Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Joker laps, reference lap times and other idiocy


  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

Poll: ? (69 member(s) have cast votes)

READ THE EXPLANATON BELOW, then vote - what do you think about the system?

  1. EXCELLENT way of balancing the field, more events should embrace this one (2 votes [2.90%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.90%

  2. It's a fairly good system and I don't see any (or many) faults in it (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. I don't mind it, but it is a tad artificial (2 votes [2.90%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.90%

  4. I have numerous problems with it and it makes no sense (25 votes [36.23%])

    Percentage of vote: 36.23%

  5. WORST THING EVER (40 votes [57.97%])

    Percentage of vote: 57.97%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:38

So basically I included this one on another poll
http://forums.autosp...w...40&start=40

This rule applies to Dubai 24 Hours, and (in some form) to Bathurst 12 hours. But since it clearly needed some explaining, I quote Victor and myself:

For those of us who don't follow every pro-am sportscar race on the planet, can someone explain what they do at the Dubai 24 Hours?


The rule used to apply to all cars, but now no longer applies to selected A6(GT3) cars (basically the fastest cars in the class in qualifying). Each class in the race is given a reference lap time based on the average performance of the cars in the class, and depending on the class, drivers are allowed to go only as fast as that reference lap time, or are allowed to go faster than it for a set number of times. If you go faster than your reference lap time and you are either in a class that doesn't allow you to, or you have used up your "joker" lap time allocation (i.e. 10-20 laps faster than the reference lap time in a race that lasts around 600 laps), you get a drive-through penalty.

And to put it mildly, if you have a problem that means the car needs to spend time in the garage, you are f*cked, because you cannot drive flat-out to catch up, you have to keep driving to a reference time and pray the ones in front of you break down too.


Basically this is the entire process Risil

Dubai 2012
1) All cars in GT3 have been performance balanced prior to event, of course
2) After qualifying the qualifiers that were "too fast" receive weight, fuel tank and ride height BoP penalties for the race (severity of adjustments is higher the faster you were)
3) What Victor explained above BUT every A6 entry must follow the rule

Dubai 2013
1) All cars in GT3 have been performance balanced prior to event, of course
2) After qualifying "PRO" cars receive weight, fuel tank and ride height BoP penalties for the race, "AM" cars nothing
3) What Victor explained above

It's absolutely ridiculous


What do you think?

Edited by SonnyViceR, 18 January 2013 - 12:42.


Advertisement

#2 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,848 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:45

Why would someone want to spend his money to race in that?

#3 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:49

It's mostly amateur / pro-am event (apart from the few fastest cars with factory drivers) so I guess someone might find joy in it.

Most of the cars in the race are non- A6/GT3 models though.

Edited by SonnyViceR, 18 January 2013 - 12:59.


#4 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,782 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:52

It's mostly amateur / pro-am event (apart from the few fastest cars with factory drivers) so I guess someone might find joy in it.


And, in general, the target times are just about out of reach for the more talented of the amateur drivers involved. The professionals can dip well below the reference times with great ease though, sometimes by 4-5 seconds per lap.

#5 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:55

And, in general, the target times are just about out of reach for the more talented of the amateur drivers involved. The professionals can dip well below the reference times with great ease though, sometimes by 4-5 seconds per lap.


Yeah I suppose it was a bigger problem last year, though the improvement isn't that big really...

Have they changed these rules for Bathurst 12h, Victor?

#6 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 1,377 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 18 January 2013 - 13:29

Why?

I only can think of that question.

Why make things more complicated?
Who is going to follow this if you are watching the race from the track? Excel Timing or something?

If people wonder why race classes are becoming harder and harder to sustain, perhaps they should quit with al those gimmick rules. Unbelievable.


#7 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,782 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 14:17

Have they changed these rules for Bathurst 12h, Victor?


