[WEC] WEC 2019/20 season

[Akrapovic]

You're right - you can't equalise technology by equalising cars. That's what BoP is. But we're not equalising technology - otherwise the privateers wouldn't have been given a leg up in power, and the fuel stint lengths wouldn't have been mandated as different. The very fact we even had lap time aims for getting the privateers within X tenths of Toyota is a huge clue that this is not EoT. It isn't BoP either, but this is not the EoT we previously had. It's a panic to keep a bad situation from getting worse whilst we prepare for new regulations. So "how far do we go?" - as far as the ACO wants. We've already breached the EoT ideals, so why not? This isn't about making a good of fair class right now - it's about keeping it alive until Hypercar regulations arrive.

You can't seriously say to Toyota to make a non-hybrid car and invest in that when the regs are changing next year.

Indeed, we'll get the little teams to make new cars! Wouldn't want Toyota to have to do it There were 2 seasons of the 'current' ruleset and it was Dallara, Oreca, Gibson, AER, SMP, Rebellion, Ginetta and Mecachrome that had to invest and make new cars. Hasn't worked out that well, with a small grid getting even smaller for next season.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

You're right - you can't equalise technology by equalising cars. That's what BoP is. But we're not equalising technology - otherwise the privateers wouldn't have been given a leg up in power, and the fuel stint lengths wouldn't have been mandated as different. The very fact we even had lap time aims for getting the privateers within X tenths of Toyota is a huge clue that this is not EoT. It isn't BoP either, but this is not the EoT we previously had. It's a panic to keep a bad situation from getting worse whilst we prepare for new regulations. So "how far do we go?" - as far as the ACO wants. We've already breached the EoT ideals, so why not? This isn't about making a good of fair class right now - it's about keeping it alive until Hypercar regulations arrive.

I don't know what else the ACO can say or do that makes their 'eot' actually eot. I thought they changed it so the wording wasn't restricted to just the engine or the fuel type? That's why I said it must extend to the type of car including powertrain (like with Audi but not fuel type). The weight gain of Toyota is supposed to offset the acceleration add tire wear etc. then at the same time the power increase of the engines on the non-hybrids was to give them a higher top speed vs Toyota's acceleration.

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Indeed, we'll get the little teams to make new cars! Wouldn't want Toyota to have to do it There were 2 seasons of the 'current' ruleset and it was Dallara, Oreca, Gibson, AER, SMP, Rebellion, Ginetta and Mecachrome that had to invest and make new cars. Hasn't worked out that well, with a small grid getting even smaller for next season.

Just to add to that statement, it seemed those guys were all for it, and that's why we had a boom in terms of private lmp1s. Rebellion, Dragonspeed, SMP, Ginetta, ByKolles... I'm not saying they did enough. But that making it more favorable for private lmp1s was a better option than telling Toyota to drop their hybrid. Also, the regs were there and the same for private lmp1s from 2014, but there was things added for 2018/19 like wing dimensions.

For multiple reasons- Toyota is in the wec because of hybrid/ they're going to support the wec for the new rules regardless of who else shows up (loyalty)/ they're the only manufacturer to stay in lmp1/ it's easier and most likely cheaper to have private teams to do lmp1 than Toyota drop their current car to make a new one for 2 seasons to be replaced while private teams can use theirs for at least 4.

If it was a bad idea, we wouldn't have seen 3, 4 different cars sign up for privateer lmp1 imo. I think plenty more could have been done, possibly equalizing them. Tires (that were vetoed), equal stints at LM instead of waiting until this year, pit times etc. Maybe hypercar gets it right, or maybe the factory teams dominate regardless?

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by TF110

I don't know what else the ACO can say or do that makes their 'eot' actually eot.

I imagine others are getting quite bored of the discussion, so I'll make this post and call it quits.

We had an "EoT" for years which balanced, petrol, diesel, 2MJ, 4MJ, 6MJ, 8MJ and non-hybrid cars. This went for years without major adjustments, which suggested that the EoT was doing its job - the technology involved was all capable of producing equivalent outcomes, and therefore it was Equivalence of Technology. That's what EoT is - you can do the same job with multiple routes, and the quality of the product is based on the quality of the team.

