No wheels off...
Discussion
Maxx said:
No, let's kick this new rule out and continue with the widespread use of 'sausage kerbs' and tyre bails on apexes. Much better to smash your car up and maybe take out the following car than suffer the indignity of being shown a driving standards flag!
Well more bollix then. We had good rules last year that got enforced. That's being suckered in to a daft school of thought. Saying a bad thing is ok because it's slightly better than another bad thing cannot be right.Edited by Maxx on Tuesday 1st April 09:28
In terms of the new rules, I thought the outcome on Sunday at Brands proved the point. As a spectator, 5 second in-race penalties are really s
te in sprint races. It's unenjoyable to be trying to add 5 seconds to a car to know where it is really running. Not an improvement at all. So it is detrimental to live viewing. I hope the benefit it brings JP is worth it.Bert
Maxx said:
Really!
If you get a copy of all of JP's pics from the weekend you will see that and lots more. Do you know that those pics above were from last year? Do you know how the rules were enforced in those cases? No. Speaking from what I do know is that in the Radicals, last year's track limits rules were enforced. It all worked well.Don't be suckered into the new JP world.
Bert
Yes, they are from 2013, Silverstone round, I took them (off the TV) myself and this is when the old rules were <cough> in force, no penalties given, and from memory only one warning despite numerous "fully off" laps (almost in a different post code) on the exit of Copse despite it being raised at the briefing.
The old rules "where" fine but (some) drivers 'broke' them, either in order to cheat or because they had insufficient skill to place the car on track, and those transgressions where often overlooked by officials (no fault of theirs, there just weren't the procedures in place to deal with them).
You don't really need to force a Radical driver to stick to the circuit, they don't handle grass and dirt very well and there is rarely any advantage.
We have new rules now, they just redefine what you are allowed to do, these new rules have been declared 'easier to spot' by those who's job it is plus new technology is being used to enforce them and (hopefully) create a level playing field. As well as helping keep the circuits more presentable and yes, perhaps save the owners some money in maintenance (the cost of which WE as racers pay for via our entry fees).
Anyone who has ever had their windscreen bullet-holed should applaude this, anyone who has followed one of their competitors as they sail out beyond the curb at Copse only to come back on 3 or 4 lengths further ahead should applaude it. Anyone who has had a car spin in front of them because the driver doesn't have the skill to place the car or to enter the corner at a consistent speed to stand a chance of getting round without going 'off track' should applaude it.
I don't know is this will eventually mean the dismantling of these 'sausage kerbs' but if it does, then any driver who has fallen foul of them should applaude this.
Yes, it's possible you may get a driving standards flag shown to you and it wasn't your fault, someone tapped you and you went wide, boohoo, get over it, poor judgement calls have always been part of racing, with the old rules as well.
Just so everyone is clear on this.
JP, in mean Brands, only enforced no wheels off at Paddock, Druids and Graham Hill exits. Drivers were cutting apexs and because no one was checking those, they "got away" with it. So you can cut the apex at Graham Hill without any problems or anywhere else they don't have a camera.
JP, in mean Brands, only enforced no wheels off at Paddock, Druids and Graham Hill exits. Drivers were cutting apexs and because no one was checking those, they "got away" with it. So you can cut the apex at Graham Hill without any problems or anywhere else they don't have a camera.
BertBert said:
In terms of the new rules, I thought the outcome on Sunday at Brands proved the point. As a spectator, 5 second in-race penalties are really ste in sprint races. It's unenjoyable to be trying to add 5 seconds to a car to know where it is really running. Not an improvement at all. So it is detrimental to live viewing. I hope the benefit it brings JP is worth it.
Bert
This. Its what Leo Parente refers to as the sporting integrity of motor racing in his blog thing on Youtube Drive channel. Personally I hate any of the incremental penalties like this, much better to warn people and if the transgressions continue straight black flag.te in sprint races. It's unenjoyable to be trying to add 5 seconds to a car to know where it is really running. Not an improvement at all. So it is detrimental to live viewing. I hope the benefit it brings JP is worth it.Bert
The point someone else made about apexes is a good case in point of how the implementation of this new ruling has just not been thought through. I actually support the use of electronics like pressure plates linked to cameras, it removes the human error which can only be a good thing in the long run but its going to cost a fortune to roll out at every corner apex and exit in the country where an advantage could be made.
I'm failing to see the issue, you push the limits. You get a warning, you now know the limit so don't do it again or do it and risk being pinalised.
Everyone has done outdoor arrive and drive karting where you get told off if you monster the kerbs and will eventually get black flagged. It's the same is it not?
I'm racing Sunday at Silverstone, so we shall see what happens.
Everyone has done outdoor arrive and drive karting where you get told off if you monster the kerbs and will eventually get black flagged. It's the same is it not?
I'm racing Sunday at Silverstone, so we shall see what happens.
