Aussies/Kiwis : Monday Night Racing

[TiZzla]

scabba your a disgrace, and you give the aussie GT community a bad name

 

[Mad94d]

scabba your a disgrace, and you give the aussie GT community a bad name

Which is why we made the AU/NZ Crowd invite only.

 

[HRT-Scibba-GTR]

scabba your a disgrace, and you give the aussie GT community a bad name

Why im a disgrace driver ? because i smash you i played very fair i don't hit you if you don't like me that to bad man that how life goes remember only game.💡

 

[extreme car]

Why im a disgrace driver ? because i smash you? I played very fair i didn't hit you. if you don't like me too bad. that's how life go remember? it's only a game.💡

punctuation is your friend.

 

[ripping_silk]

punctuation is your friend.

keep your punctuation close, your syntax closer.

 

[Nicko]

Thanks again to the AU/NZ Crowd for more brilliant MNR last night! guys and thanks.

 

[crazyhorse]

Guys, am considering an idea and would like your input.

It seems that between yourselves (essentially supersonic & TiZ) and TORCers, that we have recently come upon some good cars for the 10-lappers of SAR & MNR. What I am interested in is your opinion on running some of our better combos as 'mini-series' - essentially, run the same car/track combos for the month of June (perhaps) so we can keep a semi-serious tally of who finishes where.

I know everybody can't make every meeting, but I don't think that should hold us back... as I say, it's just for fun.

Most of the current line-up is producing some great battles. If I would change anything in the current line-up (as run on the 7th & 8th June) it would be to swap out the GT LM for a grip race (at Suzuka), in the style of the 350Z at Fuji, but again, that can be debated (if it were dropped, I would give the GTPers choice of the Suz grip ride). If we can come up with a formula that has 2 rockets & 1 grip racer at Suzuka, and 1 rocket & 1 gripper for Fuji, it seems to me that we can please almost everyone :tu:

Currently, my preferred schedule would look something like this:

Race 1 (beast): Blitz ER34 @ Suzuka
Race 2 (grip): 350Z @ Fuji F
Race 3 (beast): SRT10 @ Suzuka (debatable whether this really a grip race!)
Race 4 (grip): TBA - GTPers choice @ Suzuka
Race 5 (beast): F40 @ Fuji F
Race 6 (???): TBA - first in best dressed, or show of hands, for any combo people want to race that week, just for a little freshness.

So guys, I know I can count on plenty of opinion, so let's have it

Original SAR thread
Original MNR thread

 

[extreme car]

I think fuji 650 10 laps on Honda NSX-R with R1 tyres is quite a recipe for beast

 

[supersonic-88]

Guys, am considering an idea and would like your input.

It seems that between yourselves (essentially supersonic & TiZ) and TORCers, that we have recently come upon some good cars for the 10-lappers of SAR & MNR. What I am interested in is your opinion on running some of our better combos as 'mini-series' - essentially, run the same car/track combos for the month of June (perhaps) so we can keep a semi-serious tally of who finishes where.

I know everybody can't make every meeting, but I don't think that should hold us back... as I say, it's just for fun.

Most of the current line-up is producing some great battles. If I would change anything in the current line-up (as run on the 7th & 8th June) it would be to swap out the GT LM for a grip race (at Suzuka), in the style of the 350Z at Fuji, but again, that can be debated (if it were dropped, I would give the GTPers choice of the Suz grip ride). If we can come up with a formula that has 2 rockets & 1 grip racer at Suzuka, and 1 rocket & 1 gripper for Fuji, it seems to me that we can please almost everyone :tu:

Currently, my preferred schedule would look something like this:

Race 1 (beast): Blitz ER34 @ Suzuka
Race 2 (grip): 350Z @ Fuji F
Race 3 (beast): SRT10 @ Suzuka (debatable whether this really a grip race!)
Race 4 (grip): TBA - GTPers choice @ Suzuka
Race 5 (beast): F40 @ Fuji F
Race 6 (???): TBA - first in best dressed, or show of hands, for any combo people want to race that week, just for a little freshness.

So guys, I know I can count on plenty of opinion, so let's have it

Original SAR thread
Original MNR thread

Interesting idea. Sounds good and I guess it gives people the chance to settle in with cars rather than have to adapt each week to something new. Few things though:

- By making it semi-serious & recording results, possibly giving points, it will be inevitable I think that drivers will get annoyed. It may make SAR/MNR go from being a fun laid back event to people trying to win at all costs or do the best possible. So when crashes and contact happen it may not be the 'no worries don't worry about it' stuff but more so confrontations and arguments. You'd hope this wouldn't occur but you never know.

