Suggestion Box.

[HareTurtle]

I think Der Alta's teams idea is a good one. I'm sure if we think about it a little it can be made to work. I could see it being done just occasionaly, as an addition to the regular format, not a replacement. The usual individual division competition should still go on, so people who opt not to be on a team, or are "leftovers", so to speak, would still be able to run. There's nothing like being part of a team to crank up the competitive intensity, it would be a good learning experience for the lower division drivers, and it would help glue the WRS community together.

The idea for announcing the car a little early got me to thinking (uh-oh ). Maybe we should go to a two week format, with one race due each week. That is, there would still be one race announced each Monday night, and times due each Monday night, but the race announced on this Monday would finish in two weeks, and the times due next Monday would be for a race announced last Monday. Not only would this give people time to get the car set up, but it would help in cases where people are short on time one week due to school, job, vacation etc. And, there would always be two races you could work on, so when you get tired of doing the ZRC at CS for week 99, you could take a few laps in the Vitz at the test course for week 100.

Anyway, the WRS is a damn good series exactly as it is. I think we should give GoKents a chance to get settled in before we agitate for any major changes, but it doesn't hurt to start tossing out a few ideas, and seeing what people think.

 

[DQuaN]

Yeah I kind of like DA's idea too. The problem is, nobody would pick me!!

 

[scuderia229]

my general wish list for the weekly....

- a race involving a maxed out Mini, preferably Deep Forest 1 or Smokey Mtn. 1
- Anything RUF anywhere
- More PW/R limit races, I sorta dig having to find a car and such
- lets go back to Monte
- a multi lapper in Sim mode (i.e...Clio cup race?)
- A theme cup....take a PW/R limit and race say the sunday cup races in beginner mode. Your time is your three race times combined (though this complicates the save/replay and checking people playign with in the rules, etc)
-Take a car everyone in the weekly loves at a track everyone in the weekly loves and stick SIM tires on the car and se ehow people like it then!

 

[Kent]

1. Mini...
Maybe, who knows, but incase you haven't noticed, I'm not really a fan of slow cars.

2. Anything RUF.
This is a good suggestion and will come into play at some point.

3. PWR races
Very good idea again. This will also be used in the future, but when?

4. Monte
I assume this is cote d azur. In that case... there are too many tracks in the game to go back to cote just yet. (still need to hit some other courses first.)

5. Multi-lapper in sim mode.
Just a hard thing to do... go look at it yourself and there are about 5 different screens you will have to load through just to race one time.
(makes arcade mode seem a whole lot easier.)

6. A theme cup.
A very interesting idea indeed, however, you already stated the most obvious concerns... it would be very hard to verify anything and in that case cheating would be very hard to find.

7. Sim tires.
I will think it over, but last time we did sims I was one of the haters. (still turned in a time though)

Great suggestions, and some are going to be coming to you in the form of weekly races... others are going to be lost in your mind forever if you don't do a spot race or something.

My goal in this is to have fun races.
A little frustration is ok, but a lot...

Next week still hasn't been decided and your comments throughout the last couple of days have made a difference. (mr. front/rear)

So keep it up fellas, I like to hear what you all want.

 

[scuderia229]

Originally posted by GoKents
1. Mini...
Maybe, who knows, but incase you haven't noticed, I'm not really a fan of slow cars.

2. Anything RUF.
This is a good suggestion and will come into play at some point.


4. Monte
I assume this is cote d azur. In that case... there are too many tracks in the game to go back to cote just yet. (still need to hit some other courses first.)

5. Multi-lapper in sim mode.
Just a hard thing to do... go look at it yourself and there are about 5 different screens you will have to load through just to race one time.
(makes arcade mode seem a whole lot easier.)


7. Sim tires.
I will think it over, but last time we did sims I was one of the haters. (still turned in a time though)

1. come now we can't run stupidly high HP race cars EVERY week.....a little mini rcing would be a nice balance.

2. I'll race any RUF anywhere anytime....bring it on

4. yes Monte is the ole' Cote, Monte as in Monte Carlo. I know we were just here but it is such a damn fine circuit...we need to go to Apricot hill first....

5. Oh stop, i think the damn trophy you win in the arcade mode then the stopping of the replay is much more annoying than setting the SIM races....

