Off Camber meltdown thread

[nrc]

A time limit on a race with no live TV? How utterly stupid is that? Otherwise it was entertaining and (at least in the chat room) we did ok with live video and timing.

[devilmaster]

A time limit on a race with no live TV? How utterly stupid is that? Otherwise it was entertaining and (at least in the chat room) we did ok with live video and timing.

cept Richard kept typing well well well and hang on to your hollyhocks waaaaaay too much ;)

and either cossie is psychic, or my lag was really lagged.

[dando]

:shakehead :saywhat: :mad:

-Kevin

[nrc]

cept Richard kept typing well well well and hang on to your hollyhocks waaaaaay too much! ;)
I even got a "WHOA!" in there for old times sake. :)

[devilmaster]

I even got a "WHOA!" in there for old times sake. :)

I was going to put in an OH MY! for JT265's sake..... ;)

and for really old times sake, I could pulled a dumb Brian Williams and ask Bobby Unser at which speed do these cars fly?

But of course the IRL came along and proved a dumb question smart. :shakehead

[jonovision_man]

I'm pissed at the point system, can I meltdown about that here? :)

Unless Bourdais has lots of gremlins, AJ can't catch up. Mind you, he might not even be in it if not for the ridiculous point system... still!!! I hate it, a win should be worth a lot more than 2nd or 3rd.

jono

[devilmaster]

I'm pissed at the point system, can I meltdown about that here? :)

Unless Bourdais has lots of gremlins, AJ can't catch up. Mind you, he might not even be in it if not for the ridiculous point system... still!!! I hate it, a win should be worth a lot more than 2nd or 3rd.

jono

k... jono's psychic, me and nrc are in chat talking about that very same thing. its scarys i tells ya. :eek:

btw, chat is still going... not a big group in today, but a decent group.

[JoeBob]

The rules are the rules.

If they say there's going to be a time limit, they have to follow the rules.

I'd love to see the time limit rule removed, but as long as it is in the rulebook, they have to follow it.

[Fio1]

They had a flight to catch! :laugh: Or maybe, they had to return the island to what is was before this weekend by a curtain time. I'm sure there was a good reason. Whatever, it was a great race! :thumbup:

[devilmaster]

They had a flight to catch! :laugh: Or maybe, they had to return the island to what is was before this weekend by a curtain time. I'm sure there was a good reason. Whatever, it was a great race! :thumbup:

I think its simply just the rule. 2 hour time limit from the race.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't even 2 full hours today. I believe they subtracted the time from yesterday's 7 laps from the total time.

[Ed_Severson]

A combination of things ... first, as has already been stated, it's in the rulebook, and you don't change the rules in the middle of a race. Personally, I think the rule sucks, but it's necessary for TV coverage, and we have to live with it for now.

Secondly, they only had permission from the city to run until 12:00. I just got home from Montreal, so I missed the race and have no idea what time they started or wrapped it up, but it may be that they couldn't have extended things any further.

And yes, they did start today with 14:15 elapsed from yesterday's 2-hour allotment.

[nrc]

The rules are the rules.

If they say there's going to be a time limit, they have to follow the rules.

I'd love to see the time limit rule removed, but as long as it is in the rulebook, they have to follow it.
But that's what meltdown threads are all about. The rule - no, reality - should change weekly to suit my mood.

Seriously, if they're declaring a time limit at the beginning of a race they should have the option of throwing it out after a red flag. If there's no hope of making the broadcast slot because of a red flag the rule only hurts the fans.

[G.]

it's in the rulebook, and you don't change the rules in the middle of a race. So why did they let Legge get her car fixed?

(someone prolly already answered this somewhere, Sorry if so.)

They let all teams work on the cars, I think.

I'm NOT complaining, the more cars the merrier.

Will they re-run the race on the 'net for free? Anyone?

Oh, wait, back OT.
Time limits suck, Montreal sucks, and @work firewalls suck.

[Dirty Sanchez]

So why did they let Legge get her car fixed?

(someone prolly already answered this somewhere, Sorry if so.)I have the same question :gomer:

[nrc]

I think it's just because they allowed everyone to work on their cars during the red. Didn't seem to help A.J. :(

[Dr. Corkski]

So according to the tech experts at ccf N/H were running without traction control to avoid suspicion and Pope Tracy still got his assed handed to him by the French guy. :laugh:

[nrc]

So according to the tech experts at ccf N/H were running without traction control to avoid suspicion and Pope Tracy still got his assed handed to him by the French guy. :laugh:Yes, but they still had to sabotage A.J. to win. ;)

[Ed_Severson]

So why did they let Legge get her car fixed?

(someone prolly already answered this somewhere, Sorry if so.

PKV was able to repair the car because Champ Car released the cars back to the teams after sitting in the garage for a bit. I have no guesses as to what the motivation was there ... I spent the majority of the weekend in the Atlantics paddock 2 miles away and I'm a little fuzzy on red flag procedures, but I do know that after some sitting around on their thumbs under red, the cars were released to the teams, making it legal for them to make any changes they wished.

I got nothing on any plans for TV/re-air/internet video. I don't work with those guys.