- Drivers who aren't fast now may see even less point taking part. I've seen a few guys around who don't like the 10 lappers because they get left behind then drive around by themselves. So some may not contest just on the basis of assuming they wont be able to do well/score points or results. Perhaps we could find a way to help them. Maybe like a two-tier points or result system. The first bunch of drivers are the quicker ones, while the second bunch are the slower and each group gets individual points along with an overall table of points. Sort of like multi-class racing in sports cars.

- When you say beast & grip I assume you mean:

Beast = car which has a lot of power but tough to control
Grip = car with great grip, easy to control.

If so, then I think we should at least pick beasts which are drivable. I know some guys like cars which are a massive challenge but if its good close racing we want, then cars which at least aren't spinning off every 10 seconds would be the better choice.

Also it should be an even split of races. Half grip, Half beast or in the case of having 5 races, perhaps leaning more towards grip so 3 grip, 2 beast.

- Cars chosen should have setups readily available.

I think this would help the racing so much. The last few weeks we've had some cars which either don't have any setups around or do but they're either from spec II or for another track/PP limit. This has lead to drivers having big problems with them. No greater example than the GTLM which in both SAR/MNR this week people were struggling & some just pulled over and gave up. By having at least 1 goodish setup available to everyone, it would give us all a chance for the best racing possible.

Also not sure on the blitz. Its really a drift car, not a race car so again perhaps a different one would provide better racing.

- By having 6 races on monday night, all 10 lappers, it would be pushing it pretty late for some of the guys, especially in NZ. So either an earlier start or just stick to 5 races would be the go.

There's some points that I've thought of. Probably went on too long but hope that helps 👍

 

[TiZzla]

I had a similar idea a while ago, i think its a great idea CrazyHorse 👍

 

[GTP_joeninety]

Excellent start Crazyhorse.
Is there a problem about rejoining the race if your a lap down - was just thinking of Supersonics comment about newer(*and older*) drivers not quite ready for balls to the wall racing, maybe a spin or punt puts them behind, can they rejoin once the pack has lapped?

I personally like racing in ghost form because i can't muck up the other driver because of missed braking points etc.

There should still be some control exhibited by the driver a lap down by not purposely driving to block a lead drivers view of corners and such but it would be a good way for newer drivers to learn entry speeds
into corners etc....

anyway, i'm happy with the Blitz,F40 and the viper...........will see you all when you come back around the track!

 

[crazyhorse]

- It may make SAR/MNR go from being a fun laid back event to people trying to win at all costs or do the best possible. You'd hope this wouldn't occur but you never know.

For sure, this is an issue! With no air-tight solution, either, as far as I can see. In keeping with the "...laid back" approach, I (...and it seems you, too) would not favour a heavily policed system. Any approach will only work if we can all race as grown-ups.

Off the top o' my head, then...

1. If there is any contact during a pass in any braking zone, the racer who was behind before the zone must yield, or allow a re-pass;

Most of us do not have GT setup with side views, so a driver in front can reasonably expect to chose any racing line he/she likes. As the driver attempting to pass, it will be your job to anticipate that line, and work to achieve greater corner exit speed so as to pass along the next straight. If you can see the nose of the car along side you, you are not in front - if you see that nose under brakes, you must yield the corner, or allow a re-pass.

2. There should not be a need for a #2 if we drive like adults!

- I've seen a few guys around who don't like the 10 lappers because they get left behind then drive around by themselves. So some may not contest just on the basis of assuming they wont be able to do well/score points or results. Perhaps we could find a way to help them... Sort of like multi-class racing in sports cars.

I think that's a fabulous idea, mate - care to work out the details

Beast = car which has a lot of power but tough to control
Grip = car with great grip, easy to control.

Yeah, and yeah... 👍

If so, then I think we should at least pick beasts which are drivable. Also it should be an even split of races. Half grip, Half beast or in the case of having 5 races, perhaps leaning more towards grip so 3 grip, 2 beast.

I certainly wouldn't be unhappy with that - and in light of another of your comments "So either an earlier start or just stick to 5 races would be the go", I'm inclined to stick with 5 races. If people want to stay on after SAR/MNR (or even go before the start of Race 1), they can advertise it in this thread and run whatever they want. My only worry with 2 grip races at Suzuka is that it won't be easy to find too many cars with an abundance of grip at PP750, but if we can find some, I agree that "3 grip, 2 beast" is the way to go

- Cars chosen should have setups readily available.

