|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
7 Oct 2011, 14:01 (Ref:2967154) | #1251 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 508
|
Quote:
Porsche don't want the 911 to be superceeded as their main brand. So if a 911 can't beat a Ferrari in a straight fight you have to have BoP. We have LMP for a pure technical fight. GT is a branding exercise. Ben |
|||
|
7 Oct 2011, 14:16 (Ref:2967157) | #1252 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
I don't watch racing to be entertained by wheel-to-wheel action. If I did, I definitely would not have chosen endurance sports car racing to be the type of racing I follow! I like following this sport in order to see the development of the racing cars over the months and years. The races are just the showcase of the progress the teams have made. Yes, I do enjoy a close race when there is one (like Le Mans this year), but those close races are extra special because they mean something. It really means something when two or more teams have spent millions of dollars developing something for many months using different ideas only to have it end up being so equal to others after several hours on a track. That's special. It's also a bit rare, but that's what makes it so special. We have some special racing right now with different ideas executed in a well-polished manner running so closely. It would be even better if a particular team did not employ crash test dummies as drivers, but that is a different story.
I know the ALMS GT action has been hot and heavy this year, but let's face it. I could just fast forward through the whole race and watch the last 5 laps and not really miss anything. I guess that's what you get with performance balancing, many FCYs, and late FCYs in particular. Ok, it's not completely random. Jaguar is never in contention for example, but I still don't know what to make of the results. Anyway, I have the solution to those of you who want endurance sports car racing to be more enjoyable: don't watch the races live and instead watch highlights. You get all the action and none of the filler. Oh, and I thought Imola was rather interesting. Estoril too. I guess I'm just strange like that though. |
|
|
7 Oct 2011, 14:24 (Ref:2967160) | #1253 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 508
|
Quote:
If you want sponsors involved then you need an exciting product. You can't on the one hand talk about a lack of entertainment being ok and then casually talk about someone spending millions to build a car. Do you honestly think Audi and Peugeot would have spent millions without a cast iron power advantage over petrol in the regs? They needed to be incentivised to take the technical risk. If the peak power output of a diesel was the same as petrol in the regs they would not have done it. Same as Porsche don't bring a hybrid GT car with the same fuel tank capacity as the GTE's - it's a GT3 carrying more fuel, and that is why it stops less... Ben |
|||
|
7 Oct 2011, 14:27 (Ref:2967163) | #1254 | ||
Racer
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 430
|
Quote:
|
||
|
7 Oct 2011, 14:34 (Ref:2967167) | #1255 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
I feel pretty confident in saying that Audi and Peugeot are not spending $100+ million on their LMP1 efforts because of the awesome TV ratings the ILMC and the LMS before that got. The reason why companies want to spend money on this type of racing is because the technology gets talked about a lot by non-TV automotive media. Automotive forums, blogs, magazines, and so forth. It's a captive audience. You see a lot more coverage of sports cars on those forms of media than you will of Indycar or any other form of racing that has totally forgotten that TV watching housewives aren't the only potential demographic.
I read some other forums that have nothing to do with racing or cars even and I see Audi LMP1 diesels being discussed quite often whenever there is a discussion about someone considering a fuel efficient grocery getter and so forth. Peugeot would probably be mentioned too, but this is the US so Peugeot isn't so well known anymore. The people talking about the R10/R15/R18s aren't racing fans and they probably have never seen an ILMC race on TV or in person, but they have probably read about the technology somewhere. So, yeah, that's what makes this kind of racing special. |
|
|
7 Oct 2011, 16:35 (Ref:2967216) | #1256 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,129
|
the purpose of a safety period and a safety car is to maintain safety, not to make the race more exciting.
