Author Topic: 2016 Rule suggestions  (Read 7910 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MRSIDEWAYS

  • Posts: 226
    • Ian Stewart
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #45 on: Mon Jul 13 2015, 3:31 PM »
Does anyone at martin remember when we use to do fun stuff. Like the Night event that included two garages and had a stop watch on a stool that you had to start, then run to the car, A corner worker position was to watch and give the ok when you were belted up.  Something tells me that stuff would never fly now.
I now drive a car that won't get sideways.

Offline vipertgb

  • Posts: 34
    • Trevor
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #46 on: Mon Jul 13 2015, 8:24 PM »
Does anyone at martin remember when we use to do fun stuff. Like the Night event that included two garages and had a stop watch on a stool that you had to start, then run to the car, A corner worker position was to watch and give the ok when you were belted up.  Something tells me that stuff would never fly now.

They were actually just talking about this at last month's event.

Offline ucfquattroguy

  • Posts: 68
    • Justin Cady
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #47 on: Mon Jul 13 2015, 9:07 PM »
The issue with NASA classing is that it is designed for track racing. Power to weight ratio is worth SOOOO much in track racing, the same can't be said for autocross.

I'll waive my BS flag on that one...and Ian can vouch for this, as he was "in" on this little test, too. I've got two different timing maps on my ECU. Difference is roughly 10-15hp and 20-30lbft difference. On January's course we both saw around 6/10ths difference in laptimes swapping between tunes. Granted, MSCC's courses always tend to have lots of low speed "digs" with plenty of WOT sections you really don't have to earn as a driver (that's a seperate discussion for another day)so take that 6/10ths in the spirit in which its intended.

Offline MRSIDEWAYS

  • Posts: 226
    • Ian Stewart
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #48 on: Wed Jul 22 2015, 4:18 PM »
So I've been racking my brain on a way to allow the guy in HS that happens to be the best driver at the event (ie #1 in PAX) to win tiger without eliminating points for the guys running non-SCCA classes.
Basically it's impossible. But I do have a way of helping the disparity

You have the normal points system that we currently have in place but you add an additional points system to add additional points.
Basically you separate everything into 5 categories.
Street
Touring
Street Prepared
Prepared
Modified

Take each category and look at the individual classes. Say we know HS is the slowest class and SS is the fastest in Street it would look like
SS>AS>BS>CS>DS>ES>FS>GS>HS
So the winner of each class would then get a bonus point is his/her time was faster then the class ahead. Therefore if for some crazy reason the winner of HS happens to also be faster SS that would be 8 bonus points. If you get beat by a slower class you receive no bonus points.
Same system would apply to the other categories. Bonus points would only be awarded to the highest class beaten. So the driver in HS would have a max chance at 8 bonus points.
In order to give the faster classes a chance at more bonus points the winner of each group would then have the chance to gain an extra couple of bonus points in the same way.
Modified>Prepared>Street Prepared>Touring>Street
The only Class with Zero Chance at Bonus points would be A-Mod. As it should because A-Mod should always be faster then everyone. But no one every runs A-Mod at Martin so I don't see this being an issue. In the SUPER RARE occassion that an HS car won the Street Category and beat all the others (which would mean an HS car took FTD) that individual would get 12 bonus points. Ah hell, they should get 1000. If you manage to take FTD in HS then you just get tiger.
Class order would revert to PAX index to determine who "SHOULD" be faster then someone else. This leaves us with only 2 classes to guess on and that would be SMST2 and SMST4 both of which happily sit at the bottom of the Modified group with SMST4>SMST2

What do ya think?
« Last Edit: Wed Jul 22 2015, 4:20 PM by MRSIDEWAYS »
I now drive a car that won't get sideways.

Offline BobsterS

  • Posts: 171
    • Bob Blucher
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #49 on: Wed Jul 22 2015, 4:38 PM »
I agreed with you at "Basically it's impossible." and stopped reading there! LOL

It is an interesting concept.  Now I just have to go out and find the fastest slow car out there.

Offline MRSIDEWAYS

  • Posts: 226
    • Ian Stewart
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #50 on: Wed Jul 22 2015, 6:20 PM »
Bob, it's really not that much of a bonus structure. Think about it as Even if the holy impossible feat happens and HS sets FTD. That's only 12 points extra. On a 1 car class how many more points is that then the winner of some other class with 10 cars. It's not much. So lets say your 1 car class HS beats as far up the ladder as DS, you still only got points like a 5 or 6 car class. So it's not THAT much of a bonus. The place to be IMHO would be a AS or BS car because they are fast enough to take FTD, have enough cars in the class to get a few points and FTD in a BS car would be what 7 extra points.... that's worth it. But you gotta drive the wheels off a BS car to set FTD.
« Last Edit: Wed Jul 22 2015, 6:23 PM by MRSIDEWAYS »
I now drive a car that won't get sideways.

Offline GTB/ZR-1

  • Global Moderator
  • Posts: 243
    • George Bonafede
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #51 on: Wed Jul 22 2015, 6:28 PM »
Interesting concept & shows a lot of thought, Ian.

