggle room in case of mistakes thanks to his success in the season. with every race being win and you're in as well, it makes any race in the season have potential championship considerations. The season finale at daytona has become one of the biggest races of the year now because of it.
@@01Zipang ok, but the main problem still exists. Why the hell would you take seriously a championship decided in 1 race? All the rest of the championship is ignored, because at the end, what is important is if you are at the Championship 4 or not. Hell, we have Matt Crafton winning a tittle without a win in a format which try to focus on the wins!
Indycar Point System is Mad
Bill Elliott not winning the 1985 Winston Cup is one of the greatest mysteries in sports history. Strolls to 11 wins and still doesn't win the year.
Had NASCAR Sticked to the Latford Format in '07, we would be doing the Same thing to Jimmie Johnson and Jeff Gordon. Jimmie won 10 Races that Year compared to Jeff's 6.
He lacked consistency to DW Especially late in the season
Take the latford system and reward wins with an extra 20 points. 200 for the win, 170 for second, etc
Wins are credited more while still maintaining a full season format. If you win 10 races but finish outside the top 20 the rest of the season, you shouldn’t be champion over a guy with 25+ top tens
In my opinion, the 2004-2011 points system was the best. It still awarded consistency, but it created a playoff scenario when the last 10 races started, stopping anyone from running away early. The rounds are stupid because you can win 35 races and blow an engine in the last race and lose. Motorsport isn't about wins and losses like ball and stick sports. It's much more about consistency. We should rewarding drives that run in the top 10, not drivers that can win 4 or 5 races but finish outside the top 15 other races.
You aint alone, the 2004-2013 Chase Format was Awesome, it had a Balance of Wins, Entertainment and Consistency
IndyCar series has the best points system today.
so did cart in the 90's
Except for the double points and special qualifying points at Indy, yes. I would remove those.
So does F1
@@arenasnow i am ok with indy double points, as far i know it doesnt affected the championship considerably and it is INDYcar we are talking about, it is everything about INDY 500
Obligatory _Winston cup format is the best_ comment
I can only imagine how much Kurt and Kyle Busch rolled their eyes and thought how ridiculous the playoffs are after they were off camera.
I think the points system just shows what's valued in the series at any given time.
Reliability and longevity of the car on big tracks in the early years.
Consistency in the Winston Cup era.
Winning and only winning now.
As for my 2 cents, I think a more heavily weighted season long points system is the way to go. With a big dropoff from winner to 2nd. And similar dropoff to make Top 5s and Top 10s more important. DNFs should also receive 0 points imo but I'm less adamant about that point.
Racing is better and more entertaining when the positions matter throughout the field, not just up front.
My suggestion would be:
50 points for a Win
40 for Second place
30 for Third place
20 for Fourth place
15 for Fifth place
From there, count down on one point increments until you get only one point for finishing 20th.
10 points for a pole position and 5 point if you get the fastest lap of the race.
I like pole position points, but I don’t think an F1 style points system will translate well to nascar. It’s always bugged me in F1 how only half the drivers get points, and the complete lack of parity means there will really never be comers and goers in the points race
@@frankf2902 F1 is more of a technical competition between teams than a competition between drivers. Fairness there is that if you are the best team, you win. IMO it is artificial for a competition to declare someone the best because they finished a few races better than the one who finished the best all year. I want teams to actually put up a real effort into fighting for position instead of being a rolling chicane at the back. If they don't get their points, then they should perhaps try a bit harder.
@@TripleAlfafa I definitely agree with F1 being a very technical sport. However, as for the backmarkers, F1 has only half the field size as nascar, and runs exclusively on medium-long road courses. Lapped traffic is usually minimal in a gp, but on a nascar circuit lapped traffic will always be a thing, even if you have 15-20 cars with a reasonable shot to win each week. Moving chicane backmarkers/lapped cars can’t really be eliminated, and imo aren’t an issue. Besides, on a hypothetical f1 oval race, anyone besides a mclaren or Ferrari would be a moving chicane for a Red Bull or Mercedes’.
