SimRacing.org.uk

Season 19 - Mid Season Review

It is time for another Mid-Season review so we can canvass opinions from you, the drivers, on what has gone well and what hasn’t.  The list of Agenda items is below.  Please feel free to comment on these items or indeed raise new ones. 

ITEM 1 – The Divisions

Amateurs – Stick with chassis allocation or adopt a handicap system similar to the historics?  It would probably mean the leader of the championship drives the Brabham BT7, second place the Cooper T77 etc.   Effectively the groups used to seed the drivers would become the groups to which drivers would be assigned by virtue of their championship position.  Are the race length and damage models acceptable?  A 50 minute race seems popular.  Are people still happy with PRO rules or do we want to go back to allowing shift Rs provided the perpetrator does a Stop and Go?  Has the adoption of PRO rules improved driving standards?  Is anyone fed up with putting in a lot of praccy just to be taken out on lap 1 with no chance of a reprieve?  Should be have a rule where the bottom 3 are automatically relegated to the Novices?

Novices – Similar chassis allocation issues to the Amateurs.  Assume race length and damage models are OK?  Do you want the same track selection as the Amateurs or are you happy to run with alternatives to the difficult tracks (e.g. Westwood instead of Schottenring)?  Should be have a rule where the top 3 are automatically promoted to the Amateurs?

Historic Trophy – Mature division with no major problems except lack of numbers?  Happy with PRO rules and race length?

Graduates – Numbers are a bit down so we have used one server several times.  Would moving to Intermediate damage improve the numbers?  Would it be feasible to run the Works as PRO and the Privateers as Int damage?  What would happen if we had a joint grid?

Spec Races – This has been quite popular although the numbers have dropped in recent rounds.  Any suggestions for improving the format?


ITEM 2 – Servers

We are now renting server time from our friends at Team 7.  Has appears to have been a success, has anyone had connection problems?

ITEM 3 – Moderating and the Appeals Process

Is everyone happy with the moderating and appeals process?

ITEM 4 – Rule Changes

Are the rules as they stand OK?  What changes need to be made? 

The only area of concern has been slipstreaming and the practice of trying to break a tow.  There are long standing rules with regards to weaving but these are intended to stop blocking, particularly in the braking zone.  However they can be applied at any point on the track so it is possible to contravene the “blocking” rules long before the braking zone is reached.  Moving off the racing line and back on once per straight section is allowed without contravening the “blocking” rules.  If we were to decide that this constituted trying to break a tow and was not to be allowed then the blocking rule would have to be amended otherwise we would have an inconsistency.  Do we need a formal rule on weaving (if so we would need a clear statement as to what constitutes weaving first) or is the current gentleman’s agreement that we don’t weave to try and break a tow adequate?

It has been suggested that we should align ourselves with the current FIA rules on "defensive driving" published in Appendix L (http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.nsf/A4192D8E638689BFC12576F60029DD16/$FILE/10.04.01_Annexe%20L%202010.pdf) of the FIA International Sporting Code Regulations (http://www.fia.com/sport/Regulations/sportcoderegs.html) specifically Chapter IV, para 2 sub para b (on page 17).  The problem with this is that real racing rules are ambiguous and in the real world the FIA and the Teams employ expensive lawyers to sort it out.  Ideally we need a simple unequivocal rule that everyone understands.  The statement "they may move off the line and back onto it only once per straight/section" in point 4 of the Etiquette (https://www.ukgpl.com/index.php/rules/etiquette) rules is very clear but not perfect.  In some circumstances this rule can be interpreted in such a way as to allow a driver to gain an advantage but is this a widespread problem? 

Perhaps one solution would be to amend point 4 in the Etiquette rules to read something like "If a driver is driving defensively they may move off the racing line to take up a defensive line but may not move back onto the racing line whilst on the same straight/section".  That would be a simple unequivocal rule and would effectively make weaving impossible, but would this be too restrictive?  It would still allow a driver to exit a corner not on the racing line, move onto the racing line and then back off again in the same straight.  The current rule has been with UKGPL from the outset so it is not something I want to change without considerable thought and a poll showing the majority of drivers being in favour. 

ITEM 5 – Tracks

We can't promise to make everyone happy but are there any tracks you would particularly like to see in Season 20?  If so which mod and why?

I'm happy with just about everything, as is.

My only small area of issue is that when a race has been moderated, unless you were involved in an incident that has been ruled upon, there is no notification that the race results have been finalised.  It would be nice to know what the final results were without having to search back through weekly, to see if and when the result is official.  A small post 'moderating complete' or something along those lines within the race thread would highlight that it's all done and dusted (pending any appeal of course!).

Other than that, everyone does a fine job to create some great entertainment and I very much appreciate their efforts.

Good idea, we should do that, and I used to but stopped for some reason. Probably laziness.

I’ve long been in favour of the 65's adopting a similar handicap system to Historics. I feel it’s by far the fairest system & think it would work much better than the current chassis allocation. I also like the idea of a sliding scale of chassis handicapping based on championship position (presumably champ leader gets BT7, then Cooper etc, down to bottom drivers Lotus/Ferrari?) 

I feel chassis allocation is a bit of an inexact science & as we see each season is open to much dispute & discussion. Some people might find it unfair that they are given a slower chassis - others might get miffed because someone regularly faster than them is given a quicker chassis. But a system based on your championship postion cannot be argued with. (Perhaps we could use the previous season’s championship positions to allocate chassis for the first round too?)

I think it would also help maintain interest during the season; someone who has missed several races & is languishing at the bottom of the table might be able to take a Lotus/Ferrari for a few races & get themselves right back into championship contention. Also regular non-alien racers might be more motivated to turn up if they were fighting for the occasional podium place rather than 7th or 8th.

