BTCC General Discussion Thread

[Craner Curves]

Originally Posted by emicen

Like the Honda Civic that sat at KH for a few weeks before the BTCC last year. Generally they are stripped and caged with buckets, upgraded brakes but road engines.

In the case of the Honda it had standard brakes on the back and standard Type R running gear to be used for passenger laps.

And it was a turbo-diesel.

[BtccLee]

Here is an intersting topic perhaps: Will the quality of the grid remain at this 2014 high? Are we likely to see all the champions, particularly Menu and Giovanardi stick around?

With a few manufactures supposedly looking at the WTCC, surely they would be intersted in picking up some of those star names? I know it is in the future, but interesting non the less.

[thetool]

There's always manufacturers touted to be joining. They rarely do, and even on the occasions when they do so, it's often at the cost of an existing one. (Citroen in for Chevrolet, Honda in for BMW).

[BtccLee]

Perhaps an interesting discussion point, one which I hope it is appropriate to raise here. When is Motor Sport not actually Motor Sport? I am trying to link back to something raised on the BTCC.net forum. Basically with boost, ballast and I feel I should add reversed grids, is the BTCC simply too contrived, too artificial. Linking back to the original point, does this mean it cannot be Motor Sport, merely motorised entertainment?

The above are not really my own feelings, my response would be this:

The BTCC is sport and any sport at any level is entertainment. The BTCC is one of the few series to embrace the entertainment aspect whilst not losing the spirit of the sport. The boost and ballast are small changes; the reverse grid gives different drivers a chance to run at the front. In fact you could argue all of those things, by challenging the drivers and forcing them to adapt and improve, improve the sport. That’s how I look at it. These aren’t the words of someone who has no interest in "Pure" Motor Sport, I love series such as FRenault 3.5 where cars start in the order they qualify and go at it for 45 minutes. Motor Racing to me is Motor Racing, if it involves racing things with wheels and the aim is to win then I will watch it and love it. (I also love the Porsche Carrera Cup GB, which may prove more controversial than what I have just said!)

To me though the BTCC is a bit special, the racing is just fantastic. I acknowledge some people consider the boost and the ballast and the reverse grids as artificial, as some people find DRS and KERS artificial in F1. So do I care about the artifice, if the racing honestly leaves me breathless? Not one bit and in my view, if you chose to over analyze it, you will spoil the sport for yourself.

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by BtccLee

Perhaps an interesting discussion point, one which I hope it is appropriate to raise here. When is Motor Sport not actually Motor Sport? I am trying to link back to something raised on the BTCC.net forum. Basically with boost, ballast and I feel I should add reversed grids, is the BTCC simply too contrived, too artificial. Linking back to the original point, does this mean it cannot be Motor Sport, merely motorised entertainment?

It's no more contrived than F1 - a 'sport' where money dictates where you finish and your allocation of that money is based on 'historical significance' and/or whatever Bernie decides.

[Bramzel]

Motor sport is not sport anymore like it was in the sixties and seventies. Sponsorships and financial interests and targets have made it also a Marketing tool that needs to entertain to generate money and publicity.

[BtccLee]

Originally Posted by Bramzel

Motor sport is not sport anymore like it was in the sixties and seventies. Sponsorships and financial interests and targets have made it also a Marketing tool that needs to entertain to generate money and publicity.

Arguably then nothing is now "sport", particularly things like Football, because marketing is so prevalent everywhere.

[S griffin]

I'd rather not have the ballast, but hey it's better than other series spicing up the show. At least the rules on ballast are set, so you know where you are with it and it's not random at all.

Yes some of the things are artificial, but compared to the F1 ways of spicing it up, BTCC is one of the closest to pure racing. That said, I think that they should get rid of the boost rules, that can be too random and we don't need it at the end of the day.

[codename_47]

I'm tired of the purism argument being trotted out and used as a stick to beat the BTCC with.

Let's face it, purism isn't worth watching. Fastest cars at the front, slowest at the back. No overtaking. Yawn.

There are plenty of series out there to settle the purists desires.
Because there's nothing else on I've just watched 4 hours of sportscars from Imola, and aside from a couple of overtakes and a couple of cars stopping with mechanical issues, it had less excitement than a late 90s F1 Hungaroring race but spread out over a long time
But their fans in its forum are hooting and hollering about how great that race was. *shrug*

BTCC is primarily entertainment but I don't understand the whole notion of that being a negative thing.
It has a high amount of overtaking, yes because of this not all of the overtaking ends successfully and there are a few shunts, that's just a ratio thing, more passes=more chances for it to go wrong.

There's a lot of snobbery about the BTCC. I guess its just jealousy because its Britains most popular championship, but more series should follow in its wake and learn from it instead of pooh-poohing it out of snobbery and going in the opposite direction.
Look at what Gow has done with it, amazing TV deal, huge crowds, full grids, great racing and lots of loyal fans to talk about it.
I can't see any argument about how any of that can be seen as a bad thing, but still people will bang the anti-BTCC drum, particularly if you ever read the Marshals' forum, where they treat it as if it was something they found on the bottom of their show.