7. I'm sure I'll ***** and moan too, and I have a wheel, but it is jsut another thing to make things different...

-----

ideas #1 & 2
new idea....these would be very hard to police though.

Spec a car or a PW/R limit....allow unlimited testing on the choosen circuit but only 1 shot at a DECLARED hot lap, ifyou blow it tough (like the way F1 does it now)....however I do realize that this would be next to impossible to police.

A spec car or Pw/R limit, unlimted testing but only one session of 30mins to get a hot lap...again how to police....

-----
idea #3

best combined time, multiple circuits. Could work two ways. Same car, two tracks or two tracks two different cars, hotlaps or 2-5 lap races...your final time is your best combined times from BOTH circuits.

Could run a few more options. If you pec the car only allow ONE setup, meaning you have to balance the car setup between the two circuits, split the average if you will. Or spec two cars but specificy to run them on a given track (i.e....you have a mini and the 787b at SS11 and Tokyo, logic would be to run the 787b balls out at Tokyo and use the tight turning mini at SS11...well spec that the 787b goes ar SS11 and the mini at Tokyo.

OR

Spec the PW/R limit for each track and let people pick their own cars....

-----

idea #4

Spec a car AND a specific suspension/gear ration/downforce setup OR pick a car, any setitng you like but we ALL must use T1 tires.....

 

[Famine]

Originally posted by scuderia229
4. yes Monte is the ole' Cote, Monte as in Monte Carlo. I know we were just here but it is such a damn fine circuit...we need to go to Apricot hill first....

Actually, it isn't. It's close, but it's just not the same track.

I always quote Futurama at this point, but today I'm going to quote "Austin Powers in "Goldmember".":

"Aaaaaargh! Run! It's Gojira!"
"Actually, although that looks like Godzilla, due to international copyright laws, it's not."
"Still, we should run like it IS Godzilla!"
"Though it isn't."


As an aside, I've been pondering relegation issues recently. The thought occurs that if someone posts times and consistently gets beaten by other guys in their division, they will get dropped into the next division down. However, if someone doesn't participate at all, they can turn up once every 57 weeks, post a time in whatever division they were last and then vanish again, without giving any help to any of the other racers. Fair?

 

[Kent]

Originally posted by scuderia229
2. I'll race any RUF anywhere anytime....bring it on

I'm not too good with jive talking & personal challenges... I may make you eat those words.

As for what famine was talking about...

Originally posted by Famine
that if someone posts times and consistently gets beaten by other guys in their division, they will get dropped into the next division down. However, if someone doesn't participate at all, they can turn up once every 57 weeks, post a time in whatever division they were last and then vanish again, without giving any help to any of the other racers. Fair?

I had been thinking about this the other day, and although I will not do this, I thought it might be nice to let you all know I had been thinking about it...

How would it feel to you guys to have no divisions. Rather, we could have medals like the license test.

Take the spread of racers and look at the times.
Take the leader (gold), and go exactly 2 seconds off of the leader time, that's where you start the silvers.
Go exactly 5 seconds off of leader time and you end up with the begining of bronze.
We would keep the order of times in results, but it would be divided up by medal performance rather than division.

For example.
Gold
1.20.000
names
names
names
Silver
1.22.000
names
etc.
Bronze
1'25.000
names names names

This would get rid of divisions and reward all who put in a good performance. Plus, it would "sorta" demote those who didn't do well just by giving them a lower medal.

Hell, with this system we could setup some awesome points systems on the side.

Anyway, keep in mind what I said before I explained the system.

 

[Mr P]

Cool idea Kent 👍

 

[scuderia229]

Originally posted by Famine
Actually, it isn't. It's close, but it's just not the same track.

I always quote Futurama at this point, but today I'm going to quote "Austin Powers in "Goldmember".":

"Aaaaaargh! Run! It's Gojira!"
"Actually, although that looks like Godzilla, due to international copyright laws, it's not."
"Still, we should run like it IS Godzilla!"
"Though it isn't."


As an aside, I've been pondering relegation issues recently. The thought occurs that if someone posts times and consistently gets beaten by other guys in their division, they will get dropped into the next division down. However, if someone doesn't participate at all, they can turn up once every 57 weeks, post a time in whatever division they were last and then vanish again, without giving any help to any of the other racers. Fair?

It is a Monaco circuit of I think the mid 70s or based on one there of, I realize it isn't the EXACT one, definately has little to do with the 04 spec f1 Monaco Circuit.

