Race grid set by previous race result
Discussion
A little bird, feathered variety, but with a good grasp of the English language, mentioned the possibility, be it hearsay or rumour, that Britcar may be considering a new grid format for 2010 in that, the results of the previous race, establishes the grid for the next or something along these lines. Before I question Britcar about this "twitter" it would be of assistance if you chaps had a view on how this could, or may not work, and if it is a good or bad idea.
I see good and bad points to this in the way I currently understand it and if Britcar are on line, they may care to comment.
I see good and bad points to this in the way I currently understand it and if Britcar are on line, they may care to comment.
Edited by Racing Rod on Wednesday 25th November 22:42
The idea is to continue the Championship from round to round, with the advantages and disadvantages continuing on to the following rounds.
eg.a car starting on the grid at the first round, would get max points for qualifying as they do, but finnish 5th or sixth, would stay there for the next race start, allowing the winner of the previous race to make up points. Therefore the advantage gained would be rewarded.
Qualifying would have its own points system and all cars doing more than 40% of the race would get points.
eg.a car starting on the grid at the first round, would get max points for qualifying as they do, but finnish 5th or sixth, would stay there for the next race start, allowing the winner of the previous race to make up points. Therefore the advantage gained would be rewarded.
Qualifying would have its own points system and all cars doing more than 40% of the race would get points.
Edited by james tucker on Wednesday 25th November 13:33
The trouble is where consistence, reliability and good strategy is rewarded as it was in this years championship and should be in endurance racing, you could hand a big advantage over to cars that could ultimately be quick over 1 lap. Maybe if the points awarded in qualifying were very small it may work. There are always quicker and slower cars in every class. In class 3 this year the lotus and Marcos were quicker over a lap just about everywhere this year but didn't win the class due to accidents or reliability issues. Someone would need to sit down and work out your suggested points system on this years results and see what the results would be. Even buy rewarding 1 point for pole and 1 point for fastest lap makes a big difference at the end of the year.
I'm going to put my insurance hat on for a while.
From an underwriting point of view, I have concerns. The proposed system would inevitably lead to a group of faster cars starting at the back of the grid for race 2 and subsequent races. I would worry about the impact (literally) of faster cars going for early on-track passes at the start of a race.
We have this issue with speed differentials currently but it's not a problem because the field is generally strung out.
I also have a problem with significant points being awarded for qualifying. As an endurance race series, the incidence of accidents during qualifying is, generally, low as qualifying isn't critical to this kind of racing. However, I'm uncomfortable with the concept of banzai sprint qualifying sessions that might be critical for a championship position. I believe that this will lead to more broken cars and on-track incidents.
Having said that, as a competitor, it sounds exciting and it's good to see that new features for the championship are being considered and debated.
K.
From an underwriting point of view, I have concerns. The proposed system would inevitably lead to a group of faster cars starting at the back of the grid for race 2 and subsequent races. I would worry about the impact (literally) of faster cars going for early on-track passes at the start of a race.
We have this issue with speed differentials currently but it's not a problem because the field is generally strung out.
I also have a problem with significant points being awarded for qualifying. As an endurance race series, the incidence of accidents during qualifying is, generally, low as qualifying isn't critical to this kind of racing. However, I'm uncomfortable with the concept of banzai sprint qualifying sessions that might be critical for a championship position. I believe that this will lead to more broken cars and on-track incidents.
Having said that, as a competitor, it sounds exciting and it's good to see that new features for the championship are being considered and debated.
K.
Jemco said:
I also have a problem with significant points being awarded for qualifying. As an endurance race series, the incidence of accidents during qualifying is, generally, low as qualifying isn't critical to this kind of racing. However, I'm uncomfortable with the concept of banzai sprint qualifying sessions that might be critical for a championship position. I believe that this will lead to more broken cars and on-track incidents.
Having said that, as a competitor, it sounds exciting and it's good to see that new features for the championship are being considered and debated.
K.
Sounds like "Time Attack......"Having said that, as a competitor, it sounds exciting and it's good to see that new features for the championship are being considered and debated.
K.
What about a system where the class winner gets a Gold medal and the team with the most Gold medals at the end of the season wins the championship....or alternatively if it isn't broke dont fix it....or over complicate it!
It would also seem a bit odd and confusing (Not only for us but the spectators/on tv) if the car that qualified on pole or should I say got the fastest lap started from the back due to a DNF the race before...
Also if you do not do the race before where do you start on the grid?? If you revert back to the last race you completed or were classified in your finish position will clash with someone who finished the last race so who gets priority in starting position?!? I'm confused already
I think
Also if you do not do the race before where do you start on the grid?? If you revert back to the last race you completed or were classified in your finish position will clash with someone who finished the last race so who gets priority in starting position?!? I'm confused already
I think Edited by ngr on Wednesday 25th November 15:42
It works brilliantly in a weekend where there is one qualifying and two races. Otherwise I hate it as an idea. You don't need artificial intervention to boost overtaking in this type of racing.
What do you do if a team does a part season or misses a race - presumably make them start from the back? Will that encourage additional entries? Hardly.
Its not going to promote closer finishes and I'm struggling to think of any advantages. Qualifying to determine grid position works well for virtually every other race series - if it aint broke, don't fix it.
All in my humble opinion...
What do you do if a team does a part season or misses a race - presumably make them start from the back? Will that encourage additional entries? Hardly.
