Why o why do we not have a 2 race format in SX?

KlootZak
Profile picture for user KlootZak
Posts
1324
Joined
7/15/2012
Location
Brussels, BE
KlootZak
Edited Date/Time 10/23/2013 1:33pm
It's an easy question: why don't we have a 2 race main event in supercross? Each main event would contain 10 ~12 laps instead of 20. This would mean twice the suspense! A typical main event is an exciting start and then it gets boring. The last 10 laps are most of the time boring (yes, there are exceptions) because a great starter (Stewart, Dungey, Villopoto or Millsaps) usually gets away ...

So we get rid of the boring part and introduce a new race (with new excitement for the start) and an extra tension for the 'overall' winner.

What's not to like? It just baffles me ...Proof: MEC
|
SEE ARE125 10/23/2013 8:56am
10/23/2013 8:56am Edited Date/Time 10/23/2013 8:57am
I believe you contradicted yourself. You don't want a great starter getting away, but wouldn't having two starts reward a great starter? Shorter laps won't give anyone who gets a poor start a chance to work their way toward the front. I think the longer format allows the cream to rise to the top, and the reason those guys mentioned get away is because they are THAT good.

I think the MEC Stewart/Villopoto battle would've lasted 20 laps had they ran 20 laps. I was wondering the other night the difference between the MEC and the 2013 Atlanta SX. Similar starts, JS 1st, RV in 2nd, yet the MEC provided a great race long battle with several passes being made. However in Atlanta, RV maintained the same gap behind James the entire race. James couldn't pull away, and RV couldn't gain any ground. It's like they were just stuck where they started. I concluded that the difference was RC. He knows how to design a track that makes for great racing, unlike the current SX tracks where it becomes one lined and everyone does the same thing as the next guy and there are no opportunities to make up or lose time. Forget the joker lane and 10 lap mains in SX, I think RC should design more tracks. He knows whats up.
KlootZak
Profile picture for user KlootZak
Posts
1324
Joined
7/15/2012
Location
Brussels, BE
KlootZak 10/23/2013 11:43am
10/23/2013 11:43am
It's true that a great starter will have a higher oppertunity to win. However the chance to get a holeshot twice in a row is less likely. Even the best starters will have difficulty to pull 2 holeshots in a row on the same night. So there is higher chance somebody else will lead a main event in the same night. And this increases the tension. Imagine VIllopoto running away in main event 1. It will be excitiing to see if he can pull it off in main event 2. If you only run one main event then Villopoto would win the main event and that would be it for the evening. 5 minutes tension and it's done.

The atlanta SX is the exception I talked about. For 12 other supercrosses it was dull from mid-race to finish.
FreshTopEnd
Profile picture for user FreshTopEnd
Posts
13361
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
FreshTopEnd 10/23/2013 11:45am
10/23/2013 11:45am Edited Date/Time 10/23/2013 11:47am
I'd be for it. Overall, you'd gain more than you'd lose in terms of keeping the races closer.
Frodad78
Profile picture for user Frodad78
Posts
2156
Joined
1/11/2012
Location
USA
Frodad78 10/23/2013 11:51am
10/23/2013 11:51am
Score points by each Event finish or score points by the overall finish??

I like the idea alot, I think it would bring some excitement.

The Shop

See All »
mccread
Profile picture for user mccread
Posts
5934
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
mccread 10/23/2013 11:53am
10/23/2013 11:53am
I would love to see two mains. Getting to see the top guys for less than 25 minutes isn't great value atm.
KlootZak
Profile picture for user KlootZak
Posts
1324
Joined
7/15/2012
Location
Brussels, BE
KlootZak 10/23/2013 12:01pm
10/23/2013 12:01pm
Frodad78 wrote:
Score points by each Event finish or score points by the overall finish??

I like the idea alot, I think it would bring some excitement.
Yeah, that would be also an intresting debate (I have been wondering that question myself). If you want to be more conservative then I would suggest score points by overall finish (so the result keeps the same as the current system). If you really want to blow some new air, I would choose for points by each event.
300zx
Profile picture for user 300zx
Posts
126
Joined
7/22/2008
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
300zx 10/23/2013 12:17pm
10/23/2013 12:17pm
Welcome to 1985. I like it.

rollingtach
Profile picture for user rollingtach
Posts
232
Joined
2/25/2011
Location
Merrimack, NH, USA
rollingtach 10/23/2013 12:40pm
10/23/2013 12:40pm Edited Date/Time 10/23/2013 12:42pm
They could consider a 3 race format where the starting field diminishes in size after each race.
The top 10 riders finishing the first race move on to the 2nd and the top 5 from the 2nd race move on
to the final race of the night. The first race would be a 15 lapper to allow time for top riders to make
it through the field if they get taken out in a pile up on the start. The other 2 would be 10 laps.
Any new format that helps to reduce the size of the starting field for the final events is a good idea.
The fastest riders will have a better chance of making it through to the final and not being taken
out or held up by slower or less fit riders.
brimx153
Profile picture for user brimx153
Posts
3344
Joined
5/3/2012
Location
IE
brimx153 10/23/2013 1:33pm
10/23/2013 1:33pm
last yr deff the best races were the LCQ , there was some amazing ones , so yea i think its a good idea , sorter sprints , more racing the better imo , so glad the semis are back next yr , best news of the new season so far Smile

Post a reply to: Why o why do we not have a 2 race format in SX?