Looking at Am’s, the first 5 races (with the absence of H) have been pretty much dominated by Tim & Clive, who it’s fair to say have been considerably quicker than the rest of the field in their BT11s. Under the current chassis allocation system, the mods will presumably slap them into Coopers at some point & there they would stay for the rest of their ukgpl career (or at least until they learn the errors of their ways & slow down a bit!) My selfish side might start rubbing my hands at the prospect of nobbling the fastest drivers, but having been allocated the BT7 for half a season in Novs, I know it’s not the ideal solution! :P I guess the holy grail is a system that allows close racing, makes it harder for one person to dominate but still ensures that the best racer wins the championship on merit & for me handicapping does that much better than chassis allocation.

Agree a good idea, will make a note to post.

As regards Al H's 65 chassis suggestion it sounds fine to me. I might hesitate though when it comes to the Novices; it's probably better for them not to have to chop and change chassis race by race while also being on a big GPL learning curve.

My comments on issues raised;
65's - on the basis the top 2/3 this season move up we are getting to a situation where the Am's are bulging and Nov's depleted. Ideally there would be an intermediate division as the gap feels like a chasm to mere mortals like me. Numbers probably won't make that viable so maybe we should have 3 up / 3 down (or 2). Perhaps only counting in those that have attended 5 or more races?
If we don't do something the danger is the Nov's could die out or evolve into an intermediate league which might put potential new drivers off joining.
I also like the idea of tougher tracks for the Am's, for the same reason re attracting new drivers.

67's - I would be ok if we did Works PRO and Privates INT but that won't be practical as long as we can't guarantee enough attendence for 2 grids. Also, if we could guarantee 2 grids, differing track choices might be an idea to attract people in.

Rule changes - I would go for the suggested change as long as we keep it simple.

The only thing that needs changing is Ams chassis allocation.

Tim and EvilClive have proved that they are king with a BT11. I proved once or twice last year that I was OK with it and that merited a Cooper for me for S19, go figure. Mitigating circumstances have meant that I can't exercise race pace with the Cooper as often as I'd like, but I quite like the chassis, even if it's a bit slow.

If #1 took the BT7, #2 took the Cooper, then #3 and #4 had a choice between the BT11 or Honda that leaves anybody else with a free choice of the Lotus, BRM and Ferrari. Similarly to Historics, anybody taking a chassis better than their position means they become liable for a pitstop penalty which is calculated according to your ability and the length of the track (e.g. Hristo in a Honda would have a 20 second penalty + 15 at Zandvoort).

Pfft

I agree with the rest and I've been saying it for the past 2-3 seasons but it kept landing on deaf years - the chassis allocation in AM are very demotivating. Historics, which adopted the system from former Masters, works great, as expected.

I also miss the pitstops system in D1, because (as I've mentioned it before) the current rules go against teams running a single slower car. The results don't show the real situation because it's the lack of competition that's making it seem different than it would really be if we have a full field.

The track choices seem very good this season and I'm unhappy that I couldn't make The Ring and Schottenring, so I hope to see them next season as well.

65s

I thought about the changing the chassis allocations method this season to a more fluid one based on championship position, but I don't like it on a personal level as it means my already limited practise time is spent in several different chassis which doesn't help me, but the better Amateurs can be quick in any chassis given a few laps.

However, seeing as more and more people are suggesting it we may have to try it next season in Amateurs but I would still want to keep allocation the way it is in Novices to make it easier for the newer drivers and it seems to be a much more evenly spread division that way.

I like the idea of having a promotion/relegation scenario with the top 2 going up to Ams and the bottom 2 going down to Novs but those going up should be given free chassis choice for race 1 and maybe even race 2 then their championship position can dictate from then on.

Any Ams going down to Novs should be given at best a BT11.

We would have to think about what would happen if there were any Ams not wanting to drop down or any Novs not wanting to go up. Perhaps we would have to enforce it or maybe allow 3rd place to go up instead and force the driver staying in Novs into the slowest chassis as an incentive.

I would be an example of that though I think, because if I compete in 65s next season I would have to stay in Novices as I host them and wouldn't be able to join the Amateurs server.

The main problem in Ams of course is that if the mod is not done in time, people may be driving the wrong chassis for the next race, and what do we do then?

I don't think that intermediate damage is good idea. Privateers were made not for people who don't know how to finish race, but for people who aren't fast enough to race against aliens. IMO everybody who's going to race 67's should already know how to race. If someone is new to simracing and want to try 67's, thats ok, but first I would suggest trying Novices. Thats a great division to learn how to race.

When we have one grid for Graduates, Privateers and Works should have separate qualification. That might be good thing because with such a big speed difference sometimes it's almost impossible to made clean qual lap. At circuit's like Monza or Spa it's not a big problem, but on twisty tracks where passing is difficult(like on Monaco or Mosport) it is a big problem.

I know that GPL doesn't allow to run two separate qual sessions, so maybe we could made it twice longer. first part would be for Privateers and second part for Works.


We should have anti-weaving rule.


The best thing in Graduates is lack of handicapping. If some drivers decide to use one of the slower chassis for whole season, that their own choice.

If She doesn't allow you to drive proper car, than better leave her :P

First of all, as a hole I am happy with things here at UKGPL.

I think the selection of tracks is good, at least in the Ams, I miss the longer tracks in Historic, but maybe it would have been good if the longer tracks in Ams were a bit more spread out during the season.

Pro rules yes, of cause in the last Ams race at Schottenring I surly would have liked to have the shift-r opportunity but the pro rules rules in my oppinion. Maybe even put in a need to be classified to get points at all but, well, I am hesitant about this.

Server connection has been fine, well something odd happend at the Monaco Historic race when Q level got sky high and everybody went missing fore a while but all came back, so I guess it was just a temporary thing.