FFS it's a race track, you know the grey bendy bit of tarmac, where you are supposed to race?
If you all stick within it then this wouldn't even be a problem, the guys that aren't abiding by the rules are the ones taking the piss.
If you want to go on the grass and tarmac go do some rallycross?
P.s. I don't get what the problem is with JP wanting to take care of his (expensive) investments because some guys/ girls can't keep on the grey stuff and abide by the rules.
If you all stick within it then this wouldn't even be a problem, the guys that aren't abiding by the rules are the ones taking the piss.
If you want to go on the grass and tarmac go do some rallycross?
P.s. I don't get what the problem is with JP wanting to take care of his (expensive) investments because some guys/ girls can't keep on the grey stuff and abide by the rules.
n3il123 said:
FFS it's a race track, you know the grey bendy bit of tarmac, where you are supposed to race?
If you all stick within it then this wouldn't even be a problem, the guys that aren't abiding by the rules are the ones taking the piss.
If you want to go on the grass and tarmac go do some rallycross?
P.s. I don't get what the problem is with JP wanting to take care of his (expensive) investments because some guys/ girls can't keep on the grey stuff and abide by the rules.
So that's just uninformed crap. We had perfectly good rules last year. The same as everyone else. Now we have JPs wIf you all stick within it then this wouldn't even be a problem, the guys that aren't abiding by the rules are the ones taking the piss.
If you want to go on the grass and tarmac go do some rallycross?
P.s. I don't get what the problem is with JP wanting to take care of his (expensive) investments because some guys/ girls can't keep on the grey stuff and abide by the rules.
ky rules and cameras (FFS) to enforce them. Who benefits? Tell me that n3il123. Go on tell me the beneficiaries. BertMaxx said:
We have new rules now, they just redefine what you are allowed to do, these new rules have been declared 'easier to spot' by those who's job it is plus new technology is being used to enforce them and (hopefully) create a level playing field. As well as helping keep the circuits more presentable and yes, perhaps save the owners some money in maintenance (the cost of which WE as racers pay for via our entry fees).
Good post, Maxx!I've said all along that the new rules just redefine & clarify the old rules. Personally I feel that the tightening up of penalties is rather harsh, but that's something we've got to live with.
I'm getting rather tired of the constant whingeing that these rule changes were imposed by one man to protect his grass. They were made by the MSA Race Committee to improve driving standards. Yes, Dr Palmer is a member of the Race Committee, but the Committee comprises representatives of all aspects of the sport, including drivers & any rule changes are published for consultation before being discussed by the Committee.
I'm quite enjoying arguing about it as an academic exercise. It doesn't affect me as I am such a good driver - oh hold on...
I'd love to understand how it improves driving standards and if it does who benefits from those improvements?
I'd argue it doesn't actually improve standards, it just changes the rules. There is no difference in the driving standard needed with the new rules against the old rules as far as I can see.
It seems to have been widely publicised that for JP, grass is the issue. Is there any published info about how the new rules raise the standard?
So I'm entrenched in my view. An unnecessary new rule that has very limited benefit.
The cameras are just daft. It's just more inconsistent rule enforcement. I'd rather have consistent human driven enforcement even if it's error prone. Otherwise it's just like the M25 sprint between the speed cameras. I don't think it adds to the sport.
Bert
I'd love to understand how it improves driving standards and if it does who benefits from those improvements?
I'd argue it doesn't actually improve standards, it just changes the rules. There is no difference in the driving standard needed with the new rules against the old rules as far as I can see.
It seems to have been widely publicised that for JP, grass is the issue. Is there any published info about how the new rules raise the standard?
So I'm entrenched in my view. An unnecessary new rule that has very limited benefit.
The cameras are just daft. It's just more inconsistent rule enforcement. I'd rather have consistent human driven enforcement even if it's error prone. Otherwise it's just like the M25 sprint between the speed cameras. I don't think it adds to the sport.
Bert
I'm sorry Dave but JP 100% pushed these rules through. He even wrote a letter to Autosport explaining why he pushed this through. The only driver that was consulted as part of this process was Jason Plato
One thing that's for sure - it won't ever be removed and it was never needed.
One thing that's for sure - it won't ever be removed and it was never needed.
Edited by woof on Wednesday 2nd April 15:20
BertBert said:
So I'm entrenched in my view. An unnecessary new rule that has very limited benefit.
OK, so the benefits of the new/tightened/redefined/clarified rule are perhaps limited. If we are looking at this as a balance between two options can you tell me where you see the added benefits of allowing two wheels off as an alternative?Leaving Brands behind for a moment-anyone remember the problems caused at Snett by drivers deliberately going two/four off? One BMW race had to be stopped because of chunks of flint and a layer of dust and sand across the circuit.Plenty of drivers were moaning about driving standards then, lots of broken w/screens, headlights and punctured rads.Quite a fewdrivers took the walk upstairs for a chat. Stop blaming JP, it is down to crap driving skills that brought this about, blame those who are obviously incapable at recognising track limits and driving to them.!
