Articles Celebrations Obituaries

Points race better under old system

By Jeff Birchfield
Press Sports Writer
jbirchfield@johnsoncitypress.com

 Printer-friendly version

 Email Article

There is good reason to believe the race for the NASCAR Sprint Cup would be better under the old points system than with the Chase.

As it stands, Jimmie Johnson holds a 108-point lead over Mark Martin heading into Sunday’s final race of the season at Homestead. He needs to just finish 25th or better to clinch a fourth straight series title. Compare that to using the traditional points system, where Johnson would hold just a 13-point lead over Tony Stewart and a 56-point lead over Jeff Gordon.

While Johnson has firmly been in control of the points the last few weeks, the traditional system would have potentially produced three lead changes over the past three races. Johnson would have taken a seven-point lead over Stewart after Talladega, fallen 93 points behind Stewart after Texas and reassumed the lead with his win at Phoenix.

Keep in mind, however, the ways that guys race would change with different point scenarios. With the big lead Stewart acquired during the regular season, there is a chance he could be coasting to a series title.

Still, looking strictly at the points gathered, it’s the third time in the last four years the title race would be closer under the old points system. With one race to go in 2006, Johnson would have led Matt Kenseth by 11 points instead of 63. Last year, he would have led Carl Edwards by 56 points instead of 141. The one year which the Chase made the points race closer was 2007. That year, Gordon would have been 344 points ahead of Johnson at the season-finale instead of 86 points behind Johnson.

Other times the Chase has worked better than the traditional system. In its first year, there were five drivers with a shot at the title heading into the final race, with Kurt Busch’s eight-point win, the closest in championship history. A year later, four drivers had a shot at the championship at the season-finale, and five were still in contention in 2006.

Compare it to the six seasons prior to the Chase when five of the championships were already decided before the final race.

However, the Chase has failed to live up to the hype the last three seasons. It certainly hasn’t produced the kind of championship buzz the series had from 1988-92, when four of five titles were decided by 26 points or less. Bill Elliott won by 24 points over Rusty Wallace in 1988. Wallace won by 12 points over Dale Earnhardt in 1989, and Earnhardt defeated Martin by 26 points in 1990.

While Earnhardt scored a 195-point win over Ricky Rudd the following year, the 1992 battle remains the one which all others are measured. Heading into the final race at Atlanta, Davey Allison led by 30 points over Alan Kulwicki, 40 points over Bill Elliott, 97 points over Harry Gant, 98 points over Kyle Petty and 115 points over Martin. That final race provided another twist as Allison was caught up in a wreck by Ernie Irvan. With the championship down to a two-man fight, Kulwicki stayed in front just long enough to earn bonus points for leading the most laps. While Elliott won the race, Kulwicki used the bonus points and a second-place finish to sew up the title.

Certainly, this year’s Chase hasn’t captured the fans’ imagination the same way. While Martin still has an outside chance, many fans view it just a matter of time before Johnson wraps up his fourth crown.

I believe a few changes could be made to make the racing better next season. Even with the Chase, NASCAR still hasn’t addressed the fans’ biggest complaint — how too many points are paid for consistent finishes instead of winning races.

The final season under the old points system highlighted the problem as Kenseth easily won the title despite winning just one race, while Ryan Newman, with eight wins, wasn’t even a contender. While the points system isn’t entirely broken, as consistency does need to be rewarded, there needs to be a 50-point difference between winning a race and second-place.

I also believe it’s time for a radical change in the way bonus points are handed out. Bonus points are currently paid for leading a single lap and for leading the most laps. The recent debacle at Talladega, where many of the top drivers rode around the back of the pack until the final laps, showed a need to greater reward running up front.

The first step in providing more action would be to limit all races, with the exception of the Daytona 500 and Coca-Cola 600, to no longer than 400 miles or 400 laps at the short tracks. Second, I would keep the five-point bonus for leading a lap, but ditch the five-point bonus for leading the most laps.

Instead, I would introduce a plan where around 40 bonus points could be earned at every race. At the short tracks and the one-mile track at Dover, a driver would get a bonus point for every 10 laps he leads. At New Hampshire and Phoenix, a point would be paid for every eight laps led. It would go to every seven laps on the intermediate tracks, every five laps on the 2-mile tracks, every four laps on the 2.5-mile tracks and every three laps on the road courses.

An exception would be the longer Coca-Cola 600 (400 laps), where a point would be earned for every 10 laps led. The one race which would pay the least dividends is Watkins Glen, where only 30 bonus points would be available. The Daytona 500, the series’ marquee race, would pay 50 bonus points.

With so many points available for leading laps and winning races, it would give the teams a greater incentive to race hard and not just bide their time until the final few laps. Hopefully, it would add excitement to the races, and make for a better championship fight.

Jeff Birchfield is a sports writer for the Johnson City Press. You may contact him at jbirchfield@johnsoncitypress.com.