I think that the chassis allocation has it`s benefits in that it allows you to get used to a chassis but, as we have seen this season in Ams when Tim and Clive got the BT11 and just left the rest of us behind, it`s too square, (I don`t know if that`s the right expression). So I think a handicap system would be better in general because it`s inflicted race by race. It is also predictable, you know what is comming.

But then I have some problems with the order of cars. IMHO when it comes to the 65 cars the order ought to be Lotus, Ferrari, BT11, BRM, Honda, Cooper and BT7, I don`t know why the BT11 has so low ranking here.

The idea about moving up to Ams and down to Novice, well, the moving up thing is one thing but down?????, at least it has to be done in consensus with the drivers involved I think.

The only thing I am really critical about here is that the Moderator`s Report takes so long time to come out. This season we have only two for the Ams and none for the Historic so far after five races. For me, being new here, it`s educational to read them so please educate me.

Göran

My thoughts are
Divisions
Amateurs – Don’t race this Div (one day maybe) but would go with handicapping as a good idea if the aim is closer racing.
Novs – Div works well, so leave as is. Stay with better known/easier tracks and do not match Ams.
Historics – Race this occasionally, though well out of my depth as seems to generally attract the really experienced/fast drivers.
Grads – I am personally put off doing many of these, due to a combination of Pro Rules, choice of harder and/or longer tracks, length of race and the speed differential (or it could be I can’t drive them very well). I would prefer to see same or similar div split and rules as 65’s with a separate grid for slow and fast drivers. I would also recommend make the tracks/calendar for the 67 Novs the same as the 65 Novs so Nov’s can learn one track and run two divs.
Spec Races – Enjoy being forced to drive other cars. For me, some fun has gone out of it due to it being a championship. At the beginning, I think it was a race to go to while the Aliens were off doing inter league races, i.e no pressure.
Servers
Have not had a problem with the server
Moderating
Seems to work well to me
Rule Changes
Leave the rule as is. All rules are open to interpretation what ever is written down.
For me general principle is you don’t do something that is likely to cause and accident. Therefore you shouldn’t weave back and forwards to stop an overtake manoeuvre from happening.
Weaving to break a tow is OK as it’s not dangerous to other driver(s).
Tracks
Not a fan of very long tracks. Probably only because they take too long to learn

Nothing really to add, everything seems to be working well.

I would be in favour of introduction Pro rules to the Nov races, unless we get some real novices drivers, as most of the racers now have been racing for a least 1 season.

I'm generally happy with the way UKGPL is running at the mo.
Undecided about the handicapping system in Ams, I quite like being stuck with one car all season although being put into the BT11 has been an unexpected bonus as I feel it is a much faster car than the baby Waza, so this has slightly failed to handicap myself and Clive  :ninja:
As strange as it seems I was almost looking forward to being stuck in the Cooper next time around if I keep my current performance up!
Very happy with the inclusion of longer and trickier tracks, there're only so many times I can face the same old 11 ;)

Happy with Grads TBH, the pit stop system was good but I'm liking the added challenge of devising tactics regarding what car to run where....
For the most part I don't have a major problem with mixed grids, but do agree with Hristo's point that it's not really helping either group of drivers.

Historics - Happy but would like some more of the longer/more challenging tracks. That and to do better  ;)

Spec races - loving them! Billy deserves a medal or something  :angel:

T7 server has been fine for me and am happy with the rules as they stand.

New tracks - happy with nearly anything tbh, the more fun it is the better (did I hear Targa?  :laugh: )

I have to admit that I was VERY surprised to be given the BT11 in Ams. Whoever thought that having BT11 is a step back from the Honda I had last season, obviously has not tried the Honda!!! lol ....but I'm not one to look a gift horse in the mouth  ;).  Bet I suffer next season now :-\.

I'm in favour of different circuits as I too get bored with the same old 11 Pappy tracks.

Grads is good, but I really enjoyed the pit stops and the added tactical element it brought to the races. It also tended to add some spice to the ends of races as the time handicap worked its way through.
Running the Honda all season, does render the token system irrelevant as far as we Wazas are concerned, so can't really comment on how it works for me.
The single grid for Grads does throw in probs re the speed differential from pole to last on the grid. I can see that it is just as frustrating for the guys at the back having to constantly allow the leaders to pass them. They must spend most of the race gazing into their mirrors rather than racing??!!! But two grids of 5 or 6 cars will surely spiral down to 3 or 4 and loss of interest...and extinction???

T7 does seem to have been a good move..its a shame we dont have either the numbers or finance to run 2 such servers.

Happy with Historics and the handicap system, although it does occur to me that if one is consistantly succesful, you are going to get the same chassis choice for every race?? ask Hristo about that one.  ;D

The Spec races are an amazing success . I have to admit that they are far better supported than I would have expected them to be, not sure why...but if we can apply the same magic to the other mods, then maybe numbers will increase everywhere.??

The rule change debate seems to have been sparked by my moves at Mexico in Ams. I would maintain that there is a distinct difference between moving off line to limit the tow and weaving to prevent a passing move. Any rule change IMHO is going to have to be very clear
as to where the difference lies and how it is interpreted.

Some idea's for tracks - some I've driven and enjoyed, others have been recommended to me:

Long ones:
 Brno 49 or 65
 Dundrod (I need an excuse to learn it!)
 IOM abridged  ;D
 Pescara
 B&W werk? (the fact it's in black and white may put some off, I intend to try it tomorrow!)
 Targa (but no real way to 'race' in the normal sense  :( )

 Bathurst (Not sure if it really counts as 'long' in this company but a damn good laugh)

New short ones:
 Falkenburg (great circuit for racing on line - my own intro to GPL's on line aspect back in 2004)
 Pebble Beach (tricky but nice)
 St Jovite (needs no intro)
 Wigram (apparently very good for an Airfield course)
 Blue Mountain (fantastic circuit)
 Maybe Rock Island (Viper) or Pacific raceway?

