Blog Entry

A Small Change in the NASCAR Points System

Posted on: November 18, 2008 1:30 pm

Everyone complains that the points system in NASCAR isn't really conducive of running up front.  So what if there was a small tweak in the way points were scored.  No not giving the winner more points, I'd keep the basic structure the same but what I would do is give a point for each lap lead.

That's right you'd still get 5 points for leading a lap and 10 for leading the most laps but you would also get 1 point for each lap you lead during the race.  Say your at Martinsville and you lead 300 of the 500 laps, and win the race well you'd get your 195 points for the win, leading the most laps and 5 points for leading a lap but you would also gain 300 points for leading 300 laps making your point total for the day at 495 points.  This would mean each lap had meaning and you wouldn't see drivers just riding and being content with where they are.  Could you imagine a driver 300 points out of the chase going into Richmond could very well make the chase if he lead 300 to 350 laps and won the race. 

The flip side of this is you lose a point for each lap you do not finish.  So if you finished 43rd and only completed 300 of 500 laps then you deduct 300 from 34 and you'd have a negative 266 points which could take you from say 25th to being in a go or go home status, or take you from being in the chase to out of the chase just like that. 

Give me your thoughts of this little tweak in points.

Category: Auto Racing

Since: Dec 23, 2008
Posted on: December 24, 2008 9:23 pm

A Small Change in the NASCAR Points System


Since: Nov 28, 2007
Posted on: November 21, 2008 1:21 am

A Small Change in the NASCAR Points System


I agree that some of the races are boring and pointless at times with no-one trying anything to win just coast to a top ten or 15.  I still feel that the last couple of drivers in the chase should be quite far behind and nothing less than 3 or 4  wins get's them even in the picture by the 8th chase race.

Just thing how pointless Homstead would have even been if Carl had'nt kicked as much butt as he did after Dega.

What about a more progressive split in points 1-43 instead of 3-5 per place how about 15 between 1 & 2  plus 10 for most laps lead then 10 2 & 3  down to 3 apart  after that.  If you were to lead the most laps you would still outscore the next 3 infront of you even if you got wrecked or a blown engine.  The 3 rd place car could end up equal to the winner if he lead more laps.

In the end we agree that toooooooo many teams are'nt  trying to win just come in the top 10 or 15.  The point system needs to change so that type of racing goes away.

Since: Aug 15, 2006
Posted on: November 20, 2008 2:07 pm

A Small Change in the NASCAR Points System

Cakes, your point is valid,  I think Carl had 6 wins but only received credit for 5 because of the penalty at Vegas.  While JJ had 3 so the difference wouldn't have been that much greater.  I will not argue with you that JJ deserved the championship this year.  He did what needed to be done.  It's just that my point system, In my mind, can change the top 43 each and every week.  A team with a good week will score a lot of points a team with a blown engine could actually end up in the hole and lose positions and it would probably come down to Richmond where you would have 10 or more drivers within a mathmatical chance of making the chase and probably that many in the chase with a chance to miss it. 

Your way of compounding the winners points would work too.  or a combination of their first set of rules, where each driver was seperated by 5 points from 1 to 12 then the win points added.  There are several things that can be knocked around and any could help liven things up. 

By the way come on over to the Auto Boards, just because the season is over, we don't pack up and leave.  We always have something going on.  Even if its swapping Christmas Receipes. 

Since: Nov 28, 2007
Posted on: November 20, 2008 11:55 am

A Small Change in the NASCAR Points System


By your name I know who your fav. is!!  My point is that they gave extra points for wins in the 1st 26 and in 10 races JJ was able to eliminate that 30 or 40 point  lead that was on him.  I agree with not allowing a driver to win like Kenseth did he is one of my favs, but you must be a winner of some races.

The question is how to do this and make it better is all and each of us has a different approach.  In my opinion the guys who seem to coast are the RCR guys and all of them were in the chase and between them they had less wins the Kyle and Carl.

How do you reward the winners in the first 26 yet not too much because Kyle stunk it up the last 10 and giving too many extra points in early races is what I think is NASCARS main concern.  I think they want the hottest driver in the last 10 races to win regardless.  I'm not saying it's fair but starting the chase with all 12 within a 130-160 points would suggest this.  That is only the difference in one dnf to a 1st in one race.

I would like to see a combination of more points for wins in the CHASE only but what if a non-chaser wins??

What about giving extra points for each race won in the 1st 26 start at 10 and increase 10 for each win.  So,  you win 1 race you get 10 then the next race is 20 then the next race is 30 etc.; but they carry over into the chase so you could build up a 200 or 300 point lead over the 12th place guy.  Some one do the math but that would have made JJ race his butt off I think because of Carl's 5 or 6 wins in the 1st 26 that lead at Homestead would have been more like 50 or 60.

