[LM24 Race] 2018 Le Mans 24 Hours Race Thread

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

Not according to Todd Snider and to go just a little further...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rT9y1PtENsU

Todd Snider? I bet 75% of the people you ask wouldn't know him.

[Akrapovic]

hmm. To be fair, I think that discussion is a little unfair.

Someone made a claim.
Someone else demonstrated the claim was false and gave evidence as to why.
Others then reply with the old story of "99% of stats are made up".

Well...what about the original claim? Since that is now made up? Dunno. Just seemed a bit unfair.

[Peter Mallett]

My point was, that as a spectator I enjoyed the race and whilst even a numpty like me can see (and be impressed by) the sheer accelleration of the Toyotas, the other teams entered and knew the rules. Why argue about the result when all we are doing is reducing a mammoth effort of endurance to numbers?

Rail against the rules before you see the result. Don't complain after you've entered, seen, and/or enjoyed the event.

[JoeW04]

https://youtu.be/P2ZsJErP4cY

I was trackside most of Saturday but I missed this as I was moving round from mulsanne corner to Tetre Rouge, I've never seen anything like this at Le Mans, one of the safety cars must of been running around alone I'm guessing this was after the Kolles incident?

[fieldodreams79]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

My point was, that as a spectator I enjoyed the race and whilst even a numpty like me can see (and be impressed by) the sheer accelleration of the Toyotas, the other teams entered and knew the rules. Why argue about the result when all we are doing is reducing a mammoth effort of endurance to numbers?

Rail against the rules before you see the result. Don't complain after you've entered, seen, and/or enjoyed the event.

To add, we all pretty much knew Toyota was going run away leading up to the event. The race still had to play itself out...

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Todd Snider? I bet 75% of the people you ask wouldn't know him.

It, of course, depends on what part of the world you're standing on when the question is asked, but I'd reckon it's closer to 97.63%, overall

[Peter Mallett]

A bit iffy. I'd accept 97.99.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

My point was, that as a spectator I enjoyed the race and whilst even a numpty like me can see (and be impressed by) the sheer accelleration of the Toyotas, the other teams entered and knew the rules. Why argue about the result when all we are doing is reducing a mammoth effort of endurance to numbers?

Rail against the rules before you see the result. Don't complain after you've entered, seen, and/or enjoyed the event.

Again, I'm not trying to be difficult here - but many did complain (including myself) that this issue was very predictable before the race. Also, enjoying something doesn't mean you're not allowed to suggest issues. I think anyone claiming this years Le Mans was great and had no problems worth discussing just because they enjoyed it is blinkered. I love Le Mans every year...this year I enjoyed it, but it doesn't make it great. I also love Spa 24, but I'm not going to pretend that it's good in its current format.

If someone then says "yes but it's exactly like 2000" and someone else posts "actually it wasn't, here's the facts" then I don't think the person with stats should be the one who is poked fun at for that. ederss7 was spot on with his analysis. Some of us love stats and figures (it's kinda part of sportscars), and although I will probably be on my own on this one, I find the "Well I enjoyed the race" posts a little tiring - as if we're all meant to sit and post "Yes, that was jolly good. Not much more to discuss except how great it was. Wasn't it great chaps? Everyone agreed? Good!".

Also, the other teams agreed to a ruleset that was 0.5 seconds a lap slower than Toyota. Ask ederss what the gap was. Cos you know, that's worth discussing. But it was jolly good too.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

It is of course a well known fact that 99% of statistics are made up on the spot.

And the remaining ten percent are fabricated to deceive.

[Peter Mallett]

Yeah but if you race cars you know that there's always someone who will be wicker than you. Obviously in my case that doesn't happen. But the point is you sign up to the rules, you lose, you complain. Have any of teams complained? I haven't heard any.

So with respect to the poster who said it was just like/ worse than the 2000 race. I can have no sympathy. Not for malicious reasons just that, well that's racing.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Yeah but if you race cars you know that there's always someone who will be wicker than you. Obviously in my case that doesn't happen. But the point is you sign up to the rules, you lose, you complain. Have any of teams complained? I haven't heard any.

So with respect to the poster who said it was just like/ worse than the 2000 race. I can have no sympathy. Not for malicious reasons just that, well that's racing.