I think so too - how about having the podium guys post their numbers?

---

Fabulous input, supersonic

Glad you like the idea, TiZ. Please feel free to add your slant to the discussion, or, if you like how things are unfolding, perhaps you would help ss-88 with some car testing

chris

 

[crazyhorse]

Is there a problem about rejoining the race if your a lap down - was just thinking of Supersonics comment about newer (*and older*) drivers not quite ready for balls to the wall racing, maybe a spin or punt puts them behind, can they rejoin once the pack has lapped?

I don't see why not. R/L racers and teams often test once their race has been shot... I think it's perfectly fine

...i'm happy with the Blitz, F40 and the viper

Me too, but I think I like ss-88s "3 grip, 2 beast" combo more

 

[supersonic-88]

Glad you liked some of the ideas

For sure, this is an issue! With no air-tight solution, either, as far as I can see. In keeping with the "...laid back" approach, I (...and it seems you, too) would not favour a heavily policed system. Any approach will only work if we can all race as grown-ups.

Off the top o' my head, then...

1. If there is any contact during a pass in any braking zone, the racer who was behind before the zone must yield, or allow a re-pass;

Most of us do not have GT setup with side views, so a driver in front can reasonably expect to chose any racing line he/she likes. As the driver attempting to pass, it will be your job to anticipate that line, and work to achieve greater corner exit speed so as to pass along the next straight. If you can see the nose of the car along side you, you are not in front - if you see that nose under brakes, you must yield the corner, or allow a re-pass.

2. There should not be a need for a #2 if we drive like adults!

Agree that there is no proper solution for this. For sure you, I & probably everybody else doesn't want to be racing with 10,000 rules to follow because the basis should always be on fun. There should be a few simple rules & that's it. What you've listed above is good but perhaps a few things should be added to clarify certain rules. So maybe we'll get all the drivers to pitch some rules they believe should be in, pick the most important ones & then list them for the event?

I think that's a fabulous idea, mate - care to work out the details

Sure no problem. Would just need to work out how we're calculating results. Are we just doing it as counting who finishes in the top 3 each race? Or would we be doing points, so say top 5 finishers get points (10,6,4,2,1)

I think so too - how about having the podium guys post their numbers?

Sounds good. So say if there is a setup available, a link will be posted to it. If not, then one can be requested & a podium placed driver posts their tune.

 

[TiZzla]

I like how things are unfolding

This will only enhance MNR, but as you guys have discussed there is the risk of people getting upset if unfair racing happens.

But to be honest, it happens wether there are points on offer or not! Everybody knows the rules, Maybe you could post some official OLR rules at TORC to clear things up 👍

And im more than happy to help with the testing. I think we should stick to 5 races, and i like the idea of having well behaved cars and, the BEASTS.

 

[crazyhorse]

There should be a few simple rules & that's it. So maybe we'll get all the drivers to pitch some rules they believe should be in, pick the most important ones & then list them for the event?

Ok... let's try that 👍

Are we just doing it as counting who finishes in the top 3 each race? Or would we be doing points, so say top 5 finishers get points (10,6,4,2,1).

I like your second suggestion. If we run your two-tier idea, I would like to see a minimum of 5 racers per tier, but for racers to volunteer which tier they'd like to be in.

Idea: When the events change, the top-tier racer with the lowest points can be given the option to move to the lower tier, and the highest tier-two racer offered the chance of promotion. I don't think moving tiers should be compulsory, unless it is to maintain the '5 racers minimum per tier'. If the best tier-two guy wants 'up', and there are only 4 tier-two guys left, the lowest top-tier racer will be asked to drop a class.

So say if there is a setup available, a link will be posted to it. If not, then one can be requested & a podium placed driver posts their tune.

Works for me

...there is the risk of people getting upset ...but ...it happens wether there are points on offer or not! Everybody knows the rules, Maybe you could post some official OLR rules at TORC to clear things up 👍

I agree that it happens, regardless of any tangible reward. I think my hope is that, with the same combos getting repeated, a racer will take the long view, and look forward to turning the tables, fairly, the next time the event is run. And sure, as soon as we get a consensus on our SAR- & MNR-specific rules, I'll post 'em, though like a lot of the GTPers, the TORC boys are as clean as you can get

And im more than happy to help with the testing.

On that front, I've had a quick look at some potential PP750 cars.

