50 replies to this topic

[SonnyViceR]

The poll questions have been greatly exaggerated, I know, but I hope you get it.

 

edit: the last word on the third poll is finish, it won't let it complete for some reason (even though I haven't reached the letter limit yet)

Edited by SonnyViceR, 11 November 2013 - 17:53.

[Victor_RO]

I'm gonna go against the grain on the second question and say that I'd much rather prefer the second option, on the condition of the BoP actually being done properly by a well-written set of rules. And the reason why I prefer ten different brands (including Porsche and Ferrari) instead of just Porsche and Ferrari is simple: the variety of the trackside experience. Especially on a late Thursday or Saturday night, down at Arnage or Mulsanne.

[SonnyViceR]

I'd much rather prefer the second option, on the condition of the BoP actually being done properly by a well-written set of rules.

 

The BoP on Question 2 was meant to be FIA GT3-ish & post-2009 LMGTE styled (sorry if that wasn't clear enough) which has more to do with political lottery than rules. If you can sort of organize the cars through actual rulebook (original restrictor table according to displacement and not some hocus pocus crap etc etc) like few years ago and keep them like that, I wouldn't necessarily call that BoP but good regulations.

 

But yes everyone is entitled to their opinions.

Edited by SonnyViceR, 11 November 2013 - 18:24.

[Victor_RO]

The BoP on Question 2 was meant to be FIA GT3-ish & post-2009 LMGTE styled (sorry if that wasn't clear enough) which has more to do with political lottery than rules. If you can sort of organize the cars through actual rulebook (original restrictor table according to displacement and not some hocus pocus crap etc etc) like few years ago and keep them like that, I wouldn't necessarily call that BoP but good regulations.

 

Yeah, but technically restrictor/displacement/weight tables are still a form of BoP.

[SonnyViceR]

Yeah, but technically restrictor/displacement/weight tables are still a form of BoP.

 

Technically yes, and in ideal world we wouldn't have those either, but just as everybody keeps saying you need some sort of system in production based class that ain't prototypes, which GT is. However if you got say

 

Weight - mininum XXXXkg whatever the model is (minimum, not "minimum" ala GTE) and it stays at that

Air restricor goes according to displacement table (preferably you would have separate categories for models that have higher and lower volume displacements) and that's their only function, no exceptions or gifts or other shenanigans

 

And you wouldn't ever never re-touch them during the season - again in ideal world - then you wouldn't really be balancing the performances that the cars(/drivers/tyres/sandbags) are showing on track, but making the category accessible for all kinds of different cars.

Edited by SonnyViceR, 11 November 2013 - 18:50.

[WhiteSGPlayer]

I'm gonna go against the grain on the second question and say that I'd much rather prefer the second option, on the condition of the BoP actually being done properly by a well-written set of rules. And the reason why I prefer ten different brands (including Porsche and Ferrari) instead of just Porsche and Ferrari is simple: the variety of the trackside experience. Especially on a late Thursday or Saturday night, down at Arnage or Mulsanne.

 

Cosigned. I've never really minded BOP too much unless it gets badly out of hand, and the more variety there is with good BOP, the better.

[SonnyViceR]

I've never really minded BOP too much unless it gets badly out of hand

 

Something like this?

http://forums.autosp...d-other-idiocy/

 

But I don't think I really wanna go deeper on this topic myself, I'm sure those of you who know me (here, and elsewhere) have heard my tiresome ramblings millions of times and know exactly where I stand regarding the matter.

Edited by SonnyViceR, 11 November 2013 - 19:02.

