SEASON 24 Pre-Season Discussion

[Artiglietti]

Just a few tweaks Jason? 100% scoring rule and pitstops across all the pro divisions? Wonder what your proposal would have been had you intended to do some substantial tweaks.. It's fine with me, as long as I am allowed to race at intermidiate and novice level... But seriously, I'd rather see the multiple Shift-R go, allowing only one safety line for the lower divisions, and more limited point scorers in the higher divisions, losing the 50% rule and certainly not scattering pitstops all over the pro divisions, as they do change the nature of the racing and you cant build an entire league around that kind of races. I like the way this end of season discussions start with very specific topics and regularly end up in the stratosphere...  

[Hristo Itchov]

Good ideas, Jason, although 100% finish for points scoring is a bit too much IMO. They use a 75% rule in reality which I also suggested we should use here a few seasons ago, but it was settled to 50% which I'm not sure I approve much. 75% makes more sense, because it means you have to drive at least 40 minutes before you can score, so it doesn't make things too easy. As for Art's remark that someone may retire just prior to the point-scoring distance as opposed to someone who retires after, so what? If it happens, it's still much better than having someone just attend and score, regardless of what they do. The thing is, good and bad luck between drivers tends to equalize over a season. We wouldn't be having this dialog at all if we had at least 10 or more drivers for each race, but that's not been the case. I've personally scored points which I shouldn't have, despite retiring in the opening laps, just because we were 5-6 cars on the grid. It feels wrong.

I do agree about Shift-R and share Tony's view (sorry for not entering any GTL races recently BTW) that people given Shift-R tend to develop a bad habit of relying too much on it, though on the other hand it's a good thing to have for the opening lap, because a lot of unnecessary incidents tend to happen there and I'm still not seeing any harsher penalties being applied to such incidents, definitely not enough to make drivers change their approach. Perhaps we could run INT settings for all divisions, but only allow a single Shift-R on lap 1, with a served stop/go, regardless whether it was your fault or not. That seems fair to me and it would prevent frustration in the case where you have practiced a lot just for someone to take you out at the start.

As for pitstops, of course, GT pitstops have been quite wrong, but that's down to lack of information. F1 67s on the other hand worked great with pitstops in the past and were quite fair in terms of pitstop length, because there is enough lap time information to calculate proper pitstop times. I'm still waiting to hear how exactly is the token system good for anything, because first it prevents single-chassis teams, second it creates a bigger gap by rewarding more and more those who finished better and get more tokens, while those behind keep falling even more behind over the course of the season. With the pitstop system you can take any car you want, and you would have equal chance of fighting for position against any of the other cars. Without that, you can only win in a better car against an opponent of equal ability. It makes things too predictable and predetermined.

As I said already, divisions that run the championship-based handicap (which is a driver handicap, not a car handicap) such as 66s and F2s seem to work best, so with a few adjustments to the F2 handicap system (if we run the mod again) it's all good there. 65 though are clearly not working in the Int and Novices division, just the same way they weren't working before in the Amateur/Pro division. The only way to make it work is to either get rid of handicap completely and let people have a free choice EACH race (so they can counter the effect of the type of track being used) or to apply the championship-based handicap system, which will give chance to more people to fight for the top spots.

I also very much like the idea of running a championship where you have all cars at your disposal, but you're limited to how many you can use in a season. Tony ran this in UKGTL and it works great. As an alternative based on this system, perhaps we could do the following: everyone chooses 2 or 3 cars before the season starts, 1 out of each car group (fast, medium slow), and then can only use each car for 1/3rd of the races. For example, in 65s, if I select Cooper, BT7 and Lotus, I would have to use each no more than 3 times for 9 races. This may lead to near-spec racing at some tracks, but it would prevent unfair advantages and it would reward the drivers according to their ability.

IMO we should generally have a look in the past and see what has worked and what hasn't, and learn from it, instead of having these discussions go from scratch every time before a new season.

[Artiglietti]

I cant follow you on your reasoning about the token system Hristo, as tokens are automatically awarded once you cross the start line, and not on the basis of results. They dont work if you want to use one of the slow cars for the entire season, like you are doing, without this becoming effectively a self imposed handicap, but other than that they do work a wonder to spice up the races and changing the pecking order from race to race.

As for the pitstops, I really dont like the kind of racing that they produce, as I think it messes up things in a rather random way. Would much prefer seeing an handicap system based on championship position, if people are uncomfortable with the token system.