I really like talking with you guys over the meatballs on the football boards!!!

Fire away some thoughts!!  I'm not saying your system was bad Mickey but let's face it NASCAR is goin to keep it very simple.

Since: Mar 14, 2007
Posted on: November 20, 2008 7:31 am

A Small Change in the NASCAR Points System

I don't know if you don't like Johnson or are JR. fans; but trying to come up with a different system is silly.

Cakes - That's funny you should say that. I felt the same way when they started this ridiculous playoff system (aka the Matt Kenseth Rule).

I am not a fan of nor do I dislike either driver mentioned. My favorite (Terry Labonte) retired a couple years ago. That may be one of the reason I have lost some interest in NASCAR since I don't have a favorite at this time...bluejay

Since: Aug 16, 2006
Posted on: November 20, 2008 7:14 am

A Small Change in the NASCAR Points System

Cakes - I've been against the chase format since it was initiated. It has nothing to do with Johnson winning. NASCAR wanted to make the end of the year exciting by having a close race for the championship since Kenseth coasted to the finish the year prior to the chase. This year in only 9 races, JJ was able to build a lead big enough to essentially coast to the finish, so obviously the plan is flawed. Meanwhile, over in the Truck Series, the point difference between 1st and 2nd was 3 points going into the final race. I dont remember where I read it, but I read a quote from someone in NASCAR saying that sometimes the Chase will be close, and other years a driver will blow away the competition. Funny thing is, you can say the exact same thing about the old points system.

Since: Aug 15, 2006
Posted on: November 20, 2008 6:55 am

A Small Change in the NASCAR Points System

Cakes42, I don't know if you think anyone here is posting via blind love for a driver, but I don't think that is the case.  I mean my driver is Michael Waltrip and this points deal wouldn't have helped him at all.  Also, if this points system was prescribed during this years chase, JJ still would have won. 

The whole point of this blog was to spice up the racing on the track, give drivers and teams the incentive to qualify well, and battle for the lead instead of just riding around for a top 10 finish and trying to squeeze there way into the chase.  This system could bring a 200 or more points swing each and every race which would definetly cause ratings to go up, in my opinion.

Since: Nov 28, 2007
Posted on: November 19, 2008 11:20 pm

A Small Change in the NASCAR Points System

Jimmy was the best driver the last 10 races.  He deserves the 3 peat.  Kyle was the best the first 26 and got his lead and sucked and lost it. I don't know if you don't like Johnson or are JR. fans; but trying to come up with a different system is silly.  JJ has been the best driver the last 3 years in the last 10-12 races of the season and deserves his title and any combination of points you guys come up with appear to be skewed toward a driver you like better.

The only solution I have heard and think is interesting is to get rid of or loser out the last place driver each week after the second or third week of the chase.

Kyle and Carl did win the most races but Jimmy won a couple less and had only a couple of finishes over 30th and more top 10's.  He was the best this and the last three years.

JJ is not my favorite driver but I do not have blind love for another which is what I think some of the posters are showing with their ideas.

Since: Aug 15, 2006
Posted on: November 19, 2008 2:22 pm

A Small Change in the NASCAR Points System

One other point in this matter on a guy finishing 43rd gets more points than the winner.  Oft times we complain that the best car didn't win, it happened this year at New Hampshire, It happened at Charlotte, with Junior who dominated until he had a flat tire and smacked the wall, it happens all the time.  This would reward those who had the best car but did not get the checkered flag for one reason or the other. 

Since: Aug 16, 2006
Posted on: November 19, 2008 8:57 am

A Small Change in the NASCAR Points System

Maybe to even things out a 500 mile race at a 2 mile track you get 2 points per lap. At a place like Bristol it is 1 point per lap. You could then earn the same amount of points for each track. The road courses would get 3-4 points per lap, that way it is all even.

With this setup, the winner could theoretically score less than someone who didn't finish the race, but if he didn't complete enough laps the leader would get more points, but it would give a premium to leading laps so drivers wouldn't just follow the leader.

Driver A Leads 300 laps, but wrecks on lap 400 of a 500 lap race.

Driver B Leads 50 laps, wins the race completing all 500 laps

Drive A would get 685 points. 5 for leading a lap, 5 for leading the most, 300 points for leading 300 laps, 400 points for 400 laps, -100 for not completing 100 laps, and 75 for finishing between 26th and 43rd.

Driver B would get 805 points, 5 for leading a lap, 50 for leading 50 laps, 500 for completing 500 laps, and 250 for winning the race.

Again, this would reward someone who dominates a race but for whatever reason doesn't win. It makes leading laps important which would make the racing better as well. You could also get rid of the chase, which is always a good idea. I thought about adding in the point for each position gained, and losing a point for each position lost, but then some drivers may tank qualifying to possible get points for moving up.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or