Just had a look through the regulations, and sadly... yes. Classes A and B (GT3 and Cup cars) limited to 2:06, if cars go faster than 2:06 in qualifying they get a 50kg weight penalty, and if they go faster than it in the race = drive-through.

#8 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 14:22

Just had a look through the regulations, and sadly... yes. Classes A and B (GT3 and Cup cars) limited to 2:06, if cars go faster than 2:06 in qualifying they get a 50kg weight penalty, and if they go faster than it in the race = drive-through.


Excellent...

#9 R Soul

R Soul
  • Member

  • 588 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 18 January 2013 - 14:34

What's the difference between the last two options? The last one seems like a melodramatic version of the penultimate one and could split the 'against' vote.

#10 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 14:44

What's the difference between the last two options? The last one seems like a melodramatic version of the penultimate one and could split the 'against' vote.


It's the same as with options 1 & 2... lower you get, the more you hate it (and other way round) basically. I guess I could've gone with IT'S GREAT / IT SUCKS system too but the opinions are not always that radical

#11 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,792 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 14:53

Personally I like the wording of "I have numerous problems with it and it makes no sense". :)

#12 gm914

gm914
  • Member

  • 6,046 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 15:06

Posted Image

#13 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,399 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 18 January 2013 - 15:07

I dont get it. The system explained by Victor sounds different than the other one.

#14 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,782 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 15:11

I'm still sticking to something in-between options 3 and 4. It can make a small amount of sense, but only if it is applied like it was applied to the GT3 cars at Dubai this year. Allow the teams to choose whether they want to run to this rule or not, and give them a trade-off of ballast or fuel capacity for the ability to run unrestricted by the lap time.

#15 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 15:18

I dont get it. The system explained by Victor sounds different than the other one.


The one explained by Victor was the system... what I explained was basically what happens before the race

#16 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,399 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 18 January 2013 - 17:05

The one explained by Victor was the system... what I explained was basically what happens before the race

So the cars are already performance balanced before anything even begins? I already dont like that sort of system because it doesn't reward diversity.

Then they're given success ballast according to their qualifying form? I despise success ballast.

And during the race, they have to basically conform to a reference time?

Absolutely absurd.

Edited by Seanspeed, 18 January 2013 - 17:05.


#17 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,782 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 17:25

So the cars are already performance balanced before anything even begins? I already dont like that sort of system because it doesn't reward diversity.


That's the basic principle of GT3, and it seems to have encouraged diversity to too much of a degree. Build a car, deliver it to the FIA and/or SRO, they will performance-balance it to the pace of the class, and there's probably about 15 models of GT3 cars (at least) running around the world at this moment.

#18 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 17:43

That's the basic principle of GT3, and it seems to have encouraged diversity to too much of a degree. Build a car, deliver it to the FIA and/or SRO, they will performance-balance it to the pace of the class, and there's probably about 15 models of GT3 cars (at least) running around the world at this moment.


Ratel said @the Autosport Show that the exact number of manuf... sorry, BRANDS in GT3 right now is 14.

And yes Seanspeed, it is ABSURD indeed. But the GT3 isn't really the issue on this thread (even though I hate the class with all my heart), the joker / reference lap mess is.

Edited by SonnyViceR, 18 January 2013 - 18:11.


#19 BigCHrome

BigCHrome
  • Member

  • 4,049 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 18 January 2013 - 18:11

How pointless.

Advertisement

#20 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,399 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 18 January 2013 - 18:23

That's the basic principle of GT3, and it seems to have encouraged diversity to too much of a degree. Build a car, deliver it to the FIA and/or SRO, they will performance-balance it to the pace of the class, and there's probably about 15 models of GT3 cars (at least) running around the world at this moment.

It encourages diversity, sure, but its not rewarding it, necessarily. There's little incentive to try and build a 'better' car than somebody else.

As for the joker lap stuff, it sounds like something NASCAR would come up with. Anything to keep things close and exciting, even at an extreme cost to the spirit of competition.

