UKGPL Season 20 (2010-2011) Graduates Cup (67) - Watkins Glen (GP) - Jan 9

[FullMetalGasket]

Can somebody explain to me, what is a normal braking point at L1?

At Watkins and assuming we're talking about the Loop then for me on L1 it's way earlier than nessicary unless through some small miracle I'm leading.
I'd probably lift 50 meters before the brow minimum and then start gently braking maybe 40 meters before said brow, if the traffic is heavy or in dangerous positions then I'd lift/brake earlier still so I could hopefully avoid any shinanigens

The first big braking zone of any track on Lap 1 can never really be said to have a 'normal' point, it's nearly all traffic dependant

[Tom van Ostade]

What would happen if I tap the brakes next time I have someone on my back (brake test) in a place on the track that you don't normally brake?

What would happen is I would track you down and run you off the track! .

Tom.

Not if I retire, you continue, I report you and you get penalized.  

 

------

At most races including The Glen, I brake about half a second earlier than usual, but not as intense. This allows me to sometimes avoid cars crashing out in front of me, or outbraking themselves behind me when I notice them in time in my mirrors, by applying the throttle again for a very short amount of time. Not being on the limit allows me to move away from the racing line quicker and notice what the people around me are doing more because I'm not pushing to control the car. Taking it too easy is dangerous as well (pace might surprise people behind you) so I try to push to about 85 - 90 % on the first lap. Unless I'm in front because then I don't have to worry about hitting cars from behind myself.

Also forgot to add that due to the harmonica effect cars in the back of the pack will have to brake much sooner than the guys up front as well, so this affects your braking point in lap 1 too.

Another tactic I use in the race is when a guy behind me is running real close and is making me nervous he might run into the back of me under braking, I take a slightly defensive line and try to stay just inside of the racing line until the apex. This way when the guy behind me outbrakes himself he'll have the room to avoid me.

Because there is virtually no slipstream in the 67's (it's too short for me to use anyway) I just run behind the inner rear wheel of the guy in front so he should be able to see me in his inner mirror clearly and knows where I'm at. I usually try to run as close to him as possible on the straight, but if I can't get alongside I use the same method as I would in lap 1, braking slightly earlier but less intense, and hope the guy in front outbrakes himself and either goes off or compromises his exit so I can get alongside in the next corner.

Tom.

[Hristo Itchov]

There is no clear rule on where you brake on Lap 1 - you don't arrive at full speed to most corners most of the time, you have cars not just in front of you (unless you're in the lead), but also very close behind you, so you need to be as predictable as possible.

Lifting up the throttle slightly before applying the brakes, just to signal to those around you that you begin to decelerate, is very important. You should also consider that by getting a slow exit out of a corner due to going side by side with someone automatically gives you slower top speed down the next straight, so that obviously shortens your braking zone.

If the driver in the lead brakes early, the driver behind has to brake earlier, and the drivers behind even earlier, so there is a limit to how much earlier you can brake in reaction to those in front of you, especially if it happens all of a sudden without warning and way before the usual braking mark. It's a situation that is inevitably going to lead to incidents now and then, and that is why, just as with the other incident (but for different reasons), I don't agree with the statement "the driver behind is ALWAYS at fault". That's silly to me. It puts unreal expectations on drivers to perform beyond the scope of human reaction and car physics.

Oh, and one more thing - I've had been involved in HUGE amount of similar situations over the years where I've been in the lead and I spot someone braking too late behind me. Do I sit around and wait to get rearended? No, I lift up the brake pedal, prolong my braking zone, even accelerate for a moment, just so I give the driver behind some more room, even if it means going wide into the corner. Especially when I realize it's partially my fault for having such situation happening due to braking a bit early than the driver behind expects. So I'd rather lose time or position by going wide or even go off on my own, than just get hit. You would've seen people getting penalized 10x more if I wasn't doing that every time...

[Turkey Machine]

Oh, and one more thing - I've had been involved in HUGE amount of similar situations over the years where I've been in the lead and I spot someone braking too late behind me. Do I sit around and wait to get rearended? No, I lift up the brake pedal, prolong my braking zone, even accelerate for a moment, just so I give the driver behind some more room, even if it means going wide into the corner. Especially when I realize it's partially my fault for having such situation happening due to braking a bit early than the driver behind expects. So I'd rather lose time or position by going wide or even go off on my own, than just get hit. You would've seen people getting penalized 10x more if I wasn't doing that every time...