I don't think that really was what was being discussed, or what my point was, but if that's your stance then ok. I completely disagree and felt that the actual facts were worth posting, rather than being tossed aside so easily in a deliberately dismissive fashion. The irony is that by dismissing the real stats it adds credit to the false one. We're due a Trump/Facebook fake news meme by now, as all communication should be done in meme format.

[Peter Mallett]

Not at all. This thread is about the race. The regs and what they do or don't do should be discussed elsewhere. What you are saying is that we should get really serious about the regs to the extent that the race doesn't matter. It's the same in F1. Im frankly ****ed off with it. Get real. Teams win, teams lose. I win. Simetimes I lose. If i don't enter i dont get a chance.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I think anyone claiming this years Le Mans was great and had no problems worth discussing just because they enjoyed it is blinkered.

An interesting - and indeed perfectly fair point, but it fails to take into account the subjective angle on what is and what isn't 'great'. Take me for example. Le Mans is the highlight of my year. I look forward to it immensely and I'll admit to pining for it when it's over and I'm back here at home on Tenths reading what people have said about it. What is 'great' to me may be wholly different to what is 'great' to someone else. I don't have any need to dissect the race and analyse the stats. Nor do I need to compare Toyota's advantage in 2018 to someone else's in 2000 and whatever. The race engaged me enough and I was pleased with the outcome. If the Rebs or SMP had been able to press Toyota, yes, I'm sure I'd have enjoyed that a lot, but it didn't happen and even I with my limited knowledge knew it wasn't going to. Hell, early in the week, Bart actually told me that they couldn't challenge Toyota but he was perfectly sanguine about it. Neither he nor I felt the need to stamp our feet and shout about it.

So yes, Le Mans was 'great' for me and barring some disaster, it was always going to be. If that makes me idiotically superficial in my approach to the event, I don't much care. In fact, it was significantly 'greater' for me than 2017 which, as races go, was pretty disappointing. But then again, it was still 'great' because it was Le Mans and I was lucky enough to be there - and I didn't feel the need to consult the EoT details at any time to know that....

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

An interesting - and indeed perfectly fair point, but it fails to take into account the subjective angle on what is and what isn't 'great'. Take me for example. Le Mans is the highlight of my year. I look forward to it immensely and I'll admit to pining for it when it's over and I'm back here at home on Tenths reading what people have said about it. What is 'great' to me may be wholly different to what is 'great' to someone else. I don't have any need to dissect the race and analyse the stats. Nor do I need to compare Toyota's advantage in 2018 to someone else's in 2000 and whatever. The race engaged me enough and I was pleased with the outcome. If the Rebs or SMP had been able to press Toyota, yes, I'm sure I'd have enjoyed that a lot, but it didn't happen and even I with my limited knowledge knew it wasn't going to. Hell, early in the week, Bart actually told me that they couldn't challenge Toyota but he was perfectly sanguine about it. Neither he nor I felt the need to stamp our feet and shout about it.

So yes, Le Mans was 'great' for me and barring some disaster, it was always going to be. If that makes me idiotically superficial in my approach to the event, I don't much care. In fact, it was significantly 'greater' for me than 2017 which, as races go, was pretty disappointing. But then again, it was still 'great' because it was Le Mans and I was lucky enough to be there - and I didn't consult the EoT details to know that....

Le Mans will always be great. I don't think there's anything that will make it not great. But I also think great things should be open to analysis and discussion, and where needs be, criticism. Otherwise we're just fanboys. Some of us DO enjoy dissecting the race and analysing the stats. It's what we love Trussers for and it's what produces all these graphs and lap time charts. I really don't think that should be shot down in this way.

And a quick edit to say: I don't think any of the teams have complained. But I don't think it's fair to ignore that the ACO aimed for half a second gap and achieved a 5.5 second gap. That is worth discussing. That is what was being talked about. That's just fine.

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Not at all. This thread is about the race. The regs and what they do or don't do should be discussed elsewhere. What you are saying is that we should get really serious about the regs to the extent that the race doesn't matter. It's the same in F1. Im frankly kissed off with it. Get real. Teams win, teams lose.