Both the Lancer Evo IX / Tuned and the Lancer Evo X / Tuned are both utterly bombproof straight out of the box - no power oversteer whatsoever with stock suspension and R3s, and plenty of turn-in & grip. The BNR 34 GT-R '06 is almost as tidy, again, with stock sussie and R3s. Maybe you can come up with more "well behaved" rides... certainly the more choice we have, the better 👍

---

EDIT: Heh... just noticed my "New Member" tag, so checked my profile... and since registering here in '01, I have a COLOSSAL 16 posts to my name!!! How many before I hit "Forum Junkie" status?

 

[supersonic-88]

Ok... let's try that 👍

Ok cool. Like tizzla said the OLR rules cover much of the stuff but there's a few things at least in my mind from recently that might help clarify situations.

Such as at fuji, in the last few corners in particular there are 2 distinct lines you can take. A wide arch line where you go out right to the edge of the corner then come back in, hit the apex & go. This is slower entry but faster exit. Then you have the other line which is a shallow entry meaning you have faster corner entry but slower corner exit.

What I've seen this lead to is the guys who take the wide line being hit when they come back across to take the apex, presumably so because the driver behind took the shallow faster entry, gaining ground on the other guy, plus they might have thought the driver was going wide, when in fact all he was doing was taking a different line.

This seems to happen often at fuji but of course can occur at other tracks as well, for example the hairpin at suzuka. So basically that's just a case of understanding in certain corners there may be 2 different lines, so respect that.

I like your second suggestion. If we run your two-tier idea, I would like to see a minimum of 5 racers per tier, but for racers to volunteer which tier they'd like to be in.

Yep agree on this. I was thinking last night you'd at least want 5 or so drivers in each group. However have the feeling we'll have more drivers in the top group than the lower, perhaps even say 8 top, 4 lower. So maybe we should get people to sign up to this first. That way we can work out all the drivers that want to take part and list them in each group. Then when the racing begins if a certain driver doesn't race they just get no points for that particular race.

Idea: When the events change, the top-tier racer with the lowest points can be given the option to move to the lower tier, and the highest tier-two racer offered the chance of promotion. I don't think moving tiers should be compulsory, unless it is to maintain the '5 racers minimum per tier'. If the best tier-two guy wants 'up', and there are only 4 tier-two guys left, the lowest top-tier racer will be asked to drop a class.

That's a great idea mate 👍 Sort of like the divisions here at GTP where if certain drivers are doing well enough they can be upgraded to a faster class.

On that front, I've had a quick look at some potential PP750 cars.

Both the Lancer Evo IX / Tuned and the Lancer Evo X / Tuned are both utterly bombproof straight out of the box - no power oversteer whatsoever with stock suspension and R3s, and plenty of turn-in & grip. The BNR 34 GT-R '06 is almost as tidy, again, with stock sussie and R3s. Maybe you can come up with more "well behaved" rides... certainly the more choice we have, the better 👍

Sounds good. Used to drive the lancer quite a bit & was a nice car, good grip.

EDIT: Heh... just noticed my "New Member" tag, so checked my profile... and since registering here in '01, I have a COLOSSAL 16 posts to my name!!! How many before I hit "Forum Junkie" status?

So what's your post per day? 0.001

 

[crazyhorse]

...they might have thought the driver was going wide, when in fact all he was doing was taking a different line. ...So basically that's just a case of understanding in certain corners there may be 2 different lines, so respect that.

I hear that, for sure, but really the point we made earlier ("1. If there is any contact during a pass in any braking zone, etc") should cover most of this problem.

Perhaps a little re-wording helps...

1. If there is any contact during a pass in any braking zone or at any apex, the racer who was behind before the zone/apex must yield, or allow a re-pass. If you can see the nose of the car along side you, you are not in front - if you see that nose under brakes, or at an acceleration apex, you must yield the corner, or allow a re-pass.

And maybe the next point might be...

2. A racer may choose any racing line. If a racer ahead of you appears 'wide', but is not off-track, rule 1. applies.

In the the examples you give, you can often see a good deal more than just the nose of the guy infront - that said, I nudged TiZ in the middle of 100R at Fuji the other night - I thought he was loosing traction and running wide, so I ducked underneath, only to find he was just reshaping for the second apex. The touch forced TiZ wide and off-track. I waited for him to re-pass, but it was a clumsy (optimistic?) move, and just the sort of thing you are highlighting.