You're in the minority with that one Hristo. 99% of people I race with, when being overtaken tend to react instinctively based on whether the overtaker is in the mirrors or not.

I find Watkins Glen is a difficult circuit to overtake cleanly on anyway because the place is so damn quick. There's only 1 place you can do a clean contested overtake with enough of a slower speed differential and driving styles, and that's basically a last-corner lunge up the inside. Everything else is 3rd gear upwards.

[BadBlood]

I am very disappointed with this moderation. As I wasn't resisting and being helpful <ahem> I thought Ronnie and I should swap places

In all seriousness, I am very glad there was no penalty attached either way - it was just racing and I certainly learnt from it. Thanks Tim.

[bernie]

I find Watkins Glen is a difficult circuit to overtake cleanly on anyway because the place is so damn quick. There's only 1 place you can do a clean contested overtake with enough of a slower speed differential and driving styles, and that's basically a last-corner lunge up the inside. Everything else is 3rd gear upwards.

I always thought the spoon was the best overtaking opertunity at the Glen , not that I do much of it these days 

[vosblod]

If we penalize the following driver for any contact due to mistakes of the driver in front, then slipstreaming anyone would become too high of a risk to be worth taking. What would happen if I tap the brakes next time I have someone on my back (brake test) in a place on the track that you don't normally brake? Expect a miracle from them and have them penalized if they're unable to deliver?

I'd like to avoid any long debates but there are these two;

Marginal Rear End Shunt: Warning
The victim had totally lost control before contact and consequently his line was unpredicable. The shunter was in full control.

Unavoidable Rear End Shunt: No Penalty - Racing Incident
The victim had totally lost control, left the track and bounced back on coming to rest in front of the shunter

There is also a reduction of 1 place to recognise the partial loss of control. Brake testing though is a whole different issue.

[Hristo Itchov]

There is also a reduction of 1 place to recognise the partial loss of control. Brake testing though is a whole different issue.

Of course, Tim. But the reason I mentioned it is that it doesn't make any difference whatsoever for the driver behind. Whether it's loss of control or intentional brake test, the driver behind has to react to the same thing - unexpected change of speed. Would you penalize the driver behind every time it's loss of control and never when it's intentional brake test (and even penalize the driver in front)? In fact, would you even be able to distinguish between the two? I doubt it.

Not saying I'll ever brake test of course, but just giving you an example that things are always the same for the driver behind and the driver in front carries a lot of responsibility for being predictable, and should be prepared to pay the price for any failure to do so. It's part of racing, as I mentioned already.

IMO you're mixing up agressive driving with the intention to get in front of someone at all cost with being surprised by an unusual behaviour of the car in front. Both can lead to the same results, but the reasons are totally different.

P.S. I don't really understand what "total loss of control" means. You're either in control or not. You either slow down all of a sudden or not.

[vosblod]

I see your point but, and I don't know how everyone else feels, if someone was guilty of deliberately brake testing others it would go beyond normal penalty rules and I doubt anyone else would want to drive with them. I do disagree with you in that the driver in front must pay a price if they lose control, the whole ethos here is not to penalise someone based on their driving skill more their judgement and racecraft. I hope that makes sense, difficult to word it.
Some things are open to interpretation but the rules in this instance are pretty clear cut and don't leave much margin although the penalties do take into account a driver losing control by a progressive reduction in their severity.

Finally, I do very much appreciate that some chassis involve much more effort to race/pass then others and require a tighter style of driving. However, the way it works here in general, normally those with the more 'exacting' chassis would be those expected to be more adept in their racecraft and car control. I mean that in a positive way.

[Hristo Itchov]

I see your point but, and I don't know how everyone else feels, if someone was guilty of deliberately brake testing others it would go beyond normal penalty rules and I doubt anyone else would want to drive with them. I do disagree with you in that the driver in front must pay a price if they lose control, the whole ethos here is not to penalise someone based on their driving skill more their judgement and racecraft. I hope that makes sense, difficult to word it.
Some things are open to interpretation but the rules in this instance are pretty clear cut and don't leave much margin although the penalties do take into account a driver losing control by a progressive reduction in their severity.

