Suggestions

[BenjiMC]

Use this thread to give feedback on your experience of IGTC and suggest ways in which we can improve it.

In-Focus:
These are topics which I believe need a special focus on at this point in time. They will be updated periodically to match current issues within the league.

1) Making sure all participating drivers understand the rules
2) Getting a full grid at each event
3) Competitors gaining a professional attitude towards the league

[Leifde]

Not out of the championship completely, maybe losing a whole round's worth of points :shrug:

And by unexcused, does that mean the team not giving an excuse or you not believing the excuse?

[BenjiMC]

not giving me notice. I see your point on losing the points, but they are doing that anyway, the problem is, when this championship grows, and becomes full, then these non competitive teams are just gonna end up wasting space, hardly fair on other teams that might want to participate.

[Leifde]

How about having a reserved list for each race. To get on the reserved list the team has to either attend or give you good enough notice about not attending the one before. :shrug:

[BenjiMC]

i guess thats a better option:thumb:

[srdsprinter]

i'd be carefull with anything that could be construed as making the series less accessible. If you miss a round, you obviously wont be recieving points.

I'd say a confirmation race thread for each round.
LOTF Will have 2 cars there.

LOTF could be responsible for checking with another team that's signed up, via PM or something.

[srdsprinter]

I think perhaps teams just let this slip off their radar last round. Maybe you could just PM a few team leaders to ask for an update or any suggestions.

IGTC got quiet a little bit in the 6 week break, but if it stays active here, i believe they'll show back up.

[BenjiMC]

i agree a lot of teams didn't take this series seriously :shrug:. I guess they lacked the respect for me because i'm not "old" enough or something? maybe i just need to change my aproach to organising things.

[srdsprinter]

i agree a lot of teams didn't take this series seriously :shrug:. I guess they lacked the respect for me because i'm not "old" enough or something? maybe i just need to change my aproach to organising things.
I believe you've been running this very well from what I have seen. Keep it up and don't worry about your age. Trying to find a reliable non-racing official to keep a close eye on the driving could help, but just trying to keep everyone involved you're doing fine.

[KSheppard]

i agree a lot of teams didn't take this series seriously :shrug:. I guess they lacked the respect for me because i'm not "old" enough or something? maybe i just need to change my aproach to organising things.
I've found it's more to do with the scheduling, the more often the races are the more ppl "pay attention"...I find the weekly or biweekly series seem to be better attended than the monthly ones (I think these days too many people have too short attention spans :D )

Don't get me wrong though I like monthly events but with my personal schedule these days even a monthly one for me is hard to attend :(

[Humbleridderen]

I've found it's more to do with the scheduling, the more often the races are the more ppl "pay attention"...I find the weekly or biweekly series seem to be better attended than the monthly ones (I think these days too many people have too short attention spans :D )

Don't get me wrong though I like monthly events but with my personal schedule these days even a monthly one for me is hard to attend :(

I also think this will help. For example every 14 day. Not every week, because then it will be impossible to participate in other series too. :smileypul

[srdsprinter]

For LOTF, the scheduling was a great plus for us, IMO. Our team consists of adults, many with families of their own, and large work and family commitments. The month-6 weeks between races gives us more time to plan, practice, and work on setups.

I realize our case is probably is not the norm of the series, but am hopefull of a larger field next weekend.

[Humbleridderen]

Make any suggestions on how we could improve the championship here,

For now it's a matter of getting people to show up. I'm thinking say 2 un excused absences means dropping points, and a third means out of the championship completly. imo thats pretty fair. What do you guys think about it, or do you have better suggestions?

I support this idea too. Teams has to report absence. It´s lack of discipline not to...and their spot can be filled by another car or from an already participating teams other car.

It is normal for any league, that there will be some team exchange.

[srdsprinter]

here's a thought. Take advantage of the 24hr race and see if any of those teams would be interested in joining. Maybe make a new thread in the 24hr subforum, saying if you liked this, you could try IGTC. :shrug:

There was a really clean racing group of Brazilians on our server, i should try and find them.

[BenjiMC]

It is a good idea but a tad rude, i mean it's almost like me going to LOTF and saying any racers here wanna drive for cP? maybe by PM rather than an all out new thread lol :thumb:

Also i deliberatly chose monthly for that reason that stu said, not everyone has the time to do a fornightly league including myself and this schedule is very much like MoE and they get no problems :shrug:. I am going to go ahead with the removing of teams that dont tell me they aren't attending and putting in the teams that want to attend.

[Humbleridderen]

It is a good idea but a tad rude, i mean it's almost like me going to LOTF and saying any racers here wanna drive for cP? maybe by PM rather than an all out new thread lol :thumb:

Also i deliberatly chose monthly for that reason that stu said, not everyone has the time to do a fornightly league including myself and this schedule is very much like MoE and they get no problems :shrug:. I am going to go ahead with the removing of teams that dont tell me they aren't attending and putting in the teams that want to attend.

good! make it simple. The best idea is mostly the first! :)

[srdsprinter]

Any chance we could put some thought into how to get the start a little closer. Its been pretty spread out the past couple races. :)

[Humbleridderen]

Any chance we could put some thought into how to get the start a little closer. Its been pretty spread out the past couple races. :)

To me, the missing part is the damage thing.

Le Mans is about endurance. But the game doesn´t think too much of engine problems and other sudden problems. I really would like just a litlle more of this. It would make endurance to be much more realistic.

It´s still only focused on the drivers speed and drivers "endurance"...not the cars..except tyres.

[BenjiMC]

thats really out of my hands though :shrug:

As for starts, when they get closer, peopel start hitting each other. so i had to implement the spacing rule. however for this round as a trial, when the SC is near the last corner, all the drivers could bunch back up for a close start.

[srdsprinter]

This isn't really suggestions, but Round 4 questions:

A) Benji – I’m trying to get word if LOTF will be able to host the race. I will let you know as soon as I hear anything.

B) Question on Cautions – It seems easy for cars to get stuck in the gravel @ Westhill. Will a car being stuck (or requiring a long time to get unstuck) be a condition where a Safety Car would be deployed (as per real life)?
If yes, would a RB4 Push Car be deployed, or should said car tele-pit, or is it game-over?
If no (and said car slowly was getting out of the trap), would that zone be a no-passing zone?

C) LFS Spectator has been used by our team (LOTF) for spotting and strategy during the first several races. Does anyone know if this software is compatible with patch X, or of any alternative solutions for spotting for your teammates?

D) Patch X skin downloading takes longer to join servers for some of us. It shouldn’t be a problem, but from Sector 2, drivers have ~40 seconds before the car will get to the pit.

E) A plea to the FXR drivers: Since the Global Class Balancing, the FXR has become the competitive ~equal of the FZR. I’m glad for this completely, as I love if everyone can compete with a level playing field. The FXR has grip and security of AWD making it friendly to push very hard. It is also very forgiving to some mistakes that mean almost certain disaster for the FZR/XRR.
Some FXR teams will have previously un-seen speed, and I’m happy for them. Please take extra care when racing or lapping others. From the pick-up races I’ve seen with Patch X, FXR drivers have been too willing to use aggressive bumping to get by slower cars. One nudge at the wrong place at Westhill can end the race for FZR or XRR drivers.
I hope the race is clean, and that this is not an issue on Saturday.

[BenjiMC]

This isn't really suggestions, but Round 4 questions:

A) Benji – I’m trying to get word if LOTF will be able to host the race. I will let you know as soon as I hear anything. Thanks a lot, your help is much appreciated

B) Question on Cautions – It seems easy for cars to get stuck in the gravel @ Westhill. Will a car being stuck (or requiring a long time to get unstuck) be a condition where a Safety Car would be deployed (as per real life)?
If yes, would a RB4 Push Car be deployed, or should said car tele-pit, or is it game-over?
If no (and said car slowly was getting out of the trap), would that zone be a no-passing zone? Originally i was thinking of it as being game over but, after watching can am i'd agree to an RB4 push car to be deployed in these situations.

C) LFS Spectator has been used by our team (LOTF) for spotting and strategy during the first several races. Does anyone know if this software is compatible with patch X, or of any alternative solutions for spotting for your teammates?

D) Patch X skin downloading takes longer to join servers for some of us. It shouldn’t be a problem, but from Sector 2, drivers have ~40 seconds before the car will get to the pit. not too many skins will be new since this is round 4 but a lot of new drivers could mean it will take long, if your new then i suggest joining the server about a lap before your stint begins or downloading the higher res skins from the renders thread

E) A plea to the FXR drivers: Since the Global Class Balancing, the FXR has become the competitive ~equal of the FZR. I’m glad for this completely, as I love if everyone can compete with a level playing field. The FXR has grip and security of AWD making it friendly to push very hard. It is also very forgiving to some mistakes that mean almost certain disaster for the FZR/XRR.
Some FXR teams will have previously un-seen speed, and I’m happy for them. Please take extra care when racing or lapping others. From the pick-up races I’ve seen with Patch X, FXR drivers have been too willing to use aggressive bumping to get by slower cars. One nudge at the wrong place at Westhill can end the race for FZR or XRR drivers.
I hope the race is clean, and that this is not an issue on Saturday.

Answers in red

[azlan608]

Suggestion!? Maybe - but at least it´s something to think about!! :scratchch

I´m wondering what happens to a team if they disconnect and re-enter the race! How is the total nummer of laps calculated and is there any type of penalty given to the team!?

I´m wondering and asking because it´s really easy to use the "disconnect" to your advantage. All you have to do is have your team-mate standing by ready to enter the server..... and then pull your cable! BING you´re disconnected but your team-mate jumps in the car.

Sure, it costs a little time but nothing compared to if you just wrecked your car and have to humped back in the pits... or if you realise you are running low on fuel and can´t complete the lap!!

...and remember that the team just saved time NOT doing a pitstop!

Maybe I´m just being paranoid... :shrug:

[r4ptor]

I wouldn't be too worried about it - some may do it a few times without being noticed, but it's difficult to repeat this from race to race without raising suspicion - but a DNF would be in order when getting caught.

