Special Stage Forums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
How about try some middle ground for this topic. I agree that that for minor problems it's frustrating to be out of and event early but if you crash, so be it. so, if a driver breaks down they have until the last car starts the next stage to fix it. stuart
 

·
eating dust taking photos
Joined
·
3,740 Posts
This does sound like it would be a nice middle ground alternative to superrally but it would more heavily benefit the front runners then guys in the middle or back of the pack.


I think possibly allowing a driver to return after missing a stage with some sort of time indexxed penalty would be more fair. Say take the slowest car on the stage, then add 20% of that time back to that time and make that the replacement time for the driver that missed that stage. This would hurt front running drivers more then someone at the back but it would allow a similiar amount of time to fix the car and get back in the rally. Also allowing drivers to start deeper in the field if its a minor problem with an indexed penalty would be again IMO more fair overally. If a driver has to start 10 places back he recieves lets say 12 seconds per delayed start position. Now if you're one of the last cars you'd probably have to skip the stage but if you missed just that stage you could still finish and not DNF.


You would have to limit the number of stages a driver could miss per day in a rally or something along those lines but I think that would be a more fair system, and would still make endurance a very important aspect to be competitive over all.




We run something like this in rallycross here, a DNF recieve the lowest time in class plus 15 seconds, a driver has until a course change is ready to be made (a course change is necessitated and all other drivers have made the same amount of runs or all other drivers had made the total number of runs in that run session) that way drivers can repair minor problems. We also will let a driver make their runs in the second heat and if the failed to start a run in the morning and make all afternoon runs we give them the DNF penalty.


Its a thought....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
483 Posts
I think Ramada does something like this to allow someone who DNF's one leg to still get an overall finish for the rally. If i remember correctly it was something like slowest time +20% for each stage missed...
 

·
don't cut
Joined
·
4,073 Posts
We did something similar on the Rallye de Paris last weekend. We allowed a driver to repair their car and rejoin altough at that time they could not get any points. I tried to get the driver to be allowed to be scored at either the longest competitor time or bogey, which ever was longer. However, this got turned down. We did get permission for a team to continue after repairs. This is because of the compact controlled nature of the Paris rally however. There is no possibility of speeding on transit. Except for the steward that is. He was got speeding. :)
Richard
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
>How about try some middle ground for this topic. I agree
>that that for minor problems it's frustrating to be out of
>and event early but if you crash, so be it. so, if a driver
>breaks down they have until the last car starts the next
>stage to fix it. stuart

But the proposal is actually tougher than the current system. Now you just take road penalites (under FIA style timing and under SCCA timing if you are no the transit). Controls are not supposed to close untill 15 minutes after the last car plus MPL (30 minutes? I don't have a rule book handy so this may be wrong).

So as long as you are there with in 45 minutes of the final car you can at least check into the control, even if you are over MPL and will be time barred when the scores are added up. The startline workers should not take your timecard away, that would be up to the people doing the scoring to decide.

This proposal would also seem to penalise the back markers as the control may close 60 or 70 cars behind the leaders and 1 minute behind the final car.

Some Pro-rallys let you run the second day for grins if you DNF on day 1. Ojibwe certainly allowed that last year when there were GN cars running for fun. Lets face it, it's not like you are missing out on prize money.

Rally is about endurance (or should be IMO), just the thoughts of someone in danger of becoming an old fart.

Dave
[email protected]
 

·
eating dust taking photos
Joined
·
3,740 Posts
I completely agree on the endurance aspect, thats why I feel that if changes are to be made that the events needs to not be broken down but that teams should be able to take penalties to patch a car together.

If sweep has to pull you off the stage or you can't get off the stage on your own or with a competitor towing you you're done, make it out fix the car then run.

I think we need to at this time not get too far away from traditional rallying but to help boost the show. Getting cars back on the roads would be a good way to help produce a better show.

I dunno, I'd say leave it as it is.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Carlos Sainz has suggested a 10 minute penalty when you restart.

I like this suggestion because it is simple, keeps the endurance aspect of rallying (relatively) and also allows broken cars to restart.
 

