FITT - Moving on to GT6!

[TimberW]

How long should the tuner submission time be and how long should the test driver time be?

2 weeks and 2 weeks?
or
1 week and 2 weeks?

 

[XDesperado67]

How long should the tuner submission time be and how long should the test driver time be?

2 weeks and 2 weeks?
or
1 week and 2 weeks?

As a tuner I like as much time as I can get.
Depending on how your going to conduct the test driving and how many tunes you expect to need tested should help you determine how long you need to give for the test drivers.

Part of the challenge with these shorter events can be a shorter period for the tuners to work with. That being said if the timeframe is to short you'll either have a smaller group of entries, poorly tuned cars or a combination of both.

 

[TimberW]

Understand. So 2 weeks and 2 weeks will be good then? This is important to help me facilitate the "prizes" which is slightly different than the usual cars and gears.

 

[XDesperado67]

Understand. So 2 weeks and 2 weeks will be good then? This is important to help me facilitate the "prizes" which is slightly different than the usual cars and gears.

While I like those time frames others I'm sure are in favor of shorter time frames. Having only been through three shootouts with deadlines so far its still early days in finding the time frames that work to keep the balance between keeping people interested and involved, and length of time needed to get reasonable results from both tuners and testers.

 

[zero_speed]

How long should the tuner submission time be and how long should the test driver time be?

One of the things you might want to consider is limiting the amount of tuners and drivers. This alone will be a tremendous help in calculating time frames. Coming from someone who has participated as a tuner and test driver, on one hand you don't want to overwhelm your drivers and on the other you don't want the tuners interest to fade. Also you should consider using deadlines for sign-ups for tuners as well as would be test drivers. This will help to keep things running smoothly and help keep you on schedule for your projected deadline. For time frame I would suggest: 1 week for sign-up, 1 week for tuners, 1 week for test drivers. If all goes as well, you will be done in 3 weeks max.

 

[TimberW]

In saying that, do you think there's enough rest time between the shootout events? At the moment, it looks like it's being queued up back to back with no rest time or time for people to evaluate the shootout.

I think it's worthwhile to have time after the test driver times have been submitted and enough time for them to write a review which people would read as a wind down to the shootout. If not everyone will be looking into the next shootout and the shootout which has just finished will be quickly forgotten.

This will result in a tuner burnout I think if this goes on long term.

 

[CSLACR]

In saying that, do you think there's enough rest time between the shootout events? At the moment, it looks like it's being queued up back to back with no rest time or time for people to evaluate the shootout.

I think it's worthwhile to have time after the test driver times have been submitted and enough time for them to write a review which people would read as a wind down to the shootout. If not everyone will be looking into the next shootout and the shootout which has just finished will be quickly forgotten.

This will result in a tuner burnout I think if this goes on long term.

I think that's kind of the point though, people are enjoying it, so they want more of it, the demand will pace itself out over time as it becomes less "new" to people.
I was a test driver for two of them, none back-to-back, which has always given me break time, when I don't test, I tune.

One of the things you might want to consider is limiting the amount of tuners and drivers. This alone will be a tremendous help in calculating time frames. Coming from someone who has participated as a tuner and test driver, on one hand you don't want to overwhelm your drivers and on the other you don't want the tuners interest to fade. Also you should consider using deadlines for sign-ups for tuners as well as would be test drivers. This will help to keep things running smoothly and help keep you on schedule for your projected deadline. For time frame I would suggest: 1 week for sign-up, 1 week for tuners, 1 week for test drivers. If all goes as well, you will be done in 3 weeks max.

The thing about a whole week to sign up before a week to tune means essentially two weeks of tuning for one week of testing, which works if tunes get posted early on, and much testing can be done before the tuning deadline, but it doesn't always work out that way, at least it hasn't in the past.

 

[zero_speed]

In saying that, do you think there's enough rest time between the shootout events? At the moment, it looks like it's being queued up back to back with no rest time or time for people to evaluate the shootout.

