| Search | Memberlist | Forum Register | Profile | Log in to check your private messages | Log in |
  2017-01-31 05:00:00 GMT+00:00 until shutdown
Opinion Piece - Arbitrary Award of Competition Points - Long
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    GSKA Forum Index -> Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Jeff Sikes

Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 632
Score: 9023
Location: Athens, GA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 8:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maybe we can get the board to clarify this. The rules use to say 5 races for awards. It also says a class must average 3 entries per race for the year to be considered for championship points. Looks like only a few trophies at the banquet. I am sure this is not going to be the case, but if someone official could let us know that would be great. This will affect what and where we race the rest of the season.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Michael Jackson

Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 516
Score: 5336
Location: Lithia Springs Ga.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 8:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I checked on this and the reply I received stated " We have never enforced it, so why start now? We probably do need a minimum, but 12 is a bit high". If you remember I raced my Vintage with the Flatheads and received a plaque at the banquet and I was the only one in that class but had fun playing with the Tillers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Jeff Sikes

Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 632
Score: 9023
Location: Athens, GA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 8:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is that official, every class winner will get an award?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Daniel White

Joined: 05 Jun 2007
Posts: 574
Score: 7236
Location: Atlanta

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is it possible to reconsider the points system in order to make the standings MORE accurately reflect performance?

I certainly don't feel like I deserved 22 points the day in June when qualifying took place but the rain wiped out the races. By the same token, I think anyone who shows up and tries to practice (and pays the fees, obviously) deserves at least a minimum number of points.

I'm suggesting a system where full points are awarded only if a driver competes in qualifying and both races.

Partial points to be awarded if only qualifying and pre-final is completed due to weather, or other force majeur. Partial points meaning, for example, full points minus five.

If only qualifying is completed, perhaps full points minus ten.

If only practice takes place, a flat points system . . . say, five points for everyone. It's hard to justify no points.

That said, I'd also like to suggest that we have a plan in place if weather eliminates some of the practice and / or qualifying, but the weather manages to clear up for the races, which typically begin around 2:00. Subject to the Race Director's discretion, perhaps we could grid by points, like other series do, so we can at least get the races completed.

I realize that this gets complicated, and that I've probably not considered several scenarios, but I'd be willing to work with other members to compose a more sporting points system, one that privileges performance over attendance, but one that also, in some measure, rewards club loyalty and doesn't unduly punish the ones who live far away.
2015 Italkart Rapido V / Adkins Yamaha
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 02 Nov 2007
Posts: 761
Score: 9081

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

personally, i like the 3 drop rule, but haven't noticed a minimum race requirement. i know in mx, when there were series that didn't have a drop rule, then attendance was low, cause family stuff will come up where you might have to miss a race or 2 (or 3). i never liked to see a series where a mid-pack racer wins by attendance. but if a racer can win a points battle even if he doesn't make it to as many races shouldn't be penalized in my opinion. the racer with the most points (after drops are removed) regardless of amount of races attended should win the championship it seems to me.
711 Angus Hunt's dad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Jackson

Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 516
Score: 5336
Location: Lithia Springs Ga.

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My suggestion is that if you don't like the rules in place step up and nominate yourself to be considered for the BOD at our next election. Rules in place for this season IMO should remain as is. Best way to discourage people from participating is changing the rules after the season starts. Only time a rule should be changed after the season starts is if it involves safety, then it is acceptable. What we have in place now has been acceptable and I haven't heard any complaints. With elections coming up now is the time to make your ideas known. One thing to consider is can the club pay the track workers and track owner with a rainout and how do you compensate the President and BOD for coming down and trying to conduct a race. My gas cost the same as yours. I also race in the Clone class. When I dragged race for points you had the option to accept 30 points for driving thru the gates and paying your entry fee. You got 10 points for every round won if you got to start eliminations. Or you got a Tech Card for next race and no points. Also remember the track was owned not rented by a club, but they still had to pay there workers even if it was a rainout.There is more to it then I don't like it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Larry Rahl

Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 6
Score: 60
Location: Birmingham, GA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


It is, and never has been my intention to attack any person, GSKA, or the BOD.
That is not Me. Re-read my posts, I try to choose words wisely, to prevent misinterpretation.
However, I will argue an issue, if I think I have a sound basis.
This argument is not a personal one.
It is, I think, a logical interpretation of the rules "AS WRITTEN".

