Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • thgear
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by MazdaMatt View Post
    I think we can safely say that we're generally happy with the rules, the classing and the scoring. It is not written in stone as the sport changes constantly and one issue or another should be adressed each year, but to do a total re-write is just asking for many more issues all at once.
    happy? HA


    my current issues with the current rule set:

    scoring:

    - people without a full class get stuck with PAX, creating a fictious opponent who's experience is the combined average of all the best drivers of all the other classes! its like taking Avi, Chris and Dave and mixing them all into one...

    - propositioning, when soemone propositions another class, that class gets mixed in with the new class, and if you have enough people there then the points get skewed again

    classing:

    nothing done for aero mods

    weight still not taken properly as a function of handling rather than acceleration

    honda civics having a "worse" suspension than a vw golf....


    there is quite a bit of work ahead of us...

    Leave a comment:


  • MazdaMatt
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    I think we can safely say that we're generally happy with the rules, the classing and the scoring. It is not written in stone as the sport changes constantly and one issue or another should be adressed each year, but to do a total re-write is just asking for many more issues all at once.

    Leave a comment:


  • G-ForceJunkie
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by lowrider View Post
    In motorsport nobody cares if you are 2nd by one tenth of a second or one minute. You are second, that's all there is to it. The same can be said of the difference between third and fourth etc. When you look at any podium in motor racing, it does not say "97.3% of first" underneath the driver who is standing on the second tier. A scoring system must give equal merit to points given for every respective placing in every class.

    The current points system might give one driver 98.3 points for second in GT1 while giving another driver 99.4 points for finishing in the same position in GT2. Nowhere in motor racing is this an acceptable method of measuring finishing positions.

    With this system a driver could conceivably finish a 'close' second in four or five of his or her best races and upset the overall standings by having only one great event and creating, for example, a two second gap between himself and the second place competitor. That is not an acceptable outcome in any form of motor sport. There has to be a system which allows competitors to fairly and equitably compete amongst each other within their given classes without skewing the results in an effort to achieve an 'overall' score. The current points system gives less merit to a drivers' six best placings throughout the season. In my view, that is an unacceptable scoring mechanism.

    I am not saying that I have all the answers here, I know I don't. What I am saying is that this current scoring system creates many anomolies which are contrary to the true spirit of motor sport and this is certainly worthy of examination and revision.
    I don't know about you, but I don't even call Solosprint racing, because it's not. When you're on the track, you're not 'racing' anyone but yourself, the only way you can possibly consider Solosprint a 'race' is because after you're done 'racing' there is a sheet that says where you placed based on a classification system.

    James's last post was spot on.

    Leave a comment:


  • lowrider
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by thekid View Post
    This is where I think you are wrong. Motorsport does not mean only "RACING". Motorsport includes time trials be it at a track or in a parking lot, and both of these systems use raw times for determining winners. They always have.

    Racing on the other hand is another form of motorsport that uses points.

    These are different forms of motorsport, and it sounds like you believe there should one form of scoring for all motorsport, when in fact there are completely different "sports".

    Also to one of your other points, someone could easily finish 2nd at every event but one in a Race Series (where points are awarded 100 for a win, 95 for second, 90 for third, etc), winning that one event, but out place the person who finished first at every event but one, and finished 20th at that last race. Race series reward laps completed, and poles. Assuming that the pole is worth 5 points and there are 10 races in the series.

    Driver A = 9 wins + 1x20th place + 5 poles + 200 laps completed (1 pt per lap) = 900 + 5 + 25 + 200 = 1130
    Driver B = 1 win + 9 x 2nd place + 5 poles + 200 laps completed (1 pt per lap) = 855 + 100 + 25 + 200 = 1180

    Drive B with only one victory and 9 2nd place finishes out scores Driver A who had 9 victories and Wins the the Canadian Touring Car Championship. (Not a true story, but entirely possible using a RACE scoring system.
    Well perhaps you are right. I come from a 'racing' background and maybe it's time for me to change my deep-rooted thinking on these matters.

    Leave a comment:


  • thekid
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by lowrider View Post
    In motorsport nobody cares if you are 2nd by one tenth of a second or one minute. You are second, that's all there is to it. The same can be said of the difference between third and fourth etc. When you look at any podium in motor racing, it does not say "97.3% of first" underneath the driver who is standing on the second tier. A scoring system must give equal merit to points given for every respective placing in every class.

