Jump to content


Photo

2011 Guess the Winning Time (Malaysia)


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 gillymuse

gillymuse
  • Member

  • 312 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 29 March 2011 - 20:49

1. The deadline for all the predictions is 1 hour before the start of the Grand Prix, I'll post the time in the appropriate thread of the deadline and I'll also post when the deadline has past. Any predictions made after the deadline will not be counted and 5 will apply below.

2. Predictions should be posted into the appropriate thread except for the last round where predictions can be sent via PM.

3. All times should be posted in the form h:mm:ss.000 just to make things easy when reading the times.

4. Once the race has finished and I have the winning time from the Grand Prix, I will post the results from the Grand Prix showing who got the closest results, and then the overall championship.

5. If you miss a deadline, I will take the time predicted by another player which created the greatest difference from the actual racing time, and then increase the difference by 30 seconds and make that your time for that Grand Prix.

For example
If there were four taking part and one missed the deadline
After the Grand Prix, the winning time was 1:36:23.764.
The following times were predicted:

1:34:23.955
1:37:28.322
1:30:23.623

The time 1:30:23.623 creates the biggest difference out of the other 3 with a difference of 6:00.141. The player who missed the deadline would be given a time of 1:29:53.623, a 30 second increase in difference to 6:30.141.

Edited by gillymuse, 07 April 2011 - 14:17.


Advertisement

#2 jeze

jeze
  • Member

  • 2,973 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 30 March 2011 - 18:27

1:30.23.432

#3 mark f1

mark f1
  • Member

  • 1,873 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 01 April 2011 - 12:12

1:32:02.897

#4 rodlamas

rodlamas
  • Member

  • 8,009 posts
  • Joined: February 04

Posted 04 April 2011 - 10:29

1:29:59.999

#5 August

August
  • Member

  • 2,040 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 04 April 2011 - 11:51

If I had been the host I would've done some changes to the rules after Oz. It's your decision whether or not you'll introduce the suggestions.

6. If a race doesn't go the full distance (ie all the laps aren't completed and the race doesn't go over the 2 hour mark) I will discard the results.

7. If the warm-up lap has to be repeated, e.g. if someone stalls his car, and the race is thus one lap shorter, I count what the winning time would've been with planned No. of laps with the following formula. Calculated winning time = (planned no. of laps) / (actual no. of laps) * (actual winning time).


The formula for counting the winning time after repeated warm-up lap bases on assumption that the average speed is the same no matter what the race distance is. That same formula could be applied also to races that have been red-flagged but not continued. But, especially now without refuelling, stopped and discontinued races mean slower average speed. One or two laps shorter race doesn't practically affect to avg. speed at all, but I made some simplified calculations (hopefully I made them right) about the effect of race stopping to avg. speed. If only 25 % of race has been completed, it's effect on avg. speed-based calculated winning time is more than two minutes. If 50 % of race has been completed, it's effect on avg. speed-based calculated winning time is about half a minute. If 75 % of race has been completed, it's effect on avg. speed-based calculated winning time is less than 20 secs. So maybe the rule could be that the formula for calculated winning time will be used if 75 % of race distance has been completed, otherwise the results would be discarded, as 75 % is also the provision for full points.

8. If a race has been red-flagged but continued, like in Korea 2010, then that round won't count towards the overall competition. But, if the race goes over the two-hour mark but has not been red-flagged, then that round counts towards the overall competition, with winning time something like 2:01:00.000.


I must admit this rule may be a bit stupid. After all the idea of this game is to guess the winning avg. speed, it's just easier to speak about the winning time. Having that rule is as smart as having "Guess the 24 Hours of Le Mans Winning Time" competition, you just have to guess which part of the track the winner is when the time limit is reached, to know how much it will take to finish that lap. The formula for calculated winning time could be used, but the races are planned to finish within two hours and probably no one makes guesses like 2:15:00.000. That's why I think the results of races that went over two-hour mark should be discarded, as well as red-flagged races that are finished within two hours but whose calculated winning time would go over two hours. And of course, the races that have been red-flagged but continued won't count towards the overall competition. But these are just suggestions, it's up to you to decide about the rules.

Anyway, here's my guess:

1:33:00.000

#6 Estwald

Estwald
  • Member

  • 4,264 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 05 April 2011 - 01:00

1:29:30.000

#7 Anderis

Anderis
  • Member

  • 2,656 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 05 April 2011 - 14:48

1:37:26.002

#8 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,206 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 05 April 2011 - 16:15

1:44:30.036

Edited by scheivlak, 10 April 2011 - 06:56.