This is what I would do to my Points format:
• Award More Points to the Race Winner
• No Bonus Points for Leading Laps
• Dont Award Points to the Whole Field. Give Points to the Top 25 only (Cup only)
Heres my Cup Series Points format:
Note: Its a Hybrid of F1 Points, and the Latford Points Format
1st - 125
2nd - 100
3rd - 80
4th - 60
5th - 45
6th - 40
7th - 35
8th - 30
9th - 25
10th - 20
11th - 18
12th - 16
13th - 14
14th - 12
15th - 11
16th - 10
17th - 9
18th - 8
19th - 7
20th - 6
21st - 5
22nd - 4
23rd - 3
24th - 2
25th - 1
I actually prefer the 1972-1973 points system the most.
19:00 Drunk Loser
This makes me wonder what the DW points system would've been. Obviously the Latford System rewarded consistency, the Chase system didn't reward winning enough in DW's opinion, and idk what his thoughts were on the playoff system.
Here's an idea for a playoff format. You seed the top 16 drivers and make them go against each other head-to-head (1-16, 2-15, 3-14, so on and so forth) while everyone is racing. You keep a tally of how many points they get in each of the three races like quarters in basketball. Whoever has the most points after those three races advances to the next round. The downside is you get rid of the 12-round format unless you decide to make the first round a six-race deal.
Latford System will always make the most sense. Playoffs are trash.
Latford system was good and (probably) the best, but certainly not perfect. My biggest issue is the points payout between 1st and 2nd place.
The difference between 1st and 2nd ≠ the difference between 15th and 16th.
The points gap between finishing 1st and finishing 2nd needed to be doubled at the least.
I really like the idea of the playoff or even the chase format. However, I don’t think it should be based on wins. The “win and you’re in” thing has always been stupid to me because it allows drivers like Michael McDowell or Aric Almirola to compete for a championship when they’re mid to back of the pack on any given Sunday and have no legitimate chance of winning the championship
I like the Chase format just prior to the "win and you're in", but I wouldn't have minded the win motivator if they had done it slightly differently. Send the top 10 points drivers to the Chase. Then you can allow 2 "win and you're in" drivers as long as they are top 20 in points (not top 25). If there are not 2 with wins, then you just take the next top 2 points drivers to have a field of 12.
@@jek4837 yeah. That’s actually pretty decent idea
I think that the OG Chase wasn't a bad idea. Still got a driver who drove his ass off for 10 weeks. A winner take all seems very contrived.
I think we should go back to the pre-03 system, with a few tweaks.
-Current points distribution, (40 points for 1st, 39 for 2nd, 38 for 3rd etc.)
-5 Bonus Points for each win
-3 Bonus Points for each pole
-5 Bonus Points to the driver(s) with the most wins throughout the season.
-Bonus point for leading a lap and the most laps
The point systems I'd want to use would be the point system s1apsh0es cooked up last year, only with some tweaks, instead of stages i'd have a halfway break with the leader at halfway getting 5 bonus points, also to make the crown jewel races (Daytona 500, Coca-Cola 600, Southern 500, Bristol Night Race, one of the Talladega Races, and the Championship Race) offer double points, kinda like what IndyCar does.
Personally I would like to go back to either the 2004-2013 Chase for the Championship Format or go to a Full Season Points Format (F1 Full Season or IndyCar Full Season).
If NASCAR goes to a Full Season Format again, this is what I would do to the Points format to make every Race and Qualifying Exciting again, and how to make Points matter for all 36 Races again.
Here's the Catch, only the Top 25 Get Points.