[Andrew Hope]

I don't mind DRS, it seems like the lesser of two evils. F1 painted themselves into a corner with everyone designing cars to be as fast as possible alone out on track and surprise, it turns out that throwing 22 hillclimb cars onto the grid at Monza doesn't equal great racing. DRS I can live with, although like most things in racing, other series do it much better than F1 but nearly everyone pretends that isn't the truth. In this case, IndyCar's Push-2-Pass. It's no surprise IndyCar's system sounds like it was devised by 60-year old white men who were never cool trying to make it sound all hip for the kids, but the system itself is genuinely solid. A small boost in power for a limited amount of time, with each driver having the same number at the start of the race, and they can be used any time you want, offensively or defensively. It adds a small chess match to the larger picture of the race as a whole. DRS is half-assed, but I'm willing to overlook that because there is a good and fair intention behind it. Two wrongs may not make a right, but an unfair fancy bit on your rear wing to cancel out the unfair invisible hurricane behind every car making it impossible to pass is a reasonable trade-off to me. Two zones right after each other is st00pid, though.

 

For sports cars, I just want strict, clear regulations written and all the teams to follow them to the letter, and if Porsche does the best job and wins every race, good for Porsche. Only the ass-backwards governing bodies of sports car racing could come up with rules like performance balancing, you don't see that **** anywhere else. You don't make the Stanley Cup-winning hockey team play without sticks the next year. You don't make the Champions League winner play with 10 men the following season. I can't speak for anyone else but I watch sports car racing to see racing versions of cars I'm almost certainly never going to own, and I accept they can't all be close finishes. It's not reasonable to expect a 6-hour race to come down to a last lap battle every single time. Performance balancing has fair intentions but it becomes very difficult very quickly to make someone's heart beat faster when they're watching a sports car race and every car except the slowest has been handicapped. But I'm a dumbass, I don't know how to fix this ****.

 

The NASCAR poll is the toughest, but I voted for Grandstand Finish. As long as the caution calls are consistent, I don't have a problem with throwing the yellow. If it's been one of those races with 9 invisibris cautions already, it's okay, but if it's one of those races where they've not called a yellow for an actual crash to see if the car can get out of the way before the field comes back around, and then all of a sudden they're throwing cawshun for sandwhich baggie it looks pretty weak. NASCAR has a bit of a shady reputation with this kind of ****, and probably deserves it, and if there's 2 to go and Dale jr. is second but miles back of some ******** like Clint Bowyer and a caution for debris comes out, it had better be some big God damn debris to make me think that wasn't a weak call. Like there had better be a dog on the track or an earthquake has sunk turn 4 at Daytona into the sea. So I voted for the second option but whichever is consistent to how the race has been called up to then is fine with me.

Edited by Andrew Hope, 11 November 2013 - 19:07.

[KingTiger]

Absolutely NO to DRS. The races don't mean anything anymore, it's a complete joke. There is no soul anymore, it's just 20 cars cruising around waiting for the tires to crap out. 

 

Variety is important for Le Mans but only if it doesn't become a farce. Rules should be the same for everyone, no exceptions. Some BOP is ok but teams shouldn't be forced to drive slowly to not get penalized. 

 

In the nascar case it depends whether the championship is involved. 

[Ross Stonefeld]

Im so bored of the artificial racing argument. Though it serves a purpose in identifying the people who don't know what they're talking about.

 

You can make passing as easy as you want. You'll never make racing easy. If it's easy for me to pass you, it's easy for you to pass me right back. And that's pretty difficult racing.

[noikeee]

All up for DRS (though I want a weaker DRS).

 

No for BoP (amusingly I've been lobbying for BoP in an online sim I'm a part of, but it's the devil in real life racing).

 

No for fake cautions (no explanation needed here).

Edited by noikeee, 11 November 2013 - 21:22.

[Vepe1995]

Personally I don't like DRS, but I also want to see racing that has overtaking. If I want to watch quali laps, I'd watch the qualifying session.

 

No for BoP, because it means that cars that sort of aren't supposed race each other are.

 

Like noikee said, no fake cautions.

[Kvyat]

Im so bored of the artificial racing argument. Though it serves a purpose in identifying the people who don't know what they're talking about.

 

You can make passing as easy as you want. You'll never make racing easy. If it's easy for me to pass you, it's easy for you to pass me right back. And that's pretty difficult racing.