No I think it will be fine. Truthfully things are pretty slow around here, and us tuners are always looking for some competition. =)

I think it's worthwhile to have time after the test driver times have been submitted and enough time for them to write a review which people would read as a wind down to the shootout. If not everyone will be looking into the next shootout and the shootout which has just finished will be quickly forgotten.

This will result in a tuner burnout I think if this goes on long term.

There is nothing wrong with doing that, but you need to allocate enough time for it and also make it clear to your test drivers that it is one of the requirements.

 

[TimberW]

Thanks for the feedback. Its great to hear the feedback from both tuners and test drivers. Your experience is invaluable.

What are your thoughts of tuners being test drivers as well in the same shootout? Is there much issues on that?

 

[CSLACR]

Thanks for the feedback. Its great to hear the feedback from both tuners and test drivers. Your experience is invaluable.

What are your thoughts of tuners being test drivers as well in the same shootout? Is there much issues on that?

It was just done, without issue as far as I know of.
From what I hear it was done in the past, though a system of dropping the slowest time was used. (I think)
Though I think if everybody is playing fair dropping the slowest and/or fastest times will not change the results.

 

[zero_speed]

The thing about a whole week to sign up before a week to tune means essentially two weeks of tuning for one week of testing, which works if tunes get posted early on, and much testing can be done before the tuning deadline, but it doesn't always work out that way, at least it hasn't in the past.

Well it all falls back on limiting the number of entries. My plans for example:

12 tunes / 4 drivers

1 week registration for tuners and drivers. No late entries will be excepted, no exceptions.
During the first week it is each tuners responsibility to add testers to their friends list. if a tuner fails to comply, DQ no exceptions.

1 week for tuners to find, build, and tune entry. If deadline not met, instant DQ no exceptions. Each tuner is responsible for completely breaking in their car BEFORE putting online. Only tuners with PSN access are allowed to participate. Failure to comply with any of the above, DQ no exceptions .

1 week (7 days) for testing. Each driver is responsible for testing each car to the best of their abilities. They must submit times by the deadline. Each driver will give each tune 10 laps only (5 warm up/5 hotlaps).

Just to give you an idea lol. That is not everything either lol.

 

[praiano63]

Great can't wait to see what you find for this, but please keep your car choice hush hush for now. =)

Great!

I think i discover the right car for Tsukuba.... But i`ll not say anything ....... ... even under torture........ But it's fast, aroud the ##"...👍

 

[madmyk]

I have been out of the loop for the last two weeks. I missed C-Zeta's event due to vacation and other commitments. Now I'm looking at the list of upcoming events and I'm very impressed. I'm also worried I won't get a spot on one or more of them if I don't get on the list soon.

So what is the policy for registrations? Are the organizers taking names already? Should I post here or send a PM to the organizer to show interest? I guess it is one more thing to do here to have a policy for event registration.

Any ideas? I don't want it to be like ordering concert tickets - if you know the trick you can get tickets early, but by the time they go on sale to the public it is sold out - or there is a time and date to enter, but I have a meeting at work and by the time I get to register it is sold out.

 

[XDesperado67]

I have been out of the loop for the last two weeks. I missed C-Zeta's event due to vacation and other commitments. Now I'm looking at the list of upcoming events and I'm very impressed. I'm also worried I won't get a spot on one or more of them if I don't get on the list soon.

So what is the policy for registrations? Are the organizers taking names already? Should I post here or send a PM to the organizer to show interest? I guess it is one more thing to do here to have a policy for event registration.

Any ideas? I don't want it to be like ordering concert tickets - if you know the trick you can get tickets early, but by the time they go on sale to the public it is sold out - or there is a time and date to enter, but I have a meeting at work and by the time I get to register it is sold out.

You've not missed out on C-ZETA's Rally Shootout yet, read his OP and get in on it.

So far zero_speed is the only one who is limiting the number of participants for his shootout so you shouldn't have a problem getting in on any of the fun.

 

[madmyk]

I don't have time to join in on C-ZETA's event sadly. It looks like fun and I could use some work on rally cars to get better.