More interesting circuits  ;) :
 Hump back
 Super Slot Car
 Moon

 ;D
 

Somebody add Beal Valley into the long tracks list, that's an awesome circuit, fantastically fun, and anybody try going flat through a right-left-right-left kink at 190mph comparable to nothing.

Porto's also a great circuit, love the track in 65s, similar in feel to Bremgarten.

My 2p's worth...


1. The Divisions

Novices - I've enjoyed the season so far, it's been competitive at the front although we only have around ten regular drivers, with others dipping in and out as time permits them. I enjoy the more relaxed rules as I'm still very much prone to errors, and it's nice to be able to finish the races and gain experience.

Personally I've enjoyed tracks such as Keimola, Laguna and Westwood as my lack of experience hasn't hindered me there in terms of getting on the pace, because other drivers haven't done many miles on those tracks either. Looking at the upcoming tracks it seems a nice balance between new and old.

One thing I have found as a novice is that it's a lot of work learning tracks and getting hold of setups. As I'm in the Lotus setups are readily available but if I was forced into another chassis I might struggle. I'm not good at developing setups but I suppose the counter argument to that is that it's all part of the game, so tough luck!

Spec Races - Last season I did these and the Novs, but I decided to concentrate only on Novs this time. The main reason for that is that the Spec races are only two days before the Novs, and getting up to speed for both is too time-consuming. Not sure what the other Novs think? If the Spec races were a week later that would make it easier for me but I suppose then the Ams would have the same problem.

As I build up more knowledge of tracks I will need less practice and will be able to enter the Spec series more often.

2. Servers

I've had no issues at all with servers, thanks to all those responsible for running them, much appreciated.

3. Moderating and Appeals

Generally this is fine, it's great that someone at srou went to the effort of creating a report form with replay upload.

My only criticism would be the turnaround time in waiting for the verdict. I got penalties at both Keimola and Laguna but only got the email notification after the Westwood event, which was 5 or 6 weeks afterwards. It would nice if all verdicts were in before the next round.

That said I realise the moderators are giving up their spare time, so it is perhaps unreasonable to expect them to be looked at so quickly.

4. Rule Changes

Not had any issues with any of the rules so far.

5. Tracks

No issues here either. Perhaps the Novs could have more Papy tracks to lessen the learning curve? That said I enjoy the variety and more experienced Novs (if that's not an oxymoron) would probably not like that.

6. Other

A big thanks to all the moderators for giving up their time to run UKGPL. Since joining last autumn I've had a great time in this league, looking forward to trying to get that first win sometime soon.

Cheers,

Ross

Only track I'd advise against.  Made it to the "don't ever use again" list in my last league.  Beautiful but many pitfalls.  Not good for actual racing.  Survival is a victory itself.

I did forget to comment on the potential rules change.

I think it would be sensible to bring something in as it's a bit of a grey area whether it is allowed or not.  I have not fallen victim to the issue highlighted yet, however I wouldn't want to either.  So I would be in favour of a rule to prevent weaving along straights.

Define weaving as opposed to breaking the tow.

as per OP.

Weaving to break the tow  ???

I'm trying to stay objective on the "weaving" issue and how it could be monitored and policed but I can see a minefield ahead.

Just making a rule that says weaving is illegal IMHO won't work. As Steve has said, drivers need to know in black and white terms what IS ACCEPTABLE and what is NOT ACCEPTABLE.

If we introduce a ruling that "weaving" in an attempt to break a tow is illegal and will attract a penalty......what penalty is appropriate?
How far can you move sideways before it is deemed to be "weaving" ? ...25% of the track width?... 50% of the track width or does it only count when you move across the entire available tarmac width?.

When does that move become "defensive driving" which is allowed ? and how will you differentiate between the two? or do you ban defensive driving as well?

Because, as I understand things, the slipstream effect works ONLY when you are (almost) directly in line, so a single car width sideways move could be considered as a "weave" to deny the tow?

Or, is it to be determined by the  lateral movement off the "racing line"?, in which case whose racing line, because I know a few drivers who prepare their own "groove" which will differ from the Papyrus default which shows on the server.
Although I don't use a different groove file, I certainly do not religiously follow the default grey line, choosing instead to take the line that suits my style.
 Personally, I think the existing rule is adequate as described in the driving etiquette guidelines:-.

"Blocking is not allowed, but defensive driving is allowed. If a driver moves off the racing line before the car behind attempts to overtake, this is defensive driving. If they move off the racing line after the car behind has started to move across to overtake, this is blocking. If a driver is driving defensively they may move off the line and back onto it only once per straight/section".


Continously weaving around directly in front of another car to prevent them passing (which has nothing to do with slipstreaming) is clearly NOT acceptable as this would be "blocking" as described in the guidelines.

People have quoted the FIA rules in this discussion, but we still see F1 cars moving from side to side to blatantly block passing moves or deny slipstream, ( even pushing the passing car onto the grass!!) and recieve no penalties, so I don't see how cherry picking bits from the Real world can be considered relevant here.

Well pointed out, Evil.

Personally I think it's nearly impossible to judge objectively whether someone is blocking or just breaking the tow. The most obvious situation of blocking is when someone moves across just before or during a braking zone. Another situation is when you're just about to exit someone's slipstream and they move to your direction when it's already too late to react. Anything else should be considered normal racing.

Then again, driver errors, connection issues, being unaware of the cars around you and similar aspects can complicate the whole thing a lot more and if you just penalize without taking all that into account it won't make people happy. Who is going to deal with all that? Sounds like a rather cumbersome and pointless task.

I'd hate to be boring, but don't have much to disagree with, amongst mid-season comments.