Edited by Seanspeed, 18 January 2013 - 18:26.


#21 DrProzac

DrProzac
  • Member

  • 1,894 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 18 January 2013 - 19:15

I don't know if I fully grasp the concept, but if I do than it's one of the most idiotic things I've ever heard of.

But joker laps in rallycross aren't a bad idea (one longer/shorter lap in a race for everyone - drivers choose when to do it).

#22 spacekid

spacekid
  • Member

  • 2,678 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 19 January 2013 - 14:23

So basically - you are in a race against other drivers, if they are able to go faster than you because they are better at driving, they get punished.

How ****ing patronising can those regs get?

I've never really understood the point of golfers competing against each others handicaps on a friendly level 'cos - you either got the ball in the hole in more shots or less shots than your opponent. But you would never see that at a competitive sporting event.

If you lose because someone was better than you at the activity you were doing, then thats sport. Surely?

#23 Lennat

Lennat
  • Member

  • 484 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 19 January 2013 - 16:03

I think F1 needs something similar.

I mean, it's not real world relevant to just go as fast as possible. Public roads have set speed limits, which should be respected. F1 is sending the wrong message to its younger fans now by giving the impression that speed is all that counts. Perhaps bonus points could be given for driving extra slowly and safe? How about speed cams on the straights? Set a speed limit and take away points and fie them if the go above it.

I think it is pretty obvious that this is a great idea. I mean, otherwise people might get the impression that motorsport is about speed and exitement. :(

#24 PorcupineTroy

PorcupineTroy
  • Member

  • 293 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 19 January 2013 - 20:00

I think F1 needs something similar.

I mean, it's not real world relevant to just go as fast as possible. Public roads have set speed limits, which should be respected. F1 is sending the wrong message to its younger fans now by giving the impression that speed is all that counts. Perhaps bonus points could be given for driving extra slowly and safe? How about speed cams on the straights? Set a speed limit and take away points and fie them if the go above it.

I think it is pretty obvious that this is a great idea. I mean, otherwise people might get the impression that motorsport is about speed and exitement. :(


The first line of your post had me VERY worried! :wave:

#25 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 10 January 2014 - 19:20

This year's Dubai 24, which is happening right now but I have no interest in following, is using the same post quali bop / joker lap reference lap time etc etc etc stuff as previously, but they also have a new what-the-**** piece of gimmicky... when under caution (or Code 60 should I say) top 5 overall cars cannot pit without penalty, but everyone else can...

 

Oh Creventic

 

mlfw6275_Even_Pinky_WTFs_You.png


Edited by SonnyViceR, 10 January 2014 - 19:35.


#26 Dolph

Dolph
  • Member

  • 4,866 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 10 January 2014 - 19:35

This year's Dubai 24, which is happening right now but I have no interest in following, is using the same post quali bop / joker lap reference lap time etc etc etc stuff as previously, but they also have a new what-the-**** piece of gimmicky... when under caution (or Code 60 should I say) top 5 overall cars cannot pit without penalty, but everyone else can...

 

 

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:



#27 DrProzac

DrProzac
  • Member

  • 1,894 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 10 January 2014 - 21:19

Utter stupidity.



#28 Tapz63

Tapz63
  • Member

  • 263 posts
  • Joined: August 13

Posted 10 January 2014 - 22:03

So going too quick is a punishable offence.... Makes sense.

They should also ban overtaking.

#29 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 11 January 2014 - 07:59

So going too quick is a punishable offence.... Makes sense.

 

I guess they want to be relevant to real road cars, lolz :drunk:



#30 Peat

Peat
  • Member

  • 1,240 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 11 January 2014 - 08:54

I don't like or agree with it, but my opinion as an armchair enthusiast doesnt really matter as it's a sport for the participants, not for the spectator.

 

The fact of the matter is, they have a grid of 80 cars that don't mind it. I would call that a success.