    The current points system might give one driver 98.3 points for second in GT1 while giving another driver 99.4 points for finishing in the same position in GT2. Nowhere in motor racing is this an acceptable method of measuring finishing positions.
    This is where I think you are wrong. Motorsport does not mean only "RACING". Motorsport includes time trials be it at a track or in a parking lot, and both of these systems use raw times for determining winners. They always have.

    Racing on the other hand is another form of motorsport that uses points.

    These are different forms of motorsport, and it sounds like you believe there should one form of scoring for all motorsport, when in fact there are completely different "sports".

    Also to one of your other points, someone could easily finish 2nd at every event but one in a Race Series (where points are awarded 100 for a win, 95 for second, 90 for third, etc), winning that one event, but out place the person who finished first at every event but one, and finished 20th at that last race. Race series reward laps completed, and poles. Assuming that the pole is worth 5 points and there are 10 races in the series.

    Driver A = 9 wins + 1x20th place + 5 poles + 200 laps completed (1 pt per lap) = 900 + 5 + 25 + 200 = 1130
    Driver B = 1 win + 9 x 2nd place + 5 poles + 200 laps completed (1 pt per lap) = 855 + 100 + 25 + 200 = 1180

    Drive B with only one victory and 9 2nd place finishes out scores Driver A who had 9 victories and Wins the the Canadian Touring Car Championship. (Not a true story, but entirely possible using a RACE scoring system.

    Leave a comment:


  • lowrider
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by Slowpoke View Post
    Your system depends on creating fewer classes so that there is never an underfilled class.

    The idea of Solosprint is to be accessible at a Grassroots level. We want a class system where a guy can show up with a Hyundai Accent and be competitive with his driving skills, yet still accomodate the guys who've been in the sport for years and have developed safe (caged), wonderfully handling cars. Fewer classes mean that Mr. Accent might end up in a class where he'll NEVER have a chance to win, and Ms. Racecar would constantly clean up in a class where 98% of the participants are in less prepared cars. You'd end up with a greater percentage of unhappy people.

    So with the multiple classes we have, people finish the year, they wait for discussion/release of rule changes, plan their modifications for winter to start the spring with a PIP level of X9.9 to be maxed out in their class, then act on that. To say the least, people resist changes to that system or classing is an understatement because changes generally cost them money to stay competitive.

    The system constantly needs tweaking, and I DON'T want to turn someone away from Solosprint because I think that if you continue work with this series, it's the best place to be. But, if you want a lot simpler classing, there is www.cscs.ca . More scenery at those events, too. You can easily do both series as well.

    Your Points per class will only exacerbate what we see now in classes with few participants... that it can be easy for a good driver to rack up a 100% if there aren't enough competitors out there... that's where event PAX comes into play. Your 10 points for a class win wouldn't solve that.

    And using raw times to break ties would favour the faster (more expensive) cars... you'd still have to end up developing a new kind of pax system for this as well.

    You can get a 2 point gap at each event between 1st and 2nd place with the current system... but lord you have to earn it!! If you think about it, that's actually how John was able to wrest that class win from you... A decisive win on one day.
    You make some excellent points. To be honest, my thoughts on classification were something of an afterthought but they are not without merit. I realize that the organizers must make concessions due to the prolifery of classes in Solo 1 but this is the crux of my discussion:

    In motorsport nobody cares if you are 2nd by one tenth of a second or one minute. You are second, that's all there is to it. The same can be said of the difference between third and fourth etc. When you look at any podium in motor racing, it does not say "97.3% of first" underneath the driver who is standing on the second tier. A scoring system must give equal merit to points given for every respective placing in every class.

    The current points system might give one driver 98.3 points for second in GT1 while giving another driver 99.4 points for finishing in the same position in GT2. Nowhere in motor racing is this an acceptable method of measuring finishing positions.

    With this system a driver could conceivably finish a 'close' second in four or five of his or her best races and upset the overall standings by having only one great event and creating, for example, a two second gap between himself and the second place competitor. That is not an acceptable outcome in any form of motor sport. There has to be a system which allows competitors to fairly and equitably compete amongst each other within their given classes without skewing the results in an effort to achieve an 'overall' score. The current points system gives less merit to a drivers' six best placings throughout the season. In my view, that is an unacceptable scoring mechanism.