I preferred Billy's Spec races, when they were only fun races.  You can only please some of the people, some of the time, but it's possible that when these become do or die, the 2nd grid dies.

'Tis in the nature of the beast, for 67s to have a large discrepancy between Grads. and newbies.  As
someone,'sitting on the fence,' about competing, I'd favor a more Novice approach to Privateers.  Assuming a split grid - the fear of damage encourages slower driving, and often leads to an early departure, when 'L' plater laps were needed.  It's fine for those damned showoffs, up front! ;)

I really like a couple of Evils suggested tracks.  Brno65 is well worth the trip around, but on-line
compatability should be checked.  Also, Blue Mountain is tremendous fun, and everyone should try it!

With many thanks to the volunteers of UKGPL, who keep the clockwork ticking - not only the cogs and
springs, but even the toggles!

Ahem!
*mutter mutter mutter.....*  :'(

For once, Evil was not guilty of anything  ::)....... Although it would have been one to add IMHO.

Having just had a sneaky go on it at work I think Mosport rain should be a big possibility! Beautiful to look at and great fun to slither around on  :angel:

Only downside I see is that I would imagine it to be a tad FPS heavy (the work pc only just manages a hold a steady 36 fps with it's awesome Radeon 7500!*)
Could be great fun for an Am's, Grad's, or maybe Historics race  8)

edit:
On the subject of Historics - we really should use Monacane for them for added realism/massive accidents!


*Can you spot the irony?  ;D

The 'mod report published' thing is working well already.  Thanks guys. :)

Whoops!  Sorry Tim - I had assumed a different trackmeister, and bow to your exemplary recommendations. (note: long words hurt brain!)

Jack Sellers' graphics are great.  Hmm . . . think I'll try some fog at Mosport Rain, where a foggy brain might help?

Comments about the Spec Races being more "organised" are noted and will be considered. Have to say there is no chance of Targa or Dunrod appearing on the Spec Race calendar at any stage. But feel free to post your favourites.

Connection to UKGPL7 server has been solid for me. Can I just check where we are in terms of contributing? Are we due another payment?

Well, no sign of any from the Historic so far.

Göran

I was wondering about this too, I presume we will be able to contribute again next quarter, which should start 1st July?


Ross

I am so jealous and obviously in the wrong job

No you don't! It's rubbish!

.................and anyway, what job entitles you to a high spec graphics computer and the time to play GPL Tim???? ::)
 
I am one of the directors and I can't get away with that!! or am I doing something wrong here?????

The pc's rubbish too!
2.4gig P4 and an archaic Radeon 7500 (at least 10 years old) graphics card  :o
I had to turn the res down to 800x600 to do a lap of Targa at lunch despite having the low detail version installed (39 mins 59 secs for anyone interested - can't drive using my pad anymore :( ) and still had frame rate drops.

Evil:
I get away with it because I need a machine with full rights to test tape drive backup and restore ops, so effectively have 'my own' pc which isn't on the network  ;D

We set very high standards at Black Night Racing - goofing off work to play GPL is one of the highest achievements.

lol!!

Sorry Billy, I have trouble living up to the standard. The computer I have in the buss I am driving can`t cope with GPL at all, it can only make tickets.

Göran

One question.
Shouldn't we be democratic and have an election for the Chief Mod, Membership Secretary and Moderators?

Who are the candidates?

Yes we could.  There is only one post in the UKGPL management hierarchy that wouldn't be up for election, the web master.   Dave Gymer (https://www.simracing.org.uk/smf/index.php?action=profile&u=1&sa=racing_history&driver=1) owns SRou and the UKGPL domain name so although he doesn't get involved in the day to day running of UKGPL we couldn't run the league without him.

There is no reason why anyone couldn't do any of the other jobs.  Most of the tasks and who does what are defined here (https://www.ukgpl.com/index.php/moderating/roles).  The only job that isn't there explicitly is the Chief Moderator.  I'll update the roles and responsibilities page so it covers everything then, if we do decide to have an election, the candidates will know exactly what they are volunteering for.

Ahh yes there is the work and the pay isn't much good  ;)

It's probably not worth an election unless there is anyone else aspiring to any of the roles, if there is guess post here or PM Phil?
Maybe keep it as a footnote in future reviews so the option is always there. For my part I'm happy to continue my role in UKGPL.

Just realised I hadn't addressed most of Phil's original questions, so...

Amateurs – happy with race length & PRO rules as I think it can help to vary the results. Sadly I don’t think shift-r would work in senior leagues as the quickest drivers could probably manage a reset + stop & go & still win. Plus of course it would mean a lot more work for the mods who would have to look at all the pitstops & no-fault resets.

Re: promotion/relegation. While promotion of last season’s top 3 has worked pretty well, I’m not convinced it should be a hard & fast rule. Some of the fastest guys in Novs are in handicapped chassis so might not finish in the championship top 3. Better to carry on judging it on an individual basis. Relegation is also tricky as the slowest Ams might dominate Novs (though the handicap system could take care of that problem…)

One further thought on handicapping - if there are concerns about Novs switching cars too much using the proposed handicap system, perhaps a combination of handicap & chassis allocation would work for them? So everyone has an allocated chassis as now but BT7 & Cooper are reserved only for the top 2 in the championship. In that scenario, only the fastest (and presumably most capable) drivers would ever have to change chassis & might revert back to their regular chassis after one race anyway.

I agree with Goran. Though I guess the BRM moves ahead of the BT11 on tracks with more straights? Handicapping depending on the track would hopefully take that into account.

Grads – Happy as it is. Like the strategic element of tokens which can really help level the field. Mixed grids are a bit of an issue though – numbers are a bit low for separate grids but mixed grids lead to problems for both Privateers & Works runners. No idea if allowing resets in Privateers would increase participation, but the current low finishing rate does offer any aspiring 67 driver a good finish if they can bring a car home so thought that might increase interest.