That being said driving it in Gt3 is as close and 99% of us are ever going to get to driving on one of the most historic auto racing circuits ever.....

Now if PD could only model either the pre-chicane Monza or better yet the banked turn monza life would be good..hahaha

 

[scuderia229]

Originally posted by GoKents
I'm not too good with jive talking & personal challenges... I may make you eat those words.

As for what famine was talking about...


I had been thinking about this the other day, and although I will not do this, I thought it might be nice to let you all know I had been thinking about it...

How would it feel to you guys to have no divisions. Rather, we could have medals like the license test.

Take the spread of racers and look at the times.
Take the leader (gold), and go exactly 2 seconds off of the leader time, that's where you start the silvers.
Go exactly 5 seconds off of leader time and you end up with the begining of bronze.
We would keep the order of times in results, but it would be divided up by medal performance rather than division.

For example.
Gold
1.20.000
names
names
names
Silver
1.22.000
names
etc.
Bronze
1'25.000
names names names

This would get rid of divisions and reward all who put in a good performance. Plus, it would "sorta" demote those who didn't do well just by giving them a lower medal.

Hell, with this system we could setup some awesome points systems on the side.

Anyway, keep in mind what I said before I explained the system.

I like this idea alot. While part of me likes the division the other part prefers what you jsut described above. I have explained to my wife on a few occasions..."honey, i won my division (3) but I would have placed 4th in Div 2 and 6th in Div 1..cool huh?" She then looks at me like WTF...so you got 6th? Good for you dear.....I'm proud of you....haha....

This system rewards the guys that slug it out week after week and still the guys who cherry pick each week's race depedning on if the car/circuit suits them. it also voids the need for a qualifier to get into the series..

win win for everyone I think.

I'd support it if you moved to this GoKents..

 

[Kent]

I don't think any changes will occur, but it will be in my mind.

I think it does a good job of rewarding almost everyone because instead of purely racing for a win, you can start racing for the medal/grade. Then you can still race for places if you want because final times would be displayed in order with racer as always. And I mean, come on, who in this series doesn't have some kind of "rival" to race with ? I mean every single one of us may not place first in the division, but still end up saying, oh well atleast I beat Insert name here.

Anyway, as much as I've hyped it, I really am sticking to the division system.

If it's not broke, don't fix it.

 

[Danoff]

Not that anyone cares, but I vote strongly for the medals.

 

[Oliver DePlace]

Either way. It's all good. 👍

 

[Danoff]

ODP,

How much of that time do you think is attributable to tuning. In other words, if you had just an "ok" tuned suspension and LSD, how much slower do you think you'd be.

Have you (or any of you other crazy fast guys who know tuning really well) ever considered hosting a week long tuning class. Some kind of one lesson per day event. You guys could even trade off parts of the week.

The idea would be to show us how on earth you figure out that the inital accel on the LSD should be 7, or that the suspension rebound needs to be higher and the stiffness needs to be lower.

I know it would help me.


Edit: Hell, even a class on racing would help. When to drift, how to figure out the fastest way to take a turn and so forth.

 

[Kent]

Originally posted by danoff
ODP,

How much of that time do you think is attributable to tuning. In other words, if you had just an "ok" tuned suspension and LSD, how much slower do you think you'd be.

Have you (or any of you other crazy fast guys who know tuning really well) ever considered hosting a week long tuning class. Some kind of one lesson per day event. You guys could even trade off parts of the week.

The idea would be to show us how on earth you figure out that the inital accel on the LSD should be 7, or that the suspension rebound needs to be higher and the stiffness needs to be lower.

I know it would help me.


Edit: Hell, even a class on racing would help. When to drift, how to figure out the fastest way to take a turn and so forth.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=116

Thank boom for his effort of course.

As for something more specific about what you're asking, Im not sure about odp, but I can tell you that I rarely get to really tune-in my car. (This does not mean I'm trying to fill the role of the super fast racer)

Usually I end up with a starting setup that is slightly modified... It's only the springs, camber, ride height and stabilizers that get my attention.

The rest of the settings to play with only get attention when I notice that there are problems that I know they could correct. This is the case for LSD, brakes and toe.

I would like to see more settings discussions in the thread so why don't some of you guys try posting something... I would do it myself, but no can do at the moment.