With that out of the way, here is my NASCAR Cup Points format:
1st - 70 points
2nd - 50
3rd - 45
4th - 40
5th - 37
6th - 34
7th - 31
8th - 28
9th - 25
10th - 22
11th - 20
12th - 18
13th - 16
14th - 14
15th - 12
16th - 10
17th - 9
18th - 8
19th - 7
20th - 6
21st - 5
22nd - 4
23rd - 3
24th - 2
25th - 1
Points for Qualifying:
1st (Pole Winner) - 10 points
2nd - 9
3rd - 8
4th - 7
5th - 6
6th - 5
7th - 4
8th - 3
9th - 2
10th - 1
With this Points format, it encourages everyone to Race Well and Run Up Front all throughout the Race, and it Encourages Pit Strategy as well
This Points Format is a Hybrid of the Lattford Points Format, F1 Points (with only the Select Few getting Points) and IndyCar Points
Cool video and nice to see what people thought about the system throughout the years. I honestly don’t care about the points system anymore. I’m just tired of it changing. NASCAR seems to be doubling down on the playoffs as is, and I think that’s a good idea. If it has to change again, switch it back to the full season. Those are honestly the only two choices I’d go with
They drastically changed the format after three of Jimmie's titles. Amazing
If nothing else, this video shows that people will complain no matter how the points are calculated
Here is a points idea
In a 40 car field, have 40th - 21st have a points difference of 2, then have 20th - 11th have a points difference of 3, then have 10th - 6th have a points difference of 5, then have 5th - 2nd have a points difference of 10, finally have 1st place finisher gain a difference of 25 points over 2nd place. Add 5 bonus points for leading a lap and 10 bonus points for most laps lead.
I just rewarded wins AND consistency, perfect
'Oh don't want someone to take a massive lead and make the last races boring?'
Then for the last 12 races, have the top 10 in points be put in a different bracket with 2 wild card spots for anyone 30th - 11th who have the most wins for a total of 12 drivers who can win the championship.
Those in 12th - 2nd have a difference of 5 points but the regular season leader will have a difference of 10 points over 2nd in the chase. Then of course over the last 12 races, those 12 drivers will battle for the championship gaining points like in the regular season until we have a champion crowned in the final race.
I rewarded consistency and wins within a balance, and I even made the championship battle closer without a 'last race winner takes all' stupidity deal.
Everyone should be happy now.
Man, even back in the day, NASCAR fans had no idea what they wanted 😂😂😂😂😂
It looks that some stuffs never change lol
I like the old points system better.
Don't we all agree? Yea. The Agreement said it for me.
Wow, it's almost like every championship points system is flawed in its own way and none of them are perfect. Hmmm...
It is almost like the thogout to go back to a old point system was more caused by nostalgia than a actual compromise with actual state of sport
If they insist on keeping the current playoff style, we need to provide incentive to earn the most points throughout the season as well. If someone earns the most points and wins the playoffs, $10 million bonus
Why does everyone seem to be upset if a driver wins a race by 15 seconds? Why would it be so bad if a driver clinched the championship with 2 races left? Just because a particular driver and their team kicked everyone else's ass all race or all year we should change how wins or championships are rewarded? I cannot stand Truex, but if the #19 goes to Las Vegas and leads all but 15 laps and wins by 11 seconds, he and his team were the best that day. Not every sporting event comes down to the last second or last play.
Exactly how many Super Bowls in the 90s were blowouts? I mean reward consistency but incentive winning and leading laps. You can have the best of both worlds but cut out playoffs.
@@Americalovesme2008 sure you can. I, personally, could live without a playoffs system in motorsports altogether. The winner should be awarded more points than just 1 more point than the 2nd place driver. It's very rare that a 10 or more win season takes place. A champion in NASCAR shouldn't be a driver with 6 wins, 8 top 5s, 11 top 10s and 12 DFS. Also, there's almost no way to compare NASCAR to the NFL. But to my point, why does it matter if the Super Bowl is a blowout? Should the NFL reduce all leads to 3 points at halftime to add "entertainment"?
@@mrwest231 Exactly but yet they only care about the imaginary casual viewer. That is their downfall with everything for decision making.
Simply, people like unpredictability and this breaks the idea of unpredictability, it is like if someone told a spoiler of a movie before the movie starts, eventually you get the idea that it will be a loss of time since you know what will happens anyways
I agree that consistency should be rewarded but it doesnt should come at price of competitively and unpredictability
@@superninja252 unpredictably is great, but not at the cost of sport; especially when a man made machine is the most important part of the competition. A part failure can end a race or season regardless of points system. However when the sanctioning body designs the point system like it is, a driver who otherwise would be able to lean on the 35 and/or 9 races prior is now just going home 4th in points.