It would be very easy to catch anyone cheating, as the disconnect have to be timed to such a degree that it doesn't cost time (compared to an ordinary pit stop).

When disconnected, you or a teammates just (re)joins the server and carry on. All completed laps will be added in the end - however, bare in mind that blue flag notices can't be trusted anymore - there isn't much to do about that without a live tracker.

So even if it for some weird reason was allowed to do a disconnect-driver-swap, it wouldn't be practical. You would be driving and wondering who you can fight and who you have to let pass - it only takes few bad moves before one would be labeled as a blocker/overly aggressive driver... too many disadvantages :razz:


Maybe I´m just being paranoid...

Indeed :)

[[TDRT] Spøgelset]

1. My main point:

Drop the safety car from now on. Change the rules please !!
You might wanna ask the other participating teams what they think about it.


Round 4 showed the safety car used for the entertainment only IMO.

Who got physically hurt during this race ?

Who needed the ambulance ?

Where was the ambulance on the track?

Where there any sudden rain or some parts lying on the racetrack from damaged cars?

There was no real reason to get the satefy car on track. The car once more caused a lot of confusion and race crashes as well. Have a look at Mitch on the last 2 SC periods fx...

You actually get him in trouble twice due to your SC.

Before the discussion should begin marshalls pls. tell me your reasons for deploying the safety car on the different laps.




2.
DeadWolfBones:
"I can marshall if you need someone in a pinch (even though I'm driving)?"
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=26080

Rules:
<SPAN lang=EN-GB>3.1) Do not remain on the server once you have changed over.
Well...didn´t he as a marshall?
Don´t mix these tings. You are racer or marshall. Not both pls.


Anyways:
It was TDRT´s first international S2 race. Great race we enjoyed it a lot - great experience as well. Thanks to all of the organizers. :thumbsup:

Post is made to improve this league and not to object on anything happened round 4.
I repeat:
Before the discussion should begin marshalls pls. post your reasons for deploying the safety car on the different laps. This must be reasons not happened before about 3 hours into the race where the SC was deployed for the very first time. Thank you.

[srdsprinter]

Safety car is an integral part of keeping IGTC somewhat similar to a real sportscar race.

Yes, marshalls should be seperate, but i believe they're working on that.

[BenjiMC]

There was a slow car on track at that point, and since Shift+P isn't allowed this car is a danger is it not? The speed difference of about 100 mph is enough to prove this, and if you hit this car your car would be wrecked too and i'd be pretty pissed myself. However that first safety car period was messed up beause niki spectated when he wasn't supposed to, obviously did not read the rules, which is the main problem. Too many of you guys dont read the rules and it's proved time and time again! If you all did there would be no problems. BTW mitch was the reason for one of those safety car periods. As for marshalls racing too, i'm sorry but as far as i'm concerned there is no problem with it. I drive in the races too at times, they did it in the 24hr race too. That rule of leaving the server is only for drivers not marshalling, because these drivers are using up server slots, whereas the marshall is not:thumbsup:

[BenjiMC]

Safety car is an integral part of keeping IGTC somewhat similar to a real sportscar race.

Yes, marshalls should be seperate, but i believe they're working on that.

I tried but it didn't work, i tried starting the LFSMC but not enough people want to just be marshalls, if i could get 5 amrshalls to stick around for each event it'd be great but i cant, nobody takes interest in this league atm other than participating drivers so thats obviously where the marshalls will come from :shrug:

[DeadWolfBones]

The times that Mitch got hurt by the safety car were (from what I could tell) his own fault.

First safety car (for a heavily damaged TDRT car, iirc) he failed to slow down when approaching the safety car and crashed heavily, despite the huge race control message telling him yellow flag, fall in behind SC.

Second safety car was for his own wreck.

As for me marshalling and driving, yes, I agree that it's not an ideal situation. For now, though, marshalls are needed and I don't mind stepping in to help. I intentionally didn't take any action on incidents involving my car or the cars my car was directly competing against, even though there were several times when I thought action might be necessary.

[BenjiMC]

because of this, i'm going to change the rules so that punishments are dealt when drivers obviously do not read the rules, especially concerning nametags and safety car periods, this is too much of an occuring thing, also this is going to become a team only event although privateers will be allowed still. so DR and Moo will have to do something about their driver line up :shrug:. This will all help towards making the event much more professional and hopefully one day it'll be broadcast.

however some changes are for next season, some for this season

[Leifde]

So we're not allowed to draft people in from other teams? Any particular reason for this? It just seems a bit stupid as IRL no driver sticks to one team for every single series in sports car racing. :shrug:

[BenjiMC]

it'll be to make it a TEAM championship, but it's not for sure. until it's actually writen on the rules page everything i say is just idea's give your opinion on it and i'll tkae note of it.

[[TDRT] Spøgelset]

Good thing we can agree on this marshall stuff...:thumb:

"Safety car is an integral part of keeping IGTC somewhat similar to a real sportscar race."
It would be much more similar without SC as it doesn´t do anything but messing up a endurance race of LFS.

I tell you what in theory a team could do:
Teamcar 1 saves tires and fuel for a long time then at a point telling car 2 to cause a SC period. Car 1 catches up and now is able to do the longest stint, mayby 1 pit less then the others as well.:x
Or:
5 mins before finish as No.2 of the race and 15 secs. behind the race leader I just tell my teamcar 2 to cause a SC period to be able to catch up again and have a actual chance again to win this race... :x
-------------------

"There was a slow car on track at that point, and since Shift+P isn't allowed this car is a danger is it not? The speed difference of about 100 mph is enough to prove this, and if you hit this car your car would be wrecked too and i'd be pretty pissed myself. However that first safety car period was messed up..."
There has been a lot of slow cars before at this stage of the race and thanks god you marshalls didn´t see it ...:scratchch
Pls. listen.There were no noobs driving. And driving as a privateer or not we I´m sure are all able to check on the map as well as we already hundreds of times have been overtaking very slow cars with various cars on various tracks.

The safety car mess starts:

3:08:50secs: Car #23 to discuss if his overtaking under SC was avoidable..
A given penalty would have cost the team a lot. Because of the unnessesary SC stuff.

3:12:50 secs: #13 overtaking before leader has passed start/finish line.
Same here...Confusion caused by safety car rule.

"BTW mitch was the reason for one of those safety car periods."
Rule: 10.3) If you are stuck in the gravel, the safety car will be deployed and you must wait to be pushed out by the push car.
3:40:10 secs. Well, have a look. He isn´t stuck at all and doesn´t need any help by a push car but you wanna fundrive the SC once more ending in a disaster once more as well...cars crash behind the SC and overtake under yellow.

3:48:05 cars crahing behind the SC..

3:48:35secs. Mitch overtakes 2 cars before the leading car has passed the start/finish line.
I hope I understand your rules on this point:
4.1) Drivers must not overtake a car before the pole car has past the line but are allowed to be side by side. Doing so will result in a drive through if seen in races or a 1 place drop if reported after the race. The “green flag” message will be cleared once the pole car passes the start line.

If I´m correct it would have cost him a podium finish ( and given my car one -the reason I was waiting for today to post.)

I really recommend you guys to have a look at the SC stuff once more.
The SC caused, not for the first time, trouble and confusion - that´s all it does. Pls. drop it or at least consider sending a PM to the participating teams and ask them about it.

The best racers got on the podium yesterday but the SC could easily have destroyed all hopes and as well loads of times spent for preparation for this event.

I think I made my point clear and don´t intend to post more about it. :)

Regards
[TDRT] TheDanishRacingTeam

[srdsprinter]

You're right, the safety car could have taken the best cars out of the podium. Just like in real life! Sports car endurance racing is about adapting and having the best strategy that can work with unforseen conditions.

[BenjiMC]

you obviously didn't read the rules as you will see that rule is for race STARTS not restarts i.e. mitch did nothing wrong!

now there would be no confusion if people READ THE RULES. before the safety car is out, theres a big massive sign that says, yellow flag safety car deployed meaning, slow down, now mitch is one driver that doesn't slow down because he is young and impatient, then you have 11 john holme who slows down and puts his pit limiter on when the safety car isn't even where he is, now i'm pretty sure the rules dont tell people to activate pit limiters when the SC is on the other side of the track. Yes the SC is entertaining to a degree and can mess up someones race, BUT it's not JUST for entertainment. mitch got himself out the gravel but i had already called the SC out because i thought that at that speed and where he crashed his car would've been badly damaged and hazardous.

Yes theres a lot of slow cars, but if a marshall doesn't see it then nothing is done, i dont AVOID it and say, oh look mitch could win, lets stick the SC on track! i'd rather DR didn't win since i'm in competition with them myself. but i'm sorry i dont like being accused of things. The SC makes this league different, but without people READING RULES then theres nothing i can do about the confusion, i try my best so can other people try their best, i make the rules as clear as possible, if you dont understand then tell me and i'll make them clearer! the rules are there for READING not to make the series look good, the SC is there to PREVENT accidents but soe people are TOO eager to race and not racing with their heads, they storm around not giving a shit about anything and cause accidents in the SC periods.

If you cant handle an SC then what would you do IRL? SC's are part of racing end of, imo it's good and it's what makes IGTC different to MoE or any other endu series in LFS.

Sorry if i seem a bit nasty with this reply but i'm a bit stressed and aggitated and the lot, i get annoyed when people say things dont work when they do if people would just READ THE RULES! andif i can tell people haven't i'm gonna start issuing penalties to these people because to be honest things like crashing under a safety car shouldn't happen, theres no point driving fast cause your not allowed to overtake! so your going to gain no advantage from it.

[DeadWolfBones]

I agree that penalties should be stricter for those who clearly aren't familiar with the rules. Furthermore, a brief driver's meeting between qual and the race, wherein the marshalls run down a list of pertinent rules, would probably help things quite a bit.