#9 gillymuse

gillymuse
  • Member

  • 312 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 05 April 2011 - 20:13

If I had been the host I would've done some changes to the rules after Oz. It's your decision whether or not you'll introduce the suggestions.



The formula for counting the winning time after repeated warm-up lap bases on assumption that the average speed is the same no matter what the race distance is. That same formula could be applied also to races that have been red-flagged but not continued. But, especially now without refuelling, stopped and discontinued races mean slower average speed. One or two laps shorter race doesn't practically affect to avg. speed at all, but I made some simplified calculations (hopefully I made them right) about the effect of race stopping to avg. speed. If only 25 % of race has been completed, it's effect on avg. speed-based calculated winning time is more than two minutes. If 50 % of race has been completed, it's effect on avg. speed-based calculated winning time is about half a minute. If 75 % of race has been completed, it's effect on avg. speed-based calculated winning time is less than 20 secs. So maybe the rule could be that the formula for calculated winning time will be used if 75 % of race distance has been completed, otherwise the results would be discarded, as 75 % is also the provision for full points.



I must admit this rule may be a bit stupid. After all the idea of this game is to guess the winning avg. speed, it's just easier to speak about the winning time. Having that rule is as smart as having "Guess the 24 Hours of Le Mans Winning Time" competition, you just have to guess which part of the track the winner is when the time limit is reached, to know how much it will take to finish that lap. The formula for calculated winning time could be used, but the races are planned to finish within two hours and probably no one makes guesses like 2:15:00.000. That's why I think the results of races that went over two-hour mark should be discarded, as well as red-flagged races that are finished within two hours but whose calculated winning time would go over two hours. And of course, the races that have been red-flagged but continued won't count towards the overall competition. But these are just suggestions, it's up to you to decide about the rules.

Anyway, here's my guess:

1:33:00.000

I like the suggestion of adding in the fuel affected winning times if we ever get a red flagged race which is then abandoned, so I may add that if a race does not go to completion but 75% has been completed, then the formula above would be used with a reduction of 20 seconds to take into account the reducing amount of fuel. The only problem I would have is that the time you would get from that formula would not necessarily have been the time they would have done if the race had gone to completion and these little margins of error is what differentiates the positions between the guesses.

I liked the rule for races going over two hours. With a race going over two hours, I think it would be alright to include it if it was like Monaco 2008, because can look at the weather and see that it's a circuit that has a lot of safety cars and take a shot at guessing a time that's just over two hours plus Singapore usually just misses the 2 hour mark itself. Of course occurrences like the Korean GP last year gave a very different winning time than would be expected, I could have actually got a winning time from that GP by taking away the time wasted by the delay but I feel there are too many variables for that to happen.

If such a race did occur where exceptional circumstances mean that the race doesn't complete or goes over the two hour mark considerably, then we could have a group decision from everybody as to whether such a GP should count towards the Guess the WInning Time Champ.

Edited by gillymuse, 05 April 2011 - 20:14.


#10 August

August
  • Member

  • 2,040 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 05 April 2011 - 21:41

I like the suggestion of adding in the fuel affected winning times if we ever get a red flagged race which is then abandoned, so I may add that if a race does not go to completion but 75% has been completed, then the formula above would be used with a reduction of 20 seconds to take into account the reducing amount of fuel. The only problem I would have is that the time you would get from that formula would not necessarily have been the time they would have done if the race had gone to completion and these little margins of error is what differentiates the positions between the guesses.


20 secs is quite rough a calculation. IIRC I made the calculations with assumptions like this. The race lasts 90 minutes, lap time with low fuel load is 1 min 30 secs, and lap time with high fuel load is 1 min 35 secs. I didn't take tyre degradation and pit stops into account. And if the race is stopped e.g. two laps before finish, its effect on the calculated winning time is definitely less than 20 secs.

I liked the rule for races going over two hours. With a race going over two hours, I think it would be alright to include it if it was like Monaco 2008, because can look at the weather and see that it's a circuit that has a lot of safety cars and take a shot at guessing a time that's just over two hours plus Singapore usually just misses the 2 hour mark itself.


