no reverse starting order!?

I just realized during the rally that there is no more reversed driving order. Is that really the case also on gravel? I haven't seen any talk about it despite the fact that this new rule will absolutely change the nature of competition. My guess is that in most gravel rallies we will no more see flat-out driving from top-guys before it's sunday. Also we will not possibly see big gaps between top 6 because less competitive drivers are starting from considerably better road condition. At least that was the case before the rule of reversal staring order. It might be little bit different now because half of the stages are driven twice. But I am still massively worried. I have no interest to follow such rally where top-guys are two days just trying to get second or third for the final day.

Yeah does anyone know the reason they got rid of this rule? If they want to simplify rallying then this recent change isnt such a good move. It was daft when drivers were dropping back or purposely incurring time penalties.

Does the FIA need any logical reason to do things?
Maybe they were afraid of a Loeb domination, so they let him sweep the gravel roads on his way to victory, to make the difference wit his competitors a bit smaller.

Also 'new' for 2008, Superrally on Sunday not possible anymore, so if you have to retire on sunday game over.
In 2007 if you managed to get car in Parc Ferme you got 5 min penalty per missed ss but still got clasified, this is not the case anymore in 2008.
Also some other minor changes like 15 min service in the morning instead of 10 and there is 15 min at end of leg 3 BEFORE the cars go to the podium...

In my opinion a rule to love or hate. But it obviously makes it a bit more close competition (with asphalt excluded), and therefore not such a bad move from the FIA this time. Besides, this is how it's been for years, until 4 or 5 years ago. Not that it all depends on it, but championships where much intenser back then.

Next move is to ban Super Rally.

I think this new rule don't harm in Sweden and Argentina where the road position is usually quite meaningless. But I think that Australia for instance will be catastrophe. Drivers are waiting split times in order to watch next days positions - they might even stop in the stage or drive like a mum in order to drop one or two positions. It will be so silly. I can promise that we will see interesting tactical fights but I am not necessarily sure if I spend my day hours watching split times IF drivers are not driving flat out. That will be interesting to see. We might see Loeb being deliberately second or third after staurday in quite a few rally!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Finni

I think this new rule don't harm in Sweden and Argentina where the road position is usually quite meaningless. But I think that Australia for instance will be catastrophe. Drivers are waiting split times in order to watch next days positions - they might even stop in the stage or drive like a mum in order to drop one or two positions.

---

Well, no problem this year since Australia ain't on the calender. I seem to remember this only happened in the 2000 edition, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Josti

Well, no problem this year since Australia ain't on the calender. I seem to remember this only happened in the 2000 edition, but correct me if I'm wrong.

---

And IF Australia manages to get WRC back in 2009 or 2010 it will not be at the nice Perth, where the typical red ball bearing gravel was so difficult to master.

This rule just baffles me. Why punish the Championship leader by running first on the road? It creates a level playing field when there shouldn't be. The Championship leader should be able to choose were he starts. But that's life - that's what happened during the 'Glory Years' of the WRC so we shouldn't really complain, I suppose.

The leader knowing what the other guys are doing before he starts is worse then slowing down and giving up the leader position, IMHO. The first one destroys the competition, the second makes it a lot more interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Josti

Well, no problem this year since Australia ain't on the calender. I seem to remember this only happened in the 2000 edition, but correct me if I'm wrong.

---

OK, but the same problem is present in most of gravel rallies.

Altough I am extremely suspicious to this rule it might be interesting to see what kind of consequenses it brings with it. Two days more or less cruising and then six drivers inside of minute and then at last "flat-out sunday"?

Can splits be part of the decision in not running reserve order. The leader now won't be able to observe splits from they rivals. ?

Just a longshot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A.F.F.

Can splits be part of the decision in not running reserve order. The leader now won't be able to observe splits from they rivals. ?

Just a longshot.

---

They tell him with radio contact what happened there behind him.
I think that them did that already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brother John

They tell him with radio contact what happened there behind him.
I think that them did that already.

---

There is nothing the leader can do at the final sections of each SS? He must push to the end, or risk loosing time. Atko almost got caught because of this yesterday, but he got lucky, very lucky.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyRAC

This rule just baffles me. Why punish the Championship leader by running first on the road? It creates a level playing field when there shouldn't be. The Championship leader should be able to choose were he starts. But that's life - that's what happened during the 'Glory Years' of the WRC so we shouldn't really complain, I suppose.

---

Creates a level playing field when there shouldn't be? Why should things ever be unfair for most of the drivers before they even start?

And why is it fair for the championship leader to choose where he starts? If he's late for the meeting when he chooses his position would he be placed first on the road anyway? ;)

The Championship leader running first on the road is almost 'Handicapped', it's a bit like Success ballast. Penalize the leader for winning.

But that's only the case for dry gravel rallies.

People have mentioned Australia 2000, but that was what happened in 1997/98. On the last day in 1997 Makinen came from 5/6 to close to within 7 secs of McRae. Then in 1998 McRae came from 50 odd seconds back to lead with 2 stages to go, then blown turbo. So in 2000 people had got wise to this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cosmicpanda

Creates a level playing field when there shouldn't be? Why should things ever be unfair for most of the drivers before they even start?

---

:up: I agree and this was also one resson why they changed back to no reverse starting order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyRAC

People have mentioned Australia 2000, but that was what happened in 1997/98. On the last day in 1997 Makinen came from 5/6 to close to within 7 secs of McRae. Then in 1998 McRae came from 50 odd seconds back to lead with 2 stages to go, then blown turbo. So in 2000 people had got wise to this.

---

But isn't that a good thing? It would make Sunday more interesting. Right now, you have to admit, Sunday tends to be boring.