Finally, I do very much appreciate that some chassis involve much more effort to race/pass then others and require a tighter style of driving. However, the way it works here in general, normally those with the more 'exacting' chassis would be those expected to be more adept in their racecraft and car control. I mean that in a positive way.

What I mean by "the driver in front must pay the price" is not that he should get penalized, but that if the driver behind can't avoid hitting them, they should accept the consquences of the collision. It's nothing to do with penalties for the driver in front, but to label it as a racing incident when the circumstances are such that neither driver was at fault (or both's fault, depending on point of view).

As for racing craft, there is no handicap system here in the Graduates, so you don't always end up with fast drivers running slow cars and vice versa. With the exception of single-chassis teams like Hiki-Waza, anyone can run any car. You can't automatically expect better judgement, better reactions and better driving from someone in a slow car, and penalize them if they fail to that. Nobody is driving with the intention to put others in danger and that includes me, but when they put themselves in a dangerous situation there's a limit to how much those around them can do.

[BadBlood]

P.S. I don't really understand what "total loss of control" means. You're either in control or not. You either slow down all of a sudden or not.

I often get a wheel on the grass, lift off, over correct and suddenly I am starting to spin, sometimes I can save it, often not but I am definitely not fully in control. Other times I will make a bigger mistake and spin - at that point I am a passenger - i.e. "total loss of control"

[Ronniepeterson]

What I mean by "the driver in front must pay the price" is not that he should get penalized, but that if the driver behind can't avoid hitting them, they should accept the consquences of the collision. It's nothing to do with penalties for the driver in front, but to label it as a racing incident when the circumstances are such that neither driver was at fault (or both's fault, depending on point of view).

Words fail me with the above thinking. Right or wrong it sounds very much like I'm coming through, I'm faster, get out of my way or else!!!!!.

Thank god (thats the moderator by the way) that we adopt a more civilised approach in the Privateers series. Paul, sorry again mate.

[Hristo Itchov]

What I mean by "the driver in front must pay the price" is not that he should get penalized, but that if the driver behind can't avoid hitting them, they should accept the consquences of the collision. It's nothing to do with penalties for the driver in front, but to label it as a racing incident when the circumstances are such that neither driver was at fault (or both's fault, depending on point of view).

Words fail me with the above thinking. Right or wrong it sounds very much like I'm coming through, I'm faster, get out of my way or else!!!!!.

Thank god (thats the moderator by the way) that we adopt a more civilised approach in the Privateers series. Paul, sorry again mate.

Well you stil fail to UNDERSTAND the meaning of my thinking and my words then. It's not something you do intentionally! It's not like you're actually thinking "I'M COMING THROUGH, I'M FASTER, GET OUT OF MY WAY". I'm really becoming short of words to explain it in any different manner so some of you can actually grasp the reality of such situations... it's like you're totally failing to understand the idea of racing and the risks involved, neither of which have anything to do with the arrogance and lack of respect you try to imply on my behalf.

Do I really have to go to the extremes and sacrifice a couple of my own races, just to prove the validity of my point? Would you change your way of thinking if I let myself be taken out by drivers behind with actions that take them completely out by surprise and they're unable to react, would you blame them 100% for such incidents and say they employed the "I'M COMING THROUGH, GET OUT OF MY WAY" mentality? This is becoming really frustrating...

@Paul - does it matter whether you're completely spinning or not for how much you experience a sudden loss of speed? You could be in complete lack of control by your definiton and still carry a lot of speed so nobody is going to hit you from behind, or you could be momentarily sliding and trying to correct it, yet lose a lot of speed as a result. In fact, it's PRECISELY the effort to regain control of the car which leads to sudden loss of speed, because otherwise the car would simply continue with its previous speed and direction...

[BadBlood]

The point is not the relative speed - it is the definition of "Total loss of control". Just trying to clarify. See your points, not trying to argue those one way or the other - it is just the way I interpret that phrase.

Cheers

[Hristo Itchov]

The point is not the relative speed - it is the definition of "Total loss of control". Just trying to clarify. See your points, not trying to argue those one way or the other - it is just the way I interpret that phrase.

Cheers

Sure, I know what you mean. But in this case it's only when there's the presence of the so defined "total loss of control" that the driver behind is lifted up from some of the responsibility and given a much lesser penalty, if any at all. That's what I disagree with, because the consquences of such "total loss of control" are much easier to anticipate than any effort to regain control by the driver in front.