[Widget Codriver]

The Treeline '97 rally had a tie for first place overall, measured to the hundredth of a minute, between Ray Hocker/Lynette Allison and Ron Wood/Kelly Walsh (if memory serves.) As a result, the CRS specifically wrote a tie-breaking rule.

For some reason I thought the SCCA used a different method for tie-breaking at Maine, but now I see that it matches the California Rally Series rules after all, at least for an event. I haven't checked to see what the SCCA uses for year-end championship ties.

From http://www.californiarallyseries.com/2003_CRS_rules.pdf

TIE BREAKING:
In the event of a tie at an event, both competitors will be given the points for the tied position. The next placing competitor will
be awarded points appropriate for two places below the tie. Example: A tie for second will give both the tied teams 80 points (2nd),
and the next placing team will get 50 points (4th).

In the event of a tie for a year-end ranking the tie will be broken by adding all the points accumulated in triple points events
which both competitors started in the class in question. All events started will be counted (no events will be dropped). If this does
not resolve the tie the same method will be applied to the double points events. If a tie still exists the same method will be applied
to the single points events. If the above method fails, the tie will remain.

[hr]

[p align=right]John Dillon
John @ WidgetRacing.com
www.WidgetRacing.com

 

[Havspeed]

Hi John,

Was electronic timing equipment used on all stage finish controls at MFR? I don't know if that was the case, but it seems to me that that is the best place to start any tie-breaking...

Andrew

 

[VWRX]

And if they were using electronic time-keeping, why round off to whole seconds?

-Isaac

 

[Pete Kuncis]

>And if they were using electronic time-keeping, why round
>off to whole seconds?
>
>-Isaac

Weren't they able to go to the .01 of a second a couple years ago with the older equipment? Can this not be done with the new fancy stuff?

Pete

 

[jprowland]

Maine was timed to the second, not hundreth of minute. About darn time, too, since that's the way the rest of the world does it. However, I don't think it was timed any more accurately than seconds (tenths or hundredths).

Personally, I'd be concerned about clocks drifting if it was timed that accurately and the results hinged upon it. It's not likely that the equipment would drift more than half a second within 5-10 cars (jitter is a different issue, but I doubt the Tag Heuer equipment has any discernable jitter). The cars that are most likely to have close times are also running close together in the lineup.

--
JP Rowland jeremyrowland -at- mac.com
Co-driver, #896 Audi 4000 Quattro turbo, Open
Visit my boring web page: http://homepage.mac.com/jeremyrowland

 

[Morgan]

It was my understanding that the organizers decided not to use the TAG/Heuer timing equipment as I saw it all boxed up in the Rally Amercia truck

 

[Bjorn240]

>Weren't they able to go to the .01 of a second a couple
>years ago with the older equipment? Can this not be done
>with the new fancy stuff?

I don't know what older equipment you're referring to, but I'd caution anyone that thinks measuring rally cars to the .1 (tenth) or .01 (hundredth) of a second is a simple feat.

In order to measure a rally car accurately to the .1 (tenth) of a second, you'd have to ensure that, at the very minimum, the precision of the measuring instrument allows no more than .04 of a second error. That is, for a given example time, the system must measure the time between the initial and final trigger to within 0.04 of a second each time. This may be possible, and may even be possible with the system Rally America has, but it's certainly not trivial.

And without documentation of this level of precision of the system, I think I'd rather see ties based on accurate measurements, than decisions based on fiction. I'm off to see how precise the current system is...

There must be a good website on the differences between accuracy and precision, right? It's been a long time since high school physics.

>Pete

Bjorn Christian Edstrom
Co-Driver

 

[Greg K]

Refresher from a guy who was ther not to long ago...

Accuracy - hitting the right spot.
Precision - hitting the same spot every time (even if it's not the right spot)

Greg,
Vive le Prole-le-ralliat!!!

 

[Havspeed]

>And without documentation of this level of precision of the
>system, I think I'd rather see ties based on accurate
>measurements, than decisions based on fiction. I'm off to
>see how precise the current system is...

Just tell me there weren't people with stopwatches at the finish boards, as I have seen in the past...

Andrew

 

[Bill W]

>This may be possible, and may even be possible with the
>system Rally America has, but it's certainly not trivial.
>
>And without documentation of this level of precision of the
>system, I think I'd rather see ties based on accurate
>measurements, than decisions based on fiction. I'm off to
>see how precise the current system is...
>
>Bjorn Christian Edstrom
>Co-Driver


Christian,

The TAG timing equipment currently meets FIS homologation requirements for timing. FYI, that is World Cup Skiing for anyone who doesn't know.

For the record, the TAG 520 is accurate to .001 sec, if using a photo-cell, but records internally to .0001 second. The .0001 second is used to validate the .001 level. The 520 is also thermo-compensated to precission better than +/- 0.0018 sec/hour @ 20 degrees C.

BTW, the TAG start clock also meets these same levels of precission.

Other sports have homologated timing rules. In order to impliment this level of timing, a whole new level of regulations would need to be written. Not a small task, I've been there.

I also have experience with a "tie" at a World Cup ski race to the .01 sec, but with the timing regulations, the results were left as a tie, even though the timing equipment knew who the winner actually was. Very interesting when people attempt to break into the timing shed to steal the timing tapes.

Bill Westrick
Available Co-Driver At Large
& CFR Chief of Controls

 

[jandreini]

Sno*Drift has timed to the second for 2 years now. This year, it was supposed to be mandatory at all events, but apparently has not been enforced (certainly not at STPR). Times from the TAG/Heuer equipment were more accurate, but the rules don't provide for using any of the numbers beyond the decimal. I would like to see the TAG/Heuer equipment be mandatory for all Pro Rallies, and scoring carried to the 1/10th second.

 

[w1jim]

I was at the MFR captains meeting on Friday morning (I was a "roving captain") and we all decided not to use the Tag-Heuer finish line timing equipment. I think that the general feeling was that most of the people there had some exposure to it at STPR and didn't feel comfortable with it. We should all have a training / play session with it before the comfort level is there.
JimB