And it wouldn't work on every rally. Sundays tend to be the shortest leg, usually ranging from about 50 - 100 km. For example, despite having six stages this year on the Sunday in Italy, they only covered about 50 km, I think. Mexico and Argentina usually have short Sundays, as well. Perhaps in these cases drivers would have to try a different strategy.

I'm all for making the sport exciting, but don't like the idea of it done artificially. But heh, it's only going to be a few Rallies.
Maybe it's about time the Sunday's were lengthened, I mean yesterday was a late start, why didn't they start earlier, and have more final day mileage.

It remains too see, as mentioned before, sunday is short in many rallies. I don't see it as a hugely negative thing before the consequences is proven. The real advantage of being later on the road first kicks in on number 4-6 or so, don't think it's a huge advantage to be second or third on the road compared to first.

I'm for the idea of closer rallies, don't think it's "fair" that the leader should have the best conditions either. After all, the best drivers always has the best machinery, the best weather crews, etc.

Just look on alpine skiing, where the best after round one always has the worst condition in the second. Sometimes this creates surprises, which I find to be a good thing.

I think we will have to see what happens before we can say that it will create much more tactics and deliberate slow driving.

I think that this rule is the best thing that has happened in last 5 years in WRC. I am doing some statistics and you can see clearly that during the Friday the time differences between first and last compeditive WR Car are quite small. On Saturday when bit slower drivers are starting first then the first 3-4 drivers are dissapearing to the distance that can be measured by light years.
So, if anything small happens in top 3,4,5 (spit, puncture, stall etc.) then probably they wont even lose their position!

And remember, the rules are for everyone. If you are rally leader then you have to cope with this situation, if you are second then you want to be first and then you have the same rule. They just make it harder to become a winner. But if you still can win then the win means you much more.

And tactics. If you expect the other drivers drive slower, so that they wont have to start first on the road and you decide that you are going to push like hell then there might be quite a big margin and you can see one hell of a fight during the last day when people from the fift place ar trying to catch the rally leader.

And for the very last. Rally needs sponsors, sponsors need spectators, spectators need show- > Rally is for spectators not for the drivers to drive from point A to point B. Therefore I think that it is good for rallying to see more show and more fast driving and tactics during every Leg!

It sounds good to me, this makes the front runners to push harder and lets the guys down the leader board to have more chances(of course always limited by ability and machinery). And anyways this is already an unfair sport, Citroen and Ford are way ahead of the others so why not to make it "fairer".

The system of the last few years had the disadvantage that when for example the 10th car through blocks the road, the rally leaders were not able to complete the stage and had to be given a notional time (usually the same time as the fastest driver until then). So with this system no more "stage wins" for drivers who didn't even compete on that stage, and the rally leaders will not have had less competitive kilometers than others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluuford

And tactics. If you expect the other drivers drive slower, so that they wont have to start first on the road and you decide that you are going to push like hell then there might be quite a big margin and you can see one hell of a fight during the last day when people from the fift place ar trying to catch the rally leader.

---

This is what McRae did one year in Greece or Cyprus or something, and it worked really well :up:

Can't believe people are complaining about this rule :confused: The next thing they should do is ban splits into the cars during stages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J4MIE

Can't believe people are complaining about this rule :confused: The next thing they should do is ban splits into the cars during stages.

---

And to make sure the driver cannot get information for people at the side of the road in mid-stage, all competitors will have to drive blind-folded :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kabouter

And to make sure the driver cannot get information for people at the side of the road in mid-stage, all competitors will have to drive blind-folded :D

---

That's a cool thought. Two HANS-devices, one back to your neck like now and one in front of driver's face. Safety becomes first :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Halvis

It remains too see, as mentioned before, sunday is short in many rallies. I don't see it as a hugely negative thing before the consequences is proven. The real advantage of being later on the road first kicks in on number 4-6 or so, don't think it's a huge advantage to be second or third on the road compared to first.

---

:up:

Also, lets not forget that most rallies have 2-nd runs of the stages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A.F.F.

That's a cool thought. Two HANS-devices, one back to your neck like now and one in front of driver's face. Safety becomes first :up:

---

Or they can use some kind of goggles that show the road only :)

the difference in driver skills this season is so vast so position won;t make any difference.....

Ah, I wonder how long this happines will stay when we have watched couple of rallies where leading drivers will not push until sunday. Or we are whole the time guessing if they are pushing or not till sunday. Or when we will see cars stopping deliberately.

I will enjoy rally of Sweden very much because after it there is no many non-tarmac rallies where real competition starts from the first day. Argentina is other where the road position doesn't matter. Otherwise we will perhaps see mainly tactical battles for the first two days.

by the way...tyre wear is worse when there is loose gravel on the road? or the opposite ?

if we are talking for the same type of tyre ,yes the rough surface will wear faster the tyre
in the other way, if you put a tyre special for rough surfaces it is not going to wear more
this is just for wear, no cuts etc :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J4MIE

Can't believe people are complaining about this rule :confused: The next thing they should do is ban splits into the cars during stages.

---

It's because some of us have the memory of spending hard earned money to spectate at farces like Rally Aus 2000. What a nightmare that rally was! 2 days of watching guys go purposely slow and one day of actual racing when half the field had retired. Plus tactics like Burns faking a puncture in control etc.

I'm all for more competitiveness but I am not convinced that this is the way to go. I can't see that the teams won't start to adopt the tactics that they used through that period. I am very happy to be proven wrong though.

Can’t agree with you more on the split thing!

To be fair, Rally Australia was a special case due to the extremely slippery surface, and it's now out of the calendar.

Has the FIA introduced specific and actionable penalties for drivers who do employ gamesmanship to avoid running first on the road (i remember Carlos Sainz "stalling" once 100m from stage finish at the end of day 2)?