I agree that the SC is a very interesting and fun part of the series, and that drivers need to learn how to handle themselves when the SC is out, rather than complaining that it should be removed. If the final SC period hadn't been for Mitch's own wreck, the fact that it happened when it did could have cost us the win, since we had to pit right then. As it was, Mitch was lagging behind because he'd spun and we were able to duck in to the pits just as the yellow came out, get our tire change/fuel, and get back out before he came around. It was, frankly, a pretty thrilling bit of coming up with strategy under pressure and was probably the highlight of the race for me.

[Humbleridderen]

It´s good that Benji explain afterwards, why the SC is apployed. It helped understand the reason. When you´re just in the midle of racing and you don´t see any worrying things going on, it´s difficult to understand. So thank you for the clarification.

Sc is sometimes good and sometimes bad for one. We had both a situation with SC, where we had just pitted, so we lost on that, and we also had a good situation, where we could take advantage of the SC period. It´s the same thing for all other cars. You have to deal with it and if you can, take advantage of it.

What makes it a bit special here in LFS, is that we don´t have all the debries and cars who can´t run in the middle of the track...and medical care etc. I hope it will come soon from the developers side, so endurance will be much better and realistic in the future. :nod: This features will for sure make the SC totally no doubted.

[jamesrowe]

Sorry if Dynamic Racing did anything wrong as such. We were short of a racer this weekend, everyone seems to be busy Saturdays!!! (including myself).

As such we will be removing Prophet from the DR IGTC team, it is only fair that we draft persons from DR.

We are sorry if anyone thought this was unfair, next race will be just DR ;)

[srdsprinter]

- I'm not sure i follow the team only update to the rules. Team is a term used pretty loosely in LFS, and IRL drivers often sign on for just a race or two with a team. What is off limits now?

- I'm not sure rule #2 needs to be there. We've had a max of 12 entries out of 30 possible into any of the races so far. LOTF has over 10 interested drivers, but as for right now, the team only thing + 2 cars/team sort of limits us.

- Organization looks to continually be improving. Keep up the great work Benji.

[BenjiMC]

well, once again the rules are going to be sorted out for the next event. This first season is very much a WIP, as such expect some things in the rules to change. DR you can keep prophet, i dont think anybody has seen it as unfair tbh. I dont, I just feel maybe making this a team only championship will make it seem a bit more professional.

The 2 car rule is again something to make this more professional but there is nothing stopping these teams entering as privateers. :thumb:

[jamesrowe]

well, once again the rules are going to be sorted out for the next event. This first season is very much a WIP, as such expect some things in the rules to change. DR you can keep prophet, i dont think anybody has seen it as unfair tbh. I dont, I just feel maybe making this a team only championship will make it seem a bit more professional.

The 2 car rule is again something to make this more professional but there is nothing stopping these teams entering as privateers. :thumb:

How can it be pro with cP teams in it? :x:razz: (jk)

[BenjiMC]

i believe when DR joined the standard of competition plumeted and i have since had many requests for the removal of teams such as your own:shrug:

[tomylee]

That is sad to hear, for sure :(
It would be interesting to know the reasons of that.

[Leifde]

It was a joke... James insulted cP so Benji insulted DR. :)

[BenjiMC]

he he. :thumb:

[r4ptor]

:elefant:

[tomylee]

You got me :tilt:

It sounded pretty serious. :nod:

[Lemmet]

I also think the Safety Car is a redicoulous waste of good drivers time, and it ruins the race twice as much as it helps.. I saw NO reason whatso ever to deploy the SC in the Round 4 IGTC race.. i have naturally not seen all the cases of crashes, but as long as the car (or parts from it) is not laying on the track, there should be no SC deployed.
If a car for some reason cant drive at all or its going below the speed of pit limiter (79km/t) i could see it helpfull for a SC to quietly follow the crashed car, only so the racers wont crash up in his rear.. perhaps another colour for SC on minimap so all can see where the crash is and take precautions after that.. i enjoyed the race and the experience, thogh i didnt get a full race.. but leave the Safety Car in pit where it belongs !

[Nobo]

I have been able to see the last race from a marshall's point of view and i think rather then deploying the safety car, which takes to much time untill its deployed, better would be to set the whole course under yellow, so noone is allowed to overtake, and has to look out for accidents. If he crashes into the crashed car its his fault and should maybe (you can discuss that) punished for not obeying the full course yellow or not driving carefull enough under full course yellow.

Even though i think safety car makes the whole race more interesting and more GT racing series like. So i can understand the point to keep the safety car. Trouble always begins when people are not that familiar with the rules.

[DeadWolfBones]

I have been able to see the last race from a marshall's point of view and i think rather then deploying the safety car, which takes to much time untill its deployed, better would be to set the whole course under yellow, so noone is allowed to overtake, and has to look out for accidents. If he crashes into the crashed car its his fault and should maybe (you can discuss that) punished for not obeying the full course yellow or not driving carefull enough under full course yellow.

Even though i think safety car makes the whole race more interesting and more GT racing series like. So i can understand the point to keep the safety car. Trouble always begins when people are not that familiar with the rules.

I think the problem (from the marshals' point of view) with just putting the field under a full-course yellow is that it's very difficult to make sure that no one passes under the yellow. When everyone is lined up nice and tidy behind the SC, it's much easier to spot someone misbehaving. I agree that at least one of the SC periods in the last race was unnecessary, but Benji explained his motivations for it in an earlier post and I understand the reasoning.

I do think that the speed of the safety car needs to be increased, though. It would be great if Scawen could implement a server-side speed limiter setting, but in the meantime we should consider upping the SC speed to something like 70 or 80mph (110-130kph). This will keep the tires from getting so ice cold and make the SC periods shorter. If everyone can behave themselves behind the SC, there should be no problem with having a SC-dictated speed rather than a limiter-dictated one.

[tomylee]

You have just to take a look on the position list and you will see it right away.

[srdsprinter]

Except for the number of cars on different laps, and the changes due to pit stops vs actual passes, etc. It could be difficult.

I agree it would be nice if the pace of the safety car were just 10-15 mph faster to keep from the icey tires. There was a whole nother set of issues though as this was used at south city, and inconsistent safety car pace really caused major incidents.

[DeadWolfBones]

Except for the number of cars on different laps, and the changes due to pit stops vs actual passes, etc. It could be difficult.

I agree it would be nice if the pace of the safety car were just 10-15 mph faster to keep from the icey tires. There was a whole nother set of issues though as this was used at south city, and inconsistent safety car pace really caused major incidents.

Perhaps the limiter vs. no limiter debate could be handled separately for each track. It'd make a lot of sense to use it at South City, not so much at Westhill.

[[TDRT] Spøgelset]

The good stuff:

Not just some, but every team now knows about the rules when to overtake on a SC restart because the rules have been updated/added. :thumbsup:
The problem about beeing marshall AND racer has been taken note of as well.:thumbsup:
We really can see, that you put an effort in this racing series. :thumbsup:

I think the problem (from the marshals' point of view) with just putting the field under a full-course yellow is that it's very difficult to make sure that no one passes under the yellow

A full-course yellow instead of using a SC would IMO solve most of the problems actually.

If marshalls are concerned about the monitoring of overtaking cars during a full-course yellow: The Racer/car/teams will notice and can complain later on. But then ease the penalty given. A 1 position drop would be too hard of a punishement.

Pls. realise that there has been problems with the SC´s for a very long time now. Very good argumentation against using a SC has been posted. The lack of good posts FOR the usage of a SC is so obviouse ( to me at least ).

R4ptor, DK : "The safety car is basically a mobile T1 all over the track."
Posted 22nd April 2007

That´s what it is. I totally agree. I might add this under my signature from now on.

Something else to realise:
A SC at a speed of 80 km/h will have the racer 10 cars behind drive a much much lower speed...

Anyways:
Race with the SC for this season and let´s see how the next rounds will turn out to be. But pls., before planning for the next season - have a look at all these posts once more.

Regards
[TDRT] TheDanishRacingTeam

[srdsprinter]

I'm really of the belief the 'issues' caused by the safety car are shortcomings of our own driving, not vice-versa.

If we are all aware of the rules and drive responsibly there should be no problems. Unfortunatly, we have not done so yet.

SC adds strategy to race planning, when would you pit, how would it effect your strategy. It also pushes people to stay on the lead lap as long as possible to last till a SC.

While it hasn't been needed yet, there are many places for cars to get stuck off track. If someone nudges you onto an embankment on lap 1, do you want your race to be over (i don't, my teamates would be pissed)? If not, you need full course yellow, safety car and a push car.

Safety Car is the only thing that seperates a 4 hour endurance races from a 4 hour hot-lapping contest (currently).

[BenjiMC]

I do see a lot of the reasons behind people not liking the SC, but it's simply what makes this league different from any other series. The SC may be a mobile T1 but theres one thing about T1, you know it's coming, so you slow down for it. The same for the SC, theres a big message on all of your screens that says, "Yeallow Flag Safety Car Deployed", at this point all drivers should slow down to more careful speeds in expectation of the safety car but what actually happens is everybody takes no notie of this message and speeds around the track as they normally would until they hit, and i mean HIT, the back of the SC que, then they complain about it. As stu said, the safety car is what sperates this 4 hour race from 4 hours of hotlapping, the safety car creates an element of strategy in this league a long with initial pace. mI agree there was one moment in the last round where the SC maybe wasn't needed, and i admit i was being too Pro-active at that point. If all of the drivers fully read and understand the rules then there will be no problems, but the problem is many of the drivers do not, thus the ones that do, loose out because of their mistakes.

[[TDRT] Spøgelset]

I'm really of the belief the 'issues' caused by the safety car are shortcomings of our own driving, not vice-versa.

If we are all aware of the rules and drive responsibly there should be no problems. Unfortunatly, we have not done so yet.



If you would have spend some time on watching the replay rather than posting inhere, you´d know that me and my teammate didn´t have trouble at all to safely follow the SC ...

...exept the time where some car all flying from behind crashed us. Due to this happening, we on our next pit had some repairs which cost us "some" time getting the car repaired in the pits as well as from now on had to do stints longer as planned which we knew the tires at normal race speed weren´t capable of......

You write : "If we are all aware of the rules.."

For the upcoming race better get a WHITE number and not a black one. A mashall noticed it at a time and told your team as well...like other teams you didn´t have to stop to change it, right?

As I stated before I´m posting for the next round - this one is to learn.

[[TDRT] Spøgelset]

If all of the drivers fully read and understand the rules then there will be no problems, but the problem is many of the drivers do not, thus the ones that do, loose out because of their mistakes.

My car ( #21 ) didn´t make faults behind the SC at no time. See my post before for what actually happened. My point is that the rules might be good in theory but in the head of a race hard to follow for some racers.

Let´s wait for round 5 to come. :schwitz:

[BenjiMC]

Spøgelset;463052']My car ( #21 ) didn´t make faults behind the SC at no time. See my post before for what actually happened. My point is that the rules might be good in theory but in the head of a race hard to follow for some racers.

Let´s wait for round 5 to come. :schwitz:

A lot of drivers are too anxious when driving at sc periods, this is what causes accidents, yellow flag means be careful. Not speed around at normal race pace until you hit the sc que.

[DeadWolfBones]

Spøgelset;463052']My car ( #21 ) didn´t make faults behind the SC at no time. See my post before for what actually happened. My point is that the rules might be good in theory but in the head of a race hard to follow for some racers.

Let´s wait for round 5 to come. :schwitz:

What you're advocating is that the league cater to the lowest common denominator--drivers who are incapable of understanding the rules and/or following them. I think this is a bad tactic for a league that wants to present itself professionally.

Perhaps a stiff penalty is in order for those who fail to slow down for the SC and cause accidents?

I agree with you, though, that we should finish out this season with roughly the same format it started with (tweaked between rounds for improvement). If by the end of season 1 we don't have a handle on the problems at hand, we can consider alternatives.

[r4ptor]

Spøgelset;462725']
R4ptor, DK : "The safety car is basically a mobile T1 all over the track."
Posted 22nd April 2007

That´s what it is. I totally agree. I might add this under my signature from now on.

Haha :)

I'm really of the belief the 'issues' caused by the safety car are shortcomings of our own driving, not vice-versa.

Same here. I like the idea of having a SC around - the stuff with mobile T1 was said after the race on South City and is therefor not how I see any SC's in a league. You (Spøgelset) have had to be there to see how extreme some of the (lacking) performance was.


Perhaps a stiff penalty is in order for those who fail to slow down for the SC and cause accidents?

I agree.

[Humbleridderen]

What you're advocating is that the league cater to the lowest common denominator--drivers who are incapable of understanding the rules and/or following them. I think this is a bad tactic for a league that wants to present itself professionally.

Perhaps a stiff penalty is in order for those who fail to slow down for the SC and cause accidents?

I agree with you, though, that we should finish out this season with roughly the same format it started with (tweaked between rounds for improvement). If by the end of season 1 we don't have a handle on the problems at hand, we can consider alternatives.

Of course it should be penalized to drive up in the back of the SC field and hitting the cars there!..as it is penalized to do so in all kind of races.

[srdsprinter]

Haha :)



Same here. I like the idea of having a SC around - the stuff with mobile T1 was said after the race on South City and is therefor not how I see any SC's in a league. You (Spøgelset) have had to be there to see how extreme some of the (lacking) performance was.



I agree.
As for pentalties, I believe the standard drive-thru might be a little bit weak for our 4 hour races.

The fear just isn't there of the pentalties. It's a shame the option isn't there, but I believe a 1-lap stop-and-hold pentalty would be a much stronger deterent to breaking the rules.

@ for SC infractions, I've been the victim of a few, and i've spun myself out once (:(). At South City I got NAILED from behind, but sadly it wasn't spotted by a marshall. Playing the rules to the least common denominator is not the answer though.

If we hold each other accountable, and sternly penalize infractions the issues we see should dissolve.

[Droemel]

Penalties should only be allowed to serve under green and NOT when SC is out imo.

I noticed that at the Oval race when I got overtaken by a driver just after SC came out. He received a DT and served it right away under yellow, then he closes up behind me where he was before. :scratchch

My suggestion is to freeze all penalties under yellow so they have to be served under green. Otherwise they don't really make sense to me. A driver who deceides to serve his penalty under yellow should receive another one of the next higher level.


Regards

Droemel

[BenjiMC]

I agree. we will take that on board for the next race. :thumb:

[srdsprinter]

Don't understand the reasoning/need for that change...

But,

If a drive-thru has to be served w/in 3 laps, it could conflict with the new "no DT under SC".

[Droemel]

If a drive-thru has to be served w/in 3 laps, it could conflict with the new "no DT under SC".
That's why I wrote "freeze the penalties" :D

[BenjiMC]

in which case exceptions can be made.

[AstroBoy]

Woo yay for 3 pages of reading.

1)I could marshal and would be more then happy to but conflicting time zones is why i cant do it.

2) Safty Car: God if i could drive in a league just for the SC i would, thats a selling factor for me because a safty car can win or loose a race for drivers, and not using that SC period can cost you the race i would know.

3) Penilties, i agree that under yellow they should be frozen as it doesnt serve is place, i suggest if its possible and there arent more then 1 person, hand it out just as the SC pulls off, and for DT as well they can make or break a race and is just a standard penilty, it happens in V8 Supercars all the time.

4) I dont have a 4 yet unless something else is sparked :P I hope it does get broadcasted id love to watch the action and im a follower of the series, now wheres my userbar :P

[DeadWolfBones]

Hey, thanks for the suggestions!

We're working on a broadcasting deal with ASR TV (same guys who do BOTT) and it should be in place before the next (final) race at AS North. :thumbsup:

[srdsprinter]

I can't wait for season two... :)

This has already grown into an amazing series. Some reworking of some rules and this will be a premier 4-hour series.

Anyway, ***perhaps*** a suggestion could be made for 1 double distance race per year. It could be neat to have a signature race.

Also, I love that this is one of the few series that has the balls to put the GTRs on the Fern Bay Track. As our GTR's are a sort of hybrid GT3-GT2, they don't need to spend all their time on sanitized smooth high-speed circuits (ALMS runs 600+HP prototypes around Mosport - a track that is similarly challenging).

[KSheppard]

:thumb:

[nmanley]

Suggestions:

<Officials shall not be on a public voice chat (ventrilo, teamspeak, etc) with any race participants or teams.

<In race chatting thru LFS chat should be allowed with restrictions such as "caution#15 damaged moving to pits"
In other words no BS chatting. It's already been proven that you cannot see in car notices if there is a yellow or blue flag.

[banshee56]

I mentioned in the Round 8 Objections thread that the use of RCMs (Race Control Messages) that show up across the middle of the screen may be better than regular chat messages. They still show up if someone has used Shift-F to clear the screen of messages.

Anyway, I've done the scripting work in the attached ZIP. Included is an image of how to set it up in game. Only admins can use it, since it is RCMs.

Unzip to a folder of your choice, and then move the "XXXXX.lfs" files to your data\script folder.

Cheers.

[nmanley]

That sounds good. :thumb:

[alland44]

The IGTC forum (This forum) is a big, big mess. You can`t find the information you need, if you do not come here, on a daily basis.

You definately need to have a sticky, which contains ALL the important information, for the comming race. It is not my job, to search the forum, to find out that you have changed the starting time of the next race.

Furthermore - Important news, should be messaged or mailed to the teamleaders of the participating teams.

I`m also rather upset with the way you punish a wrong name or an incorrect skin, and let people do so many critisable manouvers, while you punish a wrong sign.

It is years ago, since Ilast participated in a race, where blueflag lappers had so little knowledge of how to pass correctly :(

My car was one of the slowest and I got a lot of those flags. So use your time making the race better, and let the unimportant things lay, untill the race is over. Then you can punish people for not using the rigth skin or nametag.

So :

Easy access to the important information.

Race and qalify starts at the announced time.

Raceadmins goes after the racers, which are not following the racerules, which directly influences on the ongoing race, and do not use to much time with signs and skins.

If you want to use safetycars, then you gotta let the spoiled cars stay on track, and have people moving them "outta bounce" That`s realistic :) If you call a smashed or "on the roof laying car" in as spectator, then loose the safetycar.

And announce clearly, if you are going to use specially race rules. Here I am thinking of the bumperrace on the oval.

Finally. This is not a game. This is the worlds best race simulator. Let`s keep it as that, so we don`t end up with a citydriving alike event, when this simulator was build for racing :)

EDIT :
Ad1 - Not to many fancy rules :)

[banshee56]

A suggestion about penalties after the race. Please forgive me if it has been suggested before, as my search button on my keyboard is broken and I'm too lazy to look for the one on the forums. :shrug:

If there is a penalty that would incur a DT during a race, then the equivalent should be assessed post-race, in the form of a time penalty equal to the time it takes a GTR to go from pit entrance line to pit exit line (the boundaries of the pit lane, not the entrance or exit lanes) with pit limiter on, plus 5 seconds to account for decel/accel.

[srdsprinter]

For The Record & For What Its Worth-

This was mainly written pre-explanation. As such, we understand the situation and will move on; however, it does bear repeating.

It is known that the goal of the IGTC is to acurately re-create realistic sports-car racing through LFS. As such, we find the SC period in round 8 to be quite against this mantra.

The incident involving the Safety Car was questionable with regards to the rules:

1) The SC will be deployed by race control if a car is heavily damaged and is a danger to other cars on track, is stranded in the gravel, or is flipped somewhere on the course. The SC will remain on track for a minimum of two (2) laps.

As the car had a blown tire, it was not heavily damaged. The car was never out of control, never leaving the track. The lap he turned was a 2:07, ~10% off the pace of the average lap time, including the entrance to the pit lane. Obviously this was unknown to Benji, and we cannot fault him for that.

There are almost NO examples of a Safety Car being thrown for flat tires in real life. Flat tires are a part of racing, as is dealing with it. I cannot recall a single instance where a non-delaminated tire has warranted a SC/full course caution.

Examples where Safety Car Periods/Full Course Yellow are warranted included, but are not limited to, cars trapped in precarious places and extensively damaged vehicles (i.e. flipped). In the instance where one car ran out of gas, we agree he was in a safe spot. For the flipped car instance, we believe this would have been an acceptable, reasonable situation where a SC would be called.

The questionable aspects of the SC call are numerous:
-The team with the flat is the same as the admin of the series
-The team drivers were in direct voice contact with the admins, marshalls, and SC driver
-The SC took off before the Yellow Flag message had even been sent.

These discrepencies are independant of the fact that the SC period seriously hindered our chances of keeping 2nd place in the team championship directly and indirectly. Yes, I think we are warranted in being a little perturbed in this situation, while we understand that the circumstances may or may not have play integral parts to the SC being called.

Two things have to be addressed in the future for the series to maintain integrity:
-The defination of what consititutes a Safety Car warranting event.
-The seperation between drivers and teams from marshalls and administration.

We very much appreciate the honesty of Benji admitting the SC was not rightfully called. As one of only 2 teams to compete in every event this season, we feel privileged to have been with this series from the begining, and we look forward to growing with it in the future. :thumbsup:

Thanks,
|||Stu
|||Land of the Free Racing

[DeadWolfBones]

You're on target with most of that, and I appreciate your understanding/honesty. :thumbsup:

[banshee56]

I feel that admins can race, as long as their involvement is devoid of in-race administration. I am a primary admin of LOTA, and I race. I've been the subject of protests (because of a bonehead move), during which I only responded and had no bearing on the outcome of said protest. What I do from an admin role relative to protests on me is to discuss the protest circumstances and how the rules may need adjusted, but only after the protest is processed and any penalties are assessed. There is only one case in which I assessed penalties during a race in which I am a series admin, and that was in the SimFIA DTM series, where I had already fallen out of the race.

I agree that racers should not be on the same VOIP channel, and that the race stewards should be the only people on a password secured channel.

[srdsprinter]

I agree in your circumstance Basnhee. However, the IGTC has dynamic challenges of Safety Cars, evolving race strategy and in-race pentalty accesment, and I feel these are too challenging to allow admining and driving concurrently while maintaining the level of integrity.

Nothing against anyone in the position of the behind-the-scenes stuff, I just believe as long as these duties are kept independant of the race, we all will benefit equally.

[AppiePils]

I partly disagree. I just think its 2 ways:
1. No teams are allowed on the same channel
2. All teams are allowed on the same channel. In this case the team leaders will be muted, to prevent unnecessary discussions. This way does give each team the opportunity to have real time info.

Note (1) that discussions are ought to be dealt with afterwards through a clearly defined procedure for protests (I've PM-ed DWB a suggestion for that on AIM).
Note (2) the key of this discussion is no teams or all teams, not some teams.

[banshee56]

I agree in your circumstance Basnhee. However, the IGTC has dynamic challenges of Safety Cars, evolving race strategy and in-race pentalty accesment, and I feel these are too challenging to allow admining and driving concurrently while maintaining the level of integrity.

Nothing against anyone in the position of the behind-the-scenes stuff, I just believe as long as these duties are kept independant of the race, we all will benefit equally.

Indeed, which is what I was saying that admins should be precluded from during-race duties. :thumb:

I'm not convinced that any race team people should be on a channel that includes series admins, including going there to ask about a violation, or to make a complaint. I think those things can be done via IRC. The VOIP channel with the admins should never be visited by team members (even if they are series admins that happen to not be racing at that moment) from the time the qualifying starts to the time that the final car has crossed the line. If the race chatting thing is controlled and people adhere to the rule, as I saw for the vast majority of the race on Saturday, then the admins can communicate race-wide info via regular text messages, and team-only messages via RCMs w/usernames.

EDIT: These protests also need to be handled outside the general forum, where anyone can post. Only the admins should be discussing the protests. What should be in these threads are the original complaint and the response (which can be communicated to the admins via PM), and the admin's decision. Ideally, you guys need to get a forum of your own where you can control permissions. ProBoards offers a free forum that you can do that with. LFS Forums just don't offer enough organizational control to keep things where they should be.

[DeadWolfBones]

Indeed, which is what I was saying that admins should be precluded from during-race duties. :thumb:

I'm not convinced that any race team people should be on a channel that includes series admins, including going there to ask about a violation, or to make a complaint. I think those things can be done via IRC. The VOIP channel with the admins should never be visited by team members (even if they are series admins that happen to not be racing at that moment) from the time the qualifying starts to the time that the final car has crossed the line. If the race chatting thing is controlled and people adhere to the rule, as I saw for the vast majority of the race on Saturday, then the admins can communicate race-wide info via regular text messages, and team-only messages via RCMs w/usernames.

Appie's suggestion was to have a representative from each team in the admin channel but muted, so that everyone has equal access to the information the marshals have (i.e., total transparency). I don't have a problem with this in theory, though maybe it'd be good for the admins to also have a private channel where they can discuss behind closed doors, as it were.

[rcpilot]

You basically had big brother watching you on the track too with how many eyes were on the track. It wasn't just our team that was getting fast reponses by the admins. (3 or 4 eyes spectating the track and then a bunch of people on race spectator/in the race.) If there was an off or a blowout for anyone, someone knew about it pretty damn quick. IMO, the safety car was a weird call too and I kind of expected this discussion to be happening now when it was made, but my team had nothing to do with the call itself.

[DeadWolfBones]

EDIT: These protests also need to be handled outside the general forum, where anyone can post. Only the admins should be discussing the protests. What should be in these threads are the original complaint and the response (which can be communicated to the admins via PM), and the admin's decision. Ideally, you guys need to get a forum of your own where you can control permissions. ProBoards offers a free forum that you can do that with. LFS Forums just don't offer enough organizational control to keep things where they should be.

Agree with this entirely... LOTA's system seems quite effective to me.

[srdsprinter]

Agree with this entirely... LOTA's system seems quite effective to me.
TBH, i don't see the problem with this. With disconnects and LL pentalties, the final standings are often far from the posted LFS order.

If everyone is not able to view the discussion, confusion will abound. Also people will not concretely learn from others mistakes, i.e. names, no talking, pit exit cutting, etc.

Add-in that every team has 2-6 drivers per car, there's a lot of information that needs to be disceminated down the chain.

[DeadWolfBones]

The results of the protests would be posted publicly but would not be open for debate. It'd just cut out the endless bickering between the time the protest is posted and the time it's resolved.

This would go hand in hand with the new procedure for actually deciding protests and the proposed new tribunal of marshals (possibly drawn from competing teams).

[banshee56]

TBH, i don't see the problem with this. With disconnects and LL pentalties, the final standings are often far from the posted LFS order.

If everyone is not able to view the discussion, confusion will abound. Also people will not concretely learn from others mistakes, i.e. names, no talking, pit exit cutting, etc.

Add-in that every team has 2-6 drivers per car, there's a lot of information that needs to be disceminated down the chain.

That's why you need one person to be the liason from each team to the admins. It should be the team leader (relative to IGTC) that should originate or respond to protests, and it is his/her responsibility to get all the information required to do so. The admins need a place to effectively talk about the situation thoroughly and then respond with an decision/explanation. It's not a democracy, and admins decisions should not be potentially tarnished or affected by a continuing discussion where arguments for or against a protest are based on previous posts. It's a never ending cycle of opinions, and in the end, the admins are responsible for writing, interpreting, and enforcing the rules, right or wrong.

Obviously, if a situation arises that exposes a loophole or inconsistency in the rules, the admins must decide according to the rules as stated prior to the incident, and adjust afterward if needed. Conversely, it is the racers' and team leaders' responsibility to know the rules and said loopholes, and their right to be able to initiate or defend a protest based on what rule they are being governed by as they are written.

[Humbleridderen]

I just want to mention one thing, which fell into my mind concerning communication between admins and drivers.

I don´t think, this has much influence on a endurance or the result of this race, but I would like it to be sorted out for the future.

If a teammember is in direct communication with an admin under a yellow flag period, he can hear exactly when it´s going to be green and be much more ready than others. This can be misused and I think, it should be hindered somehow. Under yellow flag, there should be no others on the channel the admins are using. Problem is that there can be used parallel voice or text chatting programs. :scratchch

[rcpilot]

I just want to mention one thing, which fell into my mind concerning communication between admins and drivers.

I don´t think, this has much influence on a endurance or the result of this race, but I would like it to be sorted out for the future.

If a teammember is in direct communication with an admin under a yellow flag period, he can hear exactly when it´s going to be green and be much more ready than others. This can be misused and I think, it should be hindered somehow. Under yellow flag, there should be no others on the channel the admins are using. Problem is that there can be used parallel voice or text chatting programs. :scratchch
The admin doesn't mention the green flag on voice chat, besides there being a couple second delay. (No reason to mention it, it's just whenever the admin throws it.) Plus the admins were only in the same channel as the race team for the first hour or something, which was nice when they left considering there was a lot of random banter on the race channel. :P Dunno why it wasn't split up from the start this time, guess just poor organization (first drivers sitting in the main channel when the race started so everyone ended up on the main channel from then on).

[BenjiMC]

The only person that knows when it's going to be green is me. For the record, there is a separate admin channel that we use and i did use toward the end of that race. I used the CoRe channel for the first hour or so because Appie was new to IGTC marshaling and did not have the password.

[srdsprinter]

It's not a Democracy.
Nowhere have it been claimed as such. It's an open forum, where voices can be heard and the admins can make there decisions.

admins decisions should not be potentially tarnished or affected by a continuing discussion where arguments for or against a protest are based on previous posts.
The admins have admitted that they are in fact human, and prone to the occassional error. There is no danger in having open conversation, and its absolutely baffling to quel open speech in order to protect the untarnished view of any person.

[Gil07]

I'd like to see a IRC channel be available for during-race questions or complaints.