Will this work? What if TiZ had lodged an incident report... "TORC_stonemonkey - avoidable contact". Then say I get named in two more 'avoidable contact' incidents in that race, maybe then I can only earn half race points (3 incidents, as outlined by at least 2 racers)... 5 incidents in a race, and no points (5 incidents, as outlined by at least 3 racers)!? I know I can take my medicine if I get called-out for stoopid driving.

Maybe we need to make "medicine taking" a condition of signing up for the series...

"If you drive like a loon, and fail to observe rules 1. & 2., you WILL get pinged. Rack up the contacts and it will cost you points. Crying about it is not an option - your only recourse is to try again at the next meeting, when you can pick your passes more judiciously"

Heh... I'm just waffling on now

...So maybe we should get people to sign up to this first. That way we can work out all the drivers that want to take part and list them in each group.

Sounds good, mate 👍

 

[supersonic-88]

Yeah those rules sound good now. Maybe the final thing needed would be to address situations with punters. I think it was MNR this week that I was the head of a 3 car group, the punter being the 3rd car. Into the hairpin at suzuka, the punter hit the AU driver behind me, who then slammed into me. I went into the gravel while the other 2 just drove off, which didn't seem particularly right but I wasn't sure.

In that type of scenario is it just tough luck that I happened to be at the front of that group and was sent into the gravel or should it be that the 2nd placed AU driver should have stopped & waited because he basically gained a position off me through concertina effect from the punter behind?

Maybe something like:

1. If you happen to be taken out by a punter in a 1 on 1 situation then unfortunately that's just the bad luck we all face. Get back on track as quickly as possible.

2. If a punter causes a mass group crash, ie. sending others drivers into each other, then get back on track & resume the order you were in before the crash. This only applies to the drivers involved in the crash.

Agree with you that there should be some sort of proper 'report system' with a main person judging this, perhaps yourself? I'd probably go with 3 incidents = no points in that race, 5 incidents = DQ for 2/3 races. Reasoning for that is if you've had 3 incidents (and haven't addressed those by waiting or letting the person back by) then that's more than enough for me to think that a person is driving dirty. 5 incidents in just one race shows clearly that the driver is just being an ass & deserves to not get any points for 2 or 3 races. If this is repeated over multiple weeks, then the driver is completely DQ'd from the event.

 

[crazyhorse]

Punted! Maybe something like:

1. If you happen to be taken out by a punter in a 1 on 1 situation then unfortunately that's just the bad luck we all face. Get back on track as quickly as possible.

2. If a punter causes a mass group crash, ie. sending others drivers into each other, then get back on track & resume the order you were in before the crash. This only applies to the drivers involved in the crash.

I don't think it could be clearer - perfect!

I'd probably go with 3 incidents = no points in that race, 5 incidents = DQ for 2/3 races. Reasoning for that is if you've had 3 incidents (and haven't addressed those by waiting or letting the person back by) then that's more than enough for me to think that a person is driving dirty.

I was actually thinking half points for 3 incidents, EVEN if you make the proper redress - the guilty party is still, after all, wrecking someone elses race whether they wait or not. If it's 3 incidents without redress, then sure, that's becoming a big issue! I think you're spot on there 👍

Agree with you that there should be some sort of proper 'report system' with a main person judging this, perhaps yourself?

Tbh, supersonic, for the most part I am expecting a good deal of peer review when it comes to racing incidents. There is already a pretty good culture of people looking to redress an error... which means they largely know when they are at fault. I'm happy to have the final word, if it comes to that, but I can't be at every corner... i.e. the chances on me being able to comment on an incident between (e.g.) You & TiZ will be small. It will be hard to call such an incident just by looking at the track-map... which, after the first lap, is normally all I see of you two

So anyways... these seem to be our SAR/MNR guidelines (thus far):

1. If there is any contact during a pass in any braking zone or at any apex, the racer who was behind before the zone/apex must yield, or allow a re-pass. If you can see the nose of the car along side you, you are not in front - if you see that nose under brakes, or at an acceleration apex, you must yield the corner, or allow a re-pass.

2. A racer may choose any racing line. If a racer ahead of you appears 'wide', but is not off-track, then guideline 1 applies.

3. If you are taken out by a punter in a 1 on 1 situation then unfortunately that's just the bad luck we all face. Get back on track as quickly as possible. If a punter causes a crash or contact between SAR/MNR racers, i.e. sending others drivers into each other, and/or off-track, then get back on track & resume the order you were in before the crash. This only applies to the drivers involved in the crash.

