2006 Australian GT Championship (amongst other things GT)

[D.R.T.]

Fair Call. Just thinking that with a new driver, control tyre they wouldn't have known how quick the Lambo would go.

But yes being 2 seconds quicker than the benchmark time does need to be looked at.

[Chucky]

Those Lambo's could still do 1.35's on street tyres (with the right driver). The whole mess is just that as they aren't paritising cars, they're just penalising drivers.

Having restrictions in sports car racing sort of takes the spectacle away. Why can't we have "fastest wins" and get rid of parity for a change?

[Dingo]

Originally Posted by White Knight

Having restrictions in sports car racing sort of takes the spectacle away. Why can't we have "fastest wins" and get rid of parity for a change?

Because people get bored with one person dominating, and woe betide that happening in our current society that demands all shall be equal...

[Chucky]

The FIA already has a nice sliding scale of racing weight vs engine size vs air restrictor. Why is that not being used?

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by White Knight

Having restrictions in sports car racing sort of takes the spectacle away. Why can't we have "fastest wins" and get rid of parity for a change?

I do agree. However we dont currently have 1 universal set of regulations ie GT2 or GT3. FOr the future I do think that this fastest wins approach is a good formual. Thus allowing for teams to develop their cars.

The current championship with so many variances in car capabilities I think parity is the best short term solution

[silver 2]

It might help if all concerned were more interested in producing decent grids and not a ridiculous rehash of Nations Cup and it's miserable numbers.Some of these people were so busy poncing around congratulating themselves on what a great job they think they have done they seemed to overlook the reality, a fraction of the cars that could be there. It is only the attitude of these people that prevents decent grids and real racing. Will they ever get the message?

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by silver 2

It might help if all concerned were more interested in producing decent grids and not a ridiculous rehash of Nations Cup and it's miserable numbers.

Nations Cup hasnt always had miserable numbers. There were some happier days 2000-2002.

Originally Posted by silver 2

It is only the attitude of these people that prevents decent grids and real racing. Will they ever get the message?

What do you believe the solution to be ?

Parity, No Parity ??

[Jimmy14]

I cant say im a fan of parity, but without it i cant see the series surviving for very long.

[mixxer]

Building Blocks for A New Australian GT Future
http://www.autoracingdaily.com/article.php?cid=497

Hopefully one day they will have decent fields in all categories

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

What do you believe the solution to be ?

Parity, No Parity ??

The UK GT solution... a 2 driver event, with parity by driver performance. A gentleman teamed with a pro, you cant pair 2 pros together... so the pro can flog the heck out of the car, while the gentleman can drive it at their regular pace.

Sounds very easy to me.... the gentleman racer can buy and race the car of his dreams, alongside a young hotshoe.... winners everywhere I think....

[D.R.T.]

I agree that systems works well. Also great because it creates the longer races that is an important part of GT racing. These cars aren't built for short sprints. The british GT had 2 1 hour races last year, I think I read something about them running 2 hour races in 2005 (could be wrong ?)

[Chucky]

That does sound better! Somewhere for young guys to have a go while the older guys still get to run competitively. (Ala Alann Simonsen/Hector Lester pairing)

[racer69]

I can't say the British format excites me that much.

If you want to run a serious team shouldn't you be allowed to run serious drivers?

[silver 2]

When enough of the "serious drivers" can afford to own and run these types of cars perhaps then those comments could be taken "seriously" . How many ways can you say it- you have to start with what you have and build from there. The nonsense of trying to start in mid air by way of contrast is doomed to falure. A few guns(because the manufacturers rep thinks it is going to help him sell cars ) destroying the rest is counter productive to what everybody professes what they want. A simple way is for the parity to be car/driver based and hey presto most of that problem gets solved-- there is no other way to achieve that.
It then allows a bigger spread of cars( and multiples of each model) because every type (or many) would theoretically get a look in-- thereby creating interest and in time gaining credibility which in turn attracts quality of cars and drivers.

[ff s conscience]

The lambo's pleaded a case to get a special dispensation for extra tyres, so that's why they weren't penalised. But they just wore them out (fronts were the problem), and no entrants had a say in the dispensation.........

The brit GT seems to be the best workable solution currently running successfully.

Vic state at PI next weekend.... Huglin car running again. Driver TBA.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by silver 2

When enough of the "serious drivers" can afford to own and run these types of cars perhaps then those comments could be taken "seriously" . How many ways can you say it- you have to start with what you have and build from there. The nonsense of trying to start in mid air by way of contrast is doomed to falure.

Come on Silver, go a bit easy. He was just expressing an opinion. I'm really enjoying the discussion here, with everyone putting in their ideas and formula's. The more ideas however viewed, good or bad, will hopefully end in a better solution for the championship.

Lets try and create a positive atmosphere in this thread. I am possibily wrong but I just felt your post came across a little strong and harsh. (Apologies if I misinterpreted your post).

To build this championship I think everyone needs to be most receptive to fans and competitors alike. In a country where Avesco is turning away competitors and potentially fans, a championship that is welcoming to all parties could have a bit of an advantage.

[racer69]

All i was getting at was that teams should not have to be told who can drive their cars and who can't. For starters how do you define an amateur from a professional? If Holden were to return with a 'proper' Monaro with a works team (eg..GRM again), why shouldn't they be allowed to run a full complement of works drivers?