All other issues such as “Drops”,and championships, are the impact of a simple error.

The following was written last night.

My original piece was not intended to do anything other than question whether or not any points should have been awarded for what I interpreted, based on the GSKA Rules, a non event.
And, my personal belief that it is not reasonable (ethical) to expect, or receive something you have not earned.
In this case it is receiving competition points, without competing.

Since it has been stated, "it is written", and "in the rules", I set out
to find out why I am apparently wrong, I consulted the GSKA Rule Book. Again.

I presume that the following rule was used for the point award judgment;

Rain Out:: "If a race day is called for rain before qualifying is completed then all competitors will receive 1st place points. If qualifying is completed then points will be given based on qualifying times. If the heat race is completed then points are given for the finishing position in the heat race. If a session is not completed (a session is either timed qualifying, heat race or feature) then points are given for the prior completed session."

My interpretation that 8/23 was a non-event was partially from my experiences in past racing, but primarily based on this rule defining point awards. Specifically that all point award determinations speak to a point of reference, "qualifying", as the start of progress toward a point award. The "automatic 25 point to all" rule addresses "what if", that qualifying (the very initial stage of competition for points), can not be completed.
A "shortened" event being one terminated prior to "completion" of qualifying.
It does NOT speak to a point prior to qualifying, such as practice, or earlier than that.
My contention is that you can not shorten something that hasn't begun.

Qualifying, indeed begins the competition phase of an event, as it is based on timing.
And, all actions beginning with qualifying, and forward, are toward competition for points.
I concede that you have to be there to qualify.
(However, it is also true that you can be there, and if your kart doesn't start, you can't start qualifying, and you can't proceed toward a points award)

The rules do not quantify what an event is. (Bill Clinton made us all very familiar with the importance of "is")
The first sentence states "If a race day is called for rain before qualifying is completed....".
Since the 8/23 award was based on this rule, race day, and all subsequent mention of award of points relates to "qualifying".
If qualifying didn't start, then "race day" didn't start, and it can't be shortened.
Competition DID NOT begin.
It actually never happened.

Now, If the interpretation of this rule is more centered on the term "Before", than "qualifying" (aka the commencement of competition for points), then I can Partially understand the award of points.
I would then question the interpretation of the term "competitor". As only those there were actually awarded points.
Since "qualifying" is no longer necessary to the award determination, then who is a competitor ?. And further, since qualifying isn't necessary, being there to qualify isn't necessary, and competitor must be defined by who is an "official" competitor. That person who has entered the event "officially". The only "official" determination mentioned in the rules, is "registered".
If you pre-register, and pre-pay, you are then an official competitor, prior to race day, and qualifying.
If you wanted to know who is "officially" racing before a schedule race date, or prior to the start of qualifying, your ONLY reference would be to check the list of "officially" registered entrants, including pre-registrants.
Since qualifying isn't an issue yet, you can not require attendance yet.

I'm tired.
This is just to logical and simple to be dismissed.

I know that all of those who received these "gratis" points will ague that they are valid, and should remain as posted.
They may, in fact, argue that they are, and have been, "earned".
Some may even argue that they present no advantage over others who did not receive them.
[Curious logic there, as they also represent the creation of an extra race that others didn't participate in.]
[An extra race that CAN and will be used in the "drops" issue, and to their advantage]

As I stated in my original post, I do not think the points in question are legitimate in any way, and are NOT provided for in existing rules.
I believe that, in the case of 8/23, they were awarded without a concentrated and accurate interpretation of GSKA rules,
and were awarded arbitrarily, based on a simple, and honest error in interpretation.
I do not believe that the error was made with malice, or a result of calculation.

I also believe that this issue would most fairly, and accurately be relieved by the cancellation of all points awarded on that date. I do not know why this is so hard to grasp ?

Since no Trophy can be awarded for that date, these un-earned points, and this "selective extra race", will only be a factor at season end, and during calculation for class championships.
I can only say that it is never too late to correct the unintended consequence, of an unintended error, in a situation not specifically covered by rules. Better late then never. And, better now than before any REAL controversy they create.