The downside would be that a Tiger champ could be created in a 'vacuum'. What I mean is you could have a person win it that theoretically could be in a single-car clas--all year long. I believe that the Tiger champ was created in the spirit of competition; ultimately performing against like-classed cars & consistently besting all comers--or @ least placing near the top, month-in month-out.

As far as SMST classes: that's the wild west & those that frequent the class play at their own peril; so why shouldn't they be rewarded--especially if they bring a knife to a machete fight & prevail most often?

I've suggested a PAX champion, crowned just before the Tiger champ, above overall trophies, to validate the importance of the award. This will satisfy the SCCA-types (remember, we're not the SCCA--but we can certainly recognize the feat) for bragging rights.

There's NO perfect, foolproof way to crown a Tiger champ, IMO...

My .02, YM(or opinion)MV

 

Offline MRSIDEWAYS

  • Posts: 226
    • Ian Stewart
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #52 on: Wed Jul 22 2015, 8:25 PM »
Interesting concept & shows a lot of thought, Ian.

The downside would be that a Tiger champ could be created in a 'vacuum'. What I mean is you could have a person win it that theoretically could be in a single-car clas--all year long. I believe that the Tiger champ was created in the spirit of competition; ultimately performing against like-classed cars & consistently besting all comers--or @ least placing near the top, month-in month-out.

As far as SMST classes: that's the wild west & those that frequent the class play at their own peril; so why shouldn't they be rewarded--especially if they bring a knife to a machete fight & prevail most often?

I've suggested a PAX champion, crowned just before the Tiger champ, above overall trophies, to validate the importance of the award. This will satisfy the SCCA-types (remember, we're not the SCCA--but we can certainly recognize the feat) for bragging rights.

There's NO perfect, foolproof way to crown a Tiger champ, IMO...

My .02, YM(or opinion)MV
Not at all, there arent enough bonus points available for a 1 car class to actually do it. 2ndly instead of competeing against your class your competeting against everyone in your group (ie all of street). If a ds car beats every car in street including SS i wpuld hardly call that a vacuum win.
I now drive a car that won't get sideways.

Offline M@

  • Posts: 203
    • Matt
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #53 on: Thu Jul 23 2015, 9:05 AM »
I believe that the Tiger champ was created in the spirit of competition; ultimately performing against like-classed cars & consistently besting all comers--or @ least placing near the top, month-in month-out.

Like

Quote
As far as SMST classes: that's the wild west & those that frequent the class play at their own peril; so why shouldn't they be rewarded--especially if they bring a knife to a machete fight & prevail most often?

Like

Quote
There's NO perfect, foolproof way to crown a Tiger champ, IMO...

Yup

Offline MRSIDEWAYS

  • Posts: 226
    • Ian Stewart
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #54 on: Thu Jul 23 2015, 12:07 PM »
To Give you an idea of how small of an effect this actually has on points I went through July and figured out who would have received bonus points.
Ryan in GS Tied for the Most with +3
Dave in STX (had he been a member) got +3
Me in XP +1

So Ryan as it stands got 38 points. Under the bonus system he would have got 41 points (or the same as a class of 6 instead of 3
Dave Marcus (again had he been a member) would go from 43 to 46 points (1 point more then having a full class of 10). Well deserved for the car that took PAX by a large amount. 
Myself would go from 31 points to 32 points.... still not even equal to if I had a class of 2. Pretty meaningless.
After doing the above math I would recommend we double the bonus point structure as it has very little bearing on overall points.
« Last Edit: Thu Jul 23 2015, 12:21 PM by MRSIDEWAYS »
I now drive a car that won't get sideways.

Offline MRSIDEWAYS

  • Posts: 226
    • Ian Stewart
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #55 on: Wed Jul 29 2015, 5:37 PM »
I'm just waiting for someone to pop on here with a huge objection to this idea. Otherwise I'll work the numbers a bit better and write it up for a vote at the end of the year.
I now drive a car that won't get sideways.

Offline ucfquattroguy

  • Posts: 68
    • Justin Cady
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #56 on: Thu Jul 30 2015, 1:38 PM »
I'm just waiting for someone to pop on here with a huge objection to this idea. Otherwise I'll work the numbers a bit better and write it up for a vote at the end of the year.

Just write it up anyways. The forum isn't going to make or break anything. We've seen some rather interesting it comes at meetings simply because it's a "low information" format. Some proposals can't be completely grasped in just a few minutes.

Offline vipertgb

  • Posts: 34
    • Trevor
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #57 on: Fri Jul 31 2015, 6:04 AM »
Quick question about your system Ian. Let's say HS is faster than S,A,B.C,D,E,F but not GS. (GS>HS>rest of street...I think this happened in May). Does GS get 7 bonus points and HS 7 as well?

Offline MRSIDEWAYS

  • Posts: 226
    • Ian Stewart
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rule suggestions
« Reply #58 on: Fri Jul 31 2015, 11:34 AM »
No sir. You only get points UP to the point at which you get beat. So HS would need to beat GS first to ever get a point. Thats why it really doesn't apply to many people. Last event only 3 people got extra points. So essentially if I rolled up in the WRX I would likely eliminate any chance of GS getting bonus points.
« Last Edit: Fri Jul 31 2015, 11:36 AM by MRSIDEWAYS »
I now drive a car that won't get sideways.