[WTCC] Equalisation...

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by awrb

But if the mistakes weren't made SEAT wouldn't be dominating. It's a very valid point. Mistakes are made in sports, thats what the whole things about.

Are you suggesting that SEAT should be punished because BMW made mistakes?



That makes no sense (and is backtracking on an earlier statement, but I'll let that pass). Are you suggesting that the BMW drivers are thinking "I won't pass Yvan because Tarquini will take me off". That makes no sense.

You also mentioned JM not being able to do what AP hasn't done all year, as if driver skill was the problem there. I like Priaulx, but Muller is faster. Not as consistent, but on his day...

Yeah, his day comes twice a year, sadly, and someone like Gabriele Tarquini, who has been in the business for a while, said that if he had to clear a place for a works drive to be given to a youngster, he'd get Jorg out as he's "been there for 10 years and hasn't done much at all". I think it's too hard a statement, but definitely has some truth in it. Sometimes even a driver like Tarquini can make a good point.
Anyway, you misunderstood, or I didn't explain myself properly, in both statements: I never said SEAT should be punished because of the mistakes made by BMW, I said that we should take them into account in our analisys because they happened and anyway nobody can demonstrate that SEAT wouldn't have dominated without the setup problems. That was my point, I wasn't talking about SEAT at all, I was after the analysis.
As for the second one, it is not against what I previously said, it specificates what I meant, I admit I didn't explain myself properly. Some other members of this forum wouldn't be as honest, anyway, if they made a mistake. About the Tarquini thing, I wasn't saying what you understood at all! I was only remarking that the so called 'driver skill' that is superior in SEAT Sport compared to BMW includes such behaviours. I wasn't stating at all that BMW drivers won't pass him, but in an interview Andy told me that 'You can't trust him. Nobody can trust him, not even his team mates.' So there is definitely a weird feeling about Tarquini in at least a BMW team, but we all know the relationships between Gabriele and Augusto Farfus, for instance, and Jorg musn't be too happy after what he did in Mexico. They won't hold back, of course, and won't give up on passing him, but Tarquini is definitely someone who makes you afraid of losing a race for being thrown out of the track by him if you overtake him.

[touringlegend]

I would remind especially the last two posters (posts now deleted) of the following part of the FAQ..
http://tentenths.com/forum/faq.php?f...ules_behaviour

Don't let me see this deteriorate into a slanging match again or there will be consequences.

[touringlegend]

Also moved this discussion into a new thread, it had somewhat sidetracked the Marrakech topic.

[werner]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

Yeah, his day comes twice a year, sadly, and someone like Gabriele Tarquini, who has been in the business for a while, said that if he had to clear a place for a works drive to be given to a youngster, he'd get Jorg out as he's "been there for 10 years and hasn't done much at all". I think it's too hard a statement, but definitely has some truth in it. Sometimes even a driver like Tarquini can make a good point.

Jorg Muller: 22 wins in the last 8 years in ETCC/WTCC, 3x 2nd in the championship.

Gabriele Tarquini: 28 wins in 8 years, 1 title and 1x 2nd and 1x 3th in the championship.

Based on results in the past years they are pretty much on the same level.

[werner]

Although i agree on most of Stedevils posts, and less on Helterskelters, I must say I'm in favor on a penaltysystem based on results, instead of fastest laps. The reasons are because as mentioned racepace is only one aspect that determines the results, it also is determined by characteristics of the engine, tyrewear etc. In the end all those aspects are included in the final results.
Unfortunately also aspects like mistakes and luck are included in the final results, and those factors I wouldn't want to see resembled in the penaltyweights, butyou can't have everything, can you?
The largest advantage would't be simplicity though. I'm a pretty smart guy, but my mind starts to boggle when I read the articles and calculations of the weights.

BTW, I really enjoy to read the heated debate. It really is a good example of different cultures, rhetoric techniques and the difficulty to create a system that tries to combine fairness and closeness, in a sport that is almost by nature not fair.

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by werner

Jorg Muller: 22 wins in the last 8 years in ETCC/WTCC, 3x 2nd in the championship.

Gabriele Tarquini: 28 wins in 8 years, 1 title and 1x 2nd and 1x 3th in the championship.

Based on results in the past years they are pretty much on the same level.

Yeah but Jorg doesn't lack speed, he lacks consistency. On some days he's super, like Imola last year, some other times he just finds himself in the fog. Surely Jorg's a quick driver, were he more consistent he'd be unbeatable IMO.