Spec Races – have to admit I also preferred it when it was informal & non-championship. Would prefer less 65’s (but I know I’m in a minority there!) & more 66’s, 67’s, 69’s, Thunder Cars (& any other new mods that might be appearing). As a spec series, results in Lights tend to be a bit of a foregone conclusion so wonder whether longterm interest in the series might wane in some quarters.

Servers – not had any problems with server – seems to work well.

Moderating – appreciate that this takes a lot of time for the mods & am grateful for their efforts. I thought the track choices in all divisions this season were great – really have enjoyed the variety as it can get a bit predictable running the same old Papy tracks all the time. As a few people have said, would be ideal if moderation could be done before next race but fully understand that it isn’t always possible.

Rule Changes – with regard to the whole weaving/breaking tow debate, I’m rather confused about what is & isn’t allowed so would appreciate a new rule clarification. Echoing what Vos said, the simpler the better…

I think this is a really good idea and a half way house for the Novices. Those at the top, presumably who have reasonable skill, can cope with chassis changes whilst others will not have to keep chopping and changing.

Turning to the Graduates, see there is some debate with one grid / more drivers v two grids / less numbers. Would appreciate any comments from those that have tried Grads and left / 65 drivers who haven't as to what might entice you to join the Privates (novices) division? Or comments from anyone for that matter. Would INT damage or easier/more well known tracks make a difference?

I would have to disagree, not because I don't think the BT11 has better handling characteristics (and that counts at many of the tracks), but because the handicapping order is really in terms of power (or so it seems). If you move the BT11 up the order because of its better handling then you'd have to do it with the Cooper and BT7 too as they're definitely faster on twistier tracks than, say, Honda or Ferrari. It really depends too much on the track if you put handling into the equation so I believe engine power is easier to use as a factor.

I think the biggest challenge is the number of drivers. No pressure on anyone who wants to be selective about what races they enter ~ there are other things to do in life.

That said we should make the series appealing / enjoyable to the majority & I would be interested in everyone’s opinions. There are a number of issues:
Can we run two separate series with two separate grids – in which case we can have separate rules for each. Partly depends on the availability of servers. Some of the following points depend on having split series.
Running mixed grids – my feeling is you need a minimum number of entrants per race, an empty track is worse than the disadvantages of mixed ability drivers.
Pro-damage or Reset (Privateers only). Having driven Pro rules for a bit has taught me a lot about preserving engines and something about finishing races. On the other hand several hours practice to learn a new track only to crash out on the first lap (non-fault) is mighty frustrating. Maybe one reset only?
Handicapping system – the tokens system isn’t handicapping as such but there are other options. Pit stops have been used in earlier seasons although I’m not a big fan. How about chassis allocations as a means of evening out the competition?
Choice of tracks – do we have the right mix of new and regular tracks? Nurburgring and Monaco are “regulars” but certainly not the easiest. With a split series the Works can have a more challenging selection of circuits.

Final point for Ronnie – if you want to race at Monza can I interest you in the Spec Series? (alternate Sundays). Season 19 closes at Monza 10K in the 69 Mod, although we do have 65 Imola, 67 Spa & 65 Hockenheim also on offer.

tbh I'd only consider it if I had a Shift Prefect who's happy to review the whole replay and check...
You could have a Prefects badge but the pay is not that great  ;D

With the request being made, for thoughts on keeping next years championships close, I thought I'd stir the subject a little.  Trouble is, I've not been racing humanoids long enough to provide anything more than a handicapped opinion . . . ahem!  But suggest any changes, are not so complicated, as to confuse novice Novices.

After hours of tortuous soul searching, and the odd cup of tea, I've a further suggestion.  Why not force
the top 3 Ams, Novs, or whatever, to drive with one arm behind the backs?  The question is, how would one verify this?  Well, an extra strong cup of tea, has managed to get my 3 brain cells all knocking together in unison!  I have the answer - it's obvious!  You simply use the on-board cameras to check for conformity, and anyone cheating gets a 30 second penalty. ;D

One could drive with the gear-shifting arm risen up and that would show up in replays, but then they'll be stuck in whatever gear they were last in, lol.

Mid season we're nearly on race 7 but may as well put my thoughts in.
My order of Novice 65 cars for handicapping is:- Fastest, Lotus, then, BRM (2 of last 3 seasons champions were in BRM) BT11 (good all rounder), Ferrari (fastest in a straight line) Honda (lots of sudden power delivery make it difficult for a novice) Cooper (anecdotal evidence says faster than BT7, -  if so there is not much in it) slowest, BT7 ( best handling &  weight penalty against a Cooper).
 
Can't say I fancy being in the ams without shift R so bring it in please. All that practice to get pushed off on the 1st corner would soon sicken me off.
Norm H


 

At Novice level I'd say this ranking was spot on. Results from the Spec Races would tend to bear this out. May be slightly different with the Ams, probably pushing the Ferrari & Honad higher up the order.

Re the debate regarding the order for 65 cars. My illustrious predecessor, Jack O/Dave, did some extensive research using world record times across a different range of tracks. The upshot was the following order was set; Lotus / Ferrari / BRM / BT11 / Honda / Cooper / BT7.
Yes it depends on the type of track but this seems about right.

I thought that Jack (and therefore UKGPL) ranked the BT11 behind the Honda - Otherwise it seems slightly silly you lot forcing myself and Clive into it from our Waza's!  :P

It's simple really - the BT11 has better chassis and thus higher corner speeds, but the Honda has more power and better acceleration out of corners, as well as higher top speed.

I would assume a novice driver is going to be faster in a BT11 because of its superior handling characteristics, but a more experienced/talented driver would go quicker with the Honda regardless of the track (with the exception of Monaco and the likes perhaps).

