[James Blint]

The whole premise of the system is that getting a position doesn't earn you a disproportionate amount of points compared to having one less incident, otherwise people would just always ram the guy ahead and get more points for it than not doing it, which sometimes already happen even if it's not "reasonable" from the standing point of view or rating. So the system cannot have like 20 points difference between 2nd and the 3rd for example, especially as yes reports do some justice but they don't invalidate results, give you penalties on the fly while racing or severe damages, like it would in rl motorsports.

I don't think it would be fair for someone to win a champ with five 102 compared to someone racing the whole 6 tracks and getting the best results overall of all the participants. I could see how it would even lower participation as everyone would rule out the tracks they are less comfortable with in the series.

[Russell Sobie]

I would disagree as well. If you want to fight for the championship, show up and do so technical issues a part of it, it happens, happened to me too few times and there is no way I would blame the srs system for that. Often there are times when I can’t show up and race, that’s why I stopped racing the youtuber’s series now, because I don’t have much time in the evening to race and compete for the champ there

So you are missing out on youtuber series just because you can't possibly win a championship in them due to time constraints? For shame, Marek. You should show up just to force some of the folks that still have a shot at the championship due to attendance to actually have to be fast in the races you do show up for.

I don't think it would be fair for someone to win a champ with five 102 compared to someone racing the whole 6 tracks and getting the best results overall of all the participants. I could see how it would even lower participation as everyone would rule out the tracks they are less comfortable with in the series.

Very much this.

[Jason Jones]

Often there are times when I can’t show up and race, that’s why I stopped racing the youtuber’s series now, because I don’t have much time in the evening to race and compete for the champ there

If you had a chance to win the championship by attending 5 out of 6 races would you be more likely to race in the series? If so, then you have proven that it would increase the number of participants.

I don't think it would be fair for someone to win a champ with five 102 compared to someone racing the whole 6 tracks and getting the best results overall of all the participants.

Well it might not be fair in your opinion but it would be within the rules therefore it would be fair. Some people think that when they get hit from behind it isn't fair that they get incident points, but they have to accept the points anyways because the rules say that its fair for everyone to do it that way.

I had a look at the historic results for the last series and it seems that of the 8 weekly series that were available, 4 of the series championships were won with only 5 races completed, 3 more weekly series would have had multiple champs if one race was dropped.
Now why is this already happening? I think its due to lack of participation in the latter weeks.

I could see how it would even lower participation as everyone would rule out the tracks they are less comfortable with in the series.

This is a good point however I think that even though you might lose some racers for one particular race but you would end up with more racers participating throughout the whole series.

[Russell Sobie]

I'm not sure what you mean by "multiple champs"... there are already tie breakers in place all the way down to overall lowest finishing position, so there's only ever one champ for a series every season. Someone with 5 perfect scores and a zero due to a no show should not win over someone with 5 second place finishes and 1 first place finish. The first secret of success is showing up.

If attendance is what you are after, then incentivizing attendance by requiring it for a shot at the championship is the way to go. This assumes that people actually care about a 6 week long series where the winner MIGHT get a "congrats on your win" post in one of the threads on this forum probably only 10% of SRS drivers read. I'm guessing that really isn't the case, so really the only way to fill the grids is to just have fun cars on fun tracks and clean racing. I'd be interested to see how many people even look at the standings after a race versus those that just show up, cross the finish line, and move on.

What I'm saying is, I don't think this is going to change, so we might be wasting our time typing additional replies to this thread.

[Martin Smith]

In purely practical terms, discounting people's worst race can be useful to help eliminate variables that are outside our control. For example if random disconnections were a common problem, it might make sense to score only the best 4/6 or 5/6 races depending how severe the problem is. But I don't think there's any reason for a poor result that's outside our control. I suppose one could argue that real life obligations can be one of things outside our control. Obviously that takes precedence over gaming. Even then I don't think interruptions to whatever we schedule in our lives are so common that we have to make a new rule for it.

There are probably all sorts of other pros and cons of the idea, which have been discussed. But the bottom line for me is in principle, it's always a bad idea to add complication to anything without a very clear, well-defined benefit for it.

[Jason Jones]

I'm not sure what you mean by "multiple champs"... there are already tie breakers in place all the way down to overall lowest finishing position, so there's only ever one champ for a series every season.

I thought that everyone who scored maximum points won a championship. I see now that I was wrong, there aren't multiple champions in one series.

Increased attendance is what I'm hoping for, so maybe a solution would be to have the series only last 4 or 5 weeks and not change anything about the points and tiebreaker rules. As it is now, you basically just have to show up all six weeks and you have a really good chance of winning because there's usually only a handful of people racing in week 6.