#31 noikeee

noikeee
  • Member

  • 9,518 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 11 January 2014 - 13:06

This year's Dubai 24, which is happening right now but I have no interest in following, is using the same post quali bop / joker lap reference lap time etc etc etc stuff as previously, but they also have a new what-the-**** piece of gimmicky... when under caution (or Code 60 should I say) top 5 overall cars cannot pit without penalty, but everyone else can...

 

Amazing.

 

I just re-read the opening post which I had utterly forgotten happened in reality, and still can't believe a race is run like this. One of these days somebody's going to set up a race where everyone has to run the whole time with the pit speed limiter on. The 24 hours of Cruise Control.



#32 ClubmanGT

ClubmanGT
  • Member

  • 1,243 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 11 January 2014 - 13:12

That is some club level racing shit. What a disaster. 

 

Start the classes together and just have a 106 car fields. The faster cars will generally end up at the front. 



#33 TrollHunter

TrollHunter
  • New Member

  • 26 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 11 January 2014 - 13:26

And this is what happens when you let complete morons decide how a race series should be run. The only solution to this problem is, landmines? 



#34 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 11 January 2014 - 13:48

Well I suppose at least someone (other than the organizers, competitors and maybe Dubai itself) cares for this event, seeing as over 900 posts were written on the Radio Le Mans forum about it. Of course I doubt that number would've been higher than like... umm five if RLM hadn't been covering it live, but whatever.

 

Assuming that Victor is reading this, is Creventic adopting that insane Code 60 top5 pit stop fiasco for Bathurst 12 as well?


Edited by SonnyViceR, 11 January 2014 - 13:51.


#35 Richard T

Richard T
  • Member

  • 1,147 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 11 January 2014 - 15:01

Me and my teammates lost the win (D2 class) at 12h of Hungaroring in 2009 due to a code 60 just after our pitstop, 40 minutes from the end..

Ask me what I think about it ;)

Edited by Richard T, 11 January 2014 - 15:01.


#36 GSiebert

GSiebert
  • Member

  • 1,872 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 11 January 2014 - 20:05

This is so cool I hope Bernie is reading this board.



#37 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 11 January 2014 - 20:40

I don't like or agree with it, but my opinion as an armchair enthusiast doesnt really matter as it's a sport for the participants, not for the spectator.

 

The fact of the matter is, they have a grid of 80 cars that don't mind it. I would call that a success.

 

It's a semi-established 24 hour event held during the otherwise silent period in motor racing (as in early January) with the primary headliner class being open for FIA GT3 machinery, without a doubt the most populous non-Cup/Challenge category on the planet right now, of course there are loads of entries lined up... regardless of anything else. And yes there are other categories for Cup cars and touring cars as well but those categories don't follow as strict BoP tweakings and other weird voodoo rules anyway.

 

Besides, while I certainly understand your point and realize that this event is made with competitors in mind, in the end it all comes to personal opinion... and when my personal opinion ranks Dubai 24 Hours as the most disgusting, most artificial and most unlikeable motor race on the planet (yes, I even hate DTM less), I just cannot try to say defend any aspect of this event, even if there are some counter arguments. I'm sorry.

 

Also I dislike the circuit (literally just a grey parking lot in a setting that looks like a construction yard, with drawn lines showing you where the "track" goes -  there's not even an effort to camourflage anything) with heavy heart, but that's a minor point and has nothing to do with the event itself.


Edited by SonnyViceR, 11 January 2014 - 20:48.


#38 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,782 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 11 January 2014 - 20:42

Well I suppose at least someone (other than the organizers, competitors and maybe Dubai itself) cares for this event, seeing as over 900 posts were written on the Radio Le Mans forum about it. Of course I doubt that number would've been higher than like... umm five if RLM hadn't been covering it live, but whatever.

 

Assuming that Victor is reading this, is Creventic adopting that insane Code 60 top5 pit stop fiasco for Bathurst 12 as well?