·
Left seat and not British!
Joined
·
785 Posts
Not sure if anyone added this to the mix, but the sport (and SCCA's Risk Management) has a vesyed interest in letting DNF cars continue. It's called SEAT TIME. Too many low seed entries DNF early and cut down drastically on their seat time (I know a few seed 2's that have that habit, too!) Our experience at the CRNC is that our offs are usually issues with seed 6-7-8 drivers who probably haven't accumulated enough seat time to be going as fast as they are.

I would support letting DNF's continue for 'practice', ie., unscored so they didn't push.

Of course this is meaningful only for low seed entrants....but OTOH, top seeded drivers would be doing that anyway with a 10 minute penalty or slowest time +20%...that's essentially terminal for a front runner.

I believe SCCA's Risk Management has in the past had a problem with restarting DNF's as they see it as unnecessary risk exposure. But i think they'd be better off if they let the DNFs practice. Certainly at seed 6-7-8 seat time is the most important thing they can get.

Just my humble opinion.

Kim DeMotte
Official Old Fart, etc.
 

·
don't cut
Joined
·
2,252 Posts
Also allowing drivers to start deeper in
>the field if its a minor problem with an indexed penalty
>would be again IMO more fair overally. If a driver has to
>start 10 places back he recieves lets say 12 seconds per
>delayed start position.

That could be a problem. It's not uncommom for a top seeded team to take multiple minutes per stage off some lower seeded teams. Speedfactors alone suggest a potential 30% delta in speed, and passing under that situation would be dangerous for both passee and passer. Think about it, if you were a seed 7 or 8 driver, would you want Seamus Burke 1 minute behind you? The only way we could restart cars safely is if they were slotted back in somewhere around their relative speed factor.

I'm all for restarting dnf'd cars, believe me, I'm really for it. I would take any penalty in order to restart a rally. I just want the seat time I bought with my entry fee. But not if it will cause a potentiall safety/passing issue. Risk management already has enough ammo.

Dennis Martin
[email protected]
920-432-4845
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
724 Posts
I am all for Super rallly on one condition, at service teams are only allowed to change tires and add fuel. IF they want to work on any other part of the car then there is an automatic penalty (I think that 5-10 minutes) would be the minimum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
730 Posts
>I would support letting DNF's continue for 'practice', ie.,
>unscored so they didn't push.

CARS used to allow DNF competitors to continue, unofficially, for practise only. Unfortunately, unscored also means no consequences, and thus more risk taking, not less. As long as you're still in the rally and eligible for points, you're motivated to keep the car on the road. Even if you're way down the order, other people may still break, so you keep pushing for a finish.

Once that motivation is gone, you might as well take risks, see how far you can push the limits. What's to lose? That's exactly what people did, including some high profile teams. When one of these "unofficial" teams has a serious off and the stage gets cancelled, this affects those teams that are still in the rally and battling for their own finish.

If you want the full distance of "road time", your best bet is to keep the car running and on the road and actually finish the rally.
 

·
eating dust taking photos
Joined
·
3,740 Posts
Good point, could awlays limit the drivers in how far back they could start then just DNS them and give them an indexed time for the stage and give them back their start position....


It all depends on the problem. A car thats make drivable doesn't need to worry about speed factors, a car thats made competitive would. If you make a DNS penalty might as well limit the delayed start to a certain point from their position (limit how far the top guys fall back to minimize the passing problem) and then if they exceed that limit they take the indexed penalty for the stage and start the next stage.


You'd also need a steward to make sure starting cars are safe enough to head out on the roads....


It needs a lot more work then thinking it out 5 minutes before I type....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
I just witnessed super rally at the Acropolis Rally. They were only allowed to run for fun - no points like they will probably do next year.

The Ford team ran Martin because the second leg of the rally included one of those new roadside services. They wanted the practice.

The spectators loved seeing people like Martin and Gronholm every day. Amazingly they were not in the least confused by the system.

As for points, well, that's another story and I happen to agree with Carlos Sainz that it is a silly idea. But running for no points seemed to work quite well.
 

·
Slid'n around 'n havin a ball
Joined
·
2,953 Posts
The WRC is looking for ways to appease sponsors and spectators.
So far, spectators only hurt us and sponsors are leaving not joining.
---
In WRC, it is only a matter of time until the managers put backmarkers out on course to slow rival competitors on purpose.
---
What we are doing now, pleading individual cases to run where the organizers allow, works OK. Making it a rule takes the common sense out of the mix.
rz
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top