Author Topic: 2016 Rule suggestions  (Read 7911 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline vipertgb

  • Posts: 34
    • Trevor
    • View Profile
2016 Rule suggestions
« on: Mon Jun 08 2015, 6:02 PM »
I know this is a little early to start this thread, but I did notice that last year there were some really good ideas that never came to fruition. Not sure if it was due to lack of time, inaction (never putting it up for a vote), or because they got voted down. But I want to hear opinions on this stuff and iron out the wrinkles so I can put something up for vote that is has been thoroughly thought through. BTW is there a specific meeting to vote on this stuff?

--Bonus tiger points for top PAX times. Either fixed amount (e.g. 9,7,5,3,2,1), OR something based on number of entrants [1st place receives (entrants / 8 ) tiger points, 2nd gets (entrants / 12), 3rd gets (entrants / 16), etc.]. With something like that we might a minimum (e.g. 6,4,3,2,1) and maximum (e.g. 12,8,6,4,3,2,1) bonus tiger points allowed. With the split run groups of everyone getting to run both before and after lunch, I think that levels the playing field relatively well for PAX on a rainy day.

---The 107% rule becomes the 110% rule. 7% on a 40 second course is only 2.8 seconds. I feel like experienced drivers with decently prepped cars lose by that much on a semi-regular basis.

---Bonus tiger points for top raw times, PROVIDED they are within ~5% of top PAX so that undeserving shifter karts don't just rack up tons of points.

--Maximum tiger points per event (something like 40-45) so that someone can't run away with Tiger champ from 1-2 really good events.

--SMST gets split up into SMFST, SMST, and SSMST and they get PAX'd at a fraction of the parent class (~98%).

---As a side note, 140TW tires are still slower then the current 200TW tires, so personally I wouldn't mind seeing them allowed in street/ST classes.



Offline M@

  • Posts: 203
    • Matt
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #1 on: Tue Jun 09 2015, 9:18 AM »
LOL! Oh man, what have you done!! You get the enthusiastic newcomer award for 2015, a road well-traveled and often regretted.  ;D

There are special rules meetings at the October and November club meetings. All rule proposals must be presented at the October meeting and submitted in writing to the VP at that time. They are discussed at the November meeting and voted on in December. If you want to submit proposals make sure you follow that process, as discussions on this forum are just that and nothing more.

The 107% rule was finally erased from the rulebook for 2015.

NO MORE CLASSES

Our points system has been debated every year for 10 years, and everyone has tried to invent ways to "even out the playing field", change the payout structure, etc. In response to your suggestions, you're going to hear 27 different reasons why they won't work, 27 reasons why our current system is adequate, another 27 reasons why it's not, etc. This discussion will probably give you insight into that history, but I suggest first reading historical rule threads. They should be easy to find as they'll have similar subject lines to this one. Every one of them has the grande ole points debate.

The biggest problem with using PAX at MSCC for anything (points, trophies, etc.) is that very few, if any, club members build their car to the limit of their class rules. Most are here for fun, and most don't care to dive that deep into the rulebook. PAX is a fun reference point for bragging rights, but less suitable for the MSCC crowd than the SCCA crowd as anything more than a reference point. We tried a PAX class and it was empty at most events, and may have been voted out. If it still exists, it's merely a shell. I'll leave it at that and let others chime in.

Despite my sarcasm I applaud you for getting an early start on the discussion, and wanting to ensure there is enough time for adequate debate. Often these rules are voted on without enough time to thoroughly understand the full implications.  The fact that all of your suggestions have been discussed before is a good sign that you're thinking in the right direction.  :)
« Last Edit: Tue Jun 09 2015, 9:22 AM by M@ »

Offline M@

  • Posts: 203
    • Matt
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #2 on: Tue Jun 09 2015, 9:19 AM »
And the max points payout is already set at 45 for classes with 10 cars or more.

Offline BobsterS

  • Posts: 171
    • Bob Blucher
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #3 on: Tue Jun 09 2015, 9:58 AM »
PAX points don't work for Tiger because of our SMST classes, which do not have a PAX multiplier.  And yes, we tried that too and it didn't work.

Offline M@

  • Posts: 203
    • Matt
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #4 on: Tue Jun 09 2015, 12:16 PM »
Another note about Tiger Points: never has a Tiger champion won the championship, let alone run away with it, simply because of 1 or 2 good events. Each has won by being consistently good in a consistently large class relative to the others. It takes 9 months (after drops) of skill and luck (or strategizing).

Offline vipertgb

  • Posts: 34
    • Trevor
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #5 on: Wed Jul 01 2015, 2:13 PM »
Yes this is long, for those that want to know the details and the thoery behind it, that’s what this entire post is about. For everyone else that just wants the summary I’ve included a TL:DR (too long: didn’t read) at the end.

