Here's some food for thought; take a look at the 2002 season. That year, your top 10 after 26 races (using either the old or the new system; adding 5 for wins and taking 5 away for poles doesn't matter in the order) were:
Sterling Marlin
Mark Martin
Jimmie Johnson
Jeff Gordon
Tony Stewart
Rusty Wallace
Bill Elliot
Matt Kenseth
Ricky Rudd
Ryan Newman
Also in the 400-point club were Dale Jarrett and Kurt Busch (11th and 12th respectively). Applying the "new math" to the last 10 races that year, the top ten looks just a "wee-bit" different from what it actually was:
- Kurt Busch - 6563 points (had 3 wins, 1 pole in the last 10 races; ended up 3rd)
- Tony Stewart - 6504 points (no wins/poles; was the 2002 champ)
- Ryan Newman - 6425 points (1 win/4 poles; was 6th)
- Mark Martin - 6372 points (no wins/poles; was 2nd)
- Dale Jarrett - 6316 points (no wins/poles; was 9th)
- Rusty Wallace - 6301 points (no wins/1 pole; was 7th)
- Jeff Gordon - 6300 points (1 win/no poles; was 4th)
- Jimmie Johnson - 6278 points (1 win/no poles; was 5th)
- Matt Kenseth - 6246 points (1 win/no poles; was 8th)
- Ricky Rudd - 6142 points (no wins/poles; was 10th)
- Bill Elliot - 5933 points (no wins/poles; was 13th behind Dale Earnhardt Jr and Jeff Burton)
- Sterling Marlin - 5304 points (no wins/poles; was 18th behind Earnhardt, Jeff Burton, Elliot, Michael Waltrip, Ricky Craven, Bobby Labonte and Jeff Green after a crash cut his season short)
With results like that (and the yellow-flag lottery; we have to get DW and company to use that term), you can only wonder if the "third-generation" curse is in the midst of striking NASCAR.
Interesting analysis. Thanks.
I'll bet the Fox guys come up with some more as they argue it out. I'm not aginst change as such... I just think the new points system sucks, and yes, tubebender, I'm sure nbc had a great deal of influence here.