To any other organizers, I am available to help with any score sheet needs. I think my last one for CSLACR was a little confusing at first but ended up working out well. The important thing is that I can automate a lot of the calculations that take a lot of time for an organizer. I am a data geek. Please put me to good use.

I like the idea of scoring based on ranks for different categories, Desperado. I can think of a way to build that into a score sheet. Let me know how I can help.

 

[CSLACR]

I don't have time to join in on C-ZETA's event sadly. It looks like fun and I could use some work on rally cars to get better.

To any other organizers, I am available to help with any score sheet needs. I think my last one for CSLACR was a little confusing at first but ended up working out well. The important thing is that I can automate a lot of the calculations that take a lot of time for an organizer. I am a data geek. Please put me to good use.

I like the idea of scoring based on ranks for different categories, Desperado. I can think of a way to build that into a score sheet. Let me know how I can help.

In the end I think it worked great.👍

 

[madmyk]

Speaking of being a data geek, I created a file for storing my tunes and publishing them. I put up a post in the Tuning forum here. I was wondering if any tuners could check it out and see if it is useful.

I don't mean to plug my little project here, but hopefully this is okay here as I am trying to provide resources to tuners. thanks.

 

[XDesperado67]

I have added rule #4 using Johnnypenso's suggestion for it.

If their is no disagreement on this then I'll delete rules 7, 8 & 9 from the examples and we can go on to a review of example rules 10 & 11.

I'm thinking personally that rule #10 could be dropped and rule #11 get written in as part of the new rule #4.
Comments and suggestions everyone?

@madmyk your file idea looks promising and posting a link here along with a request for input on it is fine. However I suggest you talk to Basilea in this thread The Ultimate GT5 Link Collection for Tuning about listing it.
Also might try talking with Jake in his GT5 Tuning Sheet thread about a way to get your file and his sheet to work together for a truly useful combination that would make tunes readily accessible both online and off in a standardized format.

Also added the logo done by DigitalBaka to the top of the OP and since I liked the creativity involved placed the banner done by krenkme's kids to the bottom of the OP.
Please let me and them know what you all think of the Logo and Banner!

 

[DigitalBaka]

I think perhaps instead of "SO" we should use either of "host" or "event sponsor". Actually, any one of those three would be fine as long as we keep it consistent across all points rather than switching back and forth. I lean toward event sponsor but it could/should be put to a vote.

As far as rules 10 and 11, I agree that 10 is now obsolete. 11 we should try to slim down a little before adding or possibly split rule 4 into two rules as it seems a little long-winded with more on the back end. Perhaps:

4)The Shootout Organizer (SO) will designate which track(s) cars are to be tested on as well as all testing parameters. Cars are to be tested exactly as written by the tuner. SO will determine if test cars are to be placed on "share" by tuners or purchased individually by testers. It is at the discretion of the SO to decide if tuners may participate as drivers. Drivers must submit a time for all cars by the testing deadline. The winner will be determined by a formula set by SO.

O/T: Apologies for not being very involved lately. Got myself a new job and I am trying to find a rhythm now to balance everything I want to do in the day. Another couple weeks and I'll be set I think.

 

[XDesperado67]

I think perhaps instead of "SO" we should use either of "host" or "event sponsor". Actually, any one of those three would be fine as long as we keep it consistent across all points rather than switching back and forth. I lean toward event sponsor but it could/should be put to a vote.

As far as rules 10 and 11, I agree that 10 is now obsolete. 11 we should try to slim down a little before adding or possibly split rule 4 into two rules as it seems a little long-winded with more on the back end. Perhaps:

4)The Shootout Organizer (SO) will designate which track(s) cars are to be tested on as well as all testing parameters. Cars are to be tested exactly as written by the tuner. SO will determine if test cars are to be placed on "share" by tuners or purchased individually by testers. It is at the discretion of the SO to decide if tuners may participate as drivers. Drivers must submit a time for all cars by the testing deadline. The winner will be determined by a formula set by SO.

O/T: Apologies for not being very involved lately. Got myself a new job and I am trying to find a rhythm now to balance everything I want to do in the day. Another couple weeks and I'll be set I think.