[banshee56]

It's an open forum, where voices can be heard and the admins can make there decisions. That statement reflects the basic foundations of democracy. And because opinions by the masses are often affected by the desire for personal gain, I don't see why the admins' decision making process needs to be carried out in an environment that can affect what needs to be and unbiased interpretation and enforcement of the rules.



The admins have admitted that they are in fact human, and prone to the occasional error. There is no danger in having open conversation, and its absolutely baffling to quell open speech in order to protect the untarnished view of any person. I agree that open conversation is good, because more often than not, positive advancement of rules are the result. However, when it comes to admins discussing an incident relative to rules as they were in effect prior to that incident, they need to be able to decide based on the facts of the incident, not by the continually changing interpretation of the incident. Especially when those continually changing opinions are basically reactions to opinions that they may not agree with.

[DeadWolfBones]

I'd like to see a IRC channel be available for during-race questions or complaints.

This is a good idea that we'll be looking to implement.

[srdsprinter]

That statement reflects the basic foundations of democracy.
Not exactly. The Fundamental Feature of democracy are competitive elections. The Basic foundations of Democracy is where everyone has a vote. A True Basic Democracy is far different than a Representative Democracy, which is similar to what is in place now. Everyone can speak, and the Admins make their decisions.


I agree that open conversation is good, because more often than not, positive advancement of rules are the result....
The rest of your post is you trying to push LOTA strategy onto the IGTC, and has little to do with the suggestion at hand.

Admins are as error-prone as the rest of us. They are no better, no worse, but they are the one's chosen to make the decisions. Holding them and their decisions on a pedastel just because they are admins is foolish.

And again, fundamentally you are promoting the restrictions of free speech in attempts to raise admins above the humans that they are.

- Without open forums admins can make mistakes, poor decisions, corupt decisions without the chance retribution or fairness to the afflicted parties. -

[banshee56]

Not in the least. The Fundamental Feature of democracy are competitive elections. The Basic foundations of Democracy is where everyone has a vote. A True Basic Democracy is far different than a Representative Democracy, which is similar to what is in place now. Everyone can speak, and the Admins make their decisions.Yeah, sure, everyone can speak in a democracy. But we're really not talking about a democratic situation in which everyone has a vote on how laws are created to govern the individuals at large. Rather, this is a judicial scenario in which those that argue the merits or demerits of a violation of rules are the ones directly involved, along with those charged with making the ultimate decision.
In the case of the Round 8 protests that are being currently considered, there are opinions from drivers/teams that won't be directly affected by the outcome. By signing up to compete, you've agreed that the admins are the only people that are charged with making decisions on protests.


The rest of your post is you trying to push LOTA strategy onto the IGTC, and has little to do with the suggestion at hand.

Admins are as error-prone as the rest of us. They are no better, no worse, but they are the one's chosen to make the decisions. Holding them and their decisions on a pedastel just because they are admins is foolish.

And again, fundamentally you are promoting the restrictions of free speech in attempts to raise admins above the humans that they are.

- Without open forums admins can make mistakes, poor decisions, corupt decisions without the chance retribution or fairness to the afflicted parties. -My opinions have nothing to do with LOTA. In fact, they have everything to do with how protests were handled by the World Karting Association (http://www.worldkarting.com) (WKA) at regional events, in which I was involved as a Race Director in 2000-2003. For the record, the LOTA method of processing protests is a close parallel with WKA's method. With it's ability to facilitate and govern seven different racing series and it's 10,000+ membership, I would say that their methods are a sound basis for racing regulations, simulated or real life.

Anyway, I know admins are human, which is why there is a need for several people on a competition committee that processes protests. And that committee needs to be made up of competitors on a revolving basis, as we did in WKA.

I am not promoting the restriction of free speech when it comes to the formulation of rules. What I am suggesting is that we hold to the ideal that people can be judged by a select group of peers, and have the right to argue their side of a dispute, void of outside influences...i.e. those not directly involved in the protest.

[DeadWolfBones]

Admins are as error-prone as the rest of us. They are no better, no worse, but they are the one's chosen to make the decisions. Holding them and their decisions on a pedastel just because they are admins is foolish.

And again, fundamentally you are promoting the restrictions of free speech in attempts to raise admins above the humans that they are.

That's not what it is at all. It's simply acknowledging that they are the humans who are in charge. You acknowledge as much when you sign up for the league, and you agree to abide by their decisions. As has been stated, we are looking into ways to develop a more fair protest review board for the next season, but that review board will in all likelihood be private (with their decisions and reasoning posted publicly).

I challenge you to show me one professional racing series in which the drivers/teams can directly lobby the organizers during their decision-making process.

[KSheppard]

would it not be bennificial to open 1 thread per issue per race (ya there could be a lotta threads), post one by the admin, as the stated offence was presented to them, then a discussion on the issue - with a defined close time. admins would be banned from taking part in the discussion. discussion reaches it's close time and the admin can then (behind closed doors) make their decision and post a final entry with their ruling - with no more discussions to be had.

[srdsprinter]

I challenge you to find a professional racing series in which the active drivers/teams are the marshalls/admins.

Your failing to include the point that with the exception of Kaw, all admins/marshalls are current or once were drivers involved with the series. As such, they are as motivated/driven as anyone-else.

If there is nothing for them to be fearfull of, why hide behind the cloak of admin.

FTR, this season, decisions that have been clearly thought out and rendered have had little to no noticible reprecussion.

I challenge you to show me one professional racing series in which the drivers/teams can directly lobby the organizers during their decision-making process.

[DeadWolfBones]

would it not be bennificial to open 1 thread per issue per race (ya there could be a lotta threads), post one by the admin, as the stated offence was presented to them, then a discussion on the issue - with a defined close time. admins would be banned from taking part in the discussion. discussion reaches it's close time and the admin can then (behind closed doors) make their decision and post a final entry with their ruling - with no more discussions to be had.

That's an interesting idea. We'll consider it!

[DeadWolfBones]

I challenge you to find a professional racing series in which the active drivers/teams are the marshalls/admins.

Your failing to include the point that with the exception of Kaw, all admins/marshalls are current or once were drivers involved with the series. As such, they are as motivated/driven as anyone-else.

If there is nothing for them to be fearfull of, why hide behind the cloak of admin.

FTR, this season, decisions that have been clearly thought out and rendered have had little to no noticible reprecussion.

Hence our drive to have the protest board next season be staffed either by a) a representative from each team, b) a rotating panel of team representatives randomly drawn for each event, c) a panel of third party observers.

We agree that this season's situation was not optimal, however, all decisions this season have been made in good faith and without any known bias.

There's no "hiding behind the cloak." The motivation is for professionalism and expediency. As you know, the protest discussions have dragged on for up to a week in this forum this season, which makes finalizing results and standings difficult and makes things look a bit amateur. Furthermore, back and forth bickering is messy and rarely accomplishes anything when the decisions are made according to existing rules.

[banshee56]

I challenge you to show me one professional racing series in which the drivers/teams can directly lobby the organizers during their decision-making process.

I mentioned the WKA and it's methods of handling protests. I would like to expand on that method, if I may for informational purposes.

When a driver feels like they have been negatively affected by the actions of another driver/team, they must:

1) Submit the proper information within a time limit

2) Race Officials notify the protested driver of the complaint, to which they have an explicit amount of time to respond.

3) Unless the complaint affects the starting line-up of an upcoming race, all protests are handled after all racing is complete. At that time, the drivers are called into conference with the Race Director (and/or series director if available), the scorers, tech officials, and track stewards. All of these officials are required to know the rules regarding both the protest procedure and the rules of racing, per how the governing body describes.

4) Each party is allowed to pose regulated (time limited and only one party speaking at any given time) explanations and rebuttals of the protest.

5) Race/Series officials take all the information and discuss it in private relative to the rules/penalties that cover that situation. Once a decision is made, it is explained to the affected parties, without the possibility of those parties to continue to argue the protest.

6) An appeal process was in place for those not agreeing with the decision, but it had to be made to the national Competition Committee, and it was a very formal situation. It often resulted in further penalties if found guilty during the appeal process.

I know we don't have an appeal process in IGTC, and I really don't think the admins are looking to add this.

Now, I know there are those that will argue that karting is not a professional racing series, but with over 10,000 active members and 120+ sanctioned tracks competing in a multi-million dollar industry, you had better believe they absolutely must have their act straight.

[srdsprinter]

-In LOTA you seem to knock out 3,4,&6.
-As long as ANY marshall/admin is affliated with a team in LFS, this system is flawed.
-The proposed system has No substantial improvements over the system currently in place.

-The appeal system is unneeded, as the community sees any misdirections or errors and indicate to the admins what they see.

[srdsprinter]

And since we're all about challenges:

Where has the current system failed?

[banshee56]

-In LOTA you seem to knock out 3,4,&6.
-As long as ANY marshall/admin is affliated with a team in LFS, this system is flawed.
-The proposed system has No substantial improvements over the system currently in place.

-The appeal system is unneeded, as the community sees any misdirections or errors and indicate to the admins what they see.

I agree that the appeal system is not needed. Regarding LOTA, #3 (I agree) is missing and is perhaps needed, both in LOTA and IGTC. However, #4 is in place in that each party has the opportunity to argue for (in the form of protest submittal) or against (in the form of responding) the protest.

And since we're all about challenges:

Where has the current system failed?
For one thing, the original protests against car 23 in Round 8 were by someone that was not negatively affected by the alleged violation, especially since the alleged violations did not result in any advantage whatsoever by the alleged violator. Based on that alone, those protests should have never been considered.

[R.Kolz]

And since we're all about challenges:

Where has the current system failed?

For me a system has failed whenever sb. claims that some rules of an existing ruleset are guidelines more then rules.

Sidenote :
I can agree on about everything you´ve posted-not only-inhere so far. :thumb:

Regards [TDRT] R.Kolz

[srdsprinter]

For one thing, the original protests against car 23 in Round 8 were by someone that was not negatively affected by the alleged violation, especially since the alleged violations did not result in any advantage whatsoever by the alleged violator. Based on that alone, those protests should have never been considered.
If you feel you have been wronged.

