PURE | JGTS - Going on strong and adapting in the face of change!

[Denilson]

The Outlaw: Since this is an off week, I'll make sure to update the OP with race information.

I'll put up one pic with the total times.
One pic with fastest laps.
All quali results.
I'll also add a section for ballast, and what PP limit the cars with ballast sit at.

On this note, I'd like if someone who was in D2 can post both pictures (the one with the total times, and the live-timing picture in the very end of the replay) for me to add to the OP. 👍

 

[Paginas1]

I would Dennis but I'm super lazy at the moment Lol. If no one has done it by the weekend ill do it lol

 

[Litchi]

On this note, I'd like if someone who was in D2 can post both pictures (the one with the total times, and the live-timing picture in the very end of the replay) for me to add to the OP. 👍

I'll post pics with the live-timing tomor.
But idk how to see the total times on a replay...

 

[CSLACR]

I'll post pics with the live-timing tomor.
But idk how to see the total times on a replay...

Skip to the last lap and wait till all the cars finish, I think. (or all of them that will finish, if any parked or didn't finish in the window)

Yes, I noticed that..

I'm not sure.. But since we treat the weekend as one race I think the right thing would be that both of you get 20kg added.

Thoughts?

Sounds fair, points are points, no matter how you get them. 👍

 

[Scanny_Flick]

Only ways I can think of separating a tie in dual heat rounds would be finishing position in feature race (more indicative of pace than sprint race is) or qualifying position (again a good indicator of pace at that car weight)

 

[CSLACR]

Only ways I can think of separating a tie in dual heat rounds would be finishing position in feature race (more indicative of pace than sprint race is) or qualifying position (again a good indicator of pace at that car weight)

I thought of going by feature race, but then, if they have the same amount of points after both heats....

As for qualifying, I think it's highly overrated, to be honest. People put way to much pressure on themselves to get a great one instead of just heading out there like it's the first 3 laps of free run. Because of this I don't think qualifying is a great way to determine race pace.




http://pure.gate19.net/index.php?page=result&race=2011-11-20
I thought fastest lap got a bonus point?
I ask because I'll never get that again.

 

[The Outlaw]

Only ways I can think of separating a tie in dual heat rounds would be finishing position in feature race (more indicative of pace than sprint race is) or qualifying position (again a good indicator of pace at that car weight)

I was also thinking that the feature race would be a good way to decide a tie breaker, because as you say, it's generally a better indicator of someones performance - although I think it's probabaly still best to just handout ballast to both drivers in the event of a tie after both heats.

I think using the qualifying results would only further nullify the point of qualifying well (which isn't good IMO), because ATM trying to achieve a good grid spot in qualy for the feature race, only means you're setting yourself up for failure in the sprint race where you have to get things done quickly lol. And then with the rolling starts it's even easier for some of the slower cars to get eatin up by turn 1 even if they worked hard to get pole. IMO the starting grid for the sprint race should be based on the actual results from the feature race (just with a reversed grid order). I think this was discussed before but I missed how the organizers decided on the current format. Can anyone enlighten me on this? Thanks

 

[Litchi]

Race 1

Race 2

But i really don't know how to see the total time for a race on a replay...

 

[Denilson]

I guess it's only possible when the race actually ends. No problem though..

Byw: Who's going out in London on dec 2nd?
I got a few friends who are performing there, so if anyone is close, send me a PM, and I'll hook you plus some friends up.

 

[paulmac2k9]

No but Den moon a guard for me

 

[CSLACR]

I was also thinking that the feature race would be a good way to decide a tie breaker, because as you say, it's generally a better indicator of someones performance - although I think it's probabaly still best to just handout ballast to both drivers in the event of a tie after both heats.