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by werner

Although i agree on most of Stedevils posts, and less on Helterskelters, I must say I'm in favor on a penaltysystem based on results, instead of fastest laps. The reasons are because as mentioned racepace is only one aspect that determines the results, it also is determined by characteristics of the engine, tyrewear etc. In the end all those aspects are included in the final results.
Unfortunately also aspects like mistakes and luck are included in the final results, and those factors I wouldn't want to see resembled in the penaltyweights, butyou can't have everything, can you?
The largest advantage would't be simplicity though. I'm a pretty smart guy, but my mind starts to boggle when I read the articles and calculations of the weights.

I agree. Look at the Btcc, 6 winners in 6 races and ballast based on the results, and the people can easily understand why Giovanardi was heavier in Race 2, for instance. Is there anything wrong with that championship? I don't think so. You still have the best car in front, but Turkington is right there. Wtcc could well learn from the most important national series in Europe, I believe, also with the reverse grid, such fun to see O'Neill on pole and fight for the podium...

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

Yeah but Jorg doesn't lack speed, he lacks consistency. On some days he's super, like Imola last year, some other times he just finds himself in the fog. Surely Jorg's a quick driver, were he more consistent he'd be unbeatable IMO.

But can't you say the exact same thing for Tarquini?

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

I agree. Look at the Btcc, 6 winners in 6 races and ballast based on the results, and the people can easily understand why Giovanardi was heavier in Race 2, for instance

Don't tell me that different ballast between cars in all 3 races of a weekend is easier for the casual viewer to keep track of than the WTCC "ballast this weekend".

And sure, the WTCC calculations are hard to get into, but for the visitor the weights will be printed in the event program/magazine when he arrives on friday and doesnt change throughout that weekend. Doesn't really make it hard for the viewer to keep track.

the most important national series in Europe

Seems to me car manufacturers disagree with your opinion, dropping out from BTCC while eg writing 3 year participation contracts with STCC at the same time.

I believe, also with the reverse grid, such fun to see O'Neill on pole and fight for the podium...

The 3rd race randomness in grid reversal is good (if revers grids is a must, I'd much perfer eg the Argentinean way). But eg 3 standing starts is not when the aim is to have equality between RWD and FWD.

[werner]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

I agree. Look at the Btcc, 6 winners in 6 races and ballast based on the results, and the people can easily understand why Giovanardi was heavier in Race 2, for instance. Is there anything wrong with that championship? I don't think so. You still have the best car in front, but Turkington is right there. Wtcc could well learn from the most important national series in Europe, I believe, also with the reverse grid, such fun to see O'Neill on pole and fight for the podium...

Hold on a second, I don't want a system that is based on driver-results, i want a system that is based on car-results. Having six different winners from 6 races is nice, but when 1 driver is clearly better than all the other drivers, I don't mind him to win most of the races. Isn't sport meant to show who is the best competitor?
The penaltyweightsystem should in my opinion just assure that, given a drivers ability, his chances on good results are the same whether he drives a seat, a bmw a chevy or any car that is developed well enough to at least be close to the fastest cars in the S2000-class. The same driver should nót be awarded with a lighter car because he has performed badly, as was the case in the former system, and is the case in the btcc today.'
It may be good for the show, but I think it is wrong to have 1 Vauxhall heavier than the, otherwise completely similar, other Vauxhall. Therefore, to be fair, all Vauxhalls should get penaltyweights when either results or laptimes (as said, I mostly favour results) show it is the best car.

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by werner

Hold on a second, I don't want a system that is based on driver-results, i want a system that is based on car-results. Having six different winners from 6 races is nice, but when 1 driver is clearly better than all the other drivers, I don't mind him to win most of the races. Isn't sport meant to show who is the best competitor?
The penaltyweightsystem should in my opinion just assure that, given a drivers ability, his chances on good results are the same whether he drives a seat, a bmw a chevy or any car that is developed well enough to at least be close to the fastest cars in the S2000-class. The same driver should nót be awarded with a lighter car because he has performed badly, as was the case in the former system, and is the case in the btcc today.'
It may be good for the show, but I think it is wrong to have 1 Vauxhall heavier than the, otherwise completely similar, other Vauxhall. Therefore, to be fair, all Vauxhalls should get penaltyweights when either results or laptimes (as said, I mostly favour results) show it is the best car.

