15 replies to this topic

[SonnyViceR]

Yes, even further continuing the topic of "balancing the field" (as sad as it is) my next question relates to the use of success ballast and BoP. Please let not discuss about the stupidity of these two ideas here - or if there are better/worse forms out there, or why these "have" ´to exist in the first place - but just compare them against each other.

 

For those just joining in:

 

Success ballast

Automatic amount of extra weight is added to the cars according to their success in each event. Let's say car wins in Race X and gets automatic 50kg weight penalty for that (the second place would grant 35kg, third place 30kg etc). In the next race, the same car finishes 15th and loses the extra weight or at least some of what it had gained because it finished lower than the last car that gets penalty weight, which is let's say the 10th place finisher. The extra penalty weight amounts stay the same throughout the season and nothing else - in this case here - gets modified in the car performances.

 

Balance of performance

Different cars are balanced by adjusting weight, air restrictor, fuel tank and other performance areas throughout the season. The changes, whether severe or not, can be made at any time for whatever reason the organizer comes up with (performance on track, lack of performance on track, crappy or superior car/drivers/tires, politics, 4th of July celebrations etc). It's not an automatic system like success ballast

Edited by SonnyViceR, 15 November 2013 - 17:21.

[KingTiger]

Success ballast seems to work for Super GT, but I think a preseason homoligation/BOP is the least of all possible "evils".

[Andrew Hope]

Balance of performance all the way. It sets a bad precedent to give any team in any sport an incentive to lose. If it has to be one or the other I'd rather a series get all the performance strangling out of the way before the first race and everyone have at it, and not be loading bricks in the trunk every time the same guy keeps winning.

[SonnyViceR]

Success ballast seems to work for Super GT, but I think a preseason homoligation/BOP is the least of all possible "evils".

 

If it has to be one or the other I'd rather a series get all the performance strangling out of the way before the first race and everyone have at it, and not be loading bricks in the trunk every time the same guy keeps winning.

 

 

As indicated on the opening post, we're not talking about pre-season-only-BoP, but BoP that gets adjusted throughout the season. Which happens in categories such as LMGTE

 

Hell, if it was only preseason-BoP that gets set (assumed it wasn't done the idiotic FIA GT3 way) I'd probably support BoP over success ballast too.

Edited by SonnyViceR, 15 November 2013 - 17:40.

[Afterburner]

Performance-balancing is far less disturbing to me but still a stupid idea. This is what happens when we get a generation that grew up on 'everyone should win' into the world of motor racing, imo.

[Ross Stonefeld]

No, it's what happens when you try to have races where people are racing cars built to different requirements.

[ollebompa]

Performance-balancing is far less disturbing to me but still a stupid idea. This is what happens when we get a generation that grew up on 'everyone should win' into the world of motor racing, imo.

Yes, i think this is an real issue,seeing kids today. I do by no means say that they should be trown in the deep end. But need to know, good results comes from hard work only.

Edited by ollebompa, 15 November 2013 - 18:19.

[SonnyViceR]

No, it's what happens when you try to have races where people are racing cars built to different requirements.

 

And I think it's what happens when your organizing body writes shitty regulations, but what do I know.

[alfa1]

Let's say car wins in Race X and gets automatic 50kg weight penalty

In the next race, the same car finishes 15th and loses the extra weight

Disagree with it all.

Motor racing should not be hobbled like horse racing to "give everyone a chance".  It should simply be up to a team to build a better car, or a driver to go faster.

And I should imagine that in your scenario, Vettels best chance for the season is to win a race, crash out on the first lap of the next one to lose that extra weight, win the next race, crash out on the first lap of the next one to lose that extra weight... etc...

[Bob Riebe]

Neither, both are asinine contrived competition

[SonnyViceR]

Disagree with it all.

Motor racing should not be hobbled like horse racing to "give everyone a chance".  It should simply be up to a team to build a better car, or a driver to go faster.

And I should imagine that in your scenario, Vettels best chance for the season is to win a race, crash out on the first lap of the next one to lose that extra weight, win the next race, crash out on the first lap of the next one to lose that extra weight... etc...

 

Umm, it's not 'my scenario' but thing that happens in certain series.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Neither, both are asinine contrived competition

 

If you want to have multi-make racing, you're going to have an awful rule book. If not, you won't have that type of series at all.

[SonnyViceR]

If you want to have multi-make racing, you're going to have an awful rule book. If not, you won't have that type of series at all.

 

Edited by SonnyViceR, 15 November 2013 - 19:22.

[FBJim]

Handicap the cars' starting times based on their average lap time, so that in ideal conditions, every car finishes in a dead heat 

 

 

(I think a few Libre races waaaaay back in the day actually did this)

Edited by FBJim, 15 November 2013 - 20:57.

[redreni]

They do different things. BoP equalises cars, so as to allow cars that run to different weight limits, have different engines, different aero characteristics etc can compete in the same class. Success ballast doesn‘t do that, it just prevents anybody from running away with a championship assuming the cars are fairly equal to begin with.

The alternative to BoP is not success ballast. The two aren‘t mutually exclusive anyway; BTCC has had success ballast for many years now, and for the last two or three years it has also had BoP between S2000 and NGTC cars. The alternative to BoP is technical regulations, because if you have highly interventionist performance balancing you don‘t need them.

[V8 Fireworks]

"BoP equalises cars, so as to allow cars that run to different weight limits, have different engines, different aero characteristics etc can compete in the same class."

 

F1 cars are already "all the same" -- they don't need balacing unlike GT cars with different engines etc.

 

The fact that Vettel is too good is besides the point!