No win, No Title

[Nick]

I thought this might be a good topic. I'd like to hear everyone's opinion on what I'm about to suggest.

If a pro driver does not win a national event then, he or she is not eligible to win the championship. I know this might ruffle a few feathers and even incite some verbal bashing, however, it's a legitimate topic that I would like some feedback on.

Thanks for you input.

 

[mastertone]

I don't agree with you. Most points=title period. The next thing you will suggest is the one who wins the most events should win the title. That doesn't always happen either.

 

[9350]

I thought this might be a good topic. I'd like to hear everyone's opinion on what I'm about to suggest.

If a pro driver does not win a national event then, he or she is not eligible to win the championship. I know this might ruffle a few feathers and even incite some verbal bashing, however, it's a legitimate topic that I would like some feedback on.

Thanks for you input.

LOL... This is going to be a long winter LOL

I have a "what if" What if the majority of Maters who comsume their lifes bashing NHRA and EVERYTHING they do actually got a life?

If you don't like NHRA dragracing and how they run it why do you consume so much of your life *****ing about it?

I love NHRA drag racing, I made a living because of NHRA dragracing. I have my complaints about how they do some things but at the end of the day it's their show. They can run it the way they think it should be run.

 

[Nick]

Everyone pump your brakes. I was just asking.

 

[Meeks]

I thought this might be a good topic. I'd like to hear everyone's opinion on what I'm about to suggest.

If a pro driver does not win a national event then, he or she is not eligible to win the championship. I know this might ruffle a few feathers and even incite some verbal bashing, however, it's a legitimate topic that I would like some feedback on.

Thanks for you input.

I'd agree...because usually that would mean that the countdown is gone. LOL
I guess it could be possible to get to the finals quite a bit and just come up short handed every time...as long as the driver in the other lane isn't the same one every time. Honestly though, no I don't think that would be fair. They win the championship fair and square and then you say oh nope never mind you don't have a wally to back that up.

 

[my friends call me Zappy]

I don't agree with you. Most points=title period. The next thing you will suggest is the one who wins the most events should win the title. That doesn't always happen either.

Nick, I'm with Craig, Keep it simple. Most Points = Title period.

Winning an event should not be required to be season champ.

 

[paoldtimer]

Don't agree. Just because you haven't won a race doesn't mean you haven't been consistent and earned the points to be champ.


It's gonna be a long, cold winter...it's already snowing outside

 

[T.J.]

Its about going rounds regardless if you win the final. The person who goes the most rounds in a year ends up with a higher points than everyone else should not be denied the championship based on not winning an event.

 

[Nick]

Thanks for the feedback guys. Interesting perspectives.

 

[rick]

I say most points = championship

 

[willy]

Accumulation of points for the WHOLE year..no resetting..wins.

 

[Demon]

Too many 'What if's" will get posted on this, but I say most points wins the title.

 

[PJ]

most points over the entire season should do it...if it can be done with out winning a race over 24 races then fine. It looks odd but at least someone showed amazing consistently over the entire season.

I wouldn't mind them adding bonus points to winning a race either.

 

[You!]

Are any of you old enough to remember when the winner of the World Finals was crowned the champ? On that win alone? This was back when there was only 6 or so national events for the entire season. Wonder how that would go over now a days.

I mean, if want to talk about drama, that would definately pack the place.

 

[Budlow]

Why don't we make is really simple. 1 point to make first round, 2 points to make it to second round, 3 points to make it to semi-final, 5 points to winner and 4 to runner up. These points would not be cumulative, i.e. if you lose first round you get one point, if you win the event you get five. This would seem to me to reward both winners and consistency.

 

[Shazam]

Are any of you old enough to remember when the winner of the World Finals was crowned the champ? On that win alone? This was back when there was only 6 or so national events for the entire season. Wonder how that would go over now a days.

Bill, sure do remember it......"Ed the Ace" won 5 or 6 national events one year in Funny Car and didn't win the championship.

That was also when they only ran 10 or 12 races.

 

[Rajunz]

Why don't we make is really simple. 1 point to make first round, 2 points to make it to second round, 3 points to make it to semi-final, 5 points to winner and 4 to runner up. These points would not be cumulative, i.e. if you lose first round you get one point, if you win the event you get five. This would seem to me to reward both winners and consistency.

Isn't that the same thing we're doing now divided by 20?

 

[Bullet]

That would mean you could runner up at every race through the year and not win the title!

 

[possum]

What a misguided idea. Most points should win. No fastest loser, no buybacks , no countdown or other BS.

It isn't monster trucks and the average fan is older than seven.

 

[Buzzz Miller]

If you feel this way, (Not saying that I do), there is an easy way to do that. Give the winner of the event 25 points for winning the finals rather than 20. (Or even 30 if you wanted.) That way there is more bonus for winning the event, and more incentive to do so. But saying "You had the most points, but didn't win an event. So we are going to give the trophy to #2", that is not right in any world.