 

your reasoning is bad, but hey, I don't know what I'm talking about......

 

 

This is the problem with these artificial things, they easily buy out those who don't appreciate what racing is really about

 

I hate any kind of artificiality, so fiercely voted against all of them.

[Ross Stonefeld]

So what is racing really about then. Another form of completely artificial rules?

[Kvyat]

DRS gives a free pass to the faster car that was behind. The other car can't repass(excluding double DRS zones) because it is slower, obviously.

 

The driver with faster car behind should overtake using his skills alone and not with the aid of such a gimmick. This is what makes it totally aritificial.

 

Generally, artificiality is taken place when the "show" is priority over pure fairness and sportiness kind of thing

 

I agree with everyone that F1 was so much in the need of having overtaking back, but DRS is not the way to do it, IMO.

 

I remember the 2006's GP2 season when drivers were able to pass, if they had ability to do so, and DRS had no say over it. So, it's not impossible for current F1 to have cars which would allow that type of racing.

 

It's just a matter of getting out of the DRS/Pirellis confort zone and fixing up the cars once for all, imho.

Edited by Kvyat, 11 November 2013 - 23:12.

[Jejking]

I'm going for pure racing. Why? Because DRS is such an unstable factor that you can't rely on it, with so many different setups and machines. Some days it's working as expected, but on other days it's in some cases hugely overpowered and you blast past someone. I hate that, because if you have better tyres, you have much better traction out of corners and are therefore able to pass so much more easily. You are simply not in the same race, which is a shame. Vettel has crafted himself into a very good tactician, and that's admirable since he uses every opportunity to cut through 'traffic', but it isn't exciting to watch since you know what is going to happen. With the exception for Australia, where he somehow got stuck behind Sutil. Even DRS couldn't help him get past, so he has to bide his time and turn up the heat. That is what racing is about too!

[Ross Stonefeld]

DRS gives a free pass to the faster car that was behind. The other car can't repass(excluding double DRS zones) because it is slower, obviously.

 

 

Not automatically faster, or dramatically faster, just close enough to trigger DRS usage. If you're only .2 a lap quicker, on the next lap the car you just passed will be able to use DRS on you. 

 

And the leading car already has a huge aerodynamic advantage, so giving the following car DRS usage in one area of the track evens that up. It just needs to be tweaked so it's not uneven.

[KingTiger]

Not automatically faster, or dramatically faster, just close enough to trigger DRS usage. If you're only .2 a lap quicker, on the next lap the car you just passed will be able to use DRS on you. 

 

And the leading car already has a huge aerodynamic advantage, so giving the following car DRS usage in one area of the track evens that up. It just needs to be tweaked so it's not uneven.

 

Wow. Have you ever watched F1? 

[Ross Stonefeld]

For a few races now.

[FBJim]

Im so bored of the artificial racing argument. Though it serves a purpose in identifying the people who don't know what they're talking about.

 

You can make passing as easy as you want. You'll never make racing easy. If it's easy for me to pass you, it's easy for you to pass me right back. And that's pretty difficult racing.

"Artificial" is a stupid, subjective word, (and, really, "racing" is too) so let me put it this way. Making overtaking easy neutralizes overtaking, and defensive driving as driver skills. It doesn't matter if, say, you're someone like Kamui Kobyashi, who was extremely good at finding overtaking moves that other drivers, even faster ones, couldn't, because with DRS, now anyone can overtake fairly easily. It doesn't matter if you're someone who's extremely good at defensive driving, because defensive driving is now extremely ineffective on any track with a decently long straight. It takes away dimensions, and turns the sport into a hot-lapping contest.

[noikeee]

Which is why I want a weaker DRS. It was too hard to pass before DRS, so raw pace very often became useless because drivers didn't even have defend to position to hang on in front of a quicker driver - lose track position and you were screwed for 70 laps. Now it's too hard to retain position with DRS, because if the guy behind is just a little bit more than marginally quicker he will overtake you no matter what you do.

