ACT pointscores post Bega & points allocation discussion.

[Spac]

Any mistakes, let me know!

Officiating points aren't up yet - don't panic! I don't have the forms yet, so...

Edit: Gold Cup and Silver Cup points are now correct for Carl, Claude, Lizzy, and MattJ.

Kim Martin IS eligible for (and has been awarded) GC-Nav points when naving for David Stephens, in accordance with 4(f).

This bit in grey below is no-longer relevant (see edit in blue above), but I'm leaving it in my post for reference. If it doesn't make sense to you, ignore it:
And the points for Claude Murray, Carl Stewart, Matt James and Lizzy Ferme are NOT correct. I don't know how to split the points across the tie as specified in Article 4(i) of the 2006 ACT regs, so for now, they've each been awarded the full points (rather than the averaged points). I'm awaiting wisdom and/or guidence from Matty or KW to learn how to fix it (KW managed it last year when Andrew D and Blake S tied at NatCap).
This will ONLY alter these people's points - everyone else's should be correct.

[Factor]

Not that it matters but my big 1 point for Bega doesn'y show up in Silver Cup. I only want it so I get off my duck.

[Spac]

Yes it does! What are you talking about?


Fixed now.
Also fixed Dicky's missing GC point for starting.


Interesting that no Clubman rego'd people DNF'd.

[Stewy]

Spac I know there has probably been plenty of thought put in to this and I don't want to start a big hoohar,
but if 2 people win 3 events they would get 66 pioints, but if one of those people tied with some one else, one would now be behind by 2.5 points and would loose the series even tho both people won 3 each.
This is just my thought and please shot me down if you disagree, but I think if two were to tie they should both recieve the winining 22points, and then the second person should recieve second place points and so on. Not only is a win a win but some one further down the field that may be one place out fron recieving 1 point would then get one as well.
Im hoping im right in saying that at the moment that first and second place points have been combined so we have shared those points?

[claude]

I'm with you Stewy....

Lets kick up a fuss

Spac,
Give em back....Now !

EDIT * just read the series regs.....You win Spac

Ripped by the series... AGAIN.

[fro]

Originally Posted by Stewy

This is just my thought and please shot me down if you disagree, but I think if two were to tie they should both recieve the winining 22points, and then the second person should recieve second place points and so on. Not only is a win a win but some one further down the field that may be one place out fron recieving 1 point would then get one as well.
Im hoping im right in saying that at the moment that first and second place points have been combined so we have shared those points?

Commonly accepted practice is that in the event of a tie, the next place is skipped: If two people tie for first place, the next person is third. It doesn't work mathematically to have the third person to finish place second...

And it's not a win if two people tie... Only one person can win, is that not the nature of winning?

[Spac]

I actually agree with you. It was decided at the start of the year (before the regs came out! ), and I was in the minority on the committee so it became the way it is now.
It went this way because apparently that's how most sports do it (remembering that a tie in a motorsport event is far less common than in field sports).

You should have driven faster and beaten that clown in the 1600!

[Bogan]

Originally Posted by Spac

It went this way because apparently that's how most sports do it (remembering that a tie in a motorsport event is far less common than in field sports).

Whoever said that's how most sports do it must be on some good stuff. When was the last time you saw a gold and silver medal melted down and two gilver medals awarded? If it's a dead heat you get two gold, then a bronze.

Change the regs. for next year.

Oh wait, I forgot, they're already being changed. Well crayon this one in as well. Ties get the place points they finish, then skip the next unawarded place.



T.

[Stewy]

Originally Posted by Bogan

Whoever said that's how most sports do it must be on some good stuff. When was the last time you saw a gold and silver medal melted down and two gilver medals awarded? If it's a dead heat you get two gold, then a bronze.

Change the regs. for next year.

Oh wait, I forgot, they're already being changed. Well crayon this one in as well. Ties get the place points they finish, then skip the next unawarded place.



T.

[claude]

X 2

[Spac]

Originally Posted by Bogan

Whoever said that's how most sports do it must be on some good stuff.

KW suggested it. It became an issue when Blake and Andrew D dead-heated at NatCap.
He went to a reasonable amount of trouble to make the on-line point-scores work with 'averaged points'.

Here's some quotes from the 2005 ACT Series forum:

Originally Posted by Spac

Should tied competitors be given a share of the points, or both deserve full points?

IE: Blake and Andrew at NatCap finished equal first, giving them 19.5 points each - surely they both won so they're both deserving of 22 points each?

Or is there something in the regs that I'm unaware of?

I doesn't matter in this case, but potentially this advantages and disadvantages competitors fairly randomly.

Originally Posted by KW

The normal practice is to award the average, but there's nothing in the [2005] regs. It's certainly the most equitable way to do it. i.e. 2 drivers equal first, neither of them actually won, but they both did better than 2nd. I think you'll find virtually any pointscore in motorsport will do it this way.

For the website it's much, much, much, easier to award the full points to both, so if you put something in the regs to that effect it will make things easier here.

[Bogan]

Neither of them won, but they both finished first.



Countbacks to split ties over 100km (or sometimes 96) aren't fair, so award them both first place pointscore (because they both finish first, there's nothing in the regs. about "winning pointscore") and then skip any unawarded places.

Originally Posted by Series Regs

(d) Points will be awarded as follows in each category:
Starting 1 point
Finishing 1 point
1st-10th in each category 20,15,12,10,8,6,4,3,2,1 respectively

First. Not winner. First. Claude was first. Matty was first. Lizzy was first. Stewy was first. I think they all won but winning isn't in the paperwork, finishing first is. Not even finishing outright first.

That's my opinion.

T.

[Spac]

I'm not gonna argue with you, because I agree.

It can be changed for next year if people want it changed - but the 2006 regs are specific, so it's got no chance of changing until next year.


Anyone else got an opinion?

[claude]

From left field....


Does anyone use "most stages won" to break ties anymore ?

What do the big boys (ARC) do ?

[Kagan]

I thikn that the only fare way todo it is overall times, what if you strategically keep a few seconds behind the car so he is winning most the stages, but then have a big dig and pull all the time back, I don't think it is fare to then say sorry he won more stages, cause when you did win, it was by bigger margins. Just my opinion, I think the way it is now is fine, but then again, you would get more points for officaling, than you would for tieing first, so actually No, I change my mind, I am with both cars getting 22 points... and for god's sake, at least name them when giving out awards, what happened at Bega was unbelievable, two cars tie, and only one car gets the prizes, and then the other car isn't even mentioned by the orgainsers, a member from the regonised car had to give them credit... Good on you Lizzy!!!!