I think using the qualifying results would only further nullify the point of qualifying well (which isn't good IMO), because ATM trying to achieve a good grid spot in qualy for the feature race, only means you're setting yourself up for failure in the sprint race where you have to get things done quickly lol. And then with the rolling starts it's even easier for some of the slower cars to get eatin up by turn 1 even if they worked hard to get pole. IMO the starting grid for the sprint race should be based on the actual results from the feature race (just with a reversed grid order). I think this was discussed before but I missed how the organizers decided on the current format. Can anyone enlighten me on this? Thanks

I still pretty much agree with this, but I digress. Here's at least part of where it was discussed, I'm sure most or all of the comments regarding it are within a page or two of this.
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6198336#post6198336

 

[The Outlaw]

I still pretty much agree with this, but I digress. Here's at least part of where it was discussed, I'm sure most or all of the comments regarding it are within a page or two of this.
https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6198336#post6198336

I appreciate your digging 👍

Here's my whole issue with reversing the qualy order for the sprint race, since I'm currently quite opposed to the current format - To me it's rather strange when you work hard to put a car on pole, but in the end your average starting position for both races is the same as any other driver, regardless of how well you performed in qualifying, or how badly you flopped.

Additionally, if you start in the back of the grid in a feature race you have 3 times the distance to work your way through the pack to regain time, where as in the sprint race things can get very hectic (particularly if everyone starts pitting within a 1-2 lap window).

And also in the event that a couple of people DC in the feature race and aren't around for the sprint race, this will only further foul up the pre-determined qualy order for the sprint race, as those handful of drivers won't be there, thus everyone who's supposed to start behind them will need to be aware of this prior to formation lap. So the pre-determined reversed qualifying order certainly has it's potential short falls as well. If you just reverse the race results from the feature race, all we must do is go to the replay/race result icon in the lobby and everyone can quite easily determine their starting position from there.

As I touched on before, I think we have certain features in the regulations that are taking levelling a bit too far. I rather not see this Championship turn into a case of the fastest drivers continually being held back (in terms of starting postion & ballast...which can be worth ~ 1 second), simply because they perform better as drivers I'm all for good, close racing, just not when it's at such an expense to the quicker drivers. I hope I don't sound arrogant here, but maybe if one can see things from both perspectives they would understand my point.

Let's say Aderrrm set pole, and have a bad race or a DC for that matter, he'll be starting in the back of Heat 2, right?
On the other hand, if a slower driver qualis in the back, and DC or have a bad race, or claim a huge amount of positions he'll be starting in the front in Heat 2.
Bottom line, the 2 Heat idea was mainly because I wanted the slower drivers be able to start in the front, and to be given an opportunity to gain some bonus points.
Yes, the reversing of the race result will do this to some extint, but it will not help a slower driver ahead of a faster driver in case of a bad race 1 for the fatser one. I don't want this rule to act as a parashuit for a fast driver, I want it to act as a possibility to the slower driver..

The thing is, the faster driver is already on his back foot after having a bad race 1 and scoring very few points. Why should he then be handicapped again going into the sprint race, simply because they did a great job in qualifying? If anything the starting grid order (or levelling) for sprint race should be based off points scored/race results in the feature race, because as we all know, there are no points handed out on Saturday.

Sorry to bring this issue up again given that the season is already underway, I just think this is something that I strongly feel is in need of further overview. And again, whatever decision you come to will certainly not affect my participation....I guess I will just have to roll with the punches

 

[DragonGT83]

Been following along, I agree with when starting the 2nd heat that the starting grid should be reversed on the results of the 1st heat and not the qualifying order. Just makes more sense to me this way. Whats to say somebody might not try to slump in qualifying to try and obtain a position that will do them good in both heats? say middle of the pack.

 

[The Outlaw]

Been following along, I agree with when starting the 2nd heat that the starting grid should be reversed on the results of the 1st heat and not the qualifying order. Just makes more sense to me this way. Whats to say somebody might not try to slump in qualifying to try and obtain a position that will do them good in both heats? say middle of the pack.