Bruh, they got to cool it with all these points changes. This was a little bit exhausting to watch lol! Gotta do something simple like F1 or Indycar man. I don't care if you miss out on a champion-deciding race at the end of every year if you get a legitimate champion.
Thats It. I understand why the Latford Points format was criticized because it awarded Consistency too much over winning. Case in Point, the small gap between 1st - 5th, and Bonus Points for Leading Laps.
This is what I would do to my Points format:
• Award More Points to the Race Winner
• No Bonus Points for Leading Laps
• Dont Award Points to the Whole Field. Give Points to the Top 25 only (Cup only)
Heres my Cup Series Points format:
Note: Its a Hybrid of F1 Points, and the Latford Points
1st - 100
2nd - 80
3rd - 65
4th - 55
5th - 45
6th - 40
7th - 35
8th - 30
9th - 25
10th - 20
11th - 18
12th - 16
13th - 14
14th - 12
15th - 11
16th - 10
17th - 9
18th - 8
19th - 7
20th - 6
21st - 5
22nd - 4
23rd - 3
24th - 2
25th - 1
Sometimes I thought NASCAR could do something like Super GT's success ballast system to keep the championship battle closer, but I digress.
IDK how but you somehow just found a way to make NASCAR even worse. Success ballast is Super GT's single biggest flaw and a pox on every motorsport it touches. I'm actually surprised NASCAR hasn't implemented it yet, in that regard.
@@mitchell-wallisforce7859 Admittedly, Super GT had a sandbagging problem regarding success ballast to the point the 2003 GT500 and GT300 champions were both winless. They seem to have figured it out by halving the ballast for the 2nd-last round and then removing it altogether for the last one, though.
I don't quite understand why NASCAR doesn't use a system similar to F1 where the difference between 1st and so on is staggered. Say, 1st gets 100 points, 2nd gets 75, 3rd gets 60, 4th gets 50, and yadayadayada. Add in bonus points for a lap led and most led and I think it would reward the most deserving Champion. Sure, you might have some years where a guy locks up the title early, but even if so, that driver most likely deserves it anyway.
Thats It. I understand why the Latford Points format was criticized because it awarded Consistency too much over winning. Case in Point, the small gap between 1st - 5th, and Bonus Points for Leading Laps.
This is what I would do to my Points format:
• Award More Points to the Race Winner
• No Bonus Points for Leading Laps
• Dont Award Points to the Whole Field. Give Points to the Top 25 only (Cup only)
Heres my Cup Series Points format:
Note: Its a Hybrid of F1 Points, and the Latford Points Format
Qualifying Points:
1st (Pole winner) - 10
2nd - 9
3rd - 8
4th - 7
5th - 6
6th - 5
7th - 4
8th - 3
9th - 2
10th - 1
Points After a Race:
1st - 70
2nd - 50
3rd - 45
4th - 40
5th - 37
6th - 34
7th - 31
8th - 28
9th - 25
10th - 22
11th - 20
12th - 18
13th - 16
14th - 14
15th - 12
16th - 10
17th - 9
18th - 8
19th - 7
20th - 6
21st - 5
22nd - 4
23rd - 3
24th - 2
25th - 1
Good lord I hate TH-cam's commenting coding. I spend 10 minutes writing a nice reply just to get an error and a ridiculous refresh of the video that kills the 10 minute comment detailing--in detail, a fair point system that rewards all front runners and the winner along with the pole sitter and scenarios of how it would. sigh.
Any format that has no gimmicks and no resets are motorsports formats. At the end of the day, stick n ball sports gimmicks don’t belong in any form of Motorsports. The longer the chase exists, the more it’s going to hurt NASCAR due to NASCAR’s current horrible management.