Bert, surely you can see that the rule before allowed 2 wheels to be off the track and kerbs and the current rule does not so therefore it limits the damage caused even more which results in a safer circuit for all ?
The one thing we do agree on is that enforcement is necessary and had the previous rule been better enforced maybe we would not have needed the new ruling to limit damage.
The one thing we do agree on is that enforcement is necessary and had the previous rule been better enforced maybe we would not have needed the new ruling to limit damage.
mad4amanda said:
Bert, surely you can see that the rule before allowed 2 wheels to be off the track and kerbs and the current rule does not so therefore it limits the damage caused even more which results in a safer circuit for all ?
The one thing we do agree on is that enforcement is necessary and had the previous rule been better enforced maybe we would not have needed the new ruling to limit damage.
Yes indeed I can see the physical effect of the change. I'm not that sympathetic to the argument as you can tell. That has however been the rule for a really really long time and circuits seemed to have happily survived. But that means the new rule is exactly about JPs grass, not driving standards. I assume you must be the man who has to mend the edges at MSV circuits The one thing we do agree on is that enforcement is necessary and had the previous rule been better enforced maybe we would not have needed the new ruling to limit damage.
If it's about driving standards, how does changing the definition of the edge help?
Bert
BertBert you seem to be intent on listening to no one. So I guess I'm probably wasting my time here.
For many, many years my bugbear with circuits has been the dangerous drop offs behind kerbs caused by car drivers who deliberately and continuously ignore the fact that they are meant to be skilfull enough to drive on the grey/black bit. For any motorcycle event that follows a car event, we have to go around the entire circuit and get these drop offs filled in. This isn't a simple process, as loose dirt just gets washed away by rain or compacted at first contact. Concrete aprons - when installed - just invite drivers with your particular mindset to use that bit as well (and more).
A rider who drops off the kerb with a reasonable infill behind it, has a 50/50 chance of staying on the bike and not being injured. A rider who drops off a kerb that has been continually abused by "couldn't give a crap" car drivers who think that the rules apply to someone else, has a better than average chance of serious injury.
Before you assume (something you seem to continually do given your meteoric post count) that I am just a know-nothing bike racer. I spent 7 years racing cars, before I started bike racing and since then I have run numerous meetings - up to and including Moto-GP. I have also managed 3 circuits, so I do genuinely understand all aspects of this debate.
It's not just about grass - it's about the safety of ALL track users.
Why can't you see that using more surface than is permitted by the regulations is CHEATING in exactly the same way that having an oversized engine is cheating. Both are done with the deliberate intent of gaining an unfair advantage.
Is that really your attitude the the sport?
I've been a member here for years and my post count is negligible. I am not someone who spouts off dozens of times a day just because I have nothing better to do. I just don't think you have considered all of the variables here.
We all foot the bills for the upkeep of the circuits. The more happy track users and hirers there are, the more cost effective racing can be (if cost-effective is ever something you can say in conjunction with what we all do).
For many, many years my bugbear with circuits has been the dangerous drop offs behind kerbs caused by car drivers who deliberately and continuously ignore the fact that they are meant to be skilfull enough to drive on the grey/black bit. For any motorcycle event that follows a car event, we have to go around the entire circuit and get these drop offs filled in. This isn't a simple process, as loose dirt just gets washed away by rain or compacted at first contact. Concrete aprons - when installed - just invite drivers with your particular mindset to use that bit as well (and more).
A rider who drops off the kerb with a reasonable infill behind it, has a 50/50 chance of staying on the bike and not being injured. A rider who drops off a kerb that has been continually abused by "couldn't give a crap" car drivers who think that the rules apply to someone else, has a better than average chance of serious injury.
Before you assume (something you seem to continually do given your meteoric post count) that I am just a know-nothing bike racer. I spent 7 years racing cars, before I started bike racing and since then I have run numerous meetings - up to and including Moto-GP. I have also managed 3 circuits, so I do genuinely understand all aspects of this debate.
It's not just about grass - it's about the safety of ALL track users.
Why can't you see that using more surface than is permitted by the regulations is CHEATING in exactly the same way that having an oversized engine is cheating. Both are done with the deliberate intent of gaining an unfair advantage.
Is that really your attitude the the sport?
I've been a member here for years and my post count is negligible. I am not someone who spouts off dozens of times a day just because I have nothing better to do. I just don't think you have considered all of the variables here.
We all foot the bills for the upkeep of the circuits. The more happy track users and hirers there are, the more cost effective racing can be (if cost-effective is ever something you can say in conjunction with what we all do).
Gassing Station | UK Club Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff