|
|
Post by malec on Jun 18, 2012 22:10:57 GMT -5
Hey folks, Etienne from Queen's here.
Me and Jon were thinking about changing the point system for the 2012 U-Cup season. We are just at the discussion stage and I was wondering what you guys thought about it.
The system we would put in place would be the same as the ECCC (Eastern Collegiate Cycling Conference) has, without a 'c' categorie. I think it would encourage b riders to get better and upgrade to A as soon as they are fast.
Here's their points table:
1 80 48 32 20
2 70 42 24 16
3 63 36 18 12
4 57 32 15 8
5 51 28 12 5
6 45 24 9 4
7 40 21 7 3
8 35 15 5 2
9 30 12 4 1
10 26 9 3
11 22 7 2
12 18 5 1
13 15 3
14 12 2
15 9 1
16 7
17 5
18 3
19 2
20 1
----------------------------------
TOTALS 591 285 132 71
TOTAL IN RACE: 1955
Let me know what you think!
|
|
|
|
Post by rachel on Jun 19, 2012 10:08:13 GMT -5
Hi Etienne,
Cool-- thanks for getting the ball rolling on this discussion! Just to make sure I'm reading the table correctly, the second column (80, 70, 63, ...) would be the 'A' points, and the 3rd column (48, 42, 36,...) would be 'B' points?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dana on Jun 19, 2012 10:40:33 GMT -5
Etiene there's some unintended problems with this type of scoring system.
A 'B' rider getting 5th place and scoring 12 points for their school penalizes their school for upgrading. With the level of competition we have, this rider is likely to be 5th last in 'A'.
What I suggest is that we agree to do some self policing according to the Race regulations (with a few new rules) and leave the scoring alone. Competitive riders (maybe XC exp, elite, SR 1-4) must race in 'A' while OCA citizens, XC Sport and others race 'B'.
Reasonable decisions should be made for elite competitors in other endurance sports (running, xc ski, etc). Give this type of new rider 1 try at 'B' and see how they do. The Team Capatain(s) or Club Exec should encourage the rider to move up for the next race if they podium (etc).
We can all tell when people aren't racing in the correct category so the real prestige comes from a team earning a 'clean' win.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aaron on Jun 19, 2012 13:21:14 GMT -5
Myself and a couple others attempted to overhaul the points system back in 2006 on the same basis.
However, the core principles behind the U-Cup are very grassroots oriented. The concept that a 'B' rider's efforts are less than an 'A' rider is not something that the UCup aims to achieve- at least not until the Ucup is big enough. Im sure that if you speak with Dave, he will reiterate the same thing.
Historically, the UCup hasnt been big enough/serious enough for the top level scoring to really matter. The current system rewards smaller/up and coming schools, which is key since the UCup is really just Queens, UoT and Guelph. The current system makes it mathematically possible for a small team of 12 people to win the Ucup ( 3 scoring positions per category) This is VERY beneficial for the smaller schools that may just be getting the ball rolling on team organization. In 06/07 this was the cornerstone of how we trained and optimized our team. We targeted those 12 positions and trained for them. It levels the playing field.
Bigger schools also have the advantage of a larger selection pool, and there is no way around from that. Guelph pulls from 21000 students, Queens pulls from 24000, and UoT pulls from 33000. As a result, having this slightly biased scoring system makes it worth a fighting chance for a small school like Trent (7100 students)
In the future, if there are 10 schools bringing in 20 riders each, then it might be worthwhile looking at. As of right now, I would say the current system is fine.
Additionally there's nothing at stake. No scholarships, financial incentives etc. More often then not, these races are to purge the previous night's hangover. Understandably we get pretty into it, but at the end of the day, take em with a grain of salt.
2 cents.
|
|