As much as I despise the chase, the only good Chase is 2004-2013. That’s all. Plus it’s sad that Trucks and Xfinity have it too. Whatever Lattford was doing, he knew what he was doing. We need a guy like him in NASCAR nowadays
What a bad take
@@cba_2442 you either don’t understand what I’m saying or you’re a chase lover. You don’t see other Motorsports series having the chase. Because they know how to be a pure Motorsports series unlike NASCAR.
Plus I didn’t mean it’s gonna hurt NASCAR as in “iTs GoNnA dIe”. I know NASCAR isn’t gonna die and all that crap, but the longer the bad stuff Brian France added in NASCAR, it’s still gonna hurt the series and I don’t want to see that.
Agreed. There is no place for an elimination-style playoff format anywhere in motorsports (not just in NASCAR). Although it has produced its fair share of exciting races and Game 7 (or Race 36) moments, the current points system is a joke. I personally think NASCAR should go back to the Winston Cup-era points format and eliminate the playoffs entirely.
@@josephconciatori9824 sadly with the current management, they’re still gonna keep it because “they like what they’re seeing”. It’s sad
@@josephconciatori9824 It made sense in the old Hooters Pro Cup series (which is where we stole the Chase concept from) because they had separate Northern and Southern divisions that didn't race against each other. So taking the top five in points from each series and racing them together at the end of the year made a degree of sense. I wouldn't object to the current East and West series doing something like that. But when everyone runs the same schedule, it's completely unnecessary.
3:50 is that a young Steve byrnes???
It is
Mixes of the Lafford system with the bonuses on laps led and most laps led and the playoff system and stage points should be what's done maybe a little complicated
Just use the F1 points model ajusted for the field size.
Personally I would like to go back to either the 2004-2013 Chase for the Championship Format or go to a Full Season Points Format (F1 Full Season or IndyCar Full Season).
If NASCAR goes to a Full Season Format again, this is what I would do to the Points format to make every Race and Qualifying Exciting again, and how to make Points matter for all 36 Races again.
Here's the Catch, only the Top 25 Get Points.
With that out of the way, here is my NASCAR Cup Points format:
1st - 100 points
2nd - 80
3rd - 65
4th - 55
5th - 45
6th - 40
7th - 35
8th - 30
9th - 25
10th - 20
11th - 18
12th - 16
13th - 14
14th - 12
15th - 11
16th - 10
17th - 9
18th - 8
19th - 7
20th - 6
21st - 5
22nd - 4
23rd - 3
24th - 2
25th - 1
This Points Format is a Hybrid of the Lattford Points Format, F1 Points with only the Select Few getting Points
Note:
• No Bonus Points for Leading Laps, the Goal is to Win
• No More Stages (This aint the NBA, We dont need Quarters)
The Original Chase Format With The 2004-2006 10 Driver/2004-2013 10 Chase Race Format With Chase Points And No Points Resets Only For The NASCAR Cup Series.
But Bring Back The Full-Season Winston Cup Series Points Format Only For Both The NASCAR Xfinity Series And NASCAR Craftsman Truck Series.
I think the champion should be the driver with the highest average finish throughout the year. I think a points system should just be an easy way of keeping track of that whilst ensuring that driver take part in each race.
I know it gets criticism for not rewarding winning enough, but I think that having a year long points format means that every single race from first to last matters.
S1apSh0es came up with a system that seems pretty darn fair, I say we just use that.
So as I'm watching this, I decided to come up with my own points system. A mix between the old points system and a bit of F1.
1. 200
2. 170 (-30 from 1st)
3. 150 (-20)
4. 135 (-15)
5. 125 (-10)
6. 120 (-5)
7. 115 (-5)
8. 110 (-5)
9. 105 (-5)
10. 100 (-5)
It'll continue going down -5 where 29th will be the last position receiving points. 30 and below will receive 0. Any ties will be decided on the better race result position.
Lead a lap = 5 points
Lead most laps = 10 points
No playoffs. Just old school most points wins.