That sounds about right without checking back through all the posts  ;)

Well if we are talking about sheer top speed I did a little test on the Avus track and the order was: Ferrari, BRM and BT11 on 167mph, Lotus 166, Honda 165, and Cooper and BT7 163mph.

It was just top speed, I better be back with a out-of-corner-speed test. It`s a bit harder to do but ought to be possible.

I welcome if anybody else would also do a top speed test to see if you would get the same result or if it has something to do with settings, pedals or anything else. I did use the same tirepressure etc., however.

Göran

No disrepsect Goran but isn't it all a little subjective, stick H in a BT7 and he can still win.

At the risk of diaspora, let's cut back to the chase and make sure we all have fun racing. Phil's points were; Divisions / Servers/ Moderating / Rules / Tracks.

That's odd, I've always witnessed the Honda being amazingly fast on the straights. Perhaps it really is more about acceleration than sheer top speed. Or drag.


No gloating please.  ::)

Depends how quick they get there I guess!

There might be a question of tow when it comes to the Honda. I had a race at Montlhery with the GPLRACER and Thor Fischers Honda was really fast when behind me, I was in the BT11.

My test was of cause alone with no tow in action. I must try to do a test with tow, I just wonder how it should be done to be credible.

Quote from vosblod on Today at 12:37:25AM

But only if the track has more than two turns.  ;D


Göran

Btw, how do you do quotes? Mine is not right.

Göran

I would agree with Gorans finding re the Honda's top speed, it's power makes it very quick in the draft but it seems to have poor aerodynamics as it isn't very fast when on it's own.
In terms of a side by side drag race the Honda will always be slaughtered by cars like the BRM when in race trim as the BRM is so slippery  :)
Only real advantages I find the Honda has over the BT11 are that the Honda is more stable in a drift and the gearing allows you to gear for low speed corners and get slighty better exits that way.
BT11 has better top end, grip, and braking with mid and high end acceleration that is probably on a par with the Honda - It really is no suprise to me that Clive and I did so well in the Brabham! I suspect Laguna Seca would have been a different result had I been in the Waza wagon!


Goran:
To qoute Vosblod you needed to click on the 'Qoute' tab in the top right of his post instead of the 'reply' tab at the bottom of the page,
or
Having clicked reply you can then click the 'Insert Qoute' tab for the relevant post that is found in the top right of every post in the summery below your text box :)

Going back to the original agenda for a second.

Keep the damage model the same for Privateers and Works drivers. That way they can compete on an even level when only one grid is available. Plus inetermediate damage would send out a negative impression to potentila drivers that they are second class.

As for a joint grid. Slow drivers would need luck and reliability just to finish let alone get in the points. While faster drivers would need luck and patience to lap backmarkers to secure victory. This sounds great for Privateers (not set on winning every race) wishing to compete with the Works drivers. But a world of pain for the Works drivers who do not want to deal with Privateers. Me, I'm happy with whatever you guys decide.

No connection problems thus far.

I have not had to use of been involved in any moderating and appeals so am unable to comment.

Your existing rules on passing for position/lapping and being lapped seem pretty clear to me at least. Keep to the spirit of 67. Regardless of the speed differential of the drivers involved, if its for position race fairly. If its a lapping situation the faster drivers I have encountered thus far are more than capable of making a safe pass with or without the co-operation of the slower driver. Yeah you might have to wait until the next straight but hey read your own rules. Weavingto break the tow or blocking often involves the perpetrator going way off the racing line and usually off track anyway.

Tracks to consider - Monza in any shape or form, what about the banked version? Again whatever you guys decide.

 

Really sorry if I got us off the main subject. Mine was a Novice point of view. Perhaps this is not the forum for this. Mods have enough to think about. Let's close it eh.

Norm H

Sorry about the quote thing I will get it right some time.

Göran

you mean like this one when you quote someones post by clicking on the quote button at top right hand side



Or you can type the HTML code yourself

whichever you use you need to type your reply between the quote boxes .

  

60 fps patch.

This has now reached a good level of maturity that I believe it should be seriously considered for future UKGPL races. It's mandatory in another league I run in, and is now compatible with the 67 patch.

I think some test races should be run with it in the off-season, and maybe running it in one league to start with to see how it behaves.

Thoughts?

Test race sounds fine but I don't believe everyone can run it without problems.
Until everyone can run it I wouldn't be keen on turning away drivers...

is there more updates to it then.  I've ever had any issues with 60FPS, but for those that have, if there are updates I'm sure they would love to know where they are?

Run the hi-est res version of Targa against a full grid with all details on max Steve, and then tell me you don't have problems ;)

Even with a Quad core black edition Phenom II, 4 gig of RAM and an ATI HD4870/90 I then get slowdown in places @ 60hz! Same goes for Montjuic  :hammer:

Admittedly that can be fixed if I install lower quality versions of the track, but I have a monster and WANT to run everything on Max settings!  ;D

I sense the iRacing geek in you wants to max that too. :P


It depends on which tracks we run (obviously) but in my experience it's been absolutely fine for the Papy tracks, Nurburgring included and some popular add-on tracks too. I haven't yet tried it in 65, 66 or 69 mod.

It's not what you have, it's how you use it that counts  :P

 ;D

Dual Quad and no matter how many cores you have, GPL doesn't care - it would only use one. So if your single core is something like 1-2 GHz your CPU isn't better than a typical CPU 5 years ago as far as GPL goes.

I'm against the 60 fps patch, we're already hurting for members it's silly to put more people off by using the patch. I'll be one of them for sure, my PC can't handle full grids even on less graphically challenging tracks when I run the patch.