[James Blint]

I had a look at the historic results for the last series and it seems that of the 8 weekly series that were available, 4 of the series championships were won with only 5 races completed,  3 more weekly series would have had multiple champs if one race was dropped.
Now why is this already happening?  I think its due to lack of participation in the latter weeks.  

In my experience, some racers are easily discouraged after 2 or 3 races (im talking about single event series) so people don't show up anymore when they don't think they have a chance anymore to win the champ, or at least sometimes they just think so, since anyone can have a bad race or two in single events. Sometimes you might just loose interest in racing a series.

There's also the reverse effect i think, like people with very agressive behaviors showing up for the last races of a series when they have no points and can cause havok between those who had actually competed during the whole championship.

[Michal Janak]

by one of these last race expert lost Alfa 33 champ (

[Marek Vons]

Russel: No, I’m missing out mostly because last 6 months I was in USA and now if I even can, I can race like 1 or 2 races of the championship, and if it is in the middle of the champ, I dont really like to step in between people fighting for it, or maybe even I would go to server 2 because I didnt race the previous races, or I just dont have mood for AC in that time, or the series are not interesting for me.

Jason: not really, I dont like the whole idea and I would be happy if the champ would be the one who raced all 6 races even if he didnt win all of them, when he sacrified the time for all 6 races, rather than someone who can win it from best 5 results. I dont know...

But for example, once I won one of the YT series after 5 races, because the gap between me and the guy behind was more than 102pts before the last race. And he raced all 5 previous races too.

I was just saying, that technical issues belong to it, too. In gt3 I had a blue screen during the race and I would easily win the race, but it didnt happen.. in the end it was worth the whole championship.

Summarized: even when I am maybe the guy with the most won championships (for now) with 12 of them, I dont think that winning the champs is the most important thing here. It doesnt give you more rating points, more reputation. In the end, there are always some faster guys, who dont race that much and they are not that high in the ranking because of it, they are here to race from time to time and kick your ass

[Roman Yakubovich]

For personal reasons I’d welcome being able to miss a race or two, but I’m not sure if that would be fair for those who do attend each race.. But I can’t really say why, it just feels not right for me. If you want to be part of the championship, you should also attend all the racesI t hink.

Someone with 5 perfect scores and a zero due to a no show should not win over someone with 5 second place finishes and 1 first place finish. The first secret of success is showing up.

I don't think it would be fair for someone to win a champ with five 102 compared to someone racing the whole 6 tracks and getting the best results overall of all the participants. I could see how it would even lower participation as everyone would rule out the tracks they are less comfortable with in the series.

I don't understand this. Driver 1 practised a lot, watched some videos from real life, gave efforts to dig in the car's setup, won 5 races comfortably, thus being the fastest, probably the most consistent and really careful on track. Driver 2 was constantly slower (at the very least), lost all head-to-head battles to Driver 1. Then Driver 1 had to miss a race due to some sudden circumstances. How does it suddenly make Driver 2 deserve the championship win more than Driver 1? Since when attendance started define more in racing, than speed, consistency and crash proneness?   Driver 2 comes to that race without his main rival. Ok, he is good boy (really). Grab the victory (easier without Driver 1), enjoy the driving and your rating points gain. Why should he be awarded the championship win for that one race? How giving a title to Driver 2 can be fairer than to a faster and more consistent Driver 1 over the distance of the championship?

Would it be fairer to take away the championship from Lauda in 1977 just because he didn't attend last races? From Rindt in 1970? Definitely no.

I would disagree as well. If you want to fight for the championship, show up and do so technical issues a part of it, it happens, happened to me too few times and there is no way I would blame the srs system for that.

Marek, technical issues is a part of it, yes, as well as mechanical issues in real racing. But there is a major difference between SRS points system and real series', which I described in my second post in this thread.
SRS is not to blame in any way, it is definitely the best one available. I appreciate the job done by its developers and maintainers. However, it doesn't mean the system can't be improved.

There's also the reverse effect i think, like people with very agressive behaviors showing up for the last races of a series when they have no points and can cause havok between those who had actually competed during the whole championship.

James, what can stop these people from doing so with the current system? The damage in such a case really depends on the particular championship situation and damage these pseudoracers do to the others.

There are probably all sorts of other pros and cons of the idea, which have been discussed. But the bottom line for me is in principle, it's always a bad idea to add complication to anything without a very clear, well-defined benefit for it.

Martin, as for me complication is building a neural network to compute square roots. Adding at most 20 lines of code and a sentence to rules page is not a complication.
Benefit is pretty clear - championships will be won by those who deserve them most more frequently, thus the whole system being fairer.