When Porsche left, the non-hybrid cars were given a large boost. Why is that? Because private teams cannot possibly beat a factory and need a hand. But now we've broken the EoT. If it was equivalent before then it can't be equivalent now. It was either broken before or broken now? So which one is correct? You yourself point out there was changes made - so is it more right now?

Let's say for sake of discussion that it was wrong before and now is it equivalent. We still haven't had a Le Mans 24 Hours where the privateers are even allowed to run the same stint length as a factory cars without being penalised. That is, quite literally, the opposite of equivalence - you're saying a set of regulations is not allowed to out-perform the other set.

Now we might get equal stint lengths at Le Mans, but who knows - because it changes, literally, on a race-by-race basis, which is an attribute that BoP has, not EoT. The potential solutions (which is what EoT is based on), do not change on a weekly basis - so the only possible thing that can be compared to, is in fact BoP. But it also isn't BoP, because nothing is balanced.

It isn't EoT - it isn't equivalent, and it isn't technology solution-based.
It isn't BoP - it isn't balanced.

It is simply trying to manage the gap between Toyota and everyone else. It is a custom performance management system to try and tide us over to the next regulations. It is a poor solution (but possibly the only solution) to a bad situation that occurred because the series was badly managed.

As for the "boom" in LMP1 privateers - we must have watched different series. I loved the new privateers, but 2 teams is not a boom. DragonSpeed quit early on, ByKolles soldiered on and made no impact, and Ginetta did a Ginetta. So the "boom" from the changes was Rebellion moving back up, and SMP. If the previous season LMP1 state is considered a success then I'd hate to see a flop. It was better, but it was not good.

WEC Super Season Grade: D+. Must try harder.

[JoeW04]

Do you think SMP would be tempted back if things have changed at the front & would the ACO have them back?

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I imagine others are getting quite bored of the discussion, so I'll make this post and call it quits.

We had an "EoT" for years which balanced, petrol, diesel, 2MJ, 4MJ, 6MJ, 8MJ and non-hybrid cars. This went for years without major adjustments, which suggested that the EoT was doing its job - the technology involved was all capable of producing equivalent outcomes, and therefore it was Equivalence of Technology. That's what EoT is - you can do the same job with multiple routes, and the quality of the product is based on the quality of the team.

When Porsche left, the non-hybrid cars were given a large boost. Why is that? Because private teams cannot possibly beat a factory and need a hand. But now we've broken the EoT. If it was equivalent before then it can't be equivalent now. It was either broken before or broken now? So which one is correct? You yourself point out there was changes made - so is it more right now?

Let's say for sake of discussion that it was wrong before and now is it equivalent. We still haven't had a Le Mans 24 Hours where the privateers are even allowed to run the same stint length as a factory cars without being penalised. That is, quite literally, the opposite of equivalence - you're saying a set of regulations is not allowed to out-perform the other set.

Now we might get equal stint lengths at Le Mans, but who knows - because it changes, literally, on a race-by-race basis, which is an attribute that BoP has, not EoT. The potential solutions (which is what EoT is based on), do not change on a weekly basis - so the only possible thing that can be compared to, is in fact BoP. But it also isn't BoP, because nothing is balanced.

It isn't EoT - it isn't equivalent, and it isn't technology solution-based.
It isn't BoP - it isn't balanced.

It is simply trying to manage the gap between Toyota and everyone else. It is a custom performance management system to try and tide us over to the next regulations. It is a poor solution (but possibly the only solution) to a bad situation that occurred because the series was badly managed.

As for the "boom" in LMP1 privateers - we must have watched different series. I loved the new privateers, but 2 teams is not a boom. DragonSpeed quit early on, ByKolles soldiered on and made no impact, and Ginetta did a Ginetta. So the "boom" from the changes was Rebellion moving back up, and SMP. If the previous season LMP1 state is considered a success then I'd hate to see a flop. It was better, but it was not good.

WEC Super Season Grade: D+. Must try harder.

Cool thoughts, and for my last thoughts on this, the EOT wasn't ever really equal or balanced because there was an added benefit to go to the highest 'mj class'. That's why Toyota and Porsche jumped from the 6mj to 8mj subclass and Audi went from 2mj to 6mj by the time they quit. Honestly, the eot was never really equal, so my thoughts are they aren't any less equal now than they were before. We seem to agree, because if it was, privateers wouldn't have needed the upgrades they announced in 2017(?).