Good point. In the end, this discussion would be endless. Truth is, touring cars are not open wheelers and the cars are born from the manufacturer with different characteristics, and it's hard to make them equal. Maybe having a committee who decides would be the best, but then there's the huge risk that they push before a manufacturer and against another. Well, in a perfect world, anyway, this would be the best system, but since this world is not perfect, something else must be done. I think that discussing that is pointless, let's see what happens. If in the Btcc nobody dominates and in the Wtcc a particular manufacturer wins most of the races, then maybe Wtcc are on the wrong track. Otherwise, Wtcc will be right and we should all 'hat off' to the organizers and those who make the rules.

[helterskelter]

Originally Posted by stedevil

Don't tell me that different ballast between cars in all 3 races of a weekend is easier for the casual viewer to keep track of than the WTCC "ballast this weekend".
And sure, the WTCC calculations are hard to get into, but for the visitor the weights will be printed in the event program/magazine when he arrives on friday and doesnt change throughout that weekend. Doesn't really make it hard for the viewer to keep track.

Seems to me car manufacturers disagree with your opinion, dropping out from BTCC while eg writing 3 year participation contracts with STCC at the same time.

The 3rd race randomness in grid reversal is good (if revers grids is a must, I'd much perfer eg the Argentinean way). But eg 3 standing starts is not when the aim is to have equality between RWD and FWD.

Well, with this system it'd be a laugh if they changed ballasts between the 2 races. With the old system it'd have made more sense, IMO. Anyway, ballast system are never easy to understand. The best way to make it simple would be to display the amount of ballas on the windscreens, as they used to do a few years ago. I hope they'll do it now as well, cause not all the visitors read the magazine or the event program. Watching Monza Race 1 from the grandstands I don't remember a single Wtcc programme around me. If you put a +40 sticker on the windscreens it all looks more understandable, IMO.
As for the Btcc and the Stcc thing, we'd better not start another heated discussion, I don't feel like it at all. Anyway, Vauxhall has pulled out after almost 15 years, and the global crisis has hit UK in a massive way, while Sweden has a more solid economic system, which I learned and discussed at university just a few days ago.
Yes, I think at least one rolling start should be done. Especially when the FWDs have a lot of ballast on the advantage is huge, just look at Jelley in race 3.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

If you put a +40 sticker on the windscreens it all looks more understandable, IMO.

That would be a good idea to reintroduce.

the global crisis has hit UK in a massive way

So now you are saying BTCC is not the most important one? Or it's still the most important one, even with the crisis? I'm confused about what your opinion really is.

Sweden has a more solid economic system

Yes, but that is not the reason why VAG chose to compete in STCC. Car was built in Germany, sponsored by German companies and could have joined any TCC they wanted. Figure out why they chose STCC and you will know why they don't consider BTCC more important.

[awrb]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

Maybe having a committee who decides would be the best, but then there's the huge risk that they push before a manufacturer and against another.

Isn't this what we have at the moment, and who give out loads of very different dispensations just because they can? I think it an awful way to run a series. If one team is behind, it should be up to them to catch up.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by stedevil

Yes, but that is not the reason why VAG chose to compete in STCC. Car was built in Germany, sponsored by German companies and could have joined any TCC they wanted. Figure out why they chose STCC and you will know why they don't consider BTCC more important.

My thoughts? They went into the TCC with the least amount of competition. Figured they'd pick the easiest championship to win.

[helterskelter]

Come on, Vauxhall has left the championship because GM is being taken over, and so is Opel and therefore Vauxhall, it's not because Btcc has lost importance or anything. So, please don't be confused, I still think Btcc is the most important one.
My point was that the UK has lost much more because of the crisis, and yet you get a 20+ grid, which is good for an s2000 championship, given that it costs around 250k for a privateer. Also, VAG had just left the championship with Seat, would have been a laugh to go back in with VW, with another team and another car. Finally, STCC encourages biogas more than the other championships. In the end, you get 23 entrants for the STCC and 24 for the BTCC this year.
I appreciate a lot that you defend your country's championship, it is fully understandable and I would do the same if I had a serious Italian series to stick upon, but BTCC has the longest history in TC as a championship. I'll tell you something just to make you taste the difference. Italians have won both championships: Colciago won in Sweden, Tarquini won in the UK. If you speak to the next Italian touring car fan he will remember that Tarquini won the BTCC but not that Colciago won the STCC. Having said that, both championships are great, have a great support package and are very fun to watch.