Maybe the guesses for races going over two hours should also include a guess for completed laps. That would bring the avg. speed aspect into those guesses. Somebody might have thought the race is 10 laps too short and has a guess 2h01min and someone else might have thought the race is 2 laps too short and has a guess 2h00min30sec. Then the winning time is 2h01min and the race is two laps too short. It's obvious that the one who guessed the race distance right had a better guess, but the other's guess was closer to the winning time. If the No of laps were required then it'd be possible to calculate the calculated winning time (CWT from now on) from guesses and from the actual winning time. With system like that also results of red-flagged races whose CWT is over two hours could count towards the overall comp. And of course, CWT is what matters for the overall comp. Usually it's easy, CWT is the actual winning time unless the planned No. of laps aren't completed.

Of course occurrences like the Korean GP last year gave a very different winning time than would be expected, I could have actually got a winning time from that GP by taking away the time wasted by the delay but I feel there are too many variables for that to happen.


Was the precise duration of the delay ever announced. And the lap before delay is always weird so in those cases it's better to discard the results, IMO.

If such a race did occur where exceptional circumstances mean that the race doesn't complete or goes over the two hour mark considerably, then we could have a group decision from everybody as to whether such a GP should count towards the Guess the WInning Time Champ.


In fact those cases are quite unlikely. Usually the winning time is very weird only if there has been a delay in the race. Going over two hours is quite rare at normal circuits, but France '99 was not that weird considering the weather.

But it's up to you to decide about the rules.

#11 Makarias

Makarias
  • Member

  • 7,383 posts
  • Joined: December 98

Posted 06 April 2011 - 08:22

1:34:17.662

#12 Wlleiotl

Wlleiotl
  • Member

  • 877 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 06 April 2011 - 16:41

1:37.36.350

#13 Grayson

Grayson
  • AUTOSPORT digital product manager

  • 1,317 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 06 April 2011 - 19:23

1:38:30.000

#14 dank

dank
  • Member

  • 5,191 posts
  • Joined: August 07

Posted 07 April 2011 - 10:21

1:38:10.745

#15 Apex

Apex
  • Member

  • 2,293 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 07 April 2011 - 11:36

1:34:23.000

#16 Costaz

Costaz
  • Member

  • 1,536 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 07 April 2011 - 12:10

You know, guys, I think (in pure F1 form) you ever-complicate things. Calculating avarages and everything is fine, but freak results should (IMHO) be part of the game. If someone wants to go on a limb and predict a 3 hour race for this week's race, why shouldn't he be rewarded for his risk? Same, if someones wants to predict 50 minutes, why shouldn't she get the reward? If I were you, I would get rid off of all these complex and confusing rules, and take the official FIA result as the correct result, no matter what (that would give 55:30.622 for Malaysia 09, and 2:48:20.810 for Korea 2010, btw). But then again, I am not the host, and he's got the last word :wave:

My guess:

1:43:48.412

Edited by Costaz, 07 April 2011 - 12:11.


#17 gillymuse

gillymuse
  • Member

  • 312 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 07 April 2011 - 14:16

I have to say, that would be the simplest solution, Costaz, I think that should be the solution.

Thank you Costaz and August for giving advice to help improve "the show" as everyone in F1 seems to say these days :)

#18 estoril85

estoril85
  • Member

  • 1,376 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 07 April 2011 - 14:27

1:38:22.727

Edited by estoril85, 07 April 2011 - 14:27.


#19 Brawn BGP 001

Brawn BGP 001
  • Member

  • 2,580 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 07 April 2011 - 14:42

1:40.00.000

Advertisement

#20 Dispenser89

Dispenser89
  • Member

  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 07 April 2011 - 17:52

1:34:32.839

#21 italiansdoitbetter

italiansdoitbetter
  • Member

  • 535 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 07 April 2011 - 19:05

1:38:88.888

#22 kismet

kismet
  • Member

  • 6,987 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 07 April 2011 - 20:04

1:36:36.666

#23 THE HUMAN MAN

THE HUMAN MAN
  • Member

  • 515 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 07 April 2011 - 21:08

1:37:21.112

#24 AcuraF1

AcuraF1
  • Member

  • 1,914 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 07 April 2011 - 22:28

1:39:39:272

#25 August

August
  • Member

  • 2,040 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 08 April 2011 - 18:44

Good solution from Costaz. With that system there's definitely no assumptions made in the results, the system is simply. Of course, I'd feel a bit gutted if I finished the season P2, behind someone who made a wild guess, had luck, and got a huge advantage, but on the other hand brave guesses would be rewarded, and after all this ain't so serious.

#26 gillymuse

gillymuse
  • Member

  • 312 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 09 April 2011 - 20:58

1:42:12.366

#27 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,030 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 10 April 2011 - 06:52

1:50:00.000

Edited by Ali_G, 10 April 2011 - 06:54.