I agree, and I could particularly see this being a very big issue at tracks like Monaco In such a case, if you are quick driver you would probably be better off slouching in qualifying and slowly working your way up the field in the feature race in order to consolidate a strong finish through good strategy. Where as if you do strong in qualy, then in the sprint race you have very few laps to try and work your way through the pack, on a track that is extremely tricky/dangerous to pass on (partricularly with these dump truck wide GT500 cars lol).

 

[Denilson]

The Outlaw: I agree with what you say as a whole..

But, as hard as it is too gain positions in the sprint race, it's as easy to loose positions after an off/wreck..

You could perform worse in the quali on purpose if you want a better grid spot for the sprint race. But you have to remember that it's only half points.

This is our quali results prior round 1:
GTP_timeattack
tony1311
GTP_Aderrrm
GTP_CSL
BiffyClyro93
chorda
Remy_K
RedReevos
Wardez
El_Aliens69
WiiFreak
GV27-
TnJF
GTP_Welsh-Bain

So the sprint race grid looked like this:
GTP_Welsh-Bain
TnJF
GV27-
WiiFreak
Wardez
RedReevos
Remy_K
chorda
BiffyClyro93
GTP_CSL
GTP_Aderrrm
tony1311
GTP_timeattack

But should've looked like this if we reversed the result:
TnJF
GV27-
RedReevos
GTP_Welsh-Bain
BiffyClyro93
GTP_CSL
Wardez
WiiFreak
chorda
Remy_K
GTP_timeattack
tony1311
GTP_Aderrrm

I'm not 100% sure, cause I type the order as I recall it.. But either way, the difference is not that huge imo..

 

[CSLACR]

The Outlaw: I agree with what you say as a whole..

But, as hard as it is too gain positions in the sprint race, it's as easy to loose positions after an off/wreck..

You could perform worse in the quali on purpose if you want a better grid spot for the sprint race. But you have to remember that it's only half points.

This is our quali results prior round 1:
GTP_timeattack
tony1311
GTP_Aderrrm
GTP_CSL
BiffyClyro93
chorda
Remy_K
RedReevos
Wardez
El_Aliens69
WiiFreak
GV27-
TnJF
GTP_Welsh-Bain

So the sprint race grid looked like this:
GTP_Welsh-Bain
TnJF
GV27-
WiiFreak
Wardez
RedReevos
Remy_K
chorda
BiffyClyro93
GTP_CSL
GTP_Aderrrm
tony1311
GTP_timeattack

But should've looked like this if we reversed the result:
TnJF
GV27-
RedReevos
GTP_Welsh-Bain
BiffyClyro93
GTP_CSL
Wardez
WiiFreak
chorda
Remy_K
GTP_timeattack
tony1311
GTP_Aderrrm

I'm not 100% sure, cause I type the order as I recall it.. But either way, the difference is not that huge imo..

Well, it's obviously more of a scenario type thing.

But with the current system, winning feature + 13th in second heat = 48 points. Finishing 13th in feature + winning second heat only equals 36.

So to me it's a close call, I just think the reversing grid option serves those having a rough day better.

 

[Denilson]

Which is a good thing, or a bad thing..??

 

[CSLACR]

Which is a good thing, or a bad thing..??

I actually just thought of it in a new way, too.
Reversing qualifying order potentially leaves qualifying on the pole not a useful thing. It leaves room, for example, for an alien to intentionally start the back, and work up and win the feature race anyway, only to keep pole for the second heat.
Reversing grid order, there is no advantage to be gained through the system, ever.
Because the feature race yields more points, so finishing poorly for pole in second heat will only hurt a driver's points total, and qualifying is still qualifying, and the higher the better, in every scenario.

Everything good about reverse qualifying, carries into reverse starting grid.
But nothing good about reverse grid, carries into reverse qualifying.