[FIRE]

STCC because VW Sweden and EON Sweden are the main force behind the project?

[helterskelter]

Definitely

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by Matt

My thoughts? They went into the TCC with the least amount of competition. Figured they'd pick the easiest championship to win.

Your opinon is as laughable as always.
ETC Cup clearly shows, year after year, that BTCC/STCC/DTC belong to the top and many others don't. Nobody joins either 1 of those because it's the easiest to win.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

Vauxhall has left the championship because GM is being taken over

And that is also why we wont see much (if anything) of SAAB in STCC either.

My point was that the UK has lost much more because of the crisis, and yet you get a 20+ grid

So that is the reason BTCC is more important? Bigger chrisis and still 20+ cars? Pretty weak way to measure highest importantce IMO, but you are entitled to it. If you are meaning something else then your explanation is still fuzzy.

Also, VAG had just left the championship with Seat, would have been a laugh to go back in with VW, with another team and another car.

Well, you better start laughing then because that is exactly what VAG did in STCC. Dropped Audi and came back with VW.

Finally, STCC encourages biogas more than the other championships. In the end, you get 23 entrants for the STCC and 24 for the BTCC this year.

STCC has yet to have a single race. How do you calculate the total amount of entries? Because several of the BTCC entries where announced after even the first race weekend. And 1 in BTCC for now has lost his ride.

I appreciate a lot that you defend your country's championship

I don't defend "my championship", I'm trying to get a sensible motivation out of you for why you have the opinion that BTCC is the most important, even in the middle of a chrisis.

Sofar I see nothing other than what can be condensed into "personal preferance". Whats the problem with just standing up to that instead of making a long discussion of how I'm defending STCC? Talk about how there is 1 more car in BTCC or how the global chrisis is bigger in UK than Sweden is just a long way to say nothing.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by FIRE

STCC because VW Sweden and EON Sweden are the main force behind the project?

Yes, it's connected of course. The question though remains, why isn't it eg VW Germany and Eon Germany that do it in eg Procar?

The answer is, Environmental branding/marketing. People want more "green" cars and thus car companies (which a future beyond the crisis) are looking for ways to appear more "green". And for Green racing, no TCC is even close to STCC.

Almost all support classes run on biofuels (eg E85) and what is running on Petrol (inkl S2000) are using a super clean version of Petrol. The entire Göteborg City race was 100% enviromentally compensated (of which 3% was for the teams and 97% for the visiting audience).

Of course, some people think potentially 1 car more in BTCC matters more.

[helterskelter]

Of course, some people think that more than 50 years of history are less important. Wtcc are doing through the same route. Remember Btcc has a team who runs Seat Leons on E85, and that's totally private a project.
Maybe you don't live the crisis as hardly as the Brits do, but I'm Italian and I can tell you that there's virtually no more racing here, and I'm exactly where the whole Euro Stc thing started, so maybe it matters a little bit.
In the Stcc VAG have changed car and concept, how would you explain to the Brits that the Seat TDi has left the championship to put the biogas forward?
Of course you can get more entries, but you can still get less entries, which I hope won't happen. I'm talking based on the entry list, you are talking based on the idea that 'something might happen'.
Money is all that matters in motorsport, unluckily, and check how many British banks have collapsed and how many from your country, then tell me which country was destroyed by the crisis.
Of course the fact that STCC is green is very positive, and I do think that the championship is great, but the history of BTCC makes it almost as prestigeous as the Wtcc, were it not for the FIA title. Surely BTCC has seen so many great drivers, teams and managers who have moved on to the WTCC, while it's something I can't see in the STCC.
Anyway, this discussion is pointless, I'd rather stop it here. As usual, you have your opinion and I have mine, but I don't want to get into one of our endless discussions, as the moderators might find it annoying.

[stedevil]

Originally Posted by helterskelter

Of course, some people think that more than 50 years of history are less important.

Im not arguing that BTCC has not been THE TCC in the past. But past is past and this is now. I also havn't said anything about the future, BTCC might rise to it's former glory again some day. But stating that BTCC is the most important E-TCC currently seems weird when most of the development of new tech and manufacturer participation is somewhere else. I'd say BTCC is struggling to even be on par with specifically STCC, let alone be more important.

Wtcc are doing through the same route.