50% rule, as per my posts above. I had a look at the historics' table point; this season you had races where the gap between the scorers was no more than 18 points, out of a possible 49. Then you look at the actual race results and you see the leader was 1 minute ahead of the second place and lapped everyone else. I cant understand how you guys cannot see the oddity of this. Non finishers are punished regardless, people who raced in what was effectively a different class, score heavily. So, no real reward whatsoever for being quick and consistent, but just for staying in the race till half way, which is already being rewarded anyway by a very generous points system introduced a couple of seasons ago. Is this really the basis on which we want to award our championships? If you guys really want to introduce that rule, at least do change the point system for the higher divisions. With the Historics' system effectively you have been racing using 25 points thanks to that cut off point chosen randomly during the race.

[Hristo Itchov]

I cant follow you on your reasoning about the token system Hristo, as tokens are automatically awarded once you cross the start line, and not on the basis of results. They dont work if you want to use one of the slow cars for the entire season, like you are doing, without this becoming effectively a self imposed handicap, but other than that they do work a wonder to spice up the races and changing the pecking order from race to race.

Hm, goes to show I don't know exactly how the token system works (because I never actually used it), but then what's the whole point of it if everyone gets the same amount of tokens just for starting a race? How exactly is anyone penalized in any way so they would end up not having enough tokens to buy a fast car? It seems there is no handicap at all, since everyone has the same amount of tokens.

As for the points scoring, I do agree with you, I just forgot to mention it in my previous post. I've always supported point systems where performance is rewarded, instead of consistency and finishing, otherwise it leads to situations where no matter how fast you are and how much you win, someone just finishing regularly would still be in contention for the championship with you. In fact I recall the current system was a result of a heated discussion where they wanted to impose an even closer points-wise system after the previous system was ditched, so we should be glad, lol. It was also during that time when the 50% rule was introduced. As you say though, it would be more realistic and fair, performance-wise, if there are bigger point gaps between points scoring positions, especially if it's combined with a 75% rule. It would elevate UKGPL into a much more serious league, but as others have pointed out, it would probably alienate some people.

As usual, the key is in balancing out everything, though I wouldn't mind at all if we have different divisions use a different scoring system, so people would have a choice. The downside, at least at the moment, is we don't really have so many regular active members as to fill the grids properly and when that doesn't happen, the systems tend to fail.

[Podkrecony_Ziutek]

PROFESSIONAL
-----------
no shift+r

IMO the proper way to race

PROFESSIONAL
-----------
no shift+r
pitstop based handicap for faster cars.
mostly harder or new tracks
100% scoring rule ( must take the checkered flag to score)

If we are talking about simulating the F1'65/'66/'67/or F2'67 seasons, than IMO there is no place for the pitstops

PROFESSIONAL
mostly harder or new tracks

Ok, but I just hope that it doesn't mean spending most of the season on long and boring to race tracks like Nurburgring, Charade, etc.

PROFESSIONAL
-----------
100% scoring rule ( must take the checkered flag to score)

I would stick to the 50%, but 75% wouldn't be bad.

Hm, goes to show I don't know exactly how the token system works (because I never actually used it), but then what's the whole point of it if everyone gets the same amount of tokens just for starting a race? How exactly is anyone penalized in any way so they would end up not having enough tokens to buy a fast car? It seems there is no handicap at all, since everyone has the same amount of tokens.

That's because the token system isn't a handicap system at all

[liveclive]

Hmmmmm, some interesting points being raised here on all sorts of issues, which is great.

Aside from the problem that we have, of too many classes of cars for the number of servers and evenings available I have a few comments to add.
 The mods have tried some different things over the past few seasons to add some extra "spice" to our racing and it is good to hear members thoughts on them.

The 65's were, and still are, the best "intro" to GPL and I think it is important to maintain a class where the true novice can find their feet and develop without too many "penalties" or hassles.
 I would be cautious of limiting the Shift-R's in this novice class, not because drivers should learn to survive a race and not make rash moves that end in disaster, but rather because they will get to be around for a whole race and realise that generally the drivers on the podium are the ones who DID NOT require too many re-sets and Stop-n-go's. Hopefully this prompts drivers to improve their racecraft and survival skills which they can develop as they move up to stiffer competition.
If we want ALL drivers to race without a safety net, they have to learn somewhere? Racing the AI off line just is not the same, you need to provide a platform where you can race real people and learn to anticipate and recognise their moves in a competitive environment without it all ending in a crash fest.
 It might be of interest to know that a few seasons back  free Shift-R's in all races were allowed if you felt that you were not at fault, with the guilty party in any incident, expected to take a Stop-n-Go. This resulted in the mods often adjudicating over some very contentious incidents and was dropped in favour of the current system.