As for tailoring parity depending on a car/driver combination as has seemingly been mentioned, it would be a constantly moving goalpost. Are we talking along the lines of pariting Peter Hackett's Lamborghini in a different way to Rusty French's identical car, so they appear closer on the circuit. And at the same time, why should the Lamboghini's be choked to appear competitive with the Honda NSX for example? If this is the case, it is becoming socialist racing, not motorsport, and therefore what they are building from won't go much further. Who will be interested but the amateurs? I thought the aim was to build it back up to where Nations Cup was envisiged, but without all the hassles.

Don't for a minute think i am against GT-style racing, i was a great fan of Nations Cup generally, but this new formula is heading down the same path. Why they can't just produce a set of regulations and leave it at that, and not get bogged down in all this parity stuff again i have no idea. The parity debate did nothing but anger people in Nations Cup, why will it be different in Nations Cup?

[mixxer]

Lets try and create a positive atmosphere in this thread.

DRT this is good advice, shame you dont follow it yourself when it comes to other forms of Aus motorsport.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by racer69

All i was getting at was that teams should not have to be told who can drive their cars and who can't. For starters how do you define an amateur from a professional? If Holden were to return with a 'proper' Monaro with a works team (eg..GRM again), why shouldn't they be allowed to run a full complement of works drivers??

Carrera Cup already makes a distinction on who is a pro and who is an amateur.

Two tests seem to be in place... one related to what categories the drivers have come from (i.e. if they are ex-Supercar, then the chances of being pro are pretty strong...) and whether the driver is being paid to drive the car....

The British GT concept sees one driver own the car, and perhaps the team, with a more talented steerer (paid for their work) sharing the seat....

Avesco is turning away competitors and potentially fans

So the Avesco bash continues.

Lets see here, the Sports GT/Porsche field comprised 17 cars at Phillip Island at a series designed for the competitor as an alternative to the "big buck" high profile meetings such as Eastern Creek last weekend.

F4000 had 10 and Tranzam Sports 16. Even the TCC on mustered 19 after early assurances of around 30. Then there is F3 with 14 cars and only Commodore Cup got over 20. Superkarts well . . . they were very strong.

. . . and this is at the AMRS which is all about the competitor.

Now at Eastern Creek a week later, supposedly where competitor is "turning away" there were 30 Utes, 18 Performance GTs, 24 Formula Fords, 23 Porsches, 41 Aussie Racing Cars and 34 V8 Supercars . . . oh yeah a couple of more spectators.

Now is my maths bad or am I missing something?

[D.R.T.]

Firstly Mixxer I do try and be positive about all categories in Australian motorsport. I do bag Avesco and its management practices, I do try and provide reasons for this but I haven't bagged competitors or teams (maybe Gore a few times, but I had to get in line)

Originally Posted by White Knight

So the Avesco bash continues.

Lets see here, the Sports GT/Porsche field comprised 17 cars at Phillip Island at a series designed for the competitor as an alternative to the "big buck" high profile meetings such as Eastern Creek last weekend.

F4000 had 10 and Tranzam Sports 16. Even the TCC on mustered 19 after early assurances of around 30. Then there is F3 with 14 cars and only Commodore Cup got over 20. Superkarts well . . . they were very strong.

. . . and this is at the AMRS which is all about the competitor.

Now at Eastern Creek a week later, supposedly where competitor is "turning away" there were 30 Utes, 18 Performance GTs, 24 Formula Fords, 23 Porsches, 41 Aussie Racing Cars and 34 V8 Supercars . . . oh yeah a couple of more spectators.

Now is my maths bad or am I missing something?

White Knight its no Avesco bash. Isn't it true Avesco is performing a cull of its V8 numbers in the aim of getting to the magic number 32. Avesco pick and choose who the franchises go to, disallowing competitors to participate even when they outlayed substantial cash for equipment.

Also by Avesco heading to China and as they say to more OS events, by leaving Mallala, Winton and possibly Ipswich isn't this turning away Australian fans ?

Finally onto the numbers at the AMRS. The last round was mostly made up of Procar categories that are trying to rebuild themselves after last year which the AMRS is helping them to do. GTP doing the same thing at Eastern Creek with only 18 entries, so that is comparible. While the rest of supports at Eastern creek are coming from stable backgrounds in 2004. So your maths isn't wrong, but theres a story behind the numbers.

This was the AMRS 4th round, theres room to grow and improve.

Yeah but you can't say AVESCO is turning away competitors when in fact competitors (through) their categories are falling overselves and paying huge money to be on the AVESCO program.

As for turning away the local fans, I have to disagree. Most people who watch V8s are doing so on the television, more so when its interstate. Have you been interstate to watch racing at Mallala or QR or Winton.

Another item you have not factored in is that the tracks are less likely to want a V8 Supercar meeting because of the up front costs, and would much rather hire out to a local sprint event or drive day.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by White Knight

Yeah but you can't say AVESCO is turning away competitors when in fact competitors (through) their categories are falling overselves and paying huge money to be on the AVESCO program.

Yes but they are turning away v8 competitors.

Also if the AMRS can improve its growth and exposure, (not easy work) but those paying big dollars to be on the avesco bill, might start to have 2nd thoughts.

Originally Posted by White Knight

Another item you have not factored in is that the tracks are less likely to want a V8 Supercar meeting because of the up front costs, and would much rather hire out to a local sprint event or drive day.

I dont think Winton, Mallala or QR are among these tracks.

[00 XR8]

Well, positive Australian GT Championship discussion would have to include news of new cars joinning wouldn't it?

Expect to see the D'Arcy Russell Viper join the Championship at QR, and possibly 911 GT3 Cup car for Garth Rainsbury.

And Geoff Munday is apparently preparing his much un-used second ex-PHR Mustang for competition latter on in the year...........