THE SYSTEM:
So I put together a format for bonus Tiger points based on performance compared to other classes in your category. I attached an excel sheet for reference. Bonus Tiger points are awarded to the highest PAX times in the street category and the street touring category. The more drivers, the more bonus points awarded – same concept as how Tiger points are awarded now. As you can see there are only 2 instances so far in 2015 where the winner of a category would not receive max bonus points.

WHY WE NEED CHANGE:
The reason I think that some sort of inter-class bonus needs to be given is because it will better select the most skilled driver, without being so dependent on class size. There was a prime example in 2014. Ian Stewart showed up to the first 7 out of 8 events in 2014. In 2 events he RAW TIMED the winner of SMST2 (the class the Tiger champ came from) while driving a GS car (2nd slowest class) - that's a hell of a feat! Yet he still received less Tiger points than the SMST2 winner both times. He won PAX in 5 of his 7 outings, yet after the August event, with only one missed event, he was no longer in strong contention for Tiger champ (20 points behind Leland with drops). I have to assume that is a big part of why he didn't show up for the last 3 events. I'm sure there are other examples (Robert Palmblad in 2015 if he was a member), but that one really screamed at me. That is why I believe we need just a small something extra in determining Tiger champ.

WHAT IT MEANS/WHAT WILL CHANGE:
Now you're thinking doesn't this still just favor those who are in bigger classes? Thank you for asking! I would also like to propose capping Tiger points for a single event at 48. This serves a couple purposes. Those racing in a class with low attendance (but more than 1 driver) and win the category have the chance to receive max, or close to max, Tiger points. It makes it so that quite a few people can walk away from an event with max Tiger points. It also prevents someone in 2nd place from receiving max Tiger points, but they still have the possibility of getting more tiger points than winners of other classes that didn’t do so well compared to the rest of the field.  This will help keep the race for #1 a tight race until the final event. This would eliminate only 2-5 people truly being in contention for Tiger champ after the July/August event. This in theory would increase attendance in the latter part of the season.

PROS/CONS OF THE DIFFERENT GROUPS PT 1:
The majority of cars in ST classes are at a similar level of prep as each other, and same for the cars in street classes. This eliminates the huge disparities of whose car is prepared to the extent of the rules in higher classes. It also makes it less expensive for people who want a chance to win Tiger to prep a car, where before it was pointless (SMST vs street class can be upwards of $10k difference). This would increase the number of competitors for #1 Tiger and theoretically should increase attendance.

PROS/CONS OF THE DIFFERENT GROUPS PT 2:
Now as for the final category of literally everybody besides street and ST, I’ve kept it simple for now simply because I know someone has to spend their time and energy to calculate tiger points. If AXware can spit out an excel sheet of everyone’s best raw time/PAX time it won’t be so time consuming and we can spruce it up a bit and make it a bit more accurate, but I don’t know how AXware works. I would be willing to do Tiger points calculations if this method were implemented. At this point there are so many variables in what can be done to a car, and using a slightly adjusted raw time would eliminate the 20+ PAX indexes that are in this group. Yes, certain groups are favorable here (AM) and some are unfavorable (FSP). But I would consider the more popular classes (SMST/SSM/SM/SMF/BSP/CSP/DP/CM/FM) to be relatively balanced here, especially on Lake Tech’s not so amazing surface.

QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, SUGGESTIONS, FEEDBACK:
I’d like to hear feedback. In my opinion this relatively small change will make it so that more people can compete for Tiger champ, it will be a good representation of who is the most talented driver in 9 events, and it will keep competition closer, longer.

TL:DR
The current Tiger system stays how it is with the addition of bonus points for a drivers performance relative to his category (street, street touring, everyone else). See attached spreadsheet for my initial idea on how many bonus points. Also cap max Tiger points at 48 per event. Thoeretically it should make for more/closer competition for #1 Tiger and be an accurate reflection of the best overall driver for the year.
« Last Edit: Tue Jul 07 2015, 12:50 PM by vipertgb »

Offline ParadoxD

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 368
    • Travis Turner
    • View Profile
    • MSCC Official Website
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #6 on: Mon Jul 06 2015, 9:14 PM »
Trevor,

I'm not seeing an attachment...  Was it lost in the matrix?

1991 BMW 325i (DSP) - 2015 Scion FR-S (CS)

Offline vipertgb

  • Posts: 34
    • Trevor
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #7 on: Tue Jul 07 2015, 12:51 PM »
Yea not sure what happened, but it's there now.