And since were on this subject, here's an interview on dsc about... you guessed it- EOT for this season.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by TF110

And since were on this subject, here's an interview on dsc about... you guessed it- EOT for this season.

"But the people who are connected to motorsport maybe don’t understand LMP1 cars."

Always such a funny man

[gert]

Originally Posted by JoeW04

Do you think SMP would be tempted back if things have changed at the front & would the ACO have them back?

No and yes

[S griffin]

I think a lot depends on what SMP do next

[gert]

Originally Posted by TF110

And since were on this subject, here's an interview on dsc about... you guessed it- EOT for this season.

Originally Posted by Vincent Beaumesnil

We have seen at Le Mans that we are able to have Rebellion and SMP as competitive as Toyota on single-lap pace and on pure potential.

He really doesn't get it, does he?
Or is it that he does not WANT to?

[courageous]

Do people want BOP, or do they want the best team to be rewarded for their efforts?

Does anyone think the billion dollar factory Toyota team are on the same genuine level as SMP, Rebellion, Ginetta, Kolles, Glikenhaus or even Aston Martin?

If you want cutting edge technological freedom, then a big volume manufacturer will always be miles ahead unless they do a Nissan

[carbsmith]

They had 6 cars within ~1.3s at Le Mans. When Audi was last still around it was 3 seconds. So yes, they are pretty competitive on single lap pace.

[gert]

Originally Posted by carbsmith

They had 6 cars within ~1.3s at Le Mans. When Audi was last still around it was 3 seconds. So yes, they are pretty competitive on single lap pace.

pretty competitive yes, but not as competitive as Toyota (his words, not mine)

Originally Posted by courageous

Do people want BOP, or do they want the best team to be rewarded for their efforts?
Does anyone think the billion dollar factory Toyota team are on the same genuine level as SMP, Rebellion, Ginetta, Kolles, Glikenhaus or even Aston Martin?
If you want cutting edge technological freedom, then a big volume manufacturer will always be miles ahead unless they do a Nissan

I want them just to be honest about it.
If they want the manufacturer(s) to dominate, say so, and tell all others they're in it to fill the field and fight over 3rd position.
Just don't pretend you want a level playing field, and then create a set of rules that ensures the manufacturer still wins.

So, for me it is either:
*a* a level playing field
*b* two different classes: manufacturers and privateers

and not something like we have now / had last year, something that pretends to be *a* but really is *b*.

[TF110]

You can do two things, bop it so that everyone gets a trophy, or try to make it so the cars are close on ultimate pace and let the best team win. I guess bop can do that but it can be gamed. I think it's a good idea to do the success ballast thing they're planning this season. Plus it's based on points scored so no reason to get a bad result to lose ballast. Time will tell because it seems like the system will be in place for hypercar unless bop takes care of it all.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by TF110

Time will tell because it seems like the system will be in place for hypercar unless bop takes care of it all.

Didn't they already decide it

The success handicap [or] ballast was one intention, but it was the intention before we decided on BoP. We will BoP the hypercar class; it’s not possible for me to give details on what we will have.”

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2019/0...eaumesnil.html

[TF110]

The last part sounds like he doesn't even know... "not possible to give details..." they really need to get it together because a year from now hypercar is here.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I imagine others are getting quite bored of the discussion, so I'll make this post and call it quits.

We had an "EoT" for years which balanced, petrol, diesel, 2MJ, 4MJ, 6MJ, 8MJ and non-hybrid cars. This went for years without major adjustments, which suggested that the EoT was doing its job - the technology involved was all capable of producing equivalent outcomes

I've said this years ago, but to me EoT was always just BoP for the powertrain of the best in each subclass in LMP1-H. I think having the diesel Audi run shorter stints was a complete joke. It went totally against the natural outcome of the two technologies.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by bobec

I've said this years ago, but to me EoT was always just BoP for the powertrain of the best in each subclass in LMP1-H. I think having the diesel Audi run shorter stints was a complete joke. It went totally against the natural outcome of the two technologies.

Well, for what it's worth, I do agree. ACO wanted efficiency, and diesel will always be more efficient, and yet it had to run a tank that was smaller which more than offset the heavier engine, which meant it was worse.