Congratulations on the new job.👍👍

I like your rewrite of #4 but with the slight change of Shootout Organizer/SO to Event Sponsor/ES as this keeps it in line with other sections (less editing for me) and covers any type of competition or challenge that F.I.T.T. might be involved with.

 

[zero_speed]

Have a question to ask...

Why couldn't we have more than one event going at once? I don't see a issue especially if they are different types of events. Right now we have a rally event going, we could also have Timbers event going since it is touge related. It would cut down on the waiting time for some of us who waiting to host our own events. I know that there are a limited amount of official test drivers floating around, but let the potential event host make that decision for themselves. Also before anyone asks, YES I am eager to get CKR's event going.

 

[dr_slump]

Have a question to ask...

Why couldn't we have more than one event going at once? I don't see a issue especially if they are different types of events. Right now we have a rally event going, we could also have Timbers event going since it is touge related. It would cut down on the waiting time for some of us who waiting to host our own events. I know that there are a limited amount of official test drivers floating around, but let the potential event host make that decision for themselves. Also before anyone asks, YES I am eager to get CKR's event going.

The problem is that not everyone has enough freetime to enter more than one shootout at the same time.
I think it wouldn't be that difficult for us tuners, but I see the hard work the testers do. It needs extremely long to test all cars propperly. Also there aren't plenty of testers.

 

[praiano63]

The problem is that not everyone has enough freetime to enter more than one shootout at the same time.
I think it wouldn't be that difficult for us tuners, but I see the hard work the testers do. It needs extremely long to test all cars propperly. Also there aren't plenty of testers.

At least like this we can choose the one fit better to us and more fun.... i like the idea, For testers avaible to test the cars, the CSLACR shootout showed that tuners can be testers also, and give a much more acurate result with so much cars tested ... I love this idea. More choice more cars more results = better for tuners players with a lot of tunes fully deeply tested.👍👍👍

 

[XDesperado67]

Have a question to ask...

Why couldn't we have more than one event going at once? I don't see a issue especially if they are different types of events. Right now we have a rally event going, we could also have Timbers event going since it is touge related. It would cut down on the waiting time for some of us who waiting to host our own events. I know that there are a limited amount of official test drivers floating around, but let the potential event host make that decision for themselves. Also before anyone asks, YES I am eager to get CKR's event going.

It's the number of test drivers thats the main hold up in events. Finding enough drivers that will actually test all cars and post some sort of results can be tough. Even allowing tuners to drive doesn't completely resolve the issue as there is only so much time available for people to spend on GT5. Being single and working odd hours I probably spend as much time on the game as just about anyone yet I still find myself short on time to accomplish everything I want to in the game and on here.
That being said I don't see a problem running a shootout with a longer time frame such as RJ has talked about in his thread, at the same time we are running these shorter format events, as the much longer time frame is conducive to squeezing a test in whenever you have a little spare time and no expectation that you'll test 18-20 cars in one or two weeks.

 

[CSLACR]

It's the number of test drivers thats the main hold up in events. Finding enough drivers that will actually test all cars and post some sort of results can be tough. Even allowing tuners to drive doesn't completely resolve the issue as there is only so much time available for people to spend on GT5. Being single and working odd hours I probably spend as much time on the game as just about anyone yet I still find myself short on time to accomplish everything I want to in the game and on here.
That being said I don't see a problem running a shootout with a longer time frame such as RJ has talked about in his thread, at the same time we are running these shorter format events, as the much longer time frame is conducive to squeezing a test in whenever you have a little spare time and no expectation that you'll test 18-20 cars in one or two weeks.

I think the bold part is somewhat an issue itself, anytime so many (which has so far been always that I've seen) tunes are allowed to enter, it makes testing that much more difficult.

In any case I'm pretty confident with the restrictions, etc, that CKR's event could be started with a slightly longer timeframe at any point because of the limitations, which greatly decrease testing time.