 

Not as far as I know of. I'm gonna have to look through the regulations to see for sure, but I think they're also dropping the stupid qualifying rule from the previous years.

 

EDIT: The benchmark time qualifying rule is moved to classes D, E and F (touring and sports cars that are also road-legal), their benchmark time is 2:12 and any lap quicker than that will be deleted. However, since the classes are for modified road cars, it's not really likely that the cars will actually be that quick. Otherwise, all cars and drivers must be within 130% of the pole time. Class A (GT3) no longer has the benchmark time as far as I can tell.

 

http://www.bathurst1...-as-28-5-13.pdf

 

Article 2.5, pages 10-11.



#39 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 11 January 2014 - 21:04

Not as far as I know of. I'm gonna have to look through the regulations to see for sure, but I think they're also dropping the stupid qualifying rule from the previous years.

 

EDIT: The benchmark time qualifying rule is moved to classes D, E and F (touring and sports cars that are also road-legal), their benchmark time is 2:12 and any lap quicker than that will be deleted. However, since the classes are for modified road cars, it's not really likely that the cars will actually be that quick. Otherwise, all cars and drivers must be within 130% of the pole time. Class A (GT3) no longer has the benchmark time as far as I can tell.

 

http://www.bathurst1...-as-28-5-13.pdf

 

Article 2.5, pages 10-11.

 

Did Creventic receive some sort of weird demand from the lower end classes to have the benchmark nonsense? Who would actually want that? And since there are not many pros in those cars (well less than in GT3) what is the point anyway...

 

Btw, one addition to my previous Dubai post, there was one single thing that didn't make me roll my eyes when I looked at the overview of this year's race: they allowed a (handicapped and raped but nevertheless) GT1 car on the grid, that actually took the pole! I don't know why the **** they did it, probably just *because we can*, but it was nice seeing the old - and I mean old - lady C6.R having a go for 24 hour race, it's not like that's going to happen many more times in the future.



Advertisement

#40 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,782 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 11 January 2014 - 21:08

Did Creventic receive some sort of weird demand from the lower end classes to have the benchmark nonsense? Who would actually want that? And since there are not many pros in those cars (well less than in GT3) what is the point anyway...

 

Since it's for less-modified classes (and therefore lower-budget teams), I suspect this rule is a bit of a cost-control measure to stop teams spending too much on expensive modifications to make the cars too fast.

 

Yes, I'm gonna ruffle some feathers by calling this a merit of the reference laptime rule for the lower classes: it stops amateur teams from spending themselves out of the game by expensive modifications and hiring hot-shoe drivers to kill the opposition.



#41 SonnyViceR

SonnyViceR
  • Member

  • 1,387 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 11 January 2014 - 22:14



Since it's for less-modified classes (and therefore lower-budget teams), I suspect this rule is a bit of a cost-control measure to stop teams spending too much on expensive modifications to make the cars too fast.

 

Yes, I'm gonna ruffle some feathers by calling this a merit of the reference laptime rule for the lower classes: it stops amateur teams from spending themselves out of the game by expensive modifications and hiring hot-shoe drivers to kill the opposition.

 

I suppose this could be a very good argument, except for the fact that it is pointless since they already have a BoP system in place for these lower classes that basically says any car (EVEN INDIVIDUAL ENTRIES, not just general model) can be performance balanced any time during the race week. The last line also sort of refers to waiver system...

 

1121224.png

 

You may say that "well team can always sandbag through practice and qualifying and start from last place on the grid", but since that piece of regulations says that anything can be changed at any time for any reason, Creventic could just order car X to be bopped down just because their aerodynamics looked fancy or something.

 

Also as an sort of explanation for the benchmark it says this:

"As a guideline the upper limit of performance for cars in these classes is restricted to less than that of GT3 cars"


Edited by SonnyViceR, 11 January 2014 - 22:23.