If purists were put in charge of all motorsport tomorrow, there'd be about 3 seasons of excruciatingly dull racing (Read DTM) then the whole sport would be over and forgotten about in 5 years.

Racing needs excitement. It's not a dirty word.

[Greem]

Like here, the folks on the marshals forum who hate the BTCC will post loudly and often.

Don't take their view as representative of everyone.

[Greem]

Oh, in case you were wondering about purity: there is no "pure" motorsport. Dig back through the F1 forum to see my explanation of why.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by codename_47

There are plenty of series out there to settle the purists desires.
Because there's nothing else on I've just watched 4 hours of sportscars from Imola, and aside from a couple of overtakes and a couple of cars stopping with mechanical issues, it had less excitement than a late 90s F1 Hungaroring race but spread out over a long time
But their fans in its forum are hooting and hollering about how great that race was. *shrug*

I haven't seen the ELMS race so I can't comment on that specific example but if you were expecting a 4-hour endurance race to have the 'rubbin is racin' wheel-to-wheel style of a 20 min touring car race then you were always going to be disappointed.

BTW most GT and Le Mans style racing is subject to Balance of Performance adjustments so not sure you can use that as an example of 'pure' motorsport either.

[medius]

Is Simon Belcher's Avensis getting reshelled? I thought United Autosports had the last Avensis shell after James Cole's Donington accident (Tony Hughes' shell).

[cos]

Belcher said the shell was repairable.

[BtccLee]

Originally Posted by Greem

Oh, in case you were wondering about purity: there is no "pure" motorsport. Dig back through the F1 forum to see my explanation of why.

I was going to respond and say there is still “pure” Motor Sport, at the risk of causing a wider debate, I was going to reference bike racing. But on second thoughts, the British Superbikes have the NASCAR style chase system and I do not think you can argue MotoGP as being 100% pure. I suppose it is more difficult with bikes to add something like ballast, within certain parameters. However, then again I have far less interest in bikes, in fact it is limited to the occasional MotoGP, so perhaps I am just ignorant. I cannot think of bike series with reverse grids either, although feel free to contradict me here.
On another note, I asked Alan Gow on the BTCC forum about the prospect of new teams or existing teams wanting to expand. The short answer is simply they have to obtain another team’s TBL, there aren’t going to be new TBL’s added so the grid won’t really go above 31. Gow has always made it plain he would rather have 30 cars though, so I wonder if he will try and regain a TBL at some stage.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by BtccLee

On another note, I asked Alan Gow on the BTCC forum about the prospect of new teams or existing teams wanting to expand. The short answer is simply they have to obtain another team’s TBL, there aren’t going to be new TBL’s added so the grid won’t really go above 31. Gow has always made it plain he would rather have 30 cars though, so I wonder if he will try and regain a TBL at some stage.

There's no point expanding beyond 32 cars as that's the most Brands and Knockhill can accommodate. The point of a TBL is that it is a full season commitment - not really fair to then then tell teams who have made that commitment that they may not get to race at some circuits.

At least two cars have already had to claim force majeure and miss a round, so potentially could lose their TBL at the end of the year. I'm sure by the end of the year they won't be the only two candidates.

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by BtccLee

I was going to respond and say there is still “pure” Motor Sport, at the risk of causing a wider debate, I was going to reference bike racing. But on second thoughts, the British Superbikes have the NASCAR style chase system and I do not think you can argue MotoGP as being 100% pure. I suppose it is more difficult with bikes to add something like ballast, within certain parameters. However, then again I have far less interest in bikes, in fact it is limited to the occasional MotoGP, so perhaps I am just ignorant. I cannot think of bike series with reverse grids either, although feel free to contradict me here.

At the end of the day it doesn't really matter. Like almost everybody else, I watch the BTCC to be entertained and it ticks all the boxes in that respect.

[BtccLee]

Originally Posted by davyboy

At the end of the day it doesn't really matter. Like almost everybody else, I watch the BTCC to be entertained and it ticks all the boxes in that respect.

I think that's the answer... I agree entirely.

[Greem]

http://www.btcc.net/2014/05/28/btcc-...h-motor-sport/

Interesting.

The commercial tie-in is clever, but seems a bit opportunist to me. I wonder if something else prompted this change rather than a simple commercial partnership?

Discuss

[Bramzel]

I was positively surprised when I read the article. I think its a great idea, making sure the people who need to be sharp stay that way.

[steve_r]

It sounds like a good way of promoting the anti-drink-driving message. Although if you finish int he first three in a race - what do you get? A big bottle of alchoholic drink...

What happens if one of the podium finishers in the first two races takes a big swig of his champagne?

[redshoes]

Having done the commercial tie-in with Hunter Abbott's sponsor are they now going to do the same with James Cole's and introduce a mandatory 20mph speed limit.

[mattt]

Originally Posted by redshoes

Having done the commercial tie-in with Hunter Abbott's sponsor are they now going to do the same with James Cole's and introduce a mandatory 20mph speed limit.

There already is a speed limit (on the internal roads) of 10 or 20mph. Maybe a lower pitlane speed limit of 20mph could be used

[redshoes]

I was thinking on track

[Craner Curves]

Ah, so that's why Chris James didn't get an entry this year.