Back later,
-

 

[Oliver DePlace]

Originally posted by danoff
ODP,

How much of that time do you think is attributable to tuning. In other words, if you had just an "ok" tuned suspension and LSD, how much slower do you think you'd be.

Have you (or any of you other crazy fast guys who know tuning really well) ever considered hosting a week long tuning class. Some kind of one lesson per day event. You guys could even trade off parts of the week.

The idea would be to show us how on earth you figure out that the inital accel on the LSD should be 7, or that the suspension rebound needs to be higher and the stiffness needs to be lower.

I know it would help me.


Edit: Hell, even a class on racing would help. When to drift, how to figure out the fastest way to take a turn and so forth.

I'm unsure of the "time" to which you are referring.

What I did with the wk56 Honda:
Went to Test Course (0-1000m), found the shift point and tried the gear trick.
Went to Tokyo2.
Ran the car at default (except ASM 0, TCS 1). (saved the setup)
Dropped the RH, SR in the middle, max dampers and DF.
Drove it around.
Set LSD 60/60/5. If it (low speed) power oversteered too much, I reduced the second value. If it yawed too much on corner entry, I increased the third or changed brake balance. (Rear toe, among other things, can effect this.)

(Stiff dampers/springs increase the chassis stability and reduce the crazy chassis movements.
High bounce damper settings transfers the load to the tire in a "spikey" or more immediate manner. Low bounce loads the tire more progressively.
Rebound is pretty much the same, except it deals with the unloading of the tire.
Plus, there is high and low speed damping, though they are not addressed in the game.
I have to remember that this is a game and that real life tuning techniques may not directly transfer.
Trial and error is the initial method, I use, to find which settings produces a suitable car behavior.)

Adjusted SR for balance. (RH, dampers, camber and bars, also, play a role here.)
Reduced SR. Ran it.
Increased SR. Ran it.
Saved the setup with which I was fastest. Heck, saved 'em all. I can always delete, but it's a pain to rebuild.
By now, I'm pretty familiar with the track/car.
Ran the default setup (with finalized gearing). Was it better or worse? Worse. Did some quick tweaks and tried it again.
Reloaded my setup.
Beat the car 'til my thumbs were raw.
YMMV
I usually haven't the time to do a methodical tuning.
I try to find a replay (to pull the setup with GT3gEdit) or just guess.


Some cars are close at default, some are crap and some don't respond, very well, to tuning (very little difference between settings extremes).
Some cars are finicky when it comes to their setup (maybe one click of a damper makes all the difference).

About the time improvement attributed to setup. I don't know.
Some cars, a lot.
Some cars, a little.

I've noticed that there is a subtle difference between the Free Run and Arcade Race. The times are comparable, but the car feels more "slidey" in a race. This is without tire wear.
Then again, maybe it's just me.

Disclaimer: Some of the things I've just written may or may not be correct.
My future is entirely ahead of me.

 

[Kent]

Hey you guys, I know I shouldn't be talking about it again, but I wanted to mention a refinement to the medal system...

Instead of taking the leader time and using a certain # of seconds slower to establish medal divisions, we could use an equal split between the fastest racer and the slowest... Or... We could use the average speed of the entire group as the mark to begin bronze, then split the margin again between bronze and gold to find silver.

This is all just talk, but you know, figured I'd see what you all thought.

edit:
I want you guys to know this system will not come into use. This system would kill of the divisions and because of that, destroy a lot of division podium competitions. So I will be keeping the division system alive.

 

[LoudMusic]

I sent a message to Lotus ...

LoudMusic wrote on 03-15-04 5:48 PM:
I was just looking at your website in the Weekly Races information. Have you guys figured out a way to do an overall standing? If you did a reverse point system and required a certain number of time submissions, then did a ratio on the points I think you might have something.

First = 5 points
Second = 3 points
Third = 1 points

The point counts may need to be adjusted. Perhaps a larger spread between first and second than there is between second and third. I contemplated 7 - 3 - 1, but had already run the numbers below so I didn't want to change it (: It would be interesting, though, to see if it changes the standings compared to the calculations I made with 5 - 3 - 1.

Drivers have to have to entered 1/3 of all races. I did this to weed out people like Missing Link who have entered once and gotten gold. They would effectively have a perfect score, and that's not fair to the rest of the bunch. At this point with 56 races run the threshold would be 18.667, or a minimum of 19 races (I would always round up).