EDIT: I'm not 100% certain about this, but I believe the red flag procedures, for whatever reason, are not listed in the rulebook, but are available to the teams via bulletin. Can't explain that one either. :saywhat:

[coolhand]

So according to the tech experts at ccf N/H were running without traction control to avoid suspicion and Pope Tracy still got his assed handed to him by the French guy. :laugh:

That explains why sebass lost controll in turn 1, lap 1 :gomer:

[tifosi77]

What is being alledged is that NHR benefitted from their partnership with Toyota that involved the development of a trick clutch/differential that is able to effectively mimic traction control. (In a similar fashion to Ferrari's engine mapping in the late 90s that regulated power delivery in lower gears but wasn't technically traction control) But, since we are now nearly four years removed from that involvement, parts are running low, and their last complete assembly was destroyed as a result of the Denver shunt with Tracy.

The same poster is also saying NHR have discovered a way to modify the fuel pressure line and recalibrating the pressure sensor so that it gives wrong information to the ECU. This effectively changes the engine mapping without hacking the ECU, giving them marginally better fuel consumption and a bit better power to boot.

There are a lot of hoops to jump thru to make that assertion work. (For example, why does the clutch/diff break when pulling away from a shunt in Denver but remains hunky dory after post-victory donuts?) But one thing I will say; it's pretty apparent (to my ears) that the NHR cars sound different to everyone else. And you also can't deny that they get better mileage than anyone else while still managing to pull away from the pack. Plus, Bourdais did not look nearly as polished in Montreal as he has at other venues, despite still being convincingly quicker than everyone.

I had always put all that down to a combination of superior engineering/setup, the damper development program, and a world-class driver. But this guy really puts forward some compelling information. I'm not toally convinced (far from it, in fact) but there's certainly a lot of info to digest.

[coolhand]

If they were squeezing the engine like that they would be replacing more then other teams are. Is there any evidence of that?

[Willam]

I guess them cheaters was cheatin' today! :gomer:

Hell of a run by Sebastien even with that last yellow which to me looked more like a competition yellow than anything else, could be wrong though. Too bad AJ broke, would've loved to see him in a close championship run with the 3 great tracks coming up.

[tifosi77]

If they were squeezing the engine like that they would be replacing more then other teams are. Is there any evidence of that?
The changes to the engine fuel pressure lines and sensors basically lean out the overly rich fuel mixture and give NHR about .15 mpg better fuel mileage. The guts of the XFE was designed be run significantly harder than it has been these past few years, 15k rpm versus 12k rpm. And every motor is completely rebuilt every 1,200 miles, so that's the real target in terms of wonky gimmics and such. That's a lot of room to play with where reliability is concerned.

Just devil's advocate stuff here.

[Dr. Corkski]

That N/H cheat system must be so well hidden that none of the real engineers and ex-N/H drivers in the paddock could figure it out but an intardweb poster can! :gomer:

[KLang]

I guess them cheaters was cheatin' today! :gomer:

Hell of a run by Sebastien even with that last yellow which to me looked more like a competition yellow than anything else, could be wrong though. Too bad AJ broke, would've loved to see him in a close championship run with the 3 great tracks coming up.

The last yellow was due to a couple cars bypassing a chicane and depositing some cones on the track. That's what it looked like to me anyway. Quite a bit of action in the middle of the field for the last half of the race. :cool:

[jonovision_man]

That N/H cheat system must be so well hidden that none of the real engineers and ex-N/H drivers in the paddock could figure it out but an intardweb poster can! :gomer:

Heck, it's hidden so well even Junky can't find it! :D

jono

[Dr. Corkski]

Heck, it's hidden so well even Junky can't find it! :D

jono :laugh:

Some people would actually think you are 100% serious, too. :rofl:

[coolhand]

I like the part where they are saying NHR has private shock program, alot of teams can do this and build a relationship with a shock partner. It is not cheating

[jonovision_man]

k... jono's psychic, me and nrc are in chat talking about that very same thing. its scarys i tells ya. :eek:


Great minds think alike? :)

The exact same thing happened in F1 actually, they changed the point system so the championship would go down to the wire, failing to realize it would really only over-emphasize DNFs over actual performance.

I would rather see a win worth something like 40-50% more than 2nd, make it really worth pushing for in the championship. Bourdais was scolded for going for 2nd against PT... well the point system should be set up to encourage going for it, not sitting back to preserve points.

jono

[tifosi77]

I think its simply just the rule. 2 hour time limit from the race.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't even 2 full hours today. I believe they subtracted the time from yesterday's 7 laps from the total time.
Actually, I believe the time limit is 1hr 40min. It was 2hr last year, but that left no room for any post-race interviews. So they shortened it this year. Most events are given about 10 min of intro material before the green drops, so that leaves them with at least 10 min after a race for wrap ups and such while still staying within the two-hour TV timeslot.

[KLang]

Actually, I believe the time limit is 1hr 40min. It was 2hr last year, but that left no room for any post-race interviews. So they shortened it this year. Most events are given about 10 min of intro material before the green drops, so that leaves them with at least 10 min after a race for wrap ups and such while still staying within the two-hour TV timeslot.

Yesterday's TV timeslot was 2 1/2 hours. The time limits must vary with the length of the slot.

[Insomniac]

What is being alledged is that NHR benefitted from their partnership with Toyota that involved the development of a trick clutch/differential that is able to effectively mimic traction control. (In a similar fashion to Ferrari's engine mapping in the late 90s that regulated power delivery in lower gears but wasn't technically traction control) But, since we are now nearly four years removed from that involvement, parts are running low, and their last complete assembly was destroyed as a result of the Denver shunt with Tracy.

The same poster is also saying NHR have discovered a way to modify the fuel pressure line and recalibrating the pressure sensor so that it gives wrong information to the ECU. This effectively changes the engine mapping without hacking the ECU, giving them marginally better fuel consumption and a bit better power to boot.

There are a lot of hoops to jump thru to make that assertion work. (For example, why does the clutch/diff break when pulling away from a shunt in Denver but remains hunky dory after post-victory donuts?) But one thing I will say; it's pretty apparent (to my ears) that the NHR cars sound different to everyone else. And you also can't deny that they get better mileage than anyone else while still managing to pull away from the pack. Plus, Bourdais did not look nearly as polished in Montreal as he has at other venues, despite still being convincingly quicker than everyone.

I had always put all that down to a combination of superior engineering/setup, the damper development program, and a world-class driver. But this guy really puts forward some compelling information. I'm not toally convinced (far from it, in fact) but there's certainly a lot of info to digest.

Thanks for the info. I wondered how anyone could claim that with spec ECUs.

Isn't there an old saying, "if you're not cheating, you're not trying to win" or something?

[Insomniac]

I guess them cheaters was cheatin' today! :gomer:

Hell of a run by Sebastien even with that last yellow which to me looked more like a competition yellow than anything else, could be wrong though. Too bad AJ broke, would've loved to see him in a close championship run with the 3 great tracks coming up.

I thought Ranger punted the cones on to the track to cause the yellow.

[TKGAngel]

What happened to Philippe? I left for lunch (damn sales rep lunches in the middle of races), and he was in the lead, but T&S was saying that he needed a yellow to make it to the end. I come back, find out there was a yellow, and Seb won the race. Did he pit, or did Seb use his magical mystery cheating device to win the race?

[Dr. Corkski]

What happened to Philippe? I left for lunch (damn sales rep lunches in the middle of races), and he was in the lead, but T&S was saying that he needed a yellow to make it to the end. I come back, find out there was a yellow, and Seb won the race. Did he pit, or did Seb use his magical mystery cheating device to win the race?He pitted right before the yellow came out, but I am sure N/H found a way to syphon fuel out of Fabio's tank to force him to stop. :gomer:

[KLang]

What happened to Philippe? I left for lunch (damn sales rep lunches in the middle of races), and he was in the lead, but T&S was saying that he needed a yellow to make it to the end. I come back, find out there was a yellow, and Seb won the race. Did he pit, or did Seb use his magical mystery cheating device to win the race?

He did pit, came back out in third and THEN there was a yellow. It looked for a while we were going to see Nelson's first win.

[EDwardo]

When does the meltdown start?

:laugh:

[Insomniac]

In case you were wondering, with the old CART points system, it would look like this:

Bourdais 187
Allmendinger -48
Wilson -60

There would only be 69 points available in the final 3 races.

[nrc]

When does the meltdown start?

:laugh:
Hey, we're trying here. ;)

[Insomniac]

And Current F1:

Bourdais 82
Allmendinger -22
Wilson -24

30 points available in 3 races.

Old F1:

Bourdais 74
Allmendinger 23
Wilson 31

30 points available in 3 races.

I think any way you look at in, Bourdais has been dominant. Either wins or finishes on the podium (9 times, 6 wins, 1 2nd, 1 3rd). If he didn't tangle with PT in Denver, that would've been 10 podiums in 11 races. Anyone who drives that way all season is destroying the competition.

[Tifosi24]

Great minds think alike? :)

The exact same thing happened in F1 actually, they changed the point system so the championship would go down to the wire, failing to realize it would really only over-emphasize DNFs over actual performance.

I would rather see a win worth something like 40-50% more than 2nd, make it really worth pushing for in the championship. Bourdais was scolded for going for 2nd against PT... well the point system should be set up to encourage going for it, not sitting back to preserve points.

jono

This is an interesting suggestion, but I am not convinced that it would have a huge effect on single race performances. Without going into a drawn out explanation of tournament theory and competition externalities and how it relates to motor sports, my research into the subject leads me to conclude that the goal of the championship would still cause participants to hold back if a position is guaranteed. You have to have a really significant tournament effect before you are going see people risking it all to pick up one position, and I am talking an 75%+ decrease in points or a similar drop in prize winning.

[RHR_Fan]

When's Spic going to start going nuts about Nelson? :rofl:

[jonovision_man]

This is an interesting suggestion, but I am not convinced that it would have a huge effect on single race performances. Without going into a drawn out explanation of tournament theory and competition externalities and how it relates to motor sports, my research into the subject leads me to conclude that the goal of the championship would still cause participants to hold back if a position is guaranteed. You have to have a really significant tournament effect before you are going see people risking it all to pick up one position, and I am talking an 75%+ decrease in points or a similar drop in prize winning.

You seem to be assuming a high risk of crashing in any given manouver, when in fact it's really not that likely.

If you take the old F1 point system (10-6-4-3-2-1) and the odds of crashing at about 1 in 4 (without PT involved it's probably much lower than that :D) then risking 6 for 10 would be desirable in most cases if your goal is to maximize points.

And then there are cases like Schuey vs Alonso this weekend... fighting for 2nd (8 points) vs 3rd (6 points) which appears to only be a 2 point benefit, but in fact if Schuey had passed him he'd have taken 4 points out of Alonso's lead over where they sit today.

Bottom line: the more that's at stake, the more likely it is a competitor will go for it rather than lay back and take the bird in hand.

jono

[jonovision_man]

And Current F1:

Bourdais 82
Allmendinger -22
Wilson -24

30 points available in 3 races.

Old F1:

Bourdais 74
Allmendinger 23
Wilson 31

30 points available in 3 races.

I think any way you look at in, Bourdais has been dominant. Either wins or finishes on the podium (9 times, 6 wins, 1 2nd, 1 3rd). If he didn't tangle with PT in Denver, that would've been 10 podiums in 11 races. Anyone who drives that way all season is destroying the competition.

He has, and he deserves to win... this maybe isn't that good of an example of what's wrong with the point system. :)

jono

[devilmaster]

Hey, we're trying here. ;)

Yeah, we suck at this meltdown thingy. We need some people here who know how to do it.... hmmmm.....

Can we get some of the folks from trac.....ummmm..... uhhhhhh....

2nd thought, never mind. :D

[Dr. Corkski]

This is an interesting suggestion, but I am not convinced that it would have a huge effect on single race performances. Without going into a drawn out explanation of tournament theory and competition externalities and how it relates to motor sports, my research into the subject leads me to conclude that the goal of the championship would still cause participants to hold back if a position is guaranteed. You have to have a really significant tournament effect before you are going see people risking it all to pick up one position, and I am talking an 75%+ decrease in points or a similar drop in prize winning.The problem with the current Champ Car points system is that it rewards consistent mediocrity. It doesn't really affect the championship race this year other than hiding the lack of depth in the field this year.

Back in 1988 F1 actually only counted your 11 best results out of 16, as way to "minimize" the effects of DNFs on the championship.

If you apply that to the Champ Car season, and drop 3 the worst results, the standings would look something like this (not taking into account "penalties"):

1. (1) Bourdais 64 (68)
2. (2) Allmendinger 47
3. (3) J.Wil 42
4. (4) Pope Tracy 24
5. (5) Nelsonmania 16
6. (8) Blinky 15
7. (13) da Matta 12
8. (6) Dominguez 11
9. (9) Tags 10
10. (12) Servia 9
11. (11) Clarke 8
12. (7) Power 7
13. (16) Heylen 2
14. (10) Ranger 2
15. (17) Pastorelli 1
16. (14) Danica II 1
17. (20) Vasser 0
18. (19) Pizzonia 0
19. (18) Kasemets 0
20. (15) Zwolsman 0

Of course F1 got rid of that system as soon as Prost lost a title to Senna because of it. :rofl:

[devilmaster]

I haven't followed the point system at all since they changed it.

I just wait till the broadcast shows me who's winning the championship and I just accept it as fact. There really was no reason to change it.

[Insomniac]

He has, and he deserves to win... this maybe isn't that good of an example of what's wrong with the point system. :)

jono

I think I tracked the CCWS standings with various points systems in 2002, 2003 and 2004. It barely mattered IIRC. They could probably just avearge the finishing position and award the title to the driver with the lowest average finish and the champion would be the same. The points system is for fan interest and CCWS has turned theirs into a mess. F1 has kept it the simplest.

[tifosi77]

Yesterday's TV timeslot was 2 1/2 hours. The time limits must vary with the length of the slot.
I think you might be right. (Or at least more right than I was)


6.31.2. Race Time. At all events a maximum race time, exclusive of any red flag period(s), may be allotted for competition. Prior to the start of the event, the Race Director will declare whether or not a time limit exists for the event, as well as the maximum race time. When a time limit is in effect, as the lead car approaches the start/finish line and the elapsed race time approaches the declared time limit the white flag will be displayed. The race will end the next time the lead race car crosses the start/finish line. The Race Director’s decision in this regard is final and not subject to protest or appeal.
http://www.champcarworldseries.com/About/RuleBook2006.pdf

I thought there was a hard limit of 1hr 40min for each race, but apparently it's up to the race director on a case-by-case basis.

[nrc]

DM suggested a simple revision to fix this. "In the event of a red flag the Race Director may change or eliminate the time limit at his discretion."

I understand the desire to have the race end during the TV timeslot, but once a red flag makes it impossible to make your time slot there's no reason to end the race short of the original distance.

[devilmaster]

6.31.2. Race Time. At all events a maximum race time, exclusive of any red flag period(s), may be allotted for competition. Prior to the start of the event, the Race Director will declare whether or not a time limit exists for the event, as well as the maximum race time. The Race Director may alter or remove the maximum race time limit during a red flag period. When a time limit is in effect, as the lead car approaches the start/finish line and the elapsed race time approaches the declared time limit the white flag will be displayed. The race will end the next time the lead race car crosses the start/finish line. The Race Director’s decision in this regard is final and not subject to protest or appeal.

The rules as they stand don't allow for the removal of the max time limit after it has been announced that there will be one. That simple line in bold fixes that problem. If they wanted to run the full distance, they have that right. By only allowing the change during red flags, it ensures you can never change it during cars on the track and no one can claim shenanigans.

Perhaps there were other reasons why they couldn't go full distance today, but if the rules tripped them up, then I offer, respectfully, this change to the rules.

[jonovision_man]

I think I tracked the CCWS standings with various points systems in 2002, 2003 and 2004. It barely mattered IIRC. They could probably just avearge the finishing position and award the title to the driver with the lowest average finish and the champion would be the same. The points system is for fan interest and CCWS has turned theirs into a mess. F1 has kept it the simplest.

It barely matters when you apply different points systems to the same season, but that doesn't take into account the fact that drivers/teams might have acted differently if the system had more incentives. For me, the incentive should be there to take the risk. Wins should be worth a lot more than anything else, winning is hard, it's the prize.

I think it's completely absurd that a win is worth 31, one less than a 7th and an 8th. The reward is for finishing, not winning.



I haven't followed the point system at all since they changed it.

I just wait till the broadcast shows me who's winning the championship and I just accept it as fact. There really was no reason to change it.


Agreed...

jono

[rabbit]

They could probably just avearge the finishing position and award the title to the driver with the lowest average finish and the champion would be the same.
I've thought for a long time that this would be the simplest way to conduct a championship. Sorta like the MLB batting title.

[Indy]

The champion should be the one who wins the most races. Then run it down like a tiebreaker from there. Simple, with the greatest reward for higher positions, not just finishing.

[jonovision_man]

The champion should be the one who wins the most races. Then run it down like a tiebreaker from there. Simple, with the greatest reward for higher positions, not just finishing.

Agree 100%.

jono

[Wheel-Nut]

I stayed away from the CC forum for the most part yesterday so I could watch the Montreal CC race that was ran on Sunday, DVR'ed. What a great rain delay / red flag event!! :gomer:

Oh well, now I just have to avoid any F1 talk for the day.

[Insomniac]

It barely matters when you apply different points systems to the same season, but that doesn't take into account the fact that drivers/teams might have acted differently if the system had more incentives. For me, the incentive should be there to take the risk. Wins should be worth a lot more than anything else, winning is hard, it's the prize.

I think it's completely absurd that a win is worth 31, one less than a 7th and an 8th. The reward is for finishing, not winning.

I agree to a certain extent. The bigger problem isn't the points system, it's the racing. Passing wasn't this hard 5-10+ years ago. Because it's so hard, the risks are even greater for a position and the subsequent points you gain. Fix the racing and don't hand out points for showing up (that's my personal feeling). Right now, tweaking the points will probably just increase the number of crashes as opposed to the number of successful passes. We'll see what the DP01 does to the racing.

[Insomniac]

The champion should be the one who wins the most races. Then run it down like a tiebreaker from there. Simple, with the greatest reward for higher positions, not just finishing.

I disagree here. You shouldn't be the best if you were only the best for some races. You should be the best over all the races. It would reward PT like driving. Win or go home basically.

It would definitely be more entertaining. :) However, It wouldn't mean the guy who won the championship was the best driver out there.

[Insomniac]

I've thought for a long time that this would be the simplest way to conduct a championship. Sorta like the MLB batting title.

I'm sure that's what the points are for. Instead of being the lowest, you are the highest. For some reason, they keep making it more complex and gimmicky. Points for everyone, little reward for finishing first (31) over second (27) over third (25). 4 points (or 2) isn't much when you can get 31 next week. Then points for fastest lap, leading a lap, most positions gained...

[tifosi77]

I haven't followed the point system at all since they changed it.

I just wait till the broadcast shows me who's winning the championship and I just accept it as fact. There really was no reason to change it.
It's basically a subsidy for the poorer teams. By awarding points to the 'top 20 finishers' (in a series that hasn't had more than 18 regular starters for a couple years now) you extend the reach of the prize money.

It's bollocks, and I don't think it would have ever been contemplated much less implemented if the series were attracting healthy starting fields week in week out. The problem is, can they really change it next year if they get 22 (or more) cars?


The champion should be the one who wins the most races. Then run it down like a tiebreaker from there. Simple, with the greatest reward for higher positions, not just finishing.
Absolutely. The object of the exercise is winning. Not being very good at finishing second or lower. Gil de Ferran (bless him) won two 'championships' in which he won two races each year, which was fewer than his team mate scored each year. The irony is that the first year he didn't win a single race after June, iirc, and the second year he didn't win a race until the end of September!


However, It wouldn't mean the guy who won the championship was the best driver out there.
Then perhaps our undersanding of the word 'best' differs. ;)

If you do not win, you were not the best on that day. Therefore, awarding championships to drivers for finishing consistently in the points is rewarding them for not being the best. The champion should be, imo, the person who was the 'best' the most.

[Ed_Severson]

It's basically a subsidy for the poorer teams. By awarding points to the 'top 20 finishers' (in a series that hasn't had more than 18 regular starters for a couple years now) you extend the reach of the prize money.

It's bollocks, and I don't think it would have ever been contemplated much less implemented if the series were attracting healthy starting fields week in week out. The problem is, can they really change it next year if they get 22 (or more) cars?

Sorry, but I've got to step in here and correct this.

The prize money in no way depends on whether you earn any points or not. The change from the old points system, which awarded points to the top 12, to the new system, which awards points to the top 20, had nothing to do with prize money.

The idea behind the switch was (similar to NASCAR) to encourage teams to continue running during a race where they would previously have not had any hope of earning points, and therefore would likely have just withdrawn from the race. Cristiano's race at Cleveland earlier this year is a perfect example. A broken throttle cable on the first lap would have put them in P18 with no realistic hope of earning any points under the old points system ... da Matta would have driven into the pits, clmibed out, and RuSport would have packed it in. Instead, they made the lengthy repair and stayed out, completing 75 laps and moving up from P18 to P14 through attrition, gaining 4 championship points in the process.

The upside of this is that it keeps more cars out on track, which is not such a bad thing for a series with 16-18 regular starters. The downside is that it creates the possibility of someone 10 laps down causing trouble for one of the front-runners, and since Champ Car chose to keep the same gaps between 1st and 2nd (31-27 vs. 20-16) and 2nd and 3rd (27-25 vs. 16-14) as the old points system, it dilutes a win a little bit relative to the old points system.

That said, there are three guys who have won races this year -- Bourdais (6), Allmendinger (4), and Wilson (1). Bourdais leads the championship; Allmendinger is second; Wilson is third. Penalties excluded, the next four guys would be Tracy (4th), Philippe (5th), and Dominguez and Power (T-6th). Based on that, I'd say the points system has it pretty close to correct.

[cameraman]

What are calm responses with clear, correct facts doing in a "melt down" thread?????

[dando]

What are calm responses with clear, correct facts doing in a "melt down" thread?????

<corky> PT sucks! </corky>

Is that better? :gomer: ;)

-Kevin

[tifosi77]

Sorry, but I've got to step in here and correct this.

The prize money in no way depends on whether you earn any points or not. The change from the old points system, which awarded points to the top 12, to the new system, which awards points to the top 20, had nothing to do with prize money.
I stand corrected, then. I'm aware they wanted to encourage entrants to keep cars in the race, but I thought they also extended the prize money down the grid as a result as well.

[tifosi77]

What are calm responses with clear, correct facts doing in a "melt down" thread?????
Remember 'The Electric Company'.........

"Which one of these kids is doing his own thing....."

;)

[devilmaster]

What are calm responses with clear, correct facts doing in a "melt down" thread?????

damnit! we're trying, but it isn't as easy as it seems.... we have too many rational calm posters here.... :laugh:

[RHR_Fan]

What are calm responses with clear, correct facts doing in a "melt down" thread?????

Just start making fun of PT and Nelsonmania. :D

[G.]

:laugh: :rofl:

X 3

[Insomniac]

It's basically a subsidy for the poorer teams. By awarding points to the 'top 20 finishers' (in a series that hasn't had more than 18 regular starters for a couple years now) you extend the reach of the prize money.

Seems unnecessary. With 18 cars (at most), giving points down to P12 would've still yielded points. There wouldn't be a few people tied with 0 points at the bottom at the end of the season.


Then perhaps our undersanding of the word 'best' differs. ;)

If you do not win, you were not the best on that day. Therefore, awarding championships to drivers for finishing consistently in the points is rewarding them for not being the best. The champion should be, imo, the person who was the 'best' the most.

I guess so. The championship is awarded at the end of the season. Wins are awarded per race. To me, the guy who had the best average finish had the best performance of the season.

Also, if this was the case, what would happen to all the arguments from the PT haters? ;) He'd beat almost all his teammates every year in the championship. He might even have a couple more. :)

[rabbit]

What are calm responses with clear, correct facts doing in a "melt down" thread?????
http://www.offcamber.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1863 :thumbup:

[Opposite Lock]

melt-downs around here just aren't what they used to be:
http://www.offcamber.net/forums/showthread.php?t=6495&highlight=Pinniped :rofl:

[nrc]

melt-downs around here just aren't what they used to be:
http://www.offcamber.net/forums/showthread.php?t=6495&highlight=Pinniped :rofl:

I miss Railbird. :(

[devilmaster]

I miss Railbird. :(

and 4rnr. :(

[Spicoli]

When's Spic going to start going nuts about Nelson? :rofl:

:burp:

[TravelGal]

I like the part where they are saying NHR has private shock program, alot of teams can do this and build a relationship with a shock partner. It is not cheating

I'm a pretty regular poster over yonder but I've stayed away from that thread so I'll ask here. Is it normal to have a shock partner that refuses to sell to any other team but one? Is that what building a relationship means? I'm not trying to start a meldown (LOL), I'm just looking for a simple yes or no.

[coolhand]

I'm a pretty regular poster over yonder but I've stayed away from that thread so I'll ask here. Is it normal to have a shock partner that refuses to sell to any other team but one? Is that what building a relationship means? I'm not trying to start a meldown (LOL), I'm just looking for a simple yes or no.

I am sure Rodger had a deal like that for years with Penske Shocks.

Same old story as with any manufacturers in racing. Teams like coyne who could not afford that type of program probably were never able to estabilsh a relationship like that.

I heard back in the late 90s some teams like Pac-West were making and developing their own shocks in house. So I assume there are no restrictions on what shocks you use, but i am not positive about that

The shocks NHR are running probably had alot of imput from NHR engineers, Craig Hampson invented some stuff in the shock related areas

[edit] whoever is the coolhand in that thread is not Me

[edit2]Those are FCR fanboys making these allegations. I would not be surprised if they were employees too. considering that is the only team that let them post on the web.

[grungex]

I'd say you can take your [edit 2] and stick it where the sun don't shine. You're worse than some of the conspiracy theorists. :rolleyes:

[grungex]

I'm a pretty regular poster over yonder but I've stayed away from that thread so I'll ask here. Is it normal to have a shock partner that refuses to sell to any other team but one? Is that what building a relationship means? I'm not trying to start a meldown (LOL), I'm just looking for a simple yes or no.
It's not quite that simple. According to the rules, Dynamic must sell the dampers to anyone that asks. There are no delivery guarantees, however, nor does any of the development info get passed along.

It will be nice next year when this particular issue can be put to bed.

[coolhand]

You are exactly the type I am talking about :gomer:

Why does no other team have an Armada of internet propagandists

[coolhand]

It's not quite that simple. According to the rules, Dynamic must sell the dampers to anyone that asks. There are no delivery guarantees, however, nor does any of the development info get passed along.

It will be nice next year when this particular issue can be put to bed.

Dynamic si not the only shock company out there, you can get the same peformance curves out of other shocks too if you set them up right. NHR has things figured out. Just becuase your team does not it does not mean NHR is a bunch of cheaters.

[grungex]

Golly gee, where did I say NH was a bunch of cheaters? Travelgal asked a simple question, I gave a simple answer. You apparently have decided to extrapolate a whole lot from a couple of sentences. :rolleyes: :thumdown:

[nrc]

You are exactly the type I am talking about :gomer:

Why does no other team have an Armada of internet propagandists
Focus on the point and not the poster.

[Tony George]

peace in posting??? ,,, :gomer:

[tifosi77]

I'm a pretty regular poster over yonder but I've stayed away from that thread so I'll ask here. Is it normal to have a shock partner that refuses to sell to any other team but one? Is that what building a relationship means? I'm not trying to start a meldown (LOL), I'm just looking for a simple yes or no.
NHRs program is a little different. They've had a shock company (Dynamic Suspensions) doing developmental work for a looooong time now. I wanna say close to 10 years. It involves 7-post shaker rigs, near constant year-round simulations, and a whole heap of money. NHR has paid for all this, too, so it's essentially a bespoke system. What I've also heard is that Haas has a two-year exclusivity clause (meaning any customer of these shocks only has access to the development spec from two years ago), and that Dynamic charges so much money for them that NHR are essentially the only team that can afford to run them. (At least in this post-bankruptcy world)

Regardless, it's not illegal. Back before the mass defections, a lot of teams were running similar development programs. But since there were many teams doing similar things, advantages tended to be of a track-by-track nature and would largely even out over the course of a season. But NHR is the only team left in CC that has long-standing experience with such a program, so their advantage is now huge.

It may only be worth a couple hundreths a corner, but on most circuits it's enough to add up to a few tenths a lap. And that's before you put a smooth and consistent driver like Bourdais behind the wheel to maximize the advantage.

[grungex]

^^^
What he said. Additionally, Dynamic prefers to lease their shocks, rather than make them available for purchase, which has also caused some issues. At least one team has tried them, with limited success.

As far as the whole traction control thread on the other forum that started this last tangent, the only thing I found worthy of note was the mention of the carbon-carbon clutch that Champ Car has proposed using for the DP01. NH is adamantly against it, and nobody knows why. :confused:

[FTG]

Back before the mass defections, a lot of teams were running similar development programs.

How come Forsythe doesn't have one?

[KLang]

Ick. That traction control thread is just bizarre. :saywhat: They even banned Ed from it. :shakehead

[coolhand]

NHRs program is a little different. They've had a shock company (Dynamic Suspensions) doing developmental work for a looooong time now. I wanna say close to 10 years. It involves 7-post shaker rigs, near constant year-round simulations, and a whole heap of money. NHR has paid for all this, too, so it's essentially a bespoke system. What I've also heard is that Haas has a two-year exclusivity clause (meaning any customer of these shocks only has access to the development spec from two years ago), and that Dynamic charges so much money for them that NHR are essentially the only team that can afford to run them. (At least in this post-bankruptcy world)

Regardless, it's not illegal. Back before the mass defections, a lot of teams were running similar development programs. But since there were many teams doing similar things, advantages tended to be of a track-by-track nature and would largely even out over the course of a season. But NHR is the only team left in CC that has long-standing experience with such a program, so their advantage is now huge.

It may only be worth a couple hundreths a corner, but on most circuits it's enough to add up to a few tenths a lap. And that's before you put a smooth and consistent driver like Bourdais behind the wheel to maximize the advantage.


NHR is not spending more then forythe and RuSport per car. Again, you can get the same performance numbers out other other quality shocks too if you figure them out like the NHR guys have.

[coolhand]

Ick. That traction control thread is just bizarre. :saywhat: They even banned Ed from it. :shakehead

I am 100% sure they are not using TC. Ed is right about everything in that thread and so they ban him becuase it basically makes that place look like a madhouse.

[Wheel-Nut]

NHR Traction control.

http://www.upr.com/images_products/L_4678.jpg

[KLang]

I am 100% sure they are not using TC. Ed is right about everything in that thread and so they ban him becuase it basically makes that place look like a madhouse.

Oh I agree with you. It seems strange that very few people are questioning the credibility of the new 'insider' that is stirring schlitz up.

[TKGAngel]

Good grief, all of that nonsense happened in the past 24 hours? Crikey.

I've said it before Ed, but thanks for sharing your inside view of champcar. Sure I don't understand half of the technical talk, but you prove you know what you know. Some heads are just harder to penetrate than others.

[tifosi77]

How come Forsythe doesn't have one?
They may have focused their development in other areas for a long time. And don't forget, they were one of the last teams to switch to the Lola chassis, so they are at least a year or two behind NHR on that basis alone.


NHR is not spending more then forythe and RuSport per car. Again, you can get the same performance numbers out other other quality shocks too if you figure them out like the NHR guys have.
It's not so much a question of dollars per car as much as it is spending that money in the areas that give you the performance. Forsythe may be spending $2m a year on development of this widget or that doodad, but it's the $2m they are not spending on something else that can account for the performance gap.

Look at Forsythe: PT has been adamant about a few things regarding development, but they have (on first look, anyway) been counterproductive. Dominguez was fired in part cos he was 'reverse engineering' the car, running it closer to the 2003 spec. Well, he was the one delivering the speed for FCR at the beginning of the year, and then the new guy gets plonked into his car and immediately reels off four wins. Michael Cannon even thanked Mario D on TV for his work on the car after AJ won in Portland. Maybe the direction PT was taking the team was a blind alley? Who can say.


I am 100% sure they are not using TC. Ed is right about everything in that thread and so they ban him becuase it basically makes that place look like a madhouse.
I saw that this morning, and I am not engaged in a bit of a repartee with the site Admin over it. Cannot abide overly moderated forums, or selective punishment. Took Ed's advice and came here a few weeks ago as a result.

[FTG]

They may have focused their development in other areas for a long time.

Then that's Forsythe's problem.

[Dr. Corkski]

Then that's Forsythe's problem.Forsythe Racing has more important things to worry about like posting on intardweb forums.

[Ed_Severson]

Ick. That traction control thread is just bizarre. :saywhat: They even banned Ed from it. :shakehead

Pretty funny stuff over at paperwagon, as usual. Banning me from that thread was laughable, but it's all good. I banned myself from there altogether, but the important thing is that it made one of the mods feel like a tough guy for five minutes. :gomer:

By the way, on the Newman/Haas vs. Forsythe vs. RuSport bit ... I would have had a very different opinion a few months ago, but I think it's fairly obvious now that Forsythe is damn near equal to Newman/Haas in terms of engineering development, and RuSport is further behind than I thought they were.

Allmendinger has a great deal of talent, but he's not significantly better (if any better at all) than Bourdais, so winning four races in that car shows me that Forsythe has nearly identical capability to Newman/Haas if they have somebody in the cockpit that can take advantage of it. Not very flattering for Tracy or Dominguez when you assess their early-season performance form that perspective, and it gives me a great deal of respect for Justin Wilson, who has evidently been putting RuSport's engineering program on his back and carrying them all year long. After Milwaukee, I really thought Forsythe was missing something and RuSport was on the verge of overtaking Newman/Haas.

<---- Wrong on both counts.

[Ed_Severson]

I've now been invited to return to the thread over at CCF. For some odd reason, I don't feel compelled to accept the invitation. I'll say one other thing, and then drop the matter altogether ...

Although I can be causticly sarcastic at times, I do my best to treat people with at least the same level of respect they show me. While some people at other locations on the internet obviously don't understand that approach, you guys have always made it easy. I'm just happy that there's at least one Champ Car website out there where nobody loses sight of the fact that we're all here for the same reason.

In short, you guys are awesome, and there's no place like home. :thumbup:

[RHR_Fan]

Browsing that thread was sort of entertaining - so much attacking, whining, etc. I just wanted to see why some people were pissed at our Ed! I admit to posting there, but I always stay out of those types of threads. At any forum I try and "watch my mouth" since you never know who's reading. I always think before I make my posts. I guess I still have that mentality from when I started posting years ago since I didn't want to be thought of as the 13-yr old who just spouts out stuff.

~Nicole

[Ankf00]

http://www.davidlnelson.md/Cazadero/CazImages/Dodo_bird.jpg

[FTG]

Look at Forsythe: PT has been adamant about a few things regarding development, but they have (on first look, anyway) been counterproductive. Dominguez was fired in part cos he was 'reverse engineering' the car, running it closer to the 2003 spec.

PT has been faster since Dinger arrived. He also changed to left foot braking after Dinger arrived, based on Dinger's data. It says to me that PT was telling the truth. He and Mario were running different set ups, now they're running very similar set ups and the team has gotten faster.