 

[Imari]

I actually just thought of it in a new way, too.
Reversing qualifying order potentially leaves qualifying on the pole not a useful thing. It leaves room, for example, for an alien to intentionally start the back, and work up and win the feature race anyway, only to keep pole for the second heat.
Reversing grid order, there is no advantage to be gained through the system, ever.
Because the feature race yields more points, so finishing poorly for pole in second heat will only hurt a driver's points total, and qualifying is still qualifying, and the higher the better, in every scenario.

Everything good about reverse qualifying, carries into reverse starting grid.
But nothing good about reverse grid, carries into reverse qualifying.

Unless the intention is to devalue qualifying to a certain extent. How big a part in the race should qualifying actually play?

 

[CSLACR]

Unless the intention is to devalue qualifying to a certain extent. How big a part in the race should qualifying actually play?

You should get to start where you qualify.

I don't really see a need to change it from that.
The whole situation isn't really a big deal to me, either will end up fair for everyone throughout the season. We'll all gain and lose from either system at times.

I'm just saying if I qualify well, I don't get any points.
If I race well, I get more points.

I can work with either, whatever Dennis and Eddie decide is fine by me, all will work out in the end either way.👍

 

[Imari]

What? You do get to start where you qualify, and at no point did I suggest otherwise.

You seemed saying that qualifying first is somewhat of a mixed blessing due to starting last in the sprint race. I was merely pointing out that maybe that was not a terrible thing given how influential starting grid positions often are on the position you finish the race in.

Another problem with basing the sprint race on the results of the feature race could be people parking up. If a driver had a really unlucky race and got hit by several people and is running in tenth, are they better to park up and make sure they're in last position in order to get pole for the sprint? That's not particularly in the spirit of racing, but it'd be a valid tactic to maximise points over the two races. If the grid position in the sprint race is already determined, the driver might as well drive to the end of the race, regardless.

 

[Dr_Watson]

Race 1

Race 2

But i really don't know how to see the total time for a race on a replay...

Thanks. 👍
just did an estimation on the total time, i'm probably within a second. The only way to get it from the replay is to hit pause as the leader hits the finish line.

 

[Dr_Watson]

What? You do get to start where you qualify, and at no point did I suggest otherwise.

You seemed saying that qualifying first is somewhat of a mixed blessing due to starting last in the sprint race. I was merely pointing out that maybe that was not a terrible thing given how influential starting grid positions often are on the position you finish the race in.

Another problem with basing the sprint race on the results of the feature race could be people parking up. If a driver had a really unlucky race and got hit by several people and is running in tenth, are they better to park up and make sure they're in last position in order to get pole for the sprint? That's not particularly in the spirit of racing, but it'd be a valid tactic to maximise points over the two races. If the grid position in the sprint race is already determined, the driver might as well drive to the end of the race, regardless.

have to remember Parking the car will cost you points. you have to make sure you complete 75% of the laps before you park or you'll not get anything from the first race. + you have to do 100% of the race distance if you want full bonus points.

 

[Imari]

have to remember Parking the car will cost you points. you have to make sure you complete 75% of the laps before you park or you'll not get anything from the first race. + you have to do 100% of the race distance if you want full bonus points.

The bottom 4 of Div 2 all score 1 point. After 75% those 4 people should probably be racing backwards around the track to see who can finish last, because the likely points haul from holding yourself in the top half of the sprint race from pole (fairly likely) would probably outweigh any possible points you could make by gaining places in the final laps of the feature race (fairly unlikely if you're at the back at 75%).

I'm not saying this is what people will do, I'd be inclined just to finish the race normally and not waste brainpower on it while I'm trying to race, myself. But if people are proposing having the sprint race grid based on the results of the feature race because the system is less manipulable/gameable, then you're mistaken. Both systems can be gamed and broken, and as such I think Denilson and Wardez have made the right call in choosing the one which is easier to administrate.

 

[CSLACR]

What? You do get to start where you qualify, and at no point did I suggest otherwise.