I just think limits on amount of tune entries is the way to go, though it obviously can't be enforced for every shootout, and I know everyone wants a shot at at least some of these, but when 20 people are willing to enter as a "tuner" and only 3-5 are actually willing to drive them all, it tells me maybe some of the tuners need to spend some time driving other tunes every now and then, and/or tuners being test drivers also. Any one of us can crank out a tune in 2-3 hours, sometimes less, maybe we should share the "responsibility" of testing? It is, after all, the most fundamental aspect of tuning there is.

Of course I've spent around 5 hours on my current build so far.

 

[madmyk]

I like the Desperado's idea to break up into groups of 6 for scoring, but it could also help with testing. There could be 18 entries but a tester may only need to commit to testing 6 at a time. If I have a lot of time that week I could do 18 cars, but maybe I can only do 12 or 6 if my life is otherwise busy. To incorporate CSLACR's point, maybe a tuner should not be able to enter unless he can commit to at least 6 cars - he has to share the responsibility right?

The point I wanted to make before I saw CSLACR's response is that we can look at scheduling a little different now that there are a few events stacked up. Why can't TimberW and zero_speed kick off their events early? If they announce the exact requirements, people can start tuning now. Praiano already has his tune for CKR. I started messing with some heavyweight cars for Tons of Fun. If I knew more about Timber's event I would work on that. (I have a car but I think it won't qualify for being a concept, but I don't know for sure.)

The organization is then about how to schedule the test windows. Event sponsor's should not compete for testers or try to jump ahead of another sponsor of course. I don't see any reason they can't open the tuning window a bit early though.

 

[CSLACR]

That's a possibility, and maybe a good one.
Obviously if times are changed to "scores" in any manner, OnBoy could test 8 cars, and I could test 8 cars, and the results could still be fair, though I think it would just work better for less tunes with more drivers driving them all, because what OnBoy and I "find" driving the cars could still be completely different.

For what it's worth though, I've learned quite a bit about tuning cars different ways from testing in these events, so tuners should be more interested in helping, rather than just submit a tune and walk away waiting for results to just "appear" for them.
I enjoy testing, but at times it's also a chore that I can't wait to finish, and the current common ratio of 3-1 tuners to testers shows that.

I really, really, really think the answer is in letting tuners also test, and if need be, taking highest/lowest scores, etc out, it seems many are ok with testing, but not at the expense of being unable to make a tune.

People trying to take advantage of this will likely clear themselves out or make the obvious mistakes to clue the rest in. JMO 👍
Quote:

No cheating of any kind,these are relaxed races and we are experienced racers, we know what times can be done,and we can read your mind. We will know.

I agree.

 

[XDesperado67]

I like the Desperado's idea to break up into groups of 6 for scoring, but it could also help with testing. There could be 18 entries but a tester may only need to commit to testing 6 at a time. If I have a lot of time that week I could do 18 cars, but maybe I can only do 12 or 6 if my life is otherwise busy. To incorporate CSLACR's point, maybe a tuner should not be able to enter unless he can commit to at least 6 cars - he has to share the responsibility right?

The point I wanted to make before I saw CSLACR's response is that we can look at scheduling a little different now that there are a few events stacked up. Why can't TimberW and zero_speed kick off their events early? If they announce the exact requirements, people can start tuning now. Praiano already has his tune for CKR. I started messing with some heavyweight cars for Tons of Fun. If I knew more about Timber's event I would work on that. (I have a car but I think it won't qualify for being a concept, but I don't know for sure.)

The organization is then about how to schedule the test windows. Event sponsor's should not compete for testers or try to jump ahead of another sponsor of course. I don't see any reason they can't open the tuning window a bit early though.