What was being discussed was the gap in lap time between Toyota and the privateers in this race. That should be in this thread...right? Unless it's a stat, and then it's fake and deserves to be dismissed.

And no, that's not what I'm saying. Sorry for discussing what has been a rather hot topic on the run-up to the race. I'll be sure to just post "Jolly good! Some boys lost this time, but I'm sure they'll do better next time" and ignore anything that's been going on.

I'll drop it now, partly because it's not going anywhere and partly because, and I'm not normally this critical (and I don't think I've ever been critical of this forum), but that's a poor stance to take on having discussions on a discussion forum.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Rail against the rules before you see the result. Don't complain after you've entered, seen, and/or enjoyed the event.

That is so clear it is stunning ... and stunningly obvious.

Not a lot we are going to do about the 2018 le Mans rules now .... if we put as much energy into the 2019 or 2020 rules ...

But, the event was run by the rules we all knew in advance and we all chose to participate ... as did all the actual participants.

Trying now to make the event worse than it was (whether you thought it was great, good, bad, or terrible at the time) makes no sense and makes no difference ... Certainly doesn't make anything better.

I think we All expected the #8 Toyota to win ... even if Toyota had to smuggle both cars into the garage behind a haze of smoke grenades and swap the numbers after one broke.

I think we all knew that Rebellion Might have a shot depending on Toyota luck (which had always been rotten) and Rebellion luck (a little better) but knew that was a long shot.

We all knew the P1-Ls had been BoP'd back too far to Really challenge a hybrid.

So ... all the grousing is people who either are repeating themselves, or should have said it all in the previous 12 months.

I am looking forward. Will Toyota spend the cash to try again, now that it has got its win? After all, all it can do now is break, lose, or repeat---and none of that will bring the same media impact as the first win.

It looks unlikely that any factory hybrids will spring up .... so will Toyota spend the money to gain another victory against privateer competition, or worse ... to Fail to beat the privateers? Risk/rewards calculations tell me we might have seen the last of the TS-050.

I don't see Any chance of P1-L getting BoP'd up to hybrid pace.

As for the 2020 regs ... who knows? That could be terrible or wonderful ... but based on experience, will probably lead to a whole bunch of frustrating compromises which never quite reach the promise of the early announcements.

You know ... things were pretty unfair in the diesel years .... Only a diesel could win, and only two companies were prepared to invest the monumental monies needed to develop those gigantically powerful engines .... and to chase after the ACO's ridiculously unstable regulations, which helped keep the field down to two teams.

But those were some Glorious cars, and some really interesting races. It was hard to watch them ... they'd be nowhere, you'd hear a "whoosh" and they'd already be passing before you could turn your head. The only way to see the cars was at the end of a straight or between two slow corners.

The rules were massively unfair ... and applied rather ummm ... judiciously (diesels were Not Allowed to emit smoke---except when they had the wick turned way up so they could be really fast, and then the ACO/FIA somehow couldn't see the smoke---through the clouds of dollars.)

But looking back, i mainly remember enjoying those races. (though I was a little sad at how the P1-petrol class was made irrelevant ... sort of like P1-L.)

Not a lot has changed. Not a lot is likely to change a lot. Politicians and businessmen create the rules Not with the idea of great, fair, close racing in mind. Then the top teams take the rules for which they have paid or lobbied, and build what they can, and everyone else is second-class.

I don't see why 2020 will be a lot different unless it is by luck ... like we got lucky with a few of the FIA/ACO formulae in the past. But they don't care about racing except as a sort of miscellaneous by-product.

If Racing was what racing was about, we'd have safety standards, minimum and maximum dimensions, max fuel and tire allotments, and a schedule. We'd see races where everyone broke, races where all the experimental cars broke and some team with a VW beetle engine in a 70-year-old GT chassis beat the field. We'd have races where someone's new idea was so good, that team won by 20 laps ... and the next race everyone would have a version.

Teams would have no certainty, sponsors would have no certainty ... but it would be Racing, not race-tainment.

People here would continue to complain non-stop.

[Aysedasi]

But as I've just said above (we posted at much the same time), discussion can take place on many levels, detailed or superficial. I don't have a problem with either, but I would have a problem with anyone thinking I must be a bit dim to have thought the race 'great'. But now I'm repeating myself and my tea is getting cold......

