RCJoh-@attglobal.net
Interesting point. I've thought about it a little and here's what I
think.
As the name "Best All round Rider Competition" suggests the ranking is
a measure of competitiveness. I think the proposed rule change is a
reasonable attempt to make the ranking more accurately reflect the
level of competitiveness. As a side note here I might also suggest that
changing the name to "Best All Round RACER" might also more accurately
reflect the increased competitive emphasis of this proposed rule
change. Consider that the term "rider" suggests simple participation in
events.
Back the Brians comment, it is possible that the change may in fact
have unintended side effects. Sure, someone who is really concerned
with the BAR might be disinclined to attend smaller events. However,
I'd hope the opposite would be true. Perhaps that same person might
encourage a few of their friends (in this case hand selected to be
people said person can beat) to attend the event and thus receive full
BAR points. Either way I think the effect will be minimal and be
difficult to even quantify.
In reality the BAR is just bragging rights. If there was something
significant at stake (big prize money or the like) I could see people
being more calculated about it. But I don't believe most the majority
of competitors give it that much thought.
Whether the rule change is good or bad basically comes down to what you
believe the BAR should be: a competitive ranking or a participatory
one.
Rick
Brian L wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid1172883489-1463-@boing.topica.com"
type="cite">
Message
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
pre
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
span.emailstyle19
{font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
span.emailstyle20
{font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
span.emailstyle21
{font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
span.emailstyle22
{font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
span.EmailStyle23
{font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
<span
style="font-size: 12pt;">A. Best All Round Rider Competition.
<font color="navy"
face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span
style="font-size: 12pt; color: navy;">Points for the
BAR will be weighted based on attendance. i.e. Races with 10 or
less riders will get .5 of full points. Races with 11-20 will receive
.75 of
full points. Races 100+ will receive 1.50%.
<span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy;">
<span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">Since the BAR is a
participatory award, shouldn’t
these incentives be reversed? i.e. Wouldn’t we want to reward
people for going to the smaller races rather than the races that are
full
anyway? I have no problem with people getting easy BAR points at the
smaller races, for perhaps that extra incentive helps those races
survive.
<span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">
<span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">The proposed bonuses seem
more appropriate for something
like the Oregon Cup.
<span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">
<span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">Just a thought,
<span
style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">Brian
To respond to the whole group send to ob-@topica.com.
To respond to the list manager send to cmur-@obra.org
To unsubscribe send to obra-uns-@topica.com