It is also important to encourage drivers to move up to the more challenging divisions and they will not do that if they feel that the rules are such that they are unlikely to finish a race or even score any points.
 Paul makes a very good point about points   There are groups of drivers in any division who are of similar ability and maybe they do not run at "podium speed", but their battles for 8th,9th and 10th places throughout the season provide them with their own mini championship. Removing points from the lower finishing positions takes away this competitive element.
Which brings me nicely to the points system. The change in the points system came about because it was felt that the points system was too generous to the winner. I fully understand the view that a winner should be well rewarded for finishing first, but we had the situation where a quick driver could have an unassailable lead by halfway through in the season and as a result driver numbers tended to drop off towards the end of the season as the possibility of a challenge at the top of the leaderboard diminished with each race. The current points system has kept championships alive until the last couple of races, which is surely no bad thing??

So, a fixed 50% distance completed before you score points???
I can see the logic for this, but I'm just not sure about it. The argument that it is unfair if you drop out after 49% of the race is no different to crashing out in a PRO race after 1 lap or on the last lap, you still suffer. But, I wonder if it deters drivers from moving up a division if they fear that they will be unable to drive fast enough to compete and still survive/ finish the race, as they can in the lower divisions.
 Maybe a sliding scale of "minimum" distance alongside a  similarly limited number of usuable Shift-R's in a race so that people can slowly improve their skills??

Handicaps.....
Once again always a good subject for debate.
 If you accept that the purpose of any handicap system is to try and generate races/championships that stay competitive as long as possible, then any system that achieves that is good in my book.
 The difficulty comes in not making any handicap so onerous that you simply prevent the fastest driver from winning. I would contend that whatever handicap system is used the "best" driver should still be able to win. Maybe he will have to work really hard, but it should still be possible.
There are different types of handicapping which try to achieve better ( more competitive) racing. One type aims to slightly slow down the fastest drivers and allow the next ranks a chance of keeping them in sight and under pressure for more of the race.
 
Systems such as that used in 66's where the more successful drivers had to take the slower cars worked well and kept the competition alive throughout the season. mainly because the cars available had just the right amount of difference to make it work well.
The same system in the F2's  did not work quite so well because the gap in performance between the slowest 2 cars and the rest of the pack was too great.
The token system in 67's aims to prevent a driver simply taking the best car for every race by effectively giving him a budget to "buy" his cars for the season. It works well by forcing drivers to think about which cars they should use on which tracks, but as has been pointed out it does penalise teams that might want to run a single chassis. Although I think any team arguing that they should be able to run a Team Lotus for a season might not get much support???
The pitstop system has come in for some criticism especially in the recent GT season. The intention of a pitstop handicap is to equalise the performance of the cars over race distance, with the intention that if 10 drivers of equal ability all drove different cars they would arrive at the chequered flag in a blanket finish. In practice, it should mean that the fastest driver will still win whatever car he chooses, but maybe by not such a huge distance. The down side to this system is that it requires some accurate and proven lap times for each chassis around a track before pitstop times can be calculated.
Hristo has managed to single handedly prove the failings of this method by selecting a car that no-one had bothered with before and showing how fast it should go!!!

Any handicap system has its flaws, but I often think that complaints about how "unfair" a system is might indicate how effective it is being lol

[clouds]

If you think it could be interesting, I would try to adjust the stand still reset into the proper pit stall, just for trying some race with refuelling. This could be an interesting ballast handicap for faster GT's drivers while the others could use a lighter car with some refuelling and ...of course...no wait times at all. If you have in mind to keep each race as max interesting and fought as possible this could be one of the ways to try (but not the only one obviously).

For me to maintain competitive a championship faster guys have to drive slower cars and vice versa, but most of all, practice have to be taken in count and become a must. Why I say this ? Because give a fast car to a bad driver leads to incidents just because this kind of driver doesn't know how to manage that car, especially if he is in front in the starting grid. This is a game but...a serious game, like is serious any car racing sport. Having a handicap system doesn't mean the better pilots will have no chance to win but instead it means also the others may have some.

Last but not least like I said in other post, try to keep the community compact, with not many leagues and fragmentations. Only some championships but crowded is preferable for me.

[James Andrew]

Here's my twopenneth in an excellent discussion. Everyone's made valid points and presented their positions well. Now I have the podium, you watch that fall apart...

I've recently re-joined the league after nearly two years away. I've never been a very fast driver but I like a challenge. My speed (or lack of) convinces me that the place I should be is the lowest tier of any competition until told otherwise and I am very happy engaging in "in-my-own-head-only" battles with people who seem to be at about my own ability level but down the running order.