 

There's a happy medium to be had somewhere - but it does include some form of DRS.

[prty]

 It's no surprise IndyCar's system sounds like it was devised by 60-year old white men who were never cool trying to make it sound all hip for the kids,

 

You know, if you had said black instead of white, it probably would be considered racist. Funny how it works

[Andrew Hope]

You know, if you had said black instead of white, it probably would be considered racist. Funny how it works

I am fully confident that if 60-year old black men ran IndyCar it would be in better shape than it is now, considering that unlike the white men they were almost certainly cool and probably still are. My point was that Push-2-Pass sounds like some goofy Xtreme marketing more suited to selling Nerf guns than car racing. Everytime I see it written (with the k00l "2" in there) I picture IndyCar's board room and the chimps in suits working there, a bunch of Dick Cheney-looking guys standing around a Powerpoint presentation showing their viewership fall, and all these old plebs trying to come up with something that sounds cool and hip for the kids.

Edited by Andrew Hope, 12 November 2013 - 15:53.

[DS27]

You know, if you had said black instead of white, it probably would be considered racist. Funny how it works

 

'probably'...?

 

I'm sometimes amazed by this world we live in.

[DS27]

"Artificial" is a stupid, subjective word, (and, really, "racing" is too) so let me put it this way. Making overtaking easy neutralizes overtaking, and defensive driving as driver skills. It doesn't matter if, say, you're someone like Kamui Kobyashi, who was extremely good at finding overtaking moves that other drivers, even faster ones, couldn't, because with DRS, now anyone can overtake fairly easily. It doesn't matter if you're someone who's extremely good at defensive driving, because defensive driving is now extremely ineffective on any track with a decently long straight. It takes away dimensions, and turns the sport into a hot-lapping contest.

 

 

Yay - some common sense.

[Andrew Hope]

Some would say the sport was already a hot-lapping contest, and that creating so much turbulence you can't close within 50 feet of the guy ahead of you unless you have 9 gears and the Maybach from the Tiger tank sitting behind you was artificial too. How come now wth DRS it's artificial for the driver behind now that you can pass easier, but it wasn't artificial for 8 or 9 seasons for the driver ahead who didn't need to fear any passes because of the turbulence off the back of his car? Neither is a skill so let's be sure to say both sucked.

[SonnyViceR]

 

Some BOP is ok but teams shouldn't be forced to drive slowly to not get penalized. 

 

Or drive slowly on purpose to get awarded...

 

It's just wrong when one realizes that success ballast (which is crap itself) is the fairer of the two.

[Buttoneer]

Some would say the sport was already a hot-lapping contest, and that creating so much turbulence you can't close within 50 feet of the guy ahead of you unless you have 9 gears and the Maybach from the Tiger tank sitting behind you was artificial too. How come now wth DRS it's artificial for the driver behind now that you can pass easier, but it wasn't artificial for 8 or 9 seasons for the driver ahead who didn't need to fear any passes because of the turbulence off the back of his car? Neither is a skill so let's be sure to say both sucked.

I was about to post a less eloquent version of this.  DRS counters an artificial situation with a new one.  What we could really do with is finding a way to reduce the hurricane and allow a driver to get close behind without having to press a button or ruining his tyres getting there.

 

Probably brings us back round to the aero v mechanical grip argument which pops up every so often, but I'm still all for dancing suspension like we saw in the FW14B rather than wings and aero devices.

 

I went for purity all the way through the choices but have no idea what I'm talking about with Nascar so ignore that one if you want.

[Bob Riebe]

Or drive slowly on purpose to get awarded...

 

It's just wrong when one realizes that success ballast (which is crap itself) is the fairer of the two.

Well they could do like some short track racing in the U.S., invert the field. Fastest cars start at the rear.

 

Or do as they did some years ago i a libre races in the U.S. classes of cars started at a rough separation of lap time so at the end of the race, all would theoretically reach the fixed distance at the same time.