If Americans need safety periods because the races are not exciting enough, they should not watch endurance racing. I did not see Imola, (coincided with the Goodwood Festival of Speed), so I cannot say whether it was boring or not. Peugeot won, so that might be boring by definition for some I did see PLM (a streamed version) and I found the safety car periods extremely annoying. So please do not impose the IMSA rules upon us. If we need "exciting" races make them 20 laps, but not 10 hours. I find the safety car periods dishonest towards the cars that managed to get a time advantage by proper racing, by being better/faster or what ever, and see that advantage subsequently being reduced to zero, because of some non-descript incident that brought out the safety car. Therefore in the interest of honest racing, safety cars should be kept at bay as much as possible. |
||
__________________
pieter melissen |
7 Oct 2011, 18:27 (Ref:2967250) | #1257 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,648
|
Quote:
I was at Petit Le Mans live and there were a lot of spins that did not involve Full Course Cautions. There was literally a prototype that spun on the front stretch, sat there for 2 laps, got going again and there was no caution. There were also a lot of spins in the esses where the guys got going again with no safety cars. But all of these safety cars were legitimate in the sense that there were cars stopped on the track, not because of some phantom debris cautions to bunch the field up like NASCAR. If you want to get of US Safety Cars you have to do two things: 1. Give LMP1s more horsepower so they don't have to divebomb the lap traffic in the turns to keep their momentum up. 2. Make IMSA rules like the Le Mans 24 Hours rules where you have to get your car back to the pits yourself or your car is done. There were lots of instances at Petit where drivers couldn't make it back to the pits so instead of pulling off somewhere safe, they just would park by the track and get towed back to the pits. In fact, the Patron car said on the radio when he parked at turn 6/7 "this should be a good spot to bring out a safety car". |
||
|
7 Oct 2011, 18:40 (Ref:2967255) | #1258 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,129
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
pieter melissen |
7 Oct 2011, 19:46 (Ref:2967292) | #1259 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,474
|
|||
|
9 Oct 2011, 11:23 (Ref:2968017) | #1260 | |
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 10,744
|
I don't know about competitive racing but I'm tired of all the bulls*itting going on behind the curtains.... fine you can give the same base weights and air restrictors to all cars as they're theoretically doing right now (1245kg and restrictor according to capacity in GT2) but for the love of god, in-season adjustments and tweaks belong to GT3... and giving biggest restrictors to your championship winning car is just stupid.
|
|
|
9 Oct 2011, 14:06 (Ref:2968081) | #1261 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
|||
|
10 Oct 2011, 15:43 (Ref:2968754) | #1262 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,604
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
10 Oct 2011, 17:06 (Ref:2968776) | #1263 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,129
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
pieter melissen |
10 Oct 2011, 19:00 (Ref:2968825) | #1264 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,604
|
Fair enough, but realize that American circuits do not have the runoff or equipment that many of their European counterparts do.
|
||
|
10 Oct 2011, 19:04 (Ref:2968828) | #1265 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,129
|
yes and my reaction was triggered by the fact that somebody proposed to let loose the IMSA rules on European tracks. I think that your remark proves that it should not be considered. Alternatively, US tracks could try to equip themselves like European tracks in order to prevent these superfluous safety car periods which may result in more credible races.
|
||
__________________
pieter melissen |
11 Oct 2011, 07:49 (Ref:2969099) | #1266 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 508
|
Quote:
Ben |
|||
|
11 Oct 2011, 08:17 (Ref:2969115) | #1267 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,129
|
so you admit that safety car periods are there to increase excitement and commerical interest.....very sad indeed. The Le Mans 24 Hours would be sold out, even if there was not a single safety car period at all, and even if the winner was ten laps ahead of everybody else.
|
||
__________________
pieter melissen |
11 Oct 2011, 09:22 (Ref:2969143) | #1268 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 508
|
Quote:
The problem ACO racing has is that the LMS in particular is viewed as a series of test events for Le Mans. Post-Le Mans there's traditionally a drop in grid numbers. You can't use Le Mans as a general rule to make a point because it's a unique one of a kind event. IMO you have to apply a different concept for a season-long championship. That's what ALMS has done - I firmly believe the ACO regs coupled with US style racing is a much more interesting product than the LMS (or ELMS as was) Ben |
|||
|
11 Oct 2011, 09:54 (Ref:2969160) | #1269 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,129
|
Quote:
The drop in in grid numbers post Le Mans will most likely be not so severe when the WEC will start next year, as there will be more to win than just Le Mans. Anyway, whenever I am attending a race I hate to see the safety car come out, as it means that all the racing that has been done prior to that, was more or less in vain. Every advantage gained during proper racing will be lost, which of course is less of a concern for those who have lost those seconds, but for those who build up a proper lead, any safety car is just quite annoying. But if that's how you feel that racing should be done, I will stop arguing, because we then obviously live on a different planet. |
|||
__________________
pieter melissen |
11 Oct 2011, 10:33 (Ref:2969185) | #1270 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,261
|
Well, NASCAR used to have halftime breaks in the Truck Series. They would run half the race, then stop the race for 10-15 minutes to let the trucks get pit service and what not, and then restart. So what about breaking up a 6 hour race into 3 periods. You know, like a hockey game. Maybe you could invert the field during the last period like the NASCAR Winston race.