I agree that as tuners we can generally field some sort of tune in relative short order and I'm not adverse to the idea of opening up the tuning portions of events early and/or overlapping events. Strongly recommend however that if the tuning is opened early giving an extended period for tuners to work with that Event Sponsors mandate a strict policy stating that once a tune is submitted for an event it is locked and cannot be changed until the testing portion of the event is finished or until such time as the Event Sponsor opens a window for modifying tunes.
Another consideration in scheduling events is when an Event Sponsor mandates a limited number of testers for an event, such as for zero_speed's CKR shootout, then if the testers are agreeable to committing their time while another shootout is ongoing, and doing such does not interfere with the regularly scheduled event and testers commitments, that event could proceed ahead of the projected time frame. However that should not be used as free pass to jump the waiting line.
I also think that allowing tuners to also participate as test drivers is a big help in keeping interest in an event. Testing the other tuners cars during CSLACR's shootout let me stay involved on a continuing bases instead of just sitting anxiously by waiting for a tester to post a result for my individual entry.
Finally either limiting entries or breaking them up into smaller test groups will help limit the testers burden and should encourage more people to not only commit to testing but to also actually complete said testing.
Final thought if an Event Sponsor wants to go with the smaller test groups, it might be possible to run that event simultaneously with other events by extending the total length of the event. i.e. I accept the first 6 tunes for my event and designate them group 1 with a two week test window. Group 2 will not be formed and testing for it will not start until after group 1's test period ends. Thus instead of the 3-4 week shootout we have been doing you end up with an event lasting 7+ weeks.
Again keep in mind the available pool of test drivers and how much time they can commit are the real limiting factors in scheduling. Personally I doubt its possible to spend less than a half hour per car per track on testing so testing 10 cars on one track means 5 hours of game time.
If you look back at the FF shootout you'll see that the cumulative time for the fastest laps of all cars tested was at least 40 minutes each for the 7 drivers who completed testing on all cars.
Again F.I.T.T. is everyone's organization and I'm not going to dictate policy for it. I will voice my opinions and thoughts but ultimately it is up to you the community to decide how we operate this to make it the best for everyone.

 

[zero_speed]

The problem is that not everyone has enough freetime to enter more than one shootout at the same time.
I think it wouldn't be that difficult for us tuners, but I see the hard work the testers do. It needs extremely long to test all cars propperly. Also there aren't plenty of testers.

Point taken.

At least like this we can choose the one fit better to us and more fun.... i like the idea, For testers avaible to test the cars, the CSLACR shootout showed that tuners can be testers also, and give a much more acurate result with so much cars tested ... I love this idea. More choice more cars more results = better for tuners players with a lot of tunes fully deeply tested.👍👍👍

Agreed, variety is good.

It's the number of test drivers thats the main hold up in events. Finding enough drivers that will actually test all cars and post some sort of results can be tough. Even allowing tuners to drive doesn't completely resolve the issue as there is only so much time available for people to spend on GT5. Being single and working odd hours I probably spend as much time on the game as just about anyone yet I still find myself short on time to accomplish everything I want to in the game and on here.
That being said I don't see a problem running a shootout with a longer time frame such as RJ has talked about in his thread, at the same time we are running these shorter format events, as the much longer time frame is conducive to squeezing a test in whenever you have a little spare time and no expectation that you'll test 18-20 cars in one or two weeks.

Well I already have 3 of the 4 test drivers needed so that isn't a problem, if needed I can drop the fourth slot. Using my event as an example again there will be only 12 tunes. I think that if you are hosting a event with 18 plus tunes, said event is no longer categorised as a small/short event.

I think the bold part is somewhat an issue itself, anytime so many (which has so far been always that I've seen) tunes are allowed to enter, it makes testing that much more difficult.

In any case I'm pretty confident with the restrictions, etc, that CKR's event could be started with a slightly longer timeframe at any point because of the limitations, which greatly decrease testing time.

I just think limits on amount of tune entries is the way to go, though it obviously can't be enforced for every shootout, and I know everyone wants a shot at at least some of these, but when 20 people are willing to enter as a "tuner" and only 3-5 are actually willing to drive them all, it tells me maybe some of the tuners need to spend some time driving other tunes every now and then, and/or tuners being test drivers also. Any one of us can crank out a tune in 2-3 hours, sometimes less, maybe we should share the "responsibility" of testing? It is, after all, the most fundamental aspect of tuning there is.

Of course I've spent around 5 hours on my current build so far.

Agreed, limiting if anything is something the event sponsor should always consider.