    I am not saying that I have all the answers here, I know I don't. What I am saying is that this current scoring system creates many anomolies which are contrary to the true spirit of motor sport and this is certainly worthy of examination and revision.
    Last edited by lowrider; 10-03-2007, 09:03 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • James Mewett
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by lowrider View Post
    If SoloSprint really is about the fatsest lap then why don't we score points throughout each classification as they do in F1: 10 points for a win, 8 points for second, 6 points for third, and so on? We could easily use each competitor's second fastest time to slot people due to 'ties' in the overall points race.

    If competitors are truly interested in the fastest lap scenario, then why don't we have a scoring mechanism which 'places' them according to their victories and/or second and third place finishes etc.? At present, the overall scoring mechanism is skewed to negate the importance of event placings as they accumulate throughout the year.
    The race mentality is second place is first loser. This is ok when all the cars are on the track at the same time and winning means crossing the line first. In time trialling second place could mean 0.001 seconds slower or 1 second slower. Shouldn't someone who is 0.001 seconds slower be rewarded more than someone is 1 second slower in a series scored in seconds?

    This is particularly true when we are comparing classes in the overall standings. If you are the guy who was in second place by 0.001 seconds, do you want your result to count the same in the overall as the buy in another class who was second place by 1 second? If he was a consistent 1 second off the pace, he could in fact beat you in the overall standings based on your proposal while truly he is uncompetitive.

    Leave a comment:


  • Slowpoke
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by lowrider View Post
    James, I know and understand that you guys have worked hard to perfect the current system. I'm just throwing out some ideas here, nothing more. Your post made it sound like I have nothing good to offer here; I don't think that's true. If SoloSprint really is about the fatsest lap then why don't we score points throughout each classification as they do in F1: 10 points for a win, 8 points for second, 6 points for third, and so on? We could easily use each competitor's second fastest time to slot people due to 'ties' in the overall points race.
    Your system depends on creating fewer classes so that there is never an underfilled class.

    The idea of Solosprint is to be accessible at a Grassroots level. We want a class system where a guy can show up with a Hyundai Accent and be competitive with his driving skills, yet still accomodate the guys who've been in the sport for years and have developed safe (caged), wonderfully handling cars. Fewer classes mean that Mr. Accent might end up in a class where he'll NEVER have a chance to win, and Ms. Racecar would constantly clean up in a class where 98% of the participants are in less prepared cars. You'd end up with a greater percentage of unhappy people.

    So with the multiple classes we have, people finish the year, they wait for discussion/release of rule changes, plan their modifications for winter to start the spring with a PIP level of X9.9 to be maxed out in their class, then act on that. To say the least, people resist changes to that system or classing is an understatement because changes generally cost them money to stay competitive.

    The system constantly needs tweaking, and I DON'T want to turn someone away from Solosprint because I think that if you continue work with this series, it's the best place to be. But, if you want a lot simpler classing, there is www.cscs.ca . More scenery at those events, too. You can easily do both series as well.

    Your Points per class will only exacerbate what we see now in classes with few participants... that it can be easy for a good driver to rack up a 100% if there aren't enough competitors out there... that's where event PAX comes into play. Your 10 points for a class win wouldn't solve that.

    And using raw times to break ties would favour the faster (more expensive) cars... you'd still have to end up developing a new kind of pax system for this as well.

    You can get a 2 point gap at each event between 1st and 2nd place with the current system... but lord you have to earn it!! If you think about it, that's actually how John was able to wrest that class win from you... A decisive win on one day.

    Leave a comment:


  • lowrider
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by James Mewett View Post
    Hey, I drafted the rule book for the last couple of years, so you have to expect that I am rather attached to it. For many of us stability in the rules is highly desired. We have spent considerable effort optimizing our cars for the current rules and don't relish the idea of wholesale changes that will require us to do the same again. Also, we have bought into the time trial = fastest car wins model. If you fundamentally change that, we are talking about a different sport. I would bet that with very few exceptions, SoloSprint competitors would rather be fast than be consistent.
    James, I know and understand that you guys have worked hard to perfect the current system. I'm just throwing out some ideas here, nothing more. Your post made it sound like I have nothing good to offer here; I don't think that's true. If SoloSprint really is about the fatsest lap then why don't we score points throughout each classification as they do in F1: 10 points for a win, 8 points for second, 6 points for third, and so on? We could easily use each competitor's second fastest time to slot people due to 'ties' in the overall points race.

    If competitors are truly interested in the fastest lap scenario, then why don't we have a scoring mechanism which 'places' them according to their victories and/or second and third place finishes etc.? At present, the overall scoring mechanism is skewed to negate the importance of event placings as they accumulate throughout the year.

    Leave a comment:


  • lowrider
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by Dave Barker View Post
    Mike, organizers do NOT get victories but get to match their best finishes. Having a new ( to me ) car and the series champ in my class meant no class wins at all this season and no 100 point events including the one I organized.

    Believe me, even with the matching of your best finish points, people are not lining up to organize. We need a pretty big carrot.
    Sure, I understand. It was just a thought. I'm kind of thinking out loud on a variety of issues here.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dave Barker
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by lowrider View Post

    We all know how hard organizers work to help out with our Solo 1 events. Every participant is grateful and thankful for those efforts and we are all fortunate to have had individuals step up to the plate to help carry the load. That said, I would like to propose that ‘org’ points be handed out to organizers as an average of their best 6 results throughout the season and not as simple victories.

    Mike, organizers do NOT get victories but get to match their best finishes. Having a new ( to me ) car and the series champ in my class meant no class wins at all this season and no 100 point events including the one I organized.

    Believe me, even with the matching of your best finish points, people are not lining up to organize. We need a pretty big carrot.

    Leave a comment:


  • James Mewett
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by lowrider View Post
    Well it's nice to know that none of my ideas carry any weight with you. Thanks.
    Hey, I drafted the rule book for the last couple of years, so you have to expect that I am rather attached to it. For many of us stability in the rules is highly desired. We have spent considerable effort optimizing our cars for the current rules and don't relish the idea of wholesale changes that will require us to do the same again. Also, we have bought into the time trial = fastest car wins model. If you fundamentally change that, we are talking about a different sport. I would bet that with very few exceptions, SoloSprint competitors would rather be fast than be consistent.

    Craig's post has a good suggestion for anyone interesting in changing the status quo - score an event (or the season) using your suggested rule change and show us how it produces a better result. If you have a theory about a better method YOU should be prepared to show that it actually works better with real examples.

    Leave a comment:


  • craig
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    First of all, if rocket science is better, why not?

    I do agree that the scoring system is a bit much - but to me, not a rocket scientist, the only mildly confusing part is when PAX rears its head.

    The fundamental change that you are proposing is rewarding speed and consistency, rather than rewarding speed over consistency, as it is now. I believe that such a change is an entirely different kind of competition. I do not mind if separate events reward speed and consistency - SPDA ran a series like that a few years ago IIRC, and MCO scores (scored?) its 'Snowcross' series on consistency as well. In both cases, I believe, the times were just added up. Summing does what you do with your scoring, but is easier to implement and understand. However, I don't think scoring that way is SoloSprint.

    Classification: The best way to check a classification idea is to take a bunch of existing cars, class them, and see what comes out. I suspect that you'll find that your system results in a greater proportion of competitors with 'there's one car to have for this class' syndrome.

    BTW, my gutted, caged, car is street legal. The rules, as written, do encourage the installation of cages. That was the intent of the rulemakers, IIRC. I'm not saying this is still right or wrong, but there do have to be compelling reasons/advantages to change from the status quo.

    In essence, I only see the changes you have proposed; where is the rationale or case made for the changes? Why are these changes better?

    Leave a comment:


  • dubya_rx
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by James Mewett View Post

    Actually, I think you overestimate the interest in consistency. I think most SoloSprint competitors would say that the fastest car in a class should win - period. The backup score is only a necessary evil to break ties.

    I'll agree with all of your points except that one. backup points have ALWAYS determined the actual winner at any event I have participated in. If no one gets propositioned there are as many 100 point finishers as there are full classes. Thus most of the top three (or more) overall results are determined by backup times.

    Granted it has never affected me personally because I have never won my class.

    -Walter

    Leave a comment:


  • lowrider
    replied
    Re: Solo 1 Scoring & Classification Proposal

    Originally posted by James Mewett View Post
    These distinctions are completely arbitrary with no relationship with performance potential. How would this be interesting or fair? Suspension tuning has more to do with lap times than power, but is completely ignored by your proposal.
    How can you possibly say that distinguishing between street legal cars and non-street legal or 'gutted' racing cars has "no relationship with performance potential" or that it is "arbitrary"? For that matter, how can you deny that classifying all wheel drive cars separately is performance related. Well it's nice to know that none of my ideas carry any weight with you. Thanks.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X