Its not going to promote closer finishes and I'm struggling to think of any advantages. Qualifying to determine grid position works well for virtually every other race series - if it aint broke, don't fix it.
All in my humble opinion...
teamHOLDENracing said:
What do you do if a team does a part season or misses a race - presumably make them start from the back? Will that encourage additional entries? Hardly.
This could be one of the biggest problems people like to know if they are faster than Jo in front in his Mosler or Fred in his lotus, This is all part if not the point of being a racing driver is it not? If teams want to just do a few select guest appearances then what would be the point of them qualifying at all just to be demoted to the back of the grid. It would certainly put me off joining britcar and racing at all as you are allready on a back foot. Sure we don't mind starting from the back after a problem in qualifying,its a challenge but its not where we would want to start from. ( Ask Ash in his clio he's started from the back a few times this year 
) Many Drivers also cant or don't want to commit to every round due to work or family. Maybe James is thinking this will be a way to try and make sure people do every round but I feel you will lose more than you gain due to the reasons given above.
Edited by ngr on Thursday 26th November 09:11
My oppinion is that the grid based on the race before sounds very interesting. It benefits the endurance spirit, as to be well up, you need to finish. It makes the idea of having a big one year-long race, wich is fun and is innovative. I like it.
I Do NOT like the idea of giving points for qualy, as that is a extream way of a sprint race of une lap!, I think that is not the aim in endurance racing, and it beneffits cars that are faster over one lap, and that should have no importance or interest in this ptype of racing.
Championship is allways very close, and giving points is a very delicate thing, as one point can make a big difference.
I Do NOT like the idea of giving points for qualy, as that is a extream way of a sprint race of une lap!, I think that is not the aim in endurance racing, and it beneffits cars that are faster over one lap, and that should have no importance or interest in this ptype of racing.
Championship is allways very close, and giving points is a very delicate thing, as one point can make a big difference.
For an endurance championship this is daft. Perhaps I shouldn't complain as such a system would've given us considerably more points this year, but that's not the point. It's endurance racing we're doing here, so weighting the points system in favour of one lap would be silly.
Furthermore, getting a DNF is already a punishment, so being punished twice by being on the back of the grid for the next race would be a particularly unappealing.
Britcar is not BTCC and there is no requirement to introduce a 'show' element for the sake of it.
Furthermore, getting a DNF is already a punishment, so being punished twice by being on the back of the grid for the next race would be a particularly unappealing.
Britcar is not BTCC and there is no requirement to introduce a 'show' element for the sake of it.
Call me old fashioned, but isn't a race something where the car/driver combo which is quickest to get to the finishing line wins that race.
You qualify quickest, you start from the front. You fail to finish, you get no points.
The next race is precisely that, the next race. The slate is wiped clean. There is already sufficient motivation to balance speed against reliability without carrying the pain over from race to race.
Motorsport is all about extreme highs and extreme lows. If I've had a shocker of a weekend and retired after one lap, I really don't need reminding of it by starting from the back three weeks later. I want to forget about it and have another crack at a good race.
I'm working hard at the moment to pull together a package to bring the Sagaris out in Britcar next year. A change like this makes the prospect less attractive to me, not more.
You qualify quickest, you start from the front. You fail to finish, you get no points.
The next race is precisely that, the next race. The slate is wiped clean. There is already sufficient motivation to balance speed against reliability without carrying the pain over from race to race.
Motorsport is all about extreme highs and extreme lows. If I've had a shocker of a weekend and retired after one lap, I really don't need reminding of it by starting from the back three weeks later. I want to forget about it and have another crack at a good race.
I'm working hard at the moment to pull together a package to bring the Sagaris out in Britcar next year. A change like this makes the prospect less attractive to me, not more.
I agree with the majority of the other comments - it's a very bad idea which would discourage rather than encourage entries.Almost every motorsport championship in the world follows the normal system of qualifying for grid position because they have not found a better way. The few who have reverse grids do so to encourage overtaking and are usually sprint races. I can see no sense in this for an endurance championship which already has a huge speed differential between quickest and slowest. This sounds very much like the joker idea: a gimmick which is unnecessary and which will detract from rather than add to the championship.
james tucker said:
I have taken a view from this discussion,
it has been constuctive,
the idea was to try and generate an Endurance idea,
that has been used in the States for years,
it is not a new idea, but it is progressive....
We will not take it on...
James
Thanks James. Insurers will be pleased, at least!it has been constuctive,
the idea was to try and generate an Endurance idea,
that has been used in the States for years,
it is not a new idea, but it is progressive....
We will not take it on...
James
Cheers.
K.
Glad to see common sense has won the day on this one
The GT cup takes your best two laps from qualifying and uses them as you starting position for each of the weekend`s races. A very good system as DNF`s don`t result in Kamikaze lunges in the opening lap or two as cars seek a way through to their rightful place in the pack from the back of the grid.
I can think of a lot of accidents caused in this way.
The only thing you have to remember is to put in the 2nd qualifying time
Keep smiling
Henry
The GT cup takes your best two laps from qualifying and uses them as you starting position for each of the weekend`s races. A very good system as DNF`s don`t result in Kamikaze lunges in the opening lap or two as cars seek a way through to their rightful place in the pack from the back of the grid.
I can think of a lot of accidents caused in this way.
The only thing you have to remember is to put in the 2nd qualifying time
Keep smiling
Henry
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff