|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
9 Mar 2009, 10:30 (Ref:2412001) | #51 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 840
|
Good job.
|
|
__________________
"Without racing there is no Honda". Soichiro Honda |
9 Mar 2009, 10:34 (Ref:2412007) | #52 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,493
|
I think it is far too early to start griping about equivalency formulas.
If Muller & Priaulx had not been involved in that first race incident, the story may have been different. As for race 2, FWD cars will always have an advantage over RWD cars in wet conditions. |
|
|
9 Mar 2009, 10:36 (Ref:2412009) | #53 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 18,741
|
If the data in your table is correct we can conclude there isn't much difference between Seat and BMW during the races.
I have to say both races were boring. |
|
|
9 Mar 2009, 10:40 (Ref:2412010) | #54 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,493
|
||
|
9 Mar 2009, 13:00 (Ref:2412138) | #55 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,545
|
I think it is, but since I copied the numbers from the official WTCC manually, I might have made errors. Here is the whole input data if someone would like to put an extra set of eyes on verifying the numbers.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
9 Mar 2009, 13:13 (Ref:2412146) | #56 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,545
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
|
9 Mar 2009, 13:21 (Ref:2412156) | #57 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 8,935
|
Few things to amend on your calculations.
- If the 2nd car is more than 0.3s slower than the first car then you take the first car's time + 0.3s rather than the actual time set by the 2nd car. That applies to Petrol Leon (R1/R2) and Lada (Q/R1/R2) - If only one car takes part in a session that time will be used in place of the average of the fastest two. Not sure if that applies to Chevy R1 as three cars did take part but only one set a lap time. There is provision for the stewards to give a nominal time if one can not be calculated. - Averages for the 3 sessions (Q/R1/R2) are weighted, 1.5, 1.0, 1.0 - I believe the 'best' lap is based on the weighted average of the 3 sessions not from each session separately. - Differences should be round to 2 decimal places - There's some reference in the regs to scaling the lap times to a standard of 114 seconds but I'm not sure I understand what they mean. PDF regs Last edited by redshoes; 9 Mar 2009 at 13:22. Reason: fixed link |
|
|
9 Mar 2009, 13:33 (Ref:2412170) | #58 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,545
|
Thanks red, will update my spreadsheet with the stuff missing
|
|
|
9 Mar 2009, 14:36 (Ref:2412224) | #59 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,720
|
Quote:
eg BMW 57 seconds --- 114 seconds SEAT 59 seconds --- 118 seconds CHEVY 61 seconds --- 122 seconds LADA 63 seconds --- 126 seconds And then the penalty weights applied based on those times. |
|||
|
9 Mar 2009, 14:56 (Ref:2412231) | #60 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,411
|
Anyone else's head hurt right now trying to understand that?
|
||
__________________
Don't exacerbate things! |
9 Mar 2009, 15:20 (Ref:2412251) | #61 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,545
|
||
|
9 Mar 2009, 15:25 (Ref:2412253) | #62 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 840
|
they should have used the average speed, instead of time.
|
|
__________________
"Without racing there is no Honda". Soichiro Honda |
9 Mar 2009, 15:31 (Ref:2412258) | #63 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,545
|
Well speed x time = distance, so it's essentially the same. And since not all tracks are the "same" speed and have the same weather conditions you still need to compensate in the same way to ensure the stated limits of eg 0.3s difference actually mean a fixed thing.
|
|
|
9 Mar 2009, 18:09 (Ref:2412369) | #64 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,225
|
If that race had been say 5 laps longer the BMW's would have been chasing down the SEATs.
The races are just too short for BMW to really play there joker card which is, tyre preservation. FIA should ask the teams to increase race distances by 5-6 laps, then watch SEAT scream. |
||
|
9 Mar 2009, 21:38 (Ref:2412530) | #65 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,545
|
Quote:
PS Green values are the input data and the orange is what comes out the other end that goes into the "rolling average calculations". Do let me know if you find something that looks weird in there, Im sure there can easily be some bugs/misinterpretations left. |
||
|
10 Mar 2009, 04:42 (Ref:2412751) | #66 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 39
|
Quote:
|
||
|
10 Mar 2009, 09:11 (Ref:2412809) | #67 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,264
|
||
__________________
Michael Delaney was wrong. In between is not waiting - in between is the glory, the passion. In between is what elevates racing. |
10 Mar 2009, 09:32 (Ref:2412822) | #68 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 11,225
|
I think even if they added 100Kg to the base SEAT TDI weight that they would still win or be in a position to win every race.
The way to level things out is to reduce boost pressure of the diesels, though im not sure if the FIA have made a rod for their own back when it comes to the criteria or even how they go about equalising performance. |
||
|
10 Mar 2009, 14:32 (Ref:2412973) | #69 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 39
|
||
|
10 Mar 2009, 15:30 (Ref:2413011) | #70 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,545
|
Really? Is that why BMW demanded -15kg weight for BOTH races when they changed to 1 race having a rolling start? Its not like standings starts are not universally know to give a RWD advantage while rolling are F/RWD neutral. They are all equally good whiners, the reason you might think something else is because the rules gave BMW the advantage and crown every year sofar except last year... and whoopsie doo, BMW immediately started to threaten with dropping out of WTCC entirely for not winning 1 year...
|
|
|
10 Mar 2009, 16:06 (Ref:2413034) | #71 | |
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 429
|
Are there any Lada fans here? I always like to support the underdog, especially when a Dutchman is driving for them
|
|
|
10 Mar 2009, 17:05 (Ref:2413073) | #72 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 39
|
Quote:
its really normal to fight for what they want but i dont like the way that they act its f***in annoying |
||
|
10 Mar 2009, 17:30 (Ref:2413095) | #73 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,545
|
Quote:
Personally I hope for more manufacturers to join WTCC, like LADA, so when Chevy/BMW/SEAT go on with their silly demands and threats about leaving WTCC can just give them the finger. |
||
|
10 Mar 2009, 19:00 (Ref:2413148) | #74 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 809
|
The difference is that BMW wanted a weight change because they built a car according to the sporting rules that were in place at the time. When these changed without notice, BMW no longer had a car optimised for the WTCC, despite it being perfect for the championship when they designed it. SEAT complained because they had an aerodynamically inefficient car.
Personally I think all this equalisation really devalues the series. They need to make a set of rules and stick by it, give a base weight change for RWD vs FWD and do away with diesel all together. Then the teams have to try and build the best car, not rely on handicaps. |
||
|
10 Mar 2009, 19:06 (Ref:2413151) | #75 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 39
|
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mondello March 8th | peespeed | Rallying & Rallycross | 48 | 15 Mar 2009 10:45 |
[WTCC] 2009 Predictions Competition, Round 1 Curitiba (BRA) - Results! And the winner is... | FIRE | Touring Car Racing | 26 | 14 Mar 2009 20:00 |
[WTCC] Race 1 & 2 - Curitiba (BRA), 1/2 March 2008 | FIRE | Touring Car Racing | 151 | 10 Mar 2008 22:21 |
[WTCC] Race 1 & 2 - Curitiba (BRA), 10/11 March 2007 | FIRE | Touring Car Racing | 118 | 15 Mar 2007 00:00 |
[WTCC] Race 9 & 10 - Curitiba (BRA), 1/2 July 2006 | FIRE | Touring Car Racing | 64 | 4 Jul 2006 21:34 |