Formula: Points Tallied / Maximum points possible for the driver (races submitted x first place points) = Score

In order of most submissions:
IDAFC21 = 0.427
Carbonfiber Man = 0.361
Oliver DePlace = 0.657
GoKents = 0.314
Lotus350 = 0.100
UB57 = 0.100
PunkRock = 0.024
Michael K = 0.078
Jpec07 = 0.618
Mr. P = 0.685
cinjun8 = 0.610
Luxy = 0.347

Ranked in order of my suggested scoring system:
Mr. P = 0.685
Oliver DePlace = 0.657
Jpec07 = 0.618
cinjun8 = 0.610
IDAFC21 = 0.427
Carbonfiber Man = 0.361
Luxy = 0.347
GoKents = 0.314
Lotus350 = 0.100
UB57 = 0.100
Michael K = 0.078
PunkRock = 0.024

This ends up being a lot like baseball batting averages. Everyone is trying to get closer to "1.0".

I tend to like this method because it provides a moving target. I think just assigning points for possition and leaving it at that cuts out the people who are unable to enter every single week. Also, having a moving minum submissions keeps people racing at least some of the time. And to make it work you have to compare it against their own submission count. This whole system only works if the drivers don't know where they stand until everyone knows at the same time. Otherwise they may not enter times if they know they haven't achieved a good enough time to place (:

I think it's also interesting to note that if you were to go in and remove the times for everyone under 19 submissions and then take finish possisions for the remaining drivers, the scores would all be vastly different. The instances where someone enters one or two races and places very well can throw off the whole system. Effectively screwing one unlucky regular driver out of a few points. Though I would not do anything about that - I would just say it's part of the game.

Hopefully I haven't made a fool of myself. There surely are enough instances were I could have.

To which she replied ...

lotus350 wrote on 03-15-04 1:35 PM:
I have looked into the scoring situation for the weekly before and I just can't see a way around it simply because of the division split. For instance Jpec07 - with the scoring example you have posted he is pretty highly ranked but truth is most if not all his podiums were done in division 3. I'm not sure it can be done fairly that way.
Why don't you post your suggestion in the suggestions thread and see what GoKents and the others think of it?

I don't think it's silly, just maybe not possible. And if there was no divisions then it would be the same handfull of people scoring highly week after week. The only other way around this is to do a points table for each division, that would be a fair way for people to compete I suppose, but a lot of work also.


Laters,
Kelly

I'm looking for more feedback. Breaking it down per division makes sense to me, though it might be proper to include more drivers per division. Perhaps only 1/5 total races completed.

So what do you think? Something other than just a race by race total. And this is coming from a guy who has just this week submitted his first time. It will be months before I'm eligible for a listed score.

 

[Kent]

This is an alright system, but I think the 3 major flaws were already described. Besides these 3, there is nothing wrong... but to restate the problems...

1. How many points per position and how scoring should be done. (this is always a troubling subject because no one is ever sure about what point spreads are appropiate, none the less in what fashion to calculate those points. ) (In some series the lowest score is what you want)

2. Participation.
You would have to definately drop the required number of races. I would really like to see people acknowledged for their racing even if they have only done 5 or 6 races.
(not everyone was here for week 1. )

3. Class divisions...
Not just scoring by the drivers in their classes, but what results they got in each class. Most of my points come from running well in the amatuer division... that's how long it's been. Not until recently had I been on a pro podium. (only 1 pro/div 1 win for me in all the races I've done)
So my stats would be really bad in representing me. I mean, I would look like a pro that always did well, when in fact, I was just doing well in the amatuer division until I got promoted and started with the occassional podium in div 1.

So yeah, this is another great idea about how to run the system, but for now I think that lotus and famine are both doing awesome work for the series with various results and data table pages/documents.

btw, do you mind if I merge this with the suggestions?

It kinda seems like it would have gone in there pretty easily.

It is a suggestion about a scoring system... so...

 

[LoudMusic]

Oh, yeah for sure. I must have missed the other thread.

 

[Rolfje]

Then why bother the discussion?

 

[Kelly]

Originally posted by GoKents
3. Class divisions...
Not just scoring by the drivers in their classes, but what results they got in each class. Most of my points come from running well in the amatuer division... that's how long it's been. Not until recently had I been on a pro podium. (only 1 pro/div 1 win for me in all the races I've done)
So my stats would be really bad in representing me. I mean, I would look like a pro that always did well, when in fact, I was just doing well in the amatuer division until I got promoted and started with the occassional podium in div 1.