I like the Desperado's idea to break up into groups of 6 for scoring, but it could also help with testing. There could be 18 entries but a tester may only need to commit to testing 6 at a time. If I have a lot of time that week I could do 18 cars, but maybe I can only do 12 or 6 if my life is otherwise busy. To incorporate CSLACR's point, maybe a tuner should not be able to enter unless he can commit to at least 6 cars - he has to share the responsibility right?

The point I wanted to make before I saw CSLACR's response is that we can look at scheduling a little different now that there are a few events stacked up. Why can't TimberW and zero_speed kick off their events early? If they announce the exact requirements, people can start tuning now. Praiano already has his tune for CKR. I started messing with some heavyweight cars for Tons of Fun. If I knew more about Timber's event I would work on that. (I have a car but I think it won't qualify for being a concept, but I don't know for sure.)

The organization is then about how to schedule the test windows. Event sponsor's should not compete for testers or try to jump ahead of another sponsor of course. I don't see any reason they can't open the tuning window a bit early though.

Point taken.

I agree that as tuners we can generally field some sort of tune in relative short order and I'm not adverse to the idea of opening up the tuning portions of events early and/or overlapping events. Strongly recommend however that if the tuning is opened early giving an extended period for tuners to work with that Event Sponsors mandate a strict policy stating that once a tune is submitted for an event it is locked and cannot be changed until the testing portion of the event is finished or until such time as the Event Sponsor opens a window for modifying tunes.
Another consideration in scheduling events is when an Event Sponsor mandates a limited number of testers for an event, such as for zero_speed's CKR shootout, then if the testers are agreeable to committing their time while another shootout is ongoing, and doing such does not interfere with the regularly scheduled event and testers commitments, that event could proceed ahead of the projected time frame. However that should not be used as free pass to jump the waiting line.
I also think that allowing tuners to also participate as test drivers is a big help in keeping interest in an event. Testing the other tuners cars during CSLACR's shootout let me stay involved on a continuing bases instead of just sitting anxiously by waiting for a tester to post a result for my individual entry.
Finally either limiting entries or breaking them up into smaller test groups will help limit the testers burden and should encourage more people to not only commit to testing but to also actually complete said testing.
Final thought if an Event Sponsor wants to go with the smaller test groups, it might be possible to run that event simultaneously with other events by extending the total length of the event. i.e. I accept the first 6 tunes for my event and designate them group 1 with a two week test window. Group 2 will not be formed and testing for it will not start until after group 1's test period ends. Thus instead of the 3-4 week shootout we have been doing you end up with an event lasting 7+ weeks.
Again keep in mind the available pool of test drivers and how much time they can commit are the real limiting factors in scheduling. Personally I doubt its possible to spend less than a half hour per car per track on testing so testing 10 cars on one track means 5 hours of game time.
If you look back at the FF shootout you'll see that the cumulative time for the fastest laps of all cars tested was at least 40 minutes each for the 7 drivers who completed testing on all cars.
Again F.I.T.T. is everyone's organization and I'm not going to dictate policy for it. I will voice my opinions and thoughts but ultimately it is up to you the community to decide how we operate this to make it the best for everyone.

I have very strict rules, time frames, etc. planned for CKR's event. If you look back a few post when Timber was originally seeking advice you can see some of them in a post responding to CSLACR.

I am considering pulling the trigger on CKR's event early to see how it goes with all the rules I have planned. TBH all this waiting is pretty pointless it seems, overlapping events should be ok and once again the decision should be up to the event organiser. I think the purpose of FITT should be more of like a social network, to aid in the organization of events. Not some virtual governing body or a virtual Hitler either.
My last comment may be a bit extreme, but hopefully it gets my point across that no one should have to get a virtual permit to host an event. If a event sponsor has all his bassis covered and is ready to go, there should be no reason for them to wait BUT only if they choose to.

 

[Milldrum]

Maybe no overlap of tuning times and driving times. So when the tuning section finishes, launch the next challenge. When the testers are due to finish, the next testing starts. If tester numbers drop right off then re-asses.