Hopefully it's good. Let me know
Complaints about drivers and crews going "good points finishes" and being happy about good T5 and T10 finishes with the car in one piece come from the people who value dramatic showmen that are checkers-or-wreckers. The problem with rewarding checkers-or-wreckers driving is all the torn-up race cars and the massive reckless endangerment posed to the drivers, which really pisses off the sponsors, the crews, and the drivers. Also, rewarding consistency and bringing it back in one piece really puts the smaller teams in the running. Alan Kulwicki spent approximately $2.75M to win the 1992 title, for perspective, and he was an owner-driver of a single-car team going against juggernauts who spent more than that on payroll alone!
I would personally return to a Latford-esque system, but with more bonus points on offer. Points for leading a lap (per stage), leading the most laps (full race), stage points (just don't throw the yellow), stage points for qualifying P1-10, and fastest lap (per stage *and* full race). Drivers only earn bonus points if they complete at least half the distance the winner completed. Each DNF after the second in the season deducts five points, unless your race was ended by another driver's error or rule violation (in which case, your deduction instead goes to the at fault driver(s).)
Creating a win or wreak system is expensive for race teams.
Every system will be flawed but it depends on what type of racing you want is what you'll pick, if you want a fair system choose the point system, if you want more focus on winning races, use the chase system.
As a guy who mainly follows F1, it's crazy how NASCAR had to complicate its point system so much over time
F1s is so easy to Follow.
@@skatewithnomercy F1 has the best one, wouldn't work exactly in NASCAR but something that awarded points to the top 20 or 25 could work.
@@PaperBanjo64 you could weight it differently.
@@PaperBanjo64 I think it works pretty well with NASCAR overall. The only year that really stood out to me as being *wrong* was David Pearson winning the 1973 championship while skipping 10 races, because in F1, not being in the race is the same as finishing 11th. But aside from that, I don't have too many gripes about it. Newman winning in '03 also slightly rankled me, but that was a year where no one truly deserved to be champion, so every system feels wrong.
This is a terrific video. It just proves that it doesn’t matter what points system you have in place, there will always be a bunch of idiots whining about it. Everybody needs to reflect for a moment and just appreciate that something as wonderful as NASCAR exists in the first place. I wouldn’t trade NASCAR for anything else in the world no matter how they score it.
NASCAR has had lots of systems. I have mixed feelings about the Playoffs. While it is more competitive due to the resets. They are making the regular season just boring. Win and your in, do you basically don’t have to do anything until playoff time. I
Also think NASCAR is giving out to many spots, I think 12 is a good number to work with and it should be by points, just my opinion.
I was never alive for the latford system but I much prefer the system but i understand people who want to see winning awarded that’s why if I was in charge I would
Give 25 points to the pole winner and give points to top 10 qualifiers
9 points to 2nd ,8 points to 3rd, 7 points to 4th, 6 points to 5th, 5 points to 6th, 4 points to 7th, 3 points to 8th, 2 points to 9th and finally 1 point to 10th and give 5 bonus points to fastest lap in race 5 points for each lap led so if you lead 7 laps you get 35 lap led points and most laps led gets 10 bonus points and winner of a race gets 230 points and 2nd gets 200 points and then it’s 1 point less each position
Thats It. I understand why the Latford Points format was criticized because it awarded Consistency too much over winning. Case in Point, the small gap between 1st - 5th, and Bonus Points for Leading Laps.
This is what I would do to my Points format:
• Award More Points to the Race Winner
• No Bonus Points for Leading Laps
• Dont Award Points to the Whole Field. Give Points to the Top 25 only (Cup only)
Heres my Cup Series Points format:
Note: Its a Hybrid of F1 Points, and the Latford Points Format
1st - 125
2nd - 100
3rd - 80
4th - 60
5th - 45
6th - 40
7th - 35
8th - 30
9th - 25
10th - 20
11th - 18
12th - 16
13th - 14
14th - 12
15th - 11
16th - 10
17th - 9
18th - 8
19th - 7
20th - 6
21st - 5
22nd - 4
23rd - 3
24th - 2
25th - 1
What do yall want from a points system. Besides obvious things like no playoffs or at least a change if not total removal regarding stages of course