Seeing a team do something that, in their opinion, violated a rule, (happening to be the administration's team) is being wronged.

The protest was lodged to ensure that Someone was indeed not letting the madmen run the asylum, and that there was a level of accountability.

In your proposed system, no-one would be able to publicly see to this check-and-balance, if it was even allowed at all.

[R.Kolz]

If you feel you have been wronged.

Seeing a team do something that, in their opinion, violated a rule, (happening to be the administration's team) is being wronged.

The protest was lodged to ensure that Someone was indeed not letting the madmen run the asylum, and that there was a level of accountability.

In your proposed system, no-one would be able to publicly see to this check-and-balance, if it was even allowed at all.

Absolutely right.

Additionally:


[/quote] Originally Posted by DeadWolfBones:
"For one thing, the original protests against car 23 in Round 8 were by someone that was not negatively affected by the alleged violation, especially since the alleged violations did not result in any advantage whatsoever by the alleged violator. Based on that alone, those protests should have never been considered.[/quote]

What´s that about now? As teamchief of TDRT i strongly believe that´s a part of my job.

We still had a finishing car, remember therefore it´s my right to post an objection as I felt my team was negatively affected by the alleged violation.

[srdsprinter]

I agree that the appeal system is not needed. Regarding LOTA, #3 (I agree) is missing and is perhaps needed, both in LOTA and IGTC. However, #4 is in place in that each party has the opportunity to argue for (in the form of protest submittal) or against (in the form of responding) the protest.


We DISAGREE if you believe that appeals are not needed! (in YOUR system)
When a decision rendered has nothing to do with the protest, or the car involved in the protest, and there is no public forum for viewing, discussion, righting, then your system fails. If nothing else than to post something more than a half-assed cop-out of a "decision"!

#4 is NOT present in your system, as there is NO discussion, NO rebuttals, Nothing past your initial protest and rebuttal. No Further grounds of input AT ALL!

Why are you pressing this onto a great series which you have only just joined???

There is NOTHING wrong with the system in place, and there are HUGE Gaping oversights and flaws with the system you use...

NAME ONE INSTANCE where the admins screwed up! I can't.

[DeadWolfBones]

We DISAGREE if you believe that appeals are not needed!
When a decision rendered has nothing to do with the protest, or the car involved in the protest, and there is no public forum for viewing, discussion, righting, then your system fails. If nothing else than to post something more than a half-assed cop-out of a "decision"!

#4 is NOT present in your system, as there is NO discussion, NO rebuttals, Nothing past your initial protest and rebuttal. No Further grounds of input AT ALL!

Why are you pressing this onto a great series which you have only just joined???

There is Nothing wrong with the system in place, and there are HUGE Gaping oversights and flaws with the system you use...

Take a breath, Stu. As a member of the league, Banshee has the right to post his opinion as much as you do. Furthermore, there are things wrong with the current system, as I posted above. Your ideas of "huge gaping oversights and flaws" in the system above are either your paranoia over corruption, backroom dealing, and unintentional bias (which, as far as I know, haven't played into the equation yet) or the fear of simple mistakes in judgment (which happen in all walks of life, and in plenty of real life leagues--there's never going to be a case when everyone is happy over a protest decision). In the end, you have to have faith in the admins. If you can't trust the league's administration, there is no authority in the series and there's, in a sense, no series to speak of.

ETA: In any future protest system we devise, both the offender and the offended will have a chance to state their case to the admins. The only difference is that the case won't be open for the argument of others.

[banshee56]

We still had a finishing car, remember therefore it´s my right to post an objection as I felt my team was negatively affected by the alleged violation.

How can your team have been negatively affected by someone not having a pit limiter on during the last sector, but then had it on at the time of green flag? He gained absolutely no advantage over the TDRT or any other team by doing that.

[DeadWolfBones]

And since we're all about challenges:

Where has the current system failed?

Not sure if you mean the protest system or the admin system in general, so I'll go for the broader view:

1. Benji and I don't have a well-organized system for discussing and evaluating protests. Most decisions, while well-considered, are done on an individual basis by one of us and then run by the other.

2. The discussion threads for protests are filled with a lot of irrelevant bickering that often obscures the facts of the case. It would be much better if the system were set up to allow both sides to present their case in a pair of well thought-out statements and then leave it to the admins to decide the result.

3. The current in-race admin system is quite slapdash and prone to snap judgments that may be in error because they're made so quickly. In the future we need to have a dedicated team of track marshals (i.e., people who watch the track for accidents) as well as a couple or three individuals who discuss and determine the appropriate course of action, whether it be penalties or a SC.

I don't think the current protest system has produced poor results in terms of fair judgments, but I do think that it's messy and unwieldy and unnecessarily cluttered with the opinions of those who are not involved in the incidents being discussed.

Since at this point we hopefully have the rules more firmly nailed down, I feel it's fair to move to a more streamlined and professional approach to protest resolution.

[KSheppard]

RE:section D.4.3 - http://www.lfsforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=41460&d=1193082640

if a team files an objection that is upon staff review found to be a non-issue (not warranting a penalty to the accused) then the filing team is assesed the penalty that would have been handed out to the offender....:schwitz:did ya follow that?

I'd bet people would be a lot more careful in filing reports :)

[DeadWolfBones]

RE:section D.4.3 - http://www.lfsforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=41460&d=1193082640

if a team files an objection that is upon staff review found to be a non-issue (not warranting a penalty to the accused) then the filing team is assesed the penalty that would have been handed out to the offender....:schwitz:did ya follow that?

I'd bet people would be a lot more careful in filing reports :)

Indeed. We'll also look into that. :thumbsup:

[srdsprinter]

Your ideas of "huge gaping oversights and flaws" in the system above are either your paranoia over corruption, backroom dealing, and unintentional bias (which, as far as I know, haven't played into the equation yet) or the fear of simple mistakes in judgment (which happen in all walks of life, and in plenty of real life leagues--there's never going to be a case when everyone is happy over a protest decision). In the end, you have to have faith in the admins.
Why must you have unquestionable blind faith in an fallable human?

Its intrinsic to equity to have questionable doubt. Especially if the human is tied to a team inside the series.

I haven't seen more than possibly two protests where any party was left blatantly unsatisfied this season.

The fact remains, with the current system, no wrong decisions have gone unseen. In the proposed system, decisions and the process behind them can go unseen by the public.

[banshee56]

We DISAGREE if you believe that appeals are not needed! (in YOUR system)
When a decision rendered has nothing to do with the protest, or the car involved in the protest, and there is no public forum for viewing, discussion, righting, then your system fails. If nothing else than to post something more than a half-assed cop-out of a "decision"!Umm...you stated that an appeals system is unneeded. It's clear to me that you are continuing to argue a protest from another league that didn't go your way, and now you are doing so on the forums of this league. Simply put, if you don't like the way something is being done, volunteer to help instead of excessively arguing.

#4 is NOT present in your system, as there is NO discussion, NO rebuttals, Nothing past your initial protest and rebuttal. No Further grounds of input AT ALL!Perhaps and expansion of the rebuttal system is needed. We'll consider it.


Why are you pressing this onto a great series which you have only just joined???I am merely stating an opinion based on my racing experience, both in real life (12 years as a karting competitor and 3 as a Race Director) and in simulation (3-1/2 years in LFS alone, and 8 different leagues). I have the same right as you to voice my opinion in a series in which I've competed, regardless of whether I have competed in less events that you.


There is NOTHING wrong with the system in place, and there are HUGE Gaping oversights and flaws with the system you use... As far as I can tell, your opinion of "...gaping oversights and flaws with the system [LOTA] uses..." stems from the fact that you seem to want to argue endlessly when a protest doesn't go your way. I understand that no system is perfect, LOTA or IGTC, but to date, I have yet to see any suggestions regarding the LOTA protest method, only complaints when things don't go your way.

My apologies to the IGTC admins. I won't add to this discussion/argument that seems to be happening directly with Stu any further, as I feel that Stu is using this opportunity to argue over a decision in a different series that didn't go his way, and that does not add anything positively to the advancement of IGTC. Good luck to you guys in your efforts to implement a protest system that eliminates protests littered with bickering like we've continued here.


if a team files an objection that is upon staff review found to be a non-issue (not warranting a penalty to the accused) then the filing team is assesed the penalty that would have been handed out to the offender....did ya follow that?
This is actually a good idea. A modified version of this is done in many local racing series in real life, where the protesting team must submit a significant monetary application fee, and if the protest is upheld, they get it back. If not, they lose that money, which is a huge factor in considering whether to protest. You must be sure that you are in the right before you submit a protest, or you risk a loss of some sort. Obviously, the money portion can't be implemented, but how about risking a standard point deduction if your protest is denied? Hmmm....professional football in the US does the same thing with Coache's Challenges, in that they risk losing a highly valuable time-out if their challenge is denied.

[KSheppard]

....the money portion can't be implemented, but how about risking a standard point deduction if your protest is denied? ....

Ya that's what I was gettin at...thanks m8 :D

[DeadWolfBones]

Why must you have unquestionable blind faith in an fallable human?

Its intrinsic to equity to have questionable doubt. Especially if the human is tied to a team inside the series.

No one's asking for blind faith. I'm only asking for the amount of faith/respect that any competitor should have for the admins in any series/league in any sport.

As has been stated, we are working to create an admin team that doesn't also drive and is not tied to the teams in the league.

I haven't seen more than possibly two protests where any party was left blatantly unsatisfied this season.

The fact remains, with the current system, no wrong decisions have gone unseen. In the proposed system, decisions and the process behind them can go unseen by the public.

I've already stated my case here. You can read it above. But I'll note that the decisions and justifications would be made public once a decision has been reached, and that both the offender and offended would be involved in the decision-making process.

[srdsprinter]

Umm...you stated that an appeals system is unneeded. It's clear to me that you are continuing to argue a protest from another league that didn't go your way, and now you are doing so on the forums of this league. Simply put, if you don't like the way something is being done, volunteer to help instead of excessively arguing.