(Yes, that was intended as a joke. Perhaps I should delete it before someone takes it as being a serious recommendation). But, yes, I like what the LMS is doing for next year. Instead of making the racing designed around the casual couch potato fan watching the race on the boobtube who can't figure out whether to watch the race or a rerun of Matlock, they are focusing the race on the racers. It's a very refreshing idea in today's "Made for TV" world of racing that includes such travesties as FCYs, success ballast, BoP, roulette wheel grids, push-to-pass, spec everything, and Digger. It may not be the most commercially viable path, but the mostly pro-am LMS does not need to be commercially viable. Granted, it would be nice if us few diehards who accept the racing for what it is had some access to the action, but I'd rather wish I could see an LMS race than watch some manufactured production of a "race." |
|
|
11 Oct 2011, 10:33 (Ref:2969187) | #1271 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 508
|
Quote:
You can think of it that way - that the advantage is lost. On the other hand you can think of it like this; The team that has the best package and drivers will be able to build that gap each time the safety car restart occurs. If they genuinely have the best package for 6 hours it shouldn't matter whether they're P1 + 50sec or P1 +0.5sec with half an hour (or 2 minutes) to go. In addition, safety car strategy can allow teams to gain an advantage by short fuelling, etc. And people doing fuel only after half a stint and then pushing their tyres to do 1.5 stints adds to the variables in play. A good example of this was Road America where some cars did a full service after half a stint and other chose not to - the way that played out at the end was really exciting. Another way of looking at it is that IMSA style safety car usage puts much more emphasis on the whole team. Ben |
|||
|
11 Oct 2011, 11:05 (Ref:2969208) | #1272 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,129
|
Quote:
There is a joking post above about splitting up the race into sections. There could a more serious undertone to this. With modern telemetry it is exactly known where each car is at the moment that the safety car is called out. So all the relative time differences can be calculated, (everytime the safety car comes out). They should think of a way to take this differences into account at the final classification. It is going to be complicated, but it is much fairer than seeing all your efforts being wasted by some idiot who will spoil the race for everybody. And it is certainly not guaranteed that the fastest car will always re-emerge as the leader after a SC period as you say. I will not deny that it could make races more exciting towards the end, but it has always to be borne in mind what the purpose of an SC period is, namely clearing the track and trying to influence the race as LITTLE as possible. Last edited by henk4; 11 Oct 2011 at 11:10. |
|||
__________________
pieter melissen |
11 Oct 2011, 11:47 (Ref:2969238) | #1273 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 508
|
Quote:
If you don't want any random elements then you might as well do a proving ground test for each car and list the results. Motorsport is a minority sport precisely because it values this purity and lack of randomness over entertainment. Which is fine as long as you accept being a minority sport. Ben |
|||
|
11 Oct 2011, 11:56 (Ref:2969242) | #1274 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,129
|
Quote:
And I subscribe to your statement of motorsport being a minority sport where the lack of randomness is of higher value than the "entertainment" factor, because what you maybe referring at is not the way I want to be entertained by motorsport. |
|||
__________________
pieter melissen |
11 Oct 2011, 15:20 (Ref:2969361) | #1275 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,604
|
Quote:
There were no "competition cautions" at PLM. If you don't expect safety cars with 53 cars on a 2.5 mile track, you're kidding yourself. |
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Petit Le Mans - ALMS/ILMC - ROAD ATLANTA 9/28-10/1 | fieldodreams79 | Trackside | 70 | 5 Oct 2011 08:01 |
’10 ALMS Finale • Petit Le Mans • '10 ILMC Round 2 Sept. 29th – Oct. 2nd | HORNDAWG | Sportscar & GT Racing | 570 | 17 Oct 2010 19:22 |
'09 ALMS Petit Le Mans - Sep 26th | andy_b | North American Racing | 441 | 2 Oct 2009 20:12 |
*Race Thread*.... Penultimate Round of the ALMS....Petit Le Mans Oct. 1-4, 08 | HORNDAWG | North American Racing | 615 | 10 Nov 2008 08:11 |
ALMS Rnd 9: Petit Le Mans 29 Sep-1 Oct 2005 | rdjones | North American Racing | 116 | 5 Oct 2005 18:46 |