WTCC is doing green marketing, but it's just empty words. Raising the eco friendly component from regular fuel 5% to 10% is a joke, not a real change. It's on par with F1 "green stripes" on the tires. Completely meaningless.

Remember Btcc has a team who runs Seat Leons on E85, and that's totally private a project.

Indeed, and it's great to see them finally doing progress and be near the top in the races.

Maybe you don't live the crisis as hardly...

What's the point in this "my crisis is bigger than yours"? Most of Swedish industry is in Exports and if nobody is buying... . Also, Swedish banks don't go belly up now, because they already DID, 15 years ago, and the government and banks made sure it wont happen again. That's the reason they look generally better off now.

Of course, if I apply your reasoning that would mean BTCC having a golden time 10-15 years ago is "invalid" because in Sweden we had a big local (as opposed to the current global) crisis back then while most of the world was actually prospering. Doesn't really make sense now does it?

In the Stcc VAG have changed car and concept, how would you explain to the Brits that the Seat TDi has left the championship to put the biogas forward?

I'm not sure what your point is here. Are you trying to say British spectators are more stupid than Swedish? Because if it can be explained here, surely it can be in Britain as well. No?

I'm talking based on the entry list, you are talking based on the idea that 'something might happen'.

Ehh, problem is that you are comparing apples and oranges, pre season STCC numbers to running season BTCC numbers. And as you say STCC numbers can go both up and down, so you comparison is completely irrelevant and based exactly on the 'something might happen' you frown upon. And that is all your arumentation, so don't blame me for dragging it into the discussion in the first place.

I also don't agree with you that a difference of 1 car in any way matters either way. If anything matters, it's the quality of the cars and competitivness throughout the field. Otherwise doing like eg procar and throwing in some S1600 at the back of the grid would be a good way to improve a championship.

[awrb]

I think the simplest way to see which is the most important series is viewing figures, as that is what the sponsors and manufacturers will be looking at. And looking at the number of fully funded drives in each series, the number of big teams, STCC seems to have that right now, when the BTCC is relying on gentlemen drivers. that's not to say the BTCC is bad, it's my favorite series, but the STCC seems to be growing now, and really improving. VW obviously just looked at which series would get them best exposure to their target audience, and if that's Sweden, they made the right choice.

[helterskelter]

50 years history make the Btcc more prestigeous IMO, but talking about these things you always have your personal background coming in, of course.
Well for now Wtcc is just trying to make it 'greener', let's see if they do something before saying they're only using empty words. Certainly 5% to 10% doesn't look like much, but I've been told it's the best you can do without rebuilding the engine.
In fact, you made it to my point. I cannot say that Stcc was worse than Btcc 15 years ago, because the ongoing crisis made it difficult to put the meals on the tables, nevermind cars on the tracks. So, if we agree that the crisis has hit UK more hardly than Sweden, as seems shining for me, we can say it can have played some role in the withdrawal of 2 manufacturers and a grid that's not super filled. With all of this, Btcc still has 24 cars on the grid, and I reckon it's mainly because of its history. One of the other reasons is the tracks that Stcc uses compared to the British ones; with all due respect, I think that SOME of the tracks in Sweden need to be renewed. And, of course, I believe it gives you a different feeling, racing in Donington and in Mantorp Park.
I would never dare saying that. If you pull out with a totally new concept, withdraw it after a year and then come back with another different and 'revolutionary' concept I think you have to change the management of the company, as it all sounds pretty irrational, doesn't it? Imagine Vauxhall pulling out now and Opel coming in next year with a new model. Wouldn't it be funny?
I put forward the entry list because you were saying that Btcc is going down, and I assure you lots of Italian Series would love to go down as much as they are, believe me. It's not going down, it has 24 cars on the track. That was not to say that Btcc is better for having +1 on the grid, it's to say that Btcc is healthy and doing well. And probably with Volvo next year
Finally, the fact that Btcc is relying on gentlemen drivers is not quite exact. Of course you don't have paid drivers only, but have a look at these names: Giovanardi, Neal, Plato, Thompson, Chilton, Turkington... It's the nature of touring cars, take the privateers out of any championship and it'll die. We say 'privateers', but in this case I think 'indipendents' is more appropriate, as there are a few paid drivers racing for non-manufacturer-supported teams, as in the Stcc of course. Anyway, manufacturer support is not crucial, IMO.
As I said before this is just my opinion, this is a subject on which you will never come to a final decision, as it will never be objective.