3.2GHz each fankyouverrymuch  ;D

While GPL only uses the one, windows at least shifts to 1 or more of the others which has to be worth something  :)
TBH I've found very little improvement in performance as I've upgraded GFX cards from a Geforce4 through 7,8, and now the current ATI.
Don't think there's any real need for massively posh cards as GPL seems unable to profit from them  :(
P&G mod on the otherhand......  :angel:

You're making my 1.8Ghz Dual Core PC sounding remarkably archaic Tim!  ;D No Matter, I do plan a final upgrade before leaping onto Windows 7, which might just take my current PC up to 2.9Ghz if I can get hold of the CPU I want  :).

Anywho, though I've joined a bit late in the game so can't really review this season, I'd like to suggest something for the Graduates cup. I've noticed that when we do run 2 grids, those in the Heavyweights class tend to have a select few that see the chequered flag with many casualties, to such an extent that only 1 or 2 drivers make it to the end.

To combat this, and perhaps allow the learning curve to ease a little when taming the 67 beasts, why not allow the Heavys a Shift R and a stop/go, like it was back in the Clubmans days. If we don't have the numbers for two grids, then stick with the Pro rules that the Light brigade will use. I just think that when the opportunity arises, those who are not a fan of the pro rules in the 67s, should allowed a little room for error.

Seconded. :smartass:

as long as some drivers don't start to use stupid overtakes again as they know they can reset, then shift-r is a good option.

One of the problems of allowing shift-R in Privateers is moderation - it'll mean some poor sod has to go through every race with a fine tooth comb... Who took a shift-R? Was that a no-fault reset or were they partially to blame? Did they take their Stop & Go pitstop within 3 laps? Did they actually stop when they took the Stop & Go? Etc, etc. Mike seems to have his work cut out doing that type of modding for the Novs.
 

When it comes to the 60fps patch, no thanks! I never got it to work properly.

Göran

Well at the moment that would be me.
TBH all I would do is check the GPLRA report for resets then check the driver loses a chunk of time for a stop in the following laps, if not would need to visually check.
I do like the idea of one stop ONLY allowed for Privates - gives you a life card but not multiple Sh/R's unlike the Novices...

With  a lull in the action, I thought I might give a short talk, on the origins of handicapping in motor racing.

My Grandfather was a driver, from the earliest days of racing.  He built himself a racer, at his London garage.  He was a purveyor of petroleum distillates, and automobiles to those of breeding, and wealth.  The car I believe, was a Studebaker, which he stripped of all but essentials. The bodywork he created, was the latest in streamlining technology, made of the lightest of materials - some kind of wood, and shaped like a boat.  He raced at Brooklands, exactly 100 years ago, and with some success.

As cars of that time, were often homebuilt specials, and class rules were rudimentary, a method of ensuring close racing had to be devised.  The rules my grandfather fell under, were to simply have cars handicapped by time.  Each car would set off on a fixed number of laps, according to it's performance in previous races.
                                                              
The art of racing falls under various categories, and the one pertaining to my Grandfathers success, eludes to his ability to do particularly well, after succumbing to several poor performances.  This was likely to have been the case for a number of the front runners.

Few people now realize, how prevalent betting was, in the years before the 2nd World War.
My Father attended many races at Brooklands, with his Dad, and usually took a camera with him. The paddock scenes look much like, what you'd expect to see at a horse race nowadays.  There were touters, and paraphernalia, and a large stanchion, which showed the latest odds, for the drivers competing in the next race.  It's possible there was even a circling ring, so that punters could listen to engines, and check the health of tyres, before the off.  This is something missing from modern tracks, as well as those in Legends.

If laying odds, I wonder how our various drivers would, 'stack up,' on a race by race basis?  There is intrigue lurking at UKGPL, in that I find we have a presumed tout, aliased under the name of BookieW. I'm not familiar with racing here, prior to my arrival, but wonder if competition had been making an aborted return to its roots.  Beware, the tax man cometh!   :hammer:                          

As a matter of point - the 'Rumble in Rouen,' was not culminated by cars near the front of the grid.  It was those further back, who were too distant to see their impending doom.  Being closer, I was able to respond to the grim reaper, from a similar speed to the dastardly perpetrators.  A tighter grid may have avoided proliferating their, umm . . . mating dance.

It was quite normal, for drivers to line up 3 and 4 abreast in 1967, though their actual lives were on the line.  And I personally think that U.S.A. style rolling starts are a bit sissy.

We couldn't have a blanket 15yard rule as not all grids allow the back of the grid to see the flag.

Just an observation or two here.

Even in modern F1, if you listen to driver interviews, The unwritten rule on starts is that, you DO NOT move until the car in front has moved. Wise words that IMHO work in GPL if you are mid grid or lower and usually the fraction of a second that you lose off the grid you make up at T1 as you will have a little more space to plan your braking and line whilst others compromise their speed in the usual melee.

Given the launch speeds of the modern projectiles I think this "self preservation" rule is still in use as we rarely (if ever) see a shunt on the grids. Of course there is the threat of pain and mutilation in RL as a deterrent, which given some of the carnage I have witnessed  is thankfully not fully modelled in GPL!! :o

The bigger the stagger, the greater the space and temptation to try and jump the car directly in front by weaving out around him. Whereas a tight grid, 3 abreast, does kind of encourage you to keep your car straight and true if you want to stay out of trouble??

Fair point Evil. I had the impression we used the loose grids for GPL races (staggered start boxes) rather than 3 abreast to reduce the chance of incident line  pile ups. 15 yard gaps would increase the cushion.
Re. Mike's point - there are some tracks e.g. Mosport where (correct me if I'm wrong) you can't see the green flag with the 9 yard gaps if you are near the back (my usual position)
Whatever the outcome suggest we have a consistant grid arrangement.
... Bill

Easier said then done - we tend to use Paul Jackson's 1x1 staggered grids. If you want to change them you'll have to play with the track.ini settings...