 

Watching GT cars that represent nothing , except some sanctions idea of fair racing, is pointless bs.

Sad when race cars have less hp than street cars.

[Ross Stonefeld]

It's relatively easy to have high HP in a road car. 

[SonnyViceR]

Well they could do like some short track racing in the U.S., invert the field. Fastest cars start at the rear.

 

Or do as they did some years ago i a libre races in the U.S. classes of cars started at a rough separation of lap time so at the end of the race, all would theoretically reach the fixed distance at the same time.

 

Watching GT cars that represent nothing , except some sanctions idea of fair racing, is pointless bs.

Sad when race cars have less hp than street cars.

 

Sounds like the "Ultime speed comparison" commonly used at V8 Supercar events and Australian Grand Prix, you know your average street car vs race cars. It's quite fun actually, but really only for demonstration purposes only.

 

And yes what you say last is the reason I cannot support ACO GTE anymore, or any SRO GT racing for that matter. You may do something to make the category more accessible for different models, but that line can be easily crossed and ruined.

[Bob Riebe]

It's relatively easy to have high HP in a road car. 

It is much easier to have higher HP in race cars but sanctions are afraid of that so they turn the supposed race versions into something that raced in SCCA A/B production forty plus years ago.

 

OH wait they give then wings, and aero aids, for higher cornering speeds because going around corners at higher speeds is so much safer-- BRILLIANT!

 

 

No one ever crashes in the corners.

[Ross Stonefeld]

HP per volume is more impressive than the raw number. People who worry about size belong in high school.

[Bob Riebe]

HP per volume is more impressive than the raw number. People who worry about size belong in high school.

HP per artificially imposed limits only impresses people who did poorly in high school.

 

Ignorance is bliss and the ACO rules impress the ignorant quite well,

[Seanspeed]

For the F1 question, its a totally loaded question. 

 

For one, define 'artificial'.  I think that right there is enough to obfuscate the ability to answer what amounts to a 'yes' or 'no' question. 

 

Two, there are no degrees of answers available.  Some people might be hardline on one side or the other, but I think plenty of people would fall in the middle somewhere.  I know lots of people who would be happy with DRS, but without the types of tires they run on.  And I've heard some people say vice-versa.  Some people are fine with KERS.  Is that 'artificial'?  Again, not clear. 

 

Hate to be a Debby Downer, but its a pretty poorly thought-out question, obviously intended to get a specific reaction and result. 

[Ross Stonefeld]

HP per artificially imposed limits only impresses people who did poorly in high school.

 

Ignorance is bliss and the ACO rules impress the ignorant quite well,

 

Go watch NASCAR or Top Gear if you're so impressed by output. 

 

Better yet, win the lottery. That's the only thing that's going to pay for your rules-less racing 

[Bob Riebe]

HP per volume is more impressive than the raw number. People who worry about size belong in high school.

I guess you would really be impressed by this picture from letsmow.com.

 

 

Although-- as these boys are hitting over 60 mph on very short dirt tracks, I guess they are more impressive than the ACO's contrived competition.

Edited by Bob Riebe, 12 November 2013 - 18:43.

[Bob Riebe]

Go watch NASCAR or Top Gear if you're so impressed by output. 

I have little doubt that the ACO learned a lot from its dealing with Bill France Sr., so watching the ACO is like watching NASCAR, same crap, different pile.

[KingTiger]

Some would say the sport was already a hot-lapping contest, and that creating so much turbulence you can't close within 50 feet of the guy ahead of you unless you have 9 gears and the Maybach from the Tiger tank sitting behind you was artificial too. How come now wth DRS it's artificial for the driver behind now that you can pass easier, but it wasn't artificial for 8 or 9 seasons for the driver ahead who didn't need to fear any passes because of the turbulence off the back of his car? Neither is a skill so let's be sure to say both sucked.

 

Even after DRS you need a big gap to pass someone. The only thing DRS has done is take the skill out of overtaking and defending.