PS I am a Le Mans fanboy. There's no point denying it and I am wholly unashamed of my predicament. There, I've said it now......

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

But as I've just said above (we posted at much the same time), discussion can take place on many levels, detailed or superficial. I don't have a problem with either, but I would have a problem with anyone thinking I must be a bit dim to have thought the race 'great'. But now I'm repeating myself and my tea is getting cold......

Sorry mate, I edited in a reply to yours in my previous post due to that double post.

[fieldodreams79]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

But as I've just said above (we posted at much the same time), discussion can take place on many levels, detailed or superficial. I don't have a problem with either, but I would have a problem with anyone thinking I must be a bit dim to have thought the race 'great'. But now I'm repeating myself and my tea is getting cold......

Its 95 degrees F here today (35 C); tea is supposed to be cold, with real sugar. Why can't you enjoy that, too?

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

Its 95 degrees F (35 C); tea is supposed to be cold, with real sugar. Why can't you enjoy that, too?

I usually do!

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Sorry mate, I edited in a reply to yours in my previous post due to that double post.

No worries at all - really......

[Peter Mallett]

So when I saw the brake changes on the Corvettes I was seriously impressed. Meanwhile the number 8 Toyota was ticking off the laps. Then the Porsche v Ford battle was seriously entertaining. Aston was dropping back all the time, which was sad but unlike the team I can blame BOP.

I've always been seriously busy making money during the Le Mans weekend. I'm stopping all of that ******** this year so I am looking at packages for next year, which with tbe onset of new regs looks to be quite interesting.

[GT6]

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

Its 95 degrees F here today (35 C); tea is supposed to be cold, with real sugar. Why can't you enjoy that, too?

Cold tea? we are British and don't do things like that. Are you a colonial or something

[Peter Mallett]

Have you never tried Long Island Iced Tea?

You've never lived.

[carbsmith]

That's decently reasoned for 5.5s, anyways. Although my impression was Rebellion was not pushing at all in the second half. Not sure about that gap after 2 hours comparison though, it feels like pit stops and/or safety cars must be skewing that. That's one thing in general, back around 2000 you would have had a number of single train safety cars that would be saving the chasers laps compared to the new procedures.

Anyways the privateers were never promised a 0.5s/lap gap in traffic across a full stint so it's a bit of a moot point.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by carbsmith

That's decently reasoned for 5.5s, anyways. Although my impression was Rebellion was not pushing at all in the second half. Not sure about that gap after 2 hours comparison though, it feels like pit stops and/or safety cars must be skewing that. That's one thing in general, back around 2000 you would have had a number of single train safety cars that would be saving the chasers laps compared to the new procedures.

Anyways the privateers were never promised a 0.5s/lap gap in traffic across a full stint so it's a bit of a moot point.

That's a good point, and why the 0.5 seconds they were promised was not as big a death sentence as it seemed. All it would take is one bad lap in traffic, one slow zone and the gap could be made up. Because of SZ and SCs effect when teams pit, you could 'reset' the 1 lap fuel advantage Toyota would have by a SZ forcing Rebellion to pit 3 laps early, and Toyota pitting, lets say, 6 laps early. Then it balances it out.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by GT6

Cold tea? we are British and don't do things like that. Are you a colonial or something

I never aim to drink my tea cold, I generally make it then get involved in doing something else and by the time I remember, the tea is cold......

[chillibowl]

i prefer my tea mixed with lemonade. arnold palmers for the family but of course john dalys for myself. bourbon instead of vodka though for extra greatness!

as for the 'greatness' of this race...i really dont follow other then trying to (and usually failing to) catch a couple of hours over the race weekend but i have to say i did pay a bit more attention to it because of Alonso so im hardly in a position to agree or disagree with anyone here and frankly i am out of my depth when it comes to knowledge of the rules and stats here...

but if he does one day go on to secure a triple crown, i suspect this years edition will be remembered by casual followers like myself as a classic.

certainly one to be referenced as a special year with much less concern given over time about Toyota, rules, and stats etc.

thats maybe neither here nor there though.