[WTCC] Race 1 & 2 - Curitiba (BRA), 8th March 2009

[Stefvh]

Good job.

[Super Hans]

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.

[FIRE]

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.

[Super Hans]

Originally Posted by FIRE

I have to say both races were boring.

I don't think anyone could argue with that.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by FIRE

If the data in your table is correct

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.

BMW 320si	Qualy	Race1	Race2
1st	1:24,637	1:25,710	1:34,944
2nd	1:24,749	1:25,747	1:35,054

Leon TDI	Qualy	Race1	Race2
1st	1:24,196	1:25,662	1:34,948
2nd	1:24,315	1:25,760	1:35,046

Leon TFSI	Qualy	Race1	Race2
1st	1:26,026	1:26,512	1:35,920
2nd	1:26,220	1:26,838	1:36,775

Cruze	Qualy	Race1	Race2
1st	1:24,534	1:25,806	1:34,837
2nd	1:24,831	0:00,000	1:34,914

Lada 110	Qualy	Race1	Race2
1st	1:26,753	1:27,241	1:35,811
2nd	1:27,585	1:27,765	1:37,145

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by Super Hans

If Muller & Priaulx had not been involved in that first race incident, the story may have been different.

Add also that Menu was taken out in the same incident.

As for race 2, FWD cars will always have an advantage over RWD cars in wet conditions.

Not necessarily. Look eg at BTCC (which often has wet races), IF you have a fully wet track and a full wet setup, BMW can be quite competitive. However intermediate/changing conditions and/or intermediate setups and BWM as you say suffers heavily relative FWD.

[redshoes]

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

[stedevil]

Thanks red, will update my spreadsheet with the stuff missing

[Alfa Fan]

Originally Posted by redshoes

- 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.

I believe it means that whatever the fastest lap is it is arbitrarily scaled to 114 seconds, and then all the time differences set, remaining at the same percentage as they were before.

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.

[Craner Curves]

Anyone else's head hurt right now trying to understand that?

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by Craner Curves

Anyone else's head hurt right now trying to understand that?

Nope, and it's quite logical as well. Otherwise the length of time it takes to drive around the track arbitrarily affects the penalty weights.

[Stefvh]

they should have used the average speed, instead of time.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by Stefvh

they should have used the average speed, instead of time.

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.

[Sodemo]

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.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

If that race had been say 5 laps longer... ...then watch SEAT scream.

I dont think anybody would scream. All the weight adjustments and other equalizations are done with a specific race lenght in mind. If that would change, so would the equalization measures. It wouldnt be an equalization otherwise. Meanwhile, got some time to fix my spreadsheet, but gave up trying to make it display correct on the forum. So here is an image instead.

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.

[smokinjo]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

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.

indeed. they scream for everything

[Jimmy Magnusson]

Originally Posted by smokinjo

indeed. they scream for everything

Everyone does. Bunch of whiners.

[Sodemo]

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.

[smokinjo]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Magnusson

Everyone does. Bunch of whiners.

but not acting like a child who lose his toy

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by smokinjo

but not acting like a child who lose his toy

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...

[AX lover]

Are there any Lada fans here? I always like to support the underdog, especially when a Dutchman is driving for them

[smokinjo]

Originally Posted by stedevil

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...

im not talkin about what they demanded
its really normal to fight for what they want
but i dont like the way that they act
its f***in annoying

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by smokinjo

im not talkin about what they demanded
its really normal to fight for what they want
but i dont like the way that they act
its f***in annoying

Whom? BMW? And act how?
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.

[awrb]

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.

[smokinjo]

Originally Posted by stedevil

Whom? BMW? And act how?
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.

i mean SEAT