So yeah, this is another great idea about how to run the system, but for now I think that lotus and famine are both doing awesome work for the series with various results and data table pages/documents.

That is the exact reason I found it to be impossible (or just plain hard work) with people moving from divison to division it would be hard to keep track. And the way I have done the stats page makes everyone looks good (except me and a few others )



Anyway, I never expected my pm to be posted so I'd like to say sorry to Jpec for using him as the example there, it could have been Kent instead

 

[LoudMusic]

Ha ha, sorry about that Lotus. I didn't find it as a strike of offense - hopefully he won't either.

 

[Kelly]

No problem

 

[Oliver DePlace]

Any ranking, which uses percentages, will encourage "cherry picking".
This would penalize the racer, who participated in 50 races and had mixed results and reward the racer who "cherry picked" 10 races and won them all.
That stalwart racer, may become disgruntled and their motivation to participate may be diminished.
The WRS is such a mixed up bunch of circumstances, any rankings are meaningless.

 

[gt4]

Originally posted by Oliver DePlace
Any ranking, which uses percentages, will encourage "cherry picking".
This would penalize the racer, who participated in 50 races and had mixed results and reward the racer who "cherry picked" 10 races and won them all.
That stalwart racer, may become disgruntled and their motivation to participate may be diminished.
The WRS is such a mixed up bunch of circumstances, any rankings are meaningless.

well as someone who could maybe be considered a "cherrypicker" id like to say that i dont just do a wrs because i think i will do good. i do it becuase it looks like fun. sometimes they dont looks so hat to me so i dont do them or i just donjt have time. and as far as the other division thingy you could maybe weight them by division/number of races.

 

[Luxy]

I've got an idea about the whole points system stuff. I think that it's almost impossible to make everyone happy with a single system, because everyone wants different things from the WRS (and that's what makes it so great, is that it's open).

One thing that I've had in the back of my mind for a *long* time (3 months or so) is to build some sort of database driven submission system, where racers would go to a page outside of GTPlanet.net and submit their times (rather than, or in addition to a PM to GoKents).

Once the results are in a database, it's retardedly easy to sort and format the results. The best part is that it would allow you to change how the results were displayed in a variety of formats, depending on what you're interested in, without anybody having to get busy with a calculator. It could also allow you to see all of this info live during the week (with final lap times hidden, of course), kind of like what I posted in the week 57 thread.

Instead of lap times, you could show +/- info, sort by overall, sort by division, etc, etc ... the list goes on!

Anyway, like I said, I've been thinking about it forever, and technically, it's not difficult (I do this type of stuff at work), it's just a big, big chunk of work. I really do plan on getting to it someday...

Anywho ...

 

[Der Alta]

It's been a while since we ran a low powered car. Much like the registration times, can we go back and take a simple FR arcade car and run a weekly?

I know it's not exciting and hair raising, but I'm still working on my throttle control and other aspects.

Oh yeah... Planning an instant race for this coming Sunday afternoon. OOps...Edit... Gotta cancel this one. Don't you love being married?

Thanks

AO

 

[oxygenuk]

good idea Der Alta im with ya on this 1

 

[Kent]

This last week made me think a little bit...
(btw, alta, great idea, plan on that sometime in the future.)

Anyway, last week made me think about results and the way they are printed.

With a race like last week, we had the rgt division and the rest of the cars... I think that if I was to split the results into 2 groups, it would give people a little more incentive to have fun rather than just run with the group.

Basically, by the middle of the week all of us knew the rgt had the race. If this was to happen again, and say, the zonda was the car to beat, but nothing could come close... I would do a zonda category all by itself, then a non-zonda class next to it.

I think it would encourage variety of cars and car selection based on personal prefference, not what car showed the most potential.

Fact is, we all know what cars are capable of what, so when we saw gt3emperor take a lotus to 5th place last week, even with a non-podium finish, we knew that it was an awesome lap.

If we all ran great cars, and one suck-ass car ran along with us, yet kept up with the pack, regardless of exact placement, we would all know the driver did a good job.

Winning with the fastest car isn't always as rewarding as running with the funnest car.