In line with someone else's point, my learning curve involved figuring out that it was better to stay within myself and not need a S-R (or as few as possible) if I wanted to get a result that I felt reflected my true abilities. So the lower tiers definitely need to allow that to happen. Actually I've always lost a bit of self-respect when using a S-R and prefer to race with rules that are much harsher, forcing discipline, even if that often means that I fail to finish. Such is racing. I also prefer a longer race, with damage.

I may go on all night if I'm not careful so I'll move on to other things. What follows is as above: just my perception and feelings to be considered by the moderators. What you decide eventually is fine, whatever.

I've never tried pit stop penalties per chassis. Tokens have always seemed fine to me. I think I would have trouble remembering how many stops I was supposed to make in a given race as well as how many I had already done. Tokens are just "choose pre-race and go".

50% rule (or similar): I'm more on the purist side i.e. ideally only finishers get points. That said, I've been encouraged in the past to make an effort to attend races on tracks that I consider may be less well-attended simply because there's a good chance of grabbing more points whatever my finish due to a smaller grid. Naughty, and I have felt bad for it, but it did get me to turn up.

My understanding on team/individual was that everyone raced for themselves but some people were also in teams and those kind of "unofficially" gained points. Unless teams comprise of drivers assigned according to some perceived handicap system, what's the point? Me and some other back-marker in Team Slow vs Team Regular Podiums? pff.

Thanks for reading. I'll get back in my box now!

[BadBlood]

I am glad everyone is being so brief - makes it really easy for me to pull it all together! 

[Geoff65]

As far as handicapping goes for Inters and novice....see my thoughts here....https://www.simracing.org.uk/smf/index.php?topic=11328.msg203278#new

On the subject of Shift-R, or no Shift-R.....That is the question. Sorry Mr. Shakespeare. I think at least one shift-R need remain for Novices, and they should be just that, Novices. At the beginning of last season i suggested for Inters, the system adopted by OAO. As we are trying to use Intermediates for a springboard class into Pro, one only shift-R should be available for use....on the proviso that the car is driveable back to your pit box, this being the only place a reset can be taken. with regard to the safety other competitors around you of course. Keeping out of the way is a must.  If you have a fully dead engine, or are rubber side up somewhere around the track. Then your race is run. If you have a spluttering engine or have knocked a wheel off and can make it back to your pitbox for repairs....in keeping with the realism some seek, you can reset and rejoin the race without a SnG as in most cases you are already at a disadvantage and to add a SnG would be pouring salt on a wound. Drivers must not impinge on other cars racing around them.....and other cars on the track will get a WHITE flag and should make allowances for it.
Just a thought or two.
Comments invited.
Geoff.

[BadBlood]

At the Novice level there is often an incident that causes you to need a reset before you have even got going. Maybe we should have even looser grids for Novices or penalise Red Zone incidents really harshly. I have been involved in six Lap 1 incidents this year. 1 my fault, 1 partially my fault and four nothing that I could do about but most of those were due to loss of control which is what really marks the novice out. On occasion we Novs can be pretty quick but we a) cant repeat it and b) make daft errors.

Whilst not permitting more than one shift-r would, in theory, act as a stick to improve Novice drivers might drift away if there is no carrot (ability to complete a race). The Shift-R is never without cost and needs to be avoided to be competitive nonetheless we keep having them.

The point at issue is whether Novices can actually avoid incidents even if there is no Shift-R available. The evidence is that they cannot. Check the GT, PSC and Grads (Privs) races. We don't MEAN to crash... 

[happyal]

Novice 65 worked well this season I think, so keep the same.

I would like to see 69 cars run on Tuesday.

[Philippe Girard]

for me, I remain convinced that the system shift-r is not a good idea.
It does not encourage drivers to pay attention.
in training, we have plenty of time to learn the track.
much benefit from shift-r to do anything in the race.
it says: "the race is not won in the first round," but the drivers do not listen.

[dave curtis]

As far as the shift-R goes,  I think it would be interesting if a tally of legitimate shift-R (in the lower/beginner classes) is kept.  Not necessarily for the reason of imposing a end of season penalty (although; hmmm?).

Obviously the idea to have a very low number overall.  Maybe we can see at a glance how much usage is being made of the 2nd/3rd/4th chance...

Cheers,
Dave.



 

[Wiltshire Tony]

for me, I remain convinced that the system shift-r is not a good idea.
It does not encourage drivers to pay attention.
in training, we have plenty of time to learn the track.
much benefit from shift-r to do anything in the race.
it says: "the race is not won in the first round," but the drivers do not listen.

Totally agree. I will never ever use a reset. It's phoney, arcadey and just plain wrong. If I crash then that's my race down. I don't want 2nd chances. Hopefully I will learn and develop as a result.