I would really like to hear someone argue that they should receive, maintain, and use for championship calculations, un-earned competition points.
And, please include the logic behind the belief that they do not represent any advantage.

Thanks Again.

Close from today;

I would never support changing rules mid-season.
We all bought into existing rules, and we should live by them.
I believe that it is possible to make an honest, unintentional mistake, and have it adversely impact something.
No one can expect a set of rules to cover every contingency.
We are all big enough to admit, correct, and forgive an error.

I believe the existing rules can be easily, and simply be amended to clarify this "loop hole", without changing their “spirit” and true meaning.
However, if that is done, it can not be done, without also undoing the harm it has created before the fix.

This is GSKA, and not a money race organization. I Hope.
Commitment is a personal thing, and I don't think that it is something to be easily Judged.
To some, it is scraping together the money for entry, and to others it is buying a trailer and spare race motors.

I agree that the BOD and organizers deserve our support. And none of this discussion has anything to do with that. They put forth major efforts to put on these events, and can never know if rain should come. They are the first ones there, and the last to leave. And I have no problem with compensation for those efforts. Just not a leg up in competition.

Larry Rahl
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ihor Bilyy
Site Admin

Joined: 10 Apr 2006
Posts: 1824
Score: 30601
Location: Canton, GA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Competitor is one who signed paper at the track and paid entry fee.

There are basically 4 options for rain:
1. All competitors will receive X amount of points (1st place or maybe 3rd place points).
2. We race in rain.
3. All go home.
4. Rain replacement dates in schedule.

1) is what we have.

2) less than a half (my guess) will be racing in the rain, once, maybe twice... its not fun to clean kart, tools, suit, etc. after local race. As a result, if rain is possible we will have less competition, less fun, less money, ...

3) if people will go home with their money back or moved to next race there is a big chance that next time if rain possibility is somewhat high, most people decides to stay home.

4) we don't have that, maybe next year ?..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
nuthin fancy

PostPosted: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The race date mentioned, I showed up at the track with all intentions to race. Obvious, with the rain threat (I CHOSE) even up to the members meeting at the tower (We took a vote to wait until 1pm to finalize the decision to call the race,weather pending) to actually pay registration. The race was called. No points were awarded to me.With all replies to your post read I understand this to be somewhat triveal,(THE CHOSE OF EFFORT) was decided to follow through with the arriving to race,I received the same as anyone who did'nt attend.Expenses occur to those who show up and are rained out. The monetary cost is different (THE RESULT WAS THE SAME) JMO.

nuthin fancy
The club values its members ,its guests,its staff,its attendance,and your concerns !!!
Back to top
Larry Rahl

Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 6
Score: 60
Location: Birmingham, GA

PostPosted: Sat Oct 04, 2008 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The End.

I thank you, Ihor, for the official determination of what a competitor is.
"sign form in person"

I thank you Steven for an accurate description of what the conditions were at the time.
"there were karts on the track practicing and everything was in place to go racing"

I thank you nuthin fancy for the description of how the "Rain out" decision was made.
"by vote"
And, how the points award issue was addressed.
"by choice to pay"

Since I have been officially set straight, this opinion discussion is closed.

I think it is fascinating how my opinion, and expressing it, has been received (or not).
Some very interesting responses on a few different issues.

I understand, and expected, that the most vocal defenders of the application of policy, in a unique situation, were those who directly benefited from the decision.
And the Team I was with, that chose not to attend, then forfeited the choice to pay for points, and an extra official race.
While I still do not agree with the concept of gaining competition points without competing, I accept that it is so, how, and why.
It is in the Rules.

I apologize to GSKA, the BOD, and all other members, that my opinion has brought out such negative responses.
It has never been my intention to cause harm, or suggest overthrow of the Government.
I thought a point should be discussed here. My mistake, and lack of understanding.

Thank you.
I do, Now, know what commitment is. And, sadly, I can't afford it.

I am also sorry to tell you Steve, that since you uninvited me from the club, I will not be voting for you.

Is that the "Your way, or the Highway" platform ?

Thanks for the experience.
Larry Rahl

I have apparently burned bridges, before I got too them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    GSKA Forum Index -> Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by yyBB © 2008 yycomp. © 2007-2016 YYCOMP