4. Incidents involving alleged 'avoidable contact' will peer reviewed. If no consensus is reached by the parties involved, a third-party, executive decision with be forthcoming... and final. The following penalties will be incurred for the indicated number of 'avoidable contacts':

- 3 'avoidable contact' reports (per individual race), issused by at least 2 different racers, will result in half race point where redress has been made for all incidents;
- 5 'avoidable contact' reports (per individual race), issused by at least 3 different racers, will result in zero race points for the race event, even where redress has been made for all incidents;
- 1 'avoidable contact' report (per individual race), verified by at least 2 different racers, where redress has not been performed, will result in zero race points for that race;
- 2 'avoidable contact' reports (per race event), verified by at least 2 different racers, where redress has not been performed, will result in zero race points for the race event;
- 3 'avoidable contact' reports (per race event), verified by at least 2 different racers, where redress has not been performed, will result in the driver being completely DQ'd from the remainder of that race meeting;
- More than 3 'avoidable contact' reports (per race event), verified by at least 2 different racers, where redress has not been performed, will result in the driver being completely DQ'd from SAR/MNR.

We must be getting close

 

[GTP_joeninety]

Great body of work you two!

I pledge allegiance to the 'AU/NZ Crowd' flag.(and GTP's)👍

Who's designing the tattoo?!

 

[crazyhorse]

Who's designing the tattoo?!

Will have to be a full-face Maori inking, I reckon, Joe

A couple of other things have sprung to mind, which, for a 'fun' series that was to be guideline-lite, means things are verging on the unwieldy, but I hoping we've about nutted it out...

Following on from sonics's excellent 'punting' suggestions:

- First corner / First lap mayhem: While every care should be exercised to avoid contact in the first few corners, some reasonable dispensation may be given for contact during this time. Where a racer has exercised sufficient caution, an incident will not result in a 'avoidable contact' report.

- Other contact: While the vast majority of contact is to be avoided, rubbing, or any mutually-initiated (minor) contact that does not result in any party being inhibited, will not result in a 'avoidable contact' report. If there is room for side-by-side action, fair enough - it is the deliberate or careless hampering/impeding of other racers that we are policing.

---

Are we there yet...!?

We'll need to get a shuftie-on if we're gonna trial this for this week's SAR, ahead of June 15th MNR...

Sonic & TiZ - any more thoughts on cars for Suz. If the Lancers and BNR34 are the only solid rides, that's fine (currently I favour the Evo IX & BNR34), but I'd like you fellas, if you can, to come to a consensus over the Suz-beast... Blitz, tuned Viper, or other 👍

Also, could racers who are keen on running this event(s) please start to post a preference for which tier they'd like to peddle in

Thanks, guys.

 

[supersonic-88]

Rules are looking good. The only thing I thought of when reading them was what happens in the event of lag? If cars are lagging then its very hard to avoid contact. I guess that should fall into the 'other contact' exception rules. Perhaps also it should just be:

- Each of these 'avoidable contacts' applies to a single race scenario
- 2 or more drivers must report these before action is taken

3 times but stopped and waited = half points
5 times but stopped and waited = no points

3 times and didn't stop = no points
5 times and didn't stop = DQ'd from all MNR/SAR races that day

5 or more times and didn't stop = banned for the event (each event runs 1 month)

I know its not much different but keeping it simpler in terms of numbers would be better. If we have to worry about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 different things it might get messy. Keeping it at numbers 3 & 5 its easier for everyone to remember. Also there's leeway in those rules so drivers aren't getting pinged straight away so really, nobody should be getting reported or having trouble.

That should be it I think for rules unless anybody else can think of things?

Im happy to go with the Evo IX, BNR34, 350ZRS, F40 & Viper / Tuned.

I'd like to go in the top tier.

Cheers

Edit: One thing I just thought of was when drivers sign up they should state whether they will be racing SAR, MNR or both. Obviously there's no harm in signing up to both because if you can't make a race, you just get no points.

 

[crazyhorse]

...keeping it simpler in terms of numbers would be better. If we have to worry about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 different things it might get messy. Keeping it at numbers 3 & 5 its easier for everyone to remember.

No arguments from me on that... 'simpler' is better!

All I would change is severity of penalty for indiscretions where a racer makes no attempt at redress... not waiting, for me, is a cardinal sin. So something like...