[Ross Stonefeld]

If sportscar racing had NASCR-style audience figures it'd be a lot healthier.

[SonnyViceR]

Hate to be a Debby Downer, but its a pretty poorly thought-out question, obviously intended to get a specific reaction and result. 

 

Really now.

 

The poll questions have been greatly exaggerated, I know, but I hope you get it.

 

 

 

 

---

People complain when I have polls with too many options, people complain when I make them simpler (or as in this case, choosing between two exact opposites). It's hard to please everybody.

Edited by SonnyViceR, 12 November 2013 - 18:58.

[Buttoneer]

Better off sticking to pleasing nobody in my experience

[prty]

I am fully confident that if 60-year old black men ran IndyCar it would be in better shape than it is now, considering that unlike the white men they were almost certainly cool and probably still are.

Ok, let me do a test here:

 

"I am fully confident that if 60-year old white men ran IndyCar it would be in better shape than it is now, considering that unlike the black men they were almost certainly cool and probably still are."
 

Yep, definitely racist. I don't know nor care if you are white or black, but if ones have to (and rightly so) be careful with what they say, I'm sorry but the others too. It doesn't work one way.

Edited by prty, 12 November 2013 - 20:47.

[Ross Stonefeld]

It does. All my black friends are way cooler.

[prty]

It does. All my black friends are way cooler.

 

And there are other different things the other way too. But what I mean with both ways is being careful with what is said, not being cooler.

[Bob Riebe]

Ok, let me do a test here:

 

"I am fully confident that if 60-year old white men ran IndyCar it would be in better shape than it is now, considering that unlike the black men they were almost certainly cool and probably still are."
 

Yep, definitely racist. I don't know nor care if you are white or black, but if ones have to (and rightly so) be careful with what they say, I'm sorry but the others too. It doesn't work one way.

Well that depends, if all those whites were of Latino descent, they would have full adjustable air suspensions and if they were too slow they could just start the car bouncing around the track and get crowd approval.,

[Buttoneer]

...and back to the topic at hand please...

[SonnyViceR]

Better off sticking to pleasing nobody in my experience

 

Hmm yes

 

By the way, if someone really needs to have more choices than the exaggerated examples of this poll when it comes to different forms of 'artificiality', there's always my previous version here

http://forums.autosp...-artificiality/

[Shambolic]

I was about to post a less eloquent version of this.  DRS counters an artificial situation with a new one.  What we could really do with is finding a way to reduce the hurricane and allow a driver to get close behind without having to press a button or ruining his tyres getting there.

 

Probably brings us back round to the aero v mechanical grip argument which pops up every so often, but I'm still all for dancing suspension like we saw in the FW14B rather than wings and aero devices.

 

I went for purity all the way through the choices but have no idea what I'm talking about with Nascar so ignore that one if you want.

 

I detest DRS in F1. I can understand the argument it's there to negate the dirty air problem, even if I don't agree with it. But what's needed is for someone, somewhere, to determine *why* the dirty air problem exists, and formulate tech regs that reduce or ideally remove that problem.

 

Instead certain engineers representing certain teams sit together and come up with problems and solutions, and mire the whole thing even more. Instead of "expensive" redesigns we get one second gapping wing slots, and the media coverage is under pressure to claim this is on a par with Villeneuve and Arnoux.

 

I don't want to see "balancing" in any form of motorsport, and as far as I'm aware British Touring Cars run with success ballast? That is a major reason why I've no interest in it, and I don't want to see any form of "balancing" in sportscars either.

 

NASCAR for me, unless on road courses, is about a meaningless spectacle. So the purist in me wants to see it free of spuriously thrown yellows, but the bored and wanting to be mindlessly entertained part of me is all for "the show" at the expense of integrity.

[Afterburner]

What amazes me about this is the number of people claiming they'd rather have a boring race with one real pass than fake-ness in F1. Guess I've been right all along about most people wanting better-looking, unrestricted cars than the garbage they're trying to give us next year.