But I'm NOT leading (except through the artifice of the scoring system). As RJ points out above, once the two drop races are taken into account, I'm actually fourth.
In a hypothetical, if I somehow manage to find an extra second plus PER LAP for the remainder of the season, so I'm actually on pace with you, Raoni, and Tristan, and manage to gather the exact same amount of points over the remaining races, then when everyone's two worst results are neglected, I'm all of a sudden not winning anymore; I'm not even on the podium.
Do you really think I need to be handicapped in the interest of fairness?
You ARE leading in the championship standings. The 2 worst results aren't dropped until the end of the season, it happens every season and is the same for everyone. You can't predict what are the 2 worst results going to be for everyone by the end of the season, can you?
The handicap system which I'm talking about is not based on raw pace, it's based on championship standings. It's much better than subjectively deciding who should get what car, don't you think? It gives a chance for the slower drivers to be on par with quicker drivers, if we consider all other factors equal (such as consistency). The fact that you are leading by points and the others are not means you've been more consistent than the rest, so effectively you've done better than the rest. A championship is not won by raw pace, it's a combination of qualities.
If, let's say, myself, Tristan, Raoni, etc., happen to actually win and score regularly, we will be constantly handicapped in the slower car while you would be able to use a faster car and managed to mix it in the fight, all throughout the season. There is a tactical element involved, but with proper grouping of chassis and lack of under/over-handicapping (i.e. the much slower Ferrari/Brabham), the handicap system which I'm discussing does what is intended - bringing closer together each driver, but not taking away so much from those who are better as to rob them from what they deserve. And by better I don't mean necessarily faster. Just ask Al Heller how he has won Historics last season and how he is doing strong this season again.
And no, it's not about whether I think you should be handicapped or not, I just don't think handicaps should be handed out by someone's own view on things, but rather by employing a system that is not influenced by subjective interference. That way it's fair to everyone, because everyone gets the exact same treatment.
Then why are you so eager to see me handicapped (again), when you are, for all intents and purposes, ALREADY BEATING ME, and undeniably faster at every track we've visited so far, a situation that shows NO sign of changing?
Again, I'm not eager to see you handicapped, I don't care who is handicapped. The point I'm trying to make is we should rely on a handicap system that has proven its advantages over all other handicap systems we have used in the past 8-10 years of UKGPL. It's not about you or me, but about fairness.
...And BTW, Dean, you can't really compare Watkins with a track like Jarama, regardless of how long the lap is. Watkins is a proper power track...
Then the mods should have taken that into account
before saddling me with that sad sack of shit at the Glen.
Well that's one of the improvements that can be made to the handicap system, to include a circuit factor, because it's a big difference whether you race at Spa or Monaco, though it also depends on the mod. With some mods, most cars have similar engine power, but different chassis weight. With other mods it's the opposite. And then there are mods which are a combination of the two (like the original GPL 67s). I agree it makes no sense to handicap someone in a very slow car, straightline speed-wise, on a track like Monza, or in a very heavy car on a track like Monaco (though the latter is less of a problem really).
Looking at the bare stats for the Cooper (the least lame of the car choices I was offered), a 10hp deficit (215 vs. 225 for the other FVA-engined cars) led me to expect maybe a couple of tenths loss in outright pace. As it turned out, it put me to the very back of the grid, with no chance of advancement, leading to some choices that I'd otherwise not have made (going side by side into the Loop with Cookie [he ended up in the fence] and following a group much closer through Speed Trap than I normally would have done, a move which cost me both front wheels, a shift-r, and a stop and go). If I'd known just how poor that car is at a track like Watkins, I'd have raised these points before that race. Forgive my lack of prescience.
With the great slipstream effect of F2s, it only takes a proper setup (tire pressures and gear ratios in particular) to negate all power disadvantages of a slower car. You can check last season when I was handicapped in the slowest of cars and still managed to keep up with the leading group for the sole reason of setting up the car for slipstream, then taking advantage of their misfortunes.
I disagree. I'm not asking for mid-season rule changes. I'm just pointing out things that I believe the mods have not taken into proper consideration. That's the only flaw I see.
Well, that and someone who snags pole every time supporting the idea that a midfielder (that they're already beating) should be handicapped, but that's a different subject.
You just don't get what I'm saying. I'm not asking for a rule change to benefit myself from or to ruin your chances, I'm asking that we don't rely on arbitrary subjective decision on who gets what car for each race. That's too unstable and unfair in my view. It influences the championship in a very inconsistent manner and you never know what you'll get before each race. Unless we employ a system that runs on its own without outside interference, we would be better off not using any handicap at all.
If it's necessary, make the system more advanced, by introducing more group of cars with closer performances, it doesn't matter really, as long as we don't rely on subjective choice of handicap that relies on nothing else but one person's view on the situation. The latter will always see things partially, without taking into account some factors that led to points standings, to lap times, to gaps at the end of races and so on, and draw incomplete conclusions, then handicap people based on all that. I just can't accept such approach and I've already said it in the Pros division.
I'm not trying to blame Billy or any moderator, but it would be arrogant to think one can see things so clearly and be so objective, as to handicap people dynamically after each race without making it unfair towards someone. It just can't happen, that's why we use systems.