- Each of these 'avoidable contacts' applies to a single race scenario
- 2 or more drivers must report these before action is taken

3 times but redressed (stopped/allowed re-pass) = half points (...as your post)
5 times but redressed (stopped/allowed re-pass) = no points (...as your post)
3 times and failed to redress ANY of the 3 = no points (...minor change)
5 times and failed to redress ANY of the 5 = DQ'd from all MNR/SAR races that day (...minor change)

DQ'd twice from a MNR/SAR race day = banned for the event (each event runs 1 month)

Im happy to go with the Evo IX, BNR34, 350ZRS, F40 & Viper / Tuned.

Me too 👍

One thing I just thought of was when drivers sign up they should state whether they will be racing SAR, MNR or both. Obviously there's no harm in signing up to both because if you can't make a race, you just get no points.

Alternatively, while you might race on both days, you only get credited with points for your highest finish for any single car/track combo. If I run SAR and finish second in the 350Z at Fuji, and come fourth in MNR in the same car, I just get points for the second spot. That way, those who cannot make both days aren't overly disadvantaged.

I think we're there, with maybe a little more discussion of points scoring to be finalised... but I'm going to tie together what we have so far

EDIT - Seen the PM, mate... great effort... will respond directly 👍

 

[supersonic-88]

No arguments from me on that... 'simpler' is better!

All I would change is severity of penalty for indiscretions where a racer makes no attempt at redress... not waiting, for me, is a cardinal sin. So something like...

- Each of these 'avoidable contacts' applies to a single race scenario
- 2 or more drivers must report these before action is taken

3 times but redressed (stopped/allowed re-pass) = half points (...as your post)
5 times but redressed (stopped/allowed re-pass) = no points (...as your post)
3 times and failed to redress ANY of the 3 = no points (...minor change)
5 times and failed to redress ANY of the 5 = DQ'd from all MNR/SAR races that day (...minor change)

DQ'd twice from a MNR/SAR race day = banned for the event (each event runs 1 month)

Me too 👍

Alternatively, while you might race on both days, you only get credited with points for your highest finish for any single car/track combo. If I run SAR and finish second in the 350Z at Fuji, and come fourth in MNR in the same car, I just get points for the second spot. That way, those who cannot make both days aren't overly disadvantaged.

I think we're there, with maybe a little more discussion of points scoring to be finalised... but I'm going to tie together what we have so far

EDIT - Seen the PM, mate... great effort... will respond directly 👍

Yeah I wasn't totally sure on how the scoring would go about the event. With your idea of taking the best result from either a particular SAR/MNR race, basically combining both events, what would happen if say I came first in Race 1 on sunday, then 4th in race 1 on monday, while you came 5th in race 1 on sun & 1st on monday in the same race.

Taking the best result from that, it would mean there would be 2 winners for the same race? I won on sunday, you won on monday meaning we'd both get 10 points for that single race. Don't think that would work or have I confused myself?

I think what's needed is just a little addition to your idea which is, only race ONE of each race. Meaning you either participate in Race 1 in either SAR or MNR BUT NOT BOTH. That way it gives everybody the freedom to choose the day which they wish to race & we don't get into the situation I mentioned above with 2 possible race winners & getting the same points.

Glad you liked what I came up with. Ill make the changes & post it whenever you'd like me too

Edit: Damn just thought about it and what I said wouldn't make a difference. You'd still have the same problem of 2 different race winners for the same race. I don't know how to fix that problem bar just having it like I wrote in the template, which was 2 separate championships.

Edit 2: OK I think that's the best option. How it was in the template with 2 championships. That way if you know you can only do Sundays, then you do the Sunday championship. Likewise with Mondays. If you're lucky enough to do both, then by all means do both. I think they'd be enough drivers for that, we usually get 8-12 for MNR & from what I saw last week, around 4-8 for SAR. Thats plenty. You could handle the SAR championship (counting the points, rankings), while maybe I or another regular MNR driver could do the MNR side of things?

 

[crazyhorse]

...2 championships. That way if you know you can only do Sundays, then you do the Sunday championship. Likewise with Mondays.

I'm not convinced...

Personally, I'd love to see all the tier-one boys listed in the same table, and ditto the tier-two boys... if I'm Pedro or peekay (or another fast Euro-bloke) I wanna see myself stacked up against the southern hemisphere quicks, even though our schedules don't allow real-time competition. Having just one table for each tier will also really pull the two days together... pull everyone together in terms of interest.

I don't think 2 guys having the same points for the same weekly race is a big drama, either. The racer with higher finishes for the week will still come out on top with your 10,6,4,2,1 system...