You seemed saying that qualifying first is somewhat of a mixed blessing due to starting last in the sprint race. I was merely pointing out that maybe that was not a terrible thing given how influential starting grid positions often are on the position you finish the race in.

Another problem with basing the sprint race on the results of the feature race could be people parking up. If a driver had a really unlucky race and got hit by several people and is running in tenth, are they better to park up and make sure they're in last position in order to get pole for the sprint? That's not particularly in the spirit of racing, but it'd be a valid tactic to maximise points over the two races. If the grid position in the sprint race is already determined, the driver might as well drive to the end of the race, regardless.

You asked how big a part in the race qualifying should play, I answered with "you should start where you qualify".
Didn't know how else to answer it.

Now, the feature race gives double points, so if someone feels inclined to throw away the more valuable race, just for a better start in the less valuable race, that's more then fine by me.

As for the last 4 in D2, there's race completion bonus for that. 10 points is worth more then any gain you'll get in starting position.

Qualifying doesn't give points, race finishes do. If I have to choose between a good starting spot in a long race vs a short race, I'd prefer to start up front in the short race. I'm sure most of us would.

Either way, whatever they decide is fine with me.👍

 

[Dr_Watson]

Back, and sober..

Yes, top 3 with both races counted for will be applyed ballast.
60/40/20 kg respectively.

Sounds fair?

all times are up now.
http://pure.gate19.net/index.php?page=result&race=2011-11-20

and I added that ballast...
out of curiosity, if a race win hits you with 60kg... why is 100kg the max and not 120kg? (or for that matter why is the win add 60kg and not 50kg?).

 

[Imari]

Qualifying doesn't give points, race finishes do. If I have to choose between a good starting spot in a long race vs a short race, I'd prefer to start up front in the short race. I'm sure most of us would.

From the perspective of pure tactical optimisation, I agree with you. I'd have it that way around too.

On the other hand, given a choice of jam today or jam tomorrow, I'd probably rather have jam today.

It's a reasonably tough call. And it only works if you believe that you're that much faster than the next guy that it doesn't matter that you're giving up 15~20 seconds at the start of the race.

And I agree, if people up the front want to sandbag to gain position for the sprint, then they're welcome to do it IMO. If it becomes a problem, then it can be looked at.

You asked how big a part in the race qualifying should play, I answered with "you should start where you qualify".
Didn't know how else to answer it.

What I meant was, how deterministic should your qualifying position be of your overall result for the pair of races? You can go for anywhere between completely deterministic (each position starts 5 laps apart ) or completely undeterministic (random order grid regardless of qualifying position). Personally, I think it's nice that qualifying gives you a small advantage but nothing too major. I think that way leads to closer, more interesting racing at the expense of the fastest driver always winning.

 

[Denilson]

We'll stick with the reversed grid format.

I can totally see both parts good and bad sides. The main reason why we decided to go with the reversed grid option was that it initially seemed like less work for the host.. And it still is imo. And since we've already completed one race with this rule, we'll stick with it.

 

[Denilson]

all times are up now.
http://pure.gate19.net/index.php?page=result&race=2011-11-20

and I added that ballast...
out of curiosity, if a race win hits you with 60kg... why is 100kg the max and not 120kg? (or for that matter why is the win add 60kg and not 50kg?).

It was because we did not know if we had room weight wise so to speak. It looked like some cars should end up with 100 kg ballast (The STEALTH GT-R), and therefore the upper limit was 100kg to add as ballast for that car.. But since we did not go that route, we can raise the limit to 120 kg sice the maximum ballast used for the PURE specs is 80kg.

New limit is 120 kg ballast. 👍

 

[paulmac2k9]

We'll stick with the reversed grid format.

I can totally see both parts good and bad sides. The main reason why we decided to go with the reversed grid option was that it initially seemed like less work for the host.. And it still is imo. And since we've already completed one race with this rule, we'll stick with it.

I think you had a brain fade Denilson