Offline M@

  • Posts: 203
    • Matt
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #8 on: Wed Jul 08 2015, 9:20 AM »
So I could win a 10-car ES and also have the best PAX time in the street category, but I would only get 3 bonus points because the total is capped at 48?  Sounds like a socialistic "you don't need more because you already have enough" system.  Rewarding the best of the best while trying to keep tight reigns on points to ensure a close fight are conflicting goals. Let's choose one or the other.
« Last Edit: Wed Jul 08 2015, 9:23 AM by M@ »

Offline speaks

  • Posts: 81
    • Ryan Speaks
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #9 on: Wed Jul 08 2015, 10:22 AM »
Trevor, I proposed a PAX-based championship last year and it got resoundingly voted down...my reasoning was similar to your's, that I desired to have a class where you (theoretically) pursued a championship based on driver skill (but car prep is big too if you are modified) and not simply # of competitors in your class.

The Tiger Points system has it's weaknesses, especially once we switched to SCCA rules and added a lot of classes.

We instituted a PAX-based "PRO" class and it was lightly subscribed...I don't even know if that is an eligible class anymore. It had issues because we (IIRC) instituted a street-tire PAX modifier...can't remember why that was an issure, I think it was too big of a modifier??

I think Blucher has been right all along, we need to get rid of the SMST classes and those who run there would just run in their SCCA class (IE: for SMST4, Harry and Terry would have to move to SM...which coincidentally would then be a pretty big class actually...and for SMST2, all those cars would move to the 3-5 other classes based on their modifications)

I would then predict that the stock classes (ES especially, maybe CS...but STX too) would be the place to be for Tiger Points instead as they are heavily subscribed.

This is all IMHO...
Ryan Speaks
2005 STI
2013 STI

Offline vipertgb

  • Posts: 34
    • Trevor
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #10 on: Thu Jul 09 2015, 8:41 AM »
So I could win a 10-car ES and also have the best PAX time in the street category, but I would only get 3 bonus points because the total is capped at 48?  Sounds like a socialistic "you don't need more because you already have enough" system.  Rewarding the best of the best while trying to keep tight reigns on points to ensure a close fight are conflicting goals. Let's choose one or the other.

Without putting some sort of cap it doesn't change the fact that the winner will come from a consistently large class. That's the main flaw of the current tiger system, that's what needs to be done away with. If you get 1st in a 10 person ES class and 3rd in PAX, should you really receive more points than someone who got #1 PAX in a 5 person class? Personally I think #1 PAX should get the most points regardless of how many were in the class, but reading through the previous rule suggestions that's obviously not well liked.


I think Blucher has been right all along, we need to get rid of the SMST classes and those who run there would just run in their SCCA class (IE: for SMST4, Harry and Terry would have to move to SM...which coincidentally would then be a pretty big class actually...and for SMST2, all those cars would move to the 3-5 other classes based on their modifications)

I would then predict that the stock classes (ES especially, maybe CS...but STX too) would be the place to be for Tiger Points instead as they are heavily subscribed.


I like SMST, it's a good class with close competition among widely different cars. That said I don't think the yearly champion should come from the SMST class. If Tiger champ wasn't eligible from SMST, not many people would drive there anymore, defeating the purpose of keeping it.

I was thinking we could split SMST2 and SMST4 into SMFST, SMST, and SSMST and give them a PAX modifier (~.98 - .99). I would like to hear thoughts on that.

Also I think that any class that typically has 4+ drivers would be a highly competitive class. All it takes is consistently grabbing a top 3 PAX finish in your category and you're racking up the points real quick. Yes that means you have to be a GREAT driver and it's no easy feat, but isn't that the type of person the award should go to?

Offline M@

  • Posts: 203
    • Matt
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #11 on: Thu Jul 09 2015, 9:05 AM »
Trevor, is this your first year with MSCC? Just curious.

Offline vipertgb

  • Posts: 34
    • Trevor
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #12 on: Thu Jul 09 2015, 12:27 PM »
I just started autocrossing in June of 2014, with various clubs all throughout the area.

Offline M@

  • Posts: 203
    • Matt
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #13 on: Thu Jul 09 2015, 12:43 PM »
You're clearly passionate about the sport and the club, and have ideas. I honestly would suggest reading all the past forum discussions about rules, classing and Tiger points before going any further, only because these very ideas have been discussed in the past, in some cases verbatim. I don't want you to waste any efforts trying to repeat history!  It will help guide your ideas by giving you a better starting point. Those discussions should be really easy to find.

PS - try not to rock the boat as a new club member! Just looking out for ya.  :)
« Last Edit: Thu Jul 09 2015, 1:08 PM by M@ »

Offline BobsterS

  • Posts: 171
    • Bob Blucher
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #14 on: Thu Jul 09 2015, 12:49 PM »
Please, let's not go down this road again.  No more classes, no more multipliers.  The only way to resolve the problem, if there is one, is to get rid of the two smst classes.  Don't get me wrong, I think the classes are great with a wide range of cars competing, but for the past 5 years the Tiger champ has come from either smst 2 or 4.  Slower cars with very good drivers just can't compete for Tiger as long as SMST exists and that's too bad.

When it comes time for rules changes at the end of the year vote to remove SMST and remove the Tiger problem.