For example:

You, Sonic, can't make SAR... coz you're surfing (!?)... Me... I miss races 4 and 5 of MNR coz I'm glued to Supernatural... but our results look like this:

My SAR points are:
race 1, 4th = 2
race 2, 4th = 2
race 3, 1st = 10
race 4, 4th = 2
race 5, 1st = 10

My MNR points are:
race 1, 3rd = 4
race 2, 4th = 2
race 3, 3rd = 4
race 4, 2nd = DNS
race 5, 1st = DNS

My BEST total = 30 pts

Your SAR points are:
DNS - surfing

Your MNR points are:
race 1, 1st = 10
race 2, 5th = 1
race 3, 1st = 10
race 4, 1st = 10
race 5, 2nd = 6

Your BEST total = 37 pts

We both won a race 3, but overall, you beat me. Still no good?

 

[GTP_joeninety]

You guy's are machines!
For what it's worth i think Crazyhorse is right...the chances of two racers getting the same points at the end of the event would be low...even if it did happen i think it would just add flavour to the whole thing.

Question regarding the DQ /banned - as there are some players out there that for some reason enjoy the punter tag - how would that be enforced?
- mass disconnecting from a race if that person appears ?
- group punting ?

Anyway, I know i'm not the fastest out here but i can have my moments so i will apply for the top tier......

thanks fella's

 

[TiZzla]

My two cents - i think things are looking a bit complicated.

We don't really need 2 divisions, only 12 cars max in a race.

And that whole punting infringement thing looks a bit OTT.

Im not trying to knock what you guys are doing, its good to see such enthusiasm. But the more simple things are the more enjoyable it will be

Lets just have a simple points scoring thing, someone to record the results. And as for racing incidents, if a person is caught ramming people off without waiting, they get the boot.

 

[supersonic-88]

Crazy, I liked your idea, was just bringing up the possibility of that occuring. Happy to go with your plan mate Wasn't really talking about overall points at the end of the night, was more talking about how if you combine results, taking your best from each race, you'll more than likely have 2 winners for each race getting 10 points (ie you and me both getting 10 for Race 1). Just seemed weird to me, as in real life we don't have 2 winners per race. Oh and I've never surfed before

Tizz, about the divisions all it was invented for was a way to keep the slower drivers interested. As mentioned earlier, they already see little point racing the 10 lappers because they get left behind, with no chance of winning or doing well. With 2 divisions they'd then just be racing people of their same speed & can still 'win' and do well. Perhaps you're right, it may be a tad complicated and we should drop it but how else do you please everybody? I'd hate to think that those guys go, oh its a championship with all these fast guys, there's no point entering because I can't win.

On the punting infringements, they seem ok to me but if they could be made simpler than I'm all for it. Sometimes its just easier to list things in detail so then you don't have to later when somebody brings it up or questions it.

Anyway these are all still ideas, nothing is in concrete so please, keep the suggestions coming

 

[crazyhorse]

@ Sonic - "...Also it would mean if you really want to win the championship, you'd have to race both days because you'd be losing so much points by missing a day."

You'll have to forgive me, mate, if I'm doing a crappy job of explaining the idea. In the example I actually tried to show that, even though I raced two days and you only one, that you still beat me easily. Only the red numbers count i.e. the highest finish in each of the five races (I forgot to colour Your BEST total = 37 pts in red, which may have added to the confusion).

Even if I won every race at SAR and MNR, I could still only get 50 pts.

If I win every SAR race, and come second in every MNR race, I still only get 50 pts.

For sure, there is an advantage in racing both days - you get two cracks at getting a high finish... but only one, the higher one, counts

@ TiZ - "My two cents - i think things are looking a bit complicated."

Yeah... they kinda are... it's easy to get carried away... maybe Sonic & I have a little. I think we'd ALL like to get by with just a "Gentlemen's Agreement", where racers are individually responsible for the legitimacy of the racing. If Sonic is happy to, I would willing trial the event without penalties, and see if we can achieve the standard of racing we're after simply by appealing to racers' senses of fair-play. If it doesn't work out, we could maybe go back to trying to impliment a (more) simple penalty system 👍

@ Joe - "...as there are some players out there that for some reason enjoy the punter tag - how would that be enforced?"

Mate, tbh, I have no idea

Group punting... that might be a lot of fun... for a while anyways

If I had to pull an idea outta my tail-pipe, it would be just to sit on the grid for 20 secs... let the idiot, and any other randoms, trundle off. But I'm sure someone could come up with something better (...but it'd have to be simple - TiZ likes it simple)