Agreed, but that ships sailed now, and someone will disagree and say it was completely fair because why should get they get an advantage from running better tech, and then you (or I) will reply "Well that's BoP then!" and we'll be full circle.

[Anyopenroad]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

As for the "boom" in LMP1 privateers - we must have watched different series. I loved the new privateers, but 2 teams is not a boom.

Bearing in mind how little time there was for the privateer cars to be conceived, tested and sold, the subsequent grid was quite impressive - ir at least, it almost was. Had Ginetta worked out we would have had an 8-car privateer field assembled from scratch in mere months.

That at least tells us that the interest is there. Had those cars been remotely successful, it's reasonable to assume that more interest would quickly have been forthcoming and that the existing programmes would have been developed further.

As it was, it very quickly became clear that the privateers were all competing for third place. The efforts made by the ACO to balance things were half-hearted to the point of being insulting. So now it's fallen apart.

In an alternative reality Toyota left too after their first Le Mans win, making LMP1 privateer the top class. Tempted by a Le Mans win, even without a world championship attached, multiple top-class racing teams bought LMP1s and a 15-car privateer field battled it out at the front of the grid. That would have been awesome. But the ACO blew it.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by bobec

I've said this years ago, but to me EoT was always just BoP for the powertrain of the best in each subclass in LMP1-H. I think having the diesel Audi run shorter stints was a complete joke. It went totally against the natural outcome of the two technologies.

Be that as it may, prior to 2018 it wasn't a round-by-round changing element. That really defines BoP to me, constant backdoor tweaking in conjunction with obvious political manipulation.

[Aysedasi]

Strange isn't it? The alternative scenario could well have been awesome, but was it somehow unfair for Toyota to continue just because Audi and then Porsche ran away to play in Formula E and break (what are to some irrelevant) records? In many ways I feel sorry for Toyota, having developed a car which over the last couple of years would probably have beaten Audi and Porsche anyway, they are now lambasted for having the audacity to want to retain the advantage that they've invested a lot of time and money in achieving. In retrospect, Toyota failing at the very last hurdle in 2016 when they had all but beaten Audi and Porsche fair and square was more unfortunate than it appeared at the time. Perhaps if they had won, the desire to ensure an advantage thereafter against only privateers, to win Le Mans and to avoid any embarrassment against those privateers might not have been as strong. But yes, in retrospect, from most angles, the ACO did blow it and more to the point, continued to blow it after Toyota got that first win....

[carbsmith]

Originally Posted by bobec

I've said this years ago, but to me EoT was always just BoP for the powertrain of the best in each subclass in LMP1-H. I think having the diesel Audi run shorter stints was a complete joke. It went totally against the natural outcome of the two technologies.

One could say a fairly large displacement diesel race car that weighs the same as compact petrol engines is also a joke.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Be that as it may, prior to 2018 it wasn't a round-by-round changing element. That really defines BoP to me, constant backdoor tweaking in conjunction with obvious political manipulation.

This. In IMSA evdry team gets to win a couple races, then gets Radically reined in, while everyone else gets boosted.

One would think that either/or would make sense--slow the fastest Or speed the slow---but parity isn't the goal, it seems.

If WEC ends up going that route .... well, it has already wasted almost all its credibility with single-car classes .... if Hypercar is just a promo device where every team is allowed to win enough to keep its sponsors, and then the next team gets its day .... well, there is a lot of racing on TV and online.

[TF110]

Unless they do bop session by session, there's not many times to get it right or mess it up. There aren't very many races and they're pretty far apart relative to IMSA.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by TF110

Unless they do bop session by session, there's not many times to get it right or mess it up. There aren't very many races and they're pretty far apart relative to IMSA.

But GTE is just as bop class as Hypercar will be, and haven't they managed to screw it up just the same as the one in IMSA?

I don't think they'll bop it session by session (except at Le Mans, pre-TD & post-TD & post-Q adjustments guaranteed) however it should be race-by-race if GTE is to be followed

[TF110]

I have a feeling that sandbagging will be going on in hypercar but that's not the topic of this thread so we're veering off topic. Let's see what happens this upcoming season with the success penalties or whatever they want to call it.