Perhaps and expansion of the rebuttal system is needed. We'll consider it.

I am merely stating an opinion based on my racing experience, both in real life (12 years as a karting competitor and 3 as a Race Director) and in simulation (3-1/2 years in LFS alone, and 8 different leagues). I have the same right as you to voice my opinion in a series in which I've competed, regardless of whether I have competed in less events that you.

As far as I can tell, your opinion of "...gaping oversights and flaws with the system [lota] uses..." stems from the fact that you seem to want to argue endlessly when a protest doesn't go your way. I understand that no system is perfect, LOTA or IGTC, but to date, I have yet to see any suggestions regarding the LOTA protest method, only complaints when things don't go your way.

My apologies to the IGTC admins. I won't add to this discussion/argument that seems to be happening directly with Stu any further, as I feel that Stu is using this opportunity to argue over a decision in a different series that didn't go his way, and that does not add anything positively to the advancement of IGTC. Good luck to you guys in your efforts to implement a protest system that eliminates protests littered with bickering like we've continued here.

This is actually a good idea. A modified version of this is done in many local racing series in real life, where the protesting team must submit a significant monetary application fee, and if the protest is upheld, they get it back. If or you risk a loss of some sort. Obviously, the money portion can't be implemented, but how about risking a standard point deduction if your protest is denied? Hmmm....professional football in the US does the same thing with Coache's Challenges, in that they risk losing a highly valuable time-out if their challenge is denied.


Short and Sweet:

1) Appeals aren't needed in the current IGTC series. In your proposed series, they are very much needed.
2) I've volunteered to help.
3) It'd be great if you really considered the lack of rebuttal in LOTA
4) I'm trying to give logical suggestions toward improving known problems within the IGTC, not spreading my series outwards
5) About decisions in a different league. I'm not taking it there, but in the IGTC the admins stand publicly behind their decisions.
6) Penalizing a team for trying to ensure the rules are enforced?

[DeadWolfBones]

2) I've volunteered to help.

And there's a very good chance you'll be called up for the protest review board in season 2.

4) I'm trying to give logical suggestions toward improving known problems within the IGTC, not spreading my series outwards

Banshee isn't trying to colonize IGTC in the name of LOTA or anything like that. He simply has an idea of a system that might work for protests and he's spelling it out. Leave it at that.

6) Penalizing a team for trying to ensure the rules are enforced?

No, penalizing a team for filing frivolous or unsupported protests that waste the time of the officials and of the team accused.

[alland44]

I'd like to see a IRC channel be available for during-race questions or complaints.

Please !
No hardcore channels, for important things like that.
I once tried IRC and I`ll never do that again :)

It is much better to have a thread in this forum, where everyone can go and ask questions, during a race.

Keep it simple :)

All things you want to know, should be easy to finde, in here. Not on 14 different medias.

It doen`t make it more professional, with fancy panty homesites. At the end of the day, we will judge you on the way the race was conducted :)

Clear messages, clear rules and a fair and clean race, will make people call IGTC professional races.

And could I speak for more points !?
Of course everyone drives for placings, but instead of having zero points, it could be nice, also for the "back of the pack" to have something to figth for.

EDIT :

What about different car classes !? - Have you discussed that. The argument of the speed difference is simply not true. Having slow and fast cars, amongst each other, would give the race much more dynamics. Even the lonely leader will not fall asleep, because he has some slower cars to overtake all the time :)

At least consider gtr2 classes, like the ones in CTRA. That would be a sure winner !

[nmanley]

I think the event "Race Reports" on this forum has worked very well and as long as it doesn't tie up a admin or marshal, too much, should be kept as is.

I have no doubt that the series will improve with experience and input by the competitors and the sometimes bitching about race incidents. If more than one person is fussing about a situation it's well worth the time to look into it and come to a decision. I can only compliment the involvement DWB and Benji has had with this series and they way they do make the effort to make the series better. Thank you all. :)

[DeadWolfBones]

I think Benji and I would both love to do multiclass racing, but there hasn't been sufficient interest yet to divide the field. We'd have to have a dedicated, guaranteed full server field for each round to make it worth it.

[KSheppard]

I second more classes :thumb:

[nmanley]

I'm for more classes too, but I don't see why they would need full server’s fields to have them a reality. We don't have a full server very often now.
But you know there was still a large field of drivers even though we were having the last race of 8. That says something for the field of competitor’s participation.

Are cars other than GTR's being considered? That could get very interesting.

[R.Kolz]

How can your team have been negatively affected by someone not having a pit limiter on during the last sector, but then had it on at the time of green flag? He gained absolutely no advantage over the TDRT or any other team by doing that.

Of course if somebody not uses the pitlimiter and others are instructed to activate them (in this case the yellow car in the middle of the grid) or simply follow the, what they think are rules, it gives some an advantage and some others an disadvantage. In the case of round 8 it almost divided the field twice with TDRT #21/#22 car unfortunatly at the middle/back of the grid. See att. file. It shows the round 8 IGTC race start as well as the SC start.


Regards
R.Kolz

[DeadWolfBones]

I'm for more classes too, but I don't see why they would need full server’s fields to have them a reality. We don't have a full server very often now.
But you know there was still a large field of drivers even though we were having the last race of 8. That says something for the field of competitor’s participation.

Are cars other than GTR's being considered? That could get very interesting.

I think we definitely have a dedicated field of drivers, but it is still relatively small, and to divide that field in half would reduce the competition by quite a lot for both halves. I don't really see it being worth it at this stage in the game.

[BenjiMC]

If we were to introduce a second class there would have to be a reserve number of GT1 cars. Also the chances of anything other than restricted GTR's or even N-GTR's is slim.

[MARSH2a]

I think we definitely have a dedicated field of drivers, but it is still relatively small, and to divide that field in half would reduce the competition by quite a lot for both halves. I don't really see it being worth it at this stage in the game.

Think about it this way. Currently, only half of the field competes for the podium as it is. With the same number of cars being split into two classes, the latter half of our current field could be competing for a podium in their class. The number of cars/traffic would be the same and add a bit more challenge.

[MARSH2a]

Personally, I'd rather the lead car hold the pace and do without the pit limiter. Folks like to throttle up to scrub the tires during these laps.

[DeadWolfBones]

Think about it this way. Currently, only half of the field competes for the podium as it is. With the same number of cars being split into two classes, the latter half of our current field could be competing for a podium in their class. The number of cars/traffic would be the same and add a bit more challenge.

We'll definitely consider it, but shouldn't those second half teams be looking to improve rather than be looking for an easier podium? That's kind of the goal of competitive racing, no?

I'm still pretty uncomfortable with the idea of only having 6-8 cars per class.

[MARSH2a]

We'll definitely consider it, but shouldn't those second half teams be looking to improve rather than be looking for an easier podium? That's kind of the goal of competitive racing, no?


Yeah I hear ya, that's an all too common argument for not adding more classes in LFS. I just thought it would get us one step closer to an "AMLS like" event, that's all I meant. Then we'd be set for when we get our Prototype cars. :D

[Gil07]

Mm, I wouldn't like to have the field split in half like that... We don't have that much teams competing yet imo.

[DeadWolfBones]

Yeah I hear ya, that's an all too common argument for not adding more classes in LFS. I just thought it would get us one step closer to an "AMLS like" event, that's all I meant. Then we'd be set for when we get our Prototype cars. :D

That's very true. ALMS is a multi-class series, and IGTC wants in many regards to emulate ALMS.

However, you also have to take into account the large number of leagues offering multi-class racing these days (MoE, LFS GT, Le Mans League)... I think at this point IGTC is the only endurance league offering single class competition. I think that's pretty cool, really.

[Humbleridderen]

I also support NOT to have more classes. It´s much funnier and challenging to race in the same class and build up your team and skills so you wll be competing with the best of the league.

In top of that, I find it a bit silly to be blue flagged in a GT2 class 100 times in 2 hours. And when one of the GT1 cars has an accident with a GT2 car, because of a race incident, normally the GT 2 will always be blamed right away...especially if it´s the leader of the race, who got involved. Fairness will easily be forgotten. There will be an aftermath with a lot of discussion on the forum.

Keep IGTC more or less like it is. Improve the rules so they are more fair. Keep mature and neutral admins. Don´t change the concept, so it looks like all the rest. Otherwise, why should people choose IGTC in the future then?

To make things look like ALMS is a good idea, but we must be realistic on it. ALMS has a very good organisation and procedures for having 2 classes, but IGTC has to improve in this BEFORE working with 2 classes. Fairness in rules, judging, driving and organisation is the most important thing. It must prove it´s cabable for this first.

I think IGTC is on it´s way. But let´s take it step by step in the right order. :smileypul

[DeadWolfBones]

Agreed, Kenn. :]

Did you have a bad experience in the MoE race?

[Humbleridderen]

Agreed, Kenn. :]

Did you have a bad experience in the MoE race?

Let me say it this way, they didn´t impress me with their way of giving penalties during a race for things which is not easy to judge on. Things that they should have waited to look at to after the race. There were also in relation to an accident, where we got a penalty, a revenge from the other part. It was not penalized. So what can I conclude from this?

To your knowledge, in this race, I took part of a new spiring project DITTO, which is a new danish project, and not the team UNITY I have myself. Therefore there were other drivers.

Information about starting time was also bad, so we had to start 12 hours earlier than we thought we should...which made us less prepared, than we should. f.ex. in pitting, where we made stupid mistakes.

But we also made other mistakes ourselves, f.ex our 3rd driver which was completely new was not ready for a race like this. Our set was too slow. These things made me convinced, that this new project were not ready for entering yet.

All in all, we decided to withdraw from MoE, prepare ourselves better, and concentrate on better series than that one. I hope for them they also will take a serious look at themselves and change some things like taking away the penalties for accidents during a race, so it will be more fair. It should be done afterwards.

This time they and us got a minus, but I belive things can change :)