BTCC 2015 Rounds 1-3: Brands Hatch Indy

We ought to have a thread for this, really. A very intriguing season in prospect. Tremendous to see Andy Priaulx on pole — quality winning out, as it should. A shame that TOCA should have pegged the RWD cars back for no good reason, but Priaulx showed his class with an immaculate lap. Rob Collard's qualifying performance, so often his weak link, was impressive too. Andy Jordan, by contrast, never looked comfortable in the MG. I wonder how he will fare this year.

A word of praise, incidentally, for Derek Palmer Jr in the Infiniti. I still struggle to see why Infiniti, as a prestige manufacturer, should have put any money into an unknown, inexperienced team with two BTCC rookies behind the wheel, even given the publicity that will emanate from the composition of said team. But for Palmer to not qualify last, in a car that has hardly had any running, is an achievement in itself. OK, he's more than two seconds off pole on a short lap, but even so I thought he'd be last by some margin. A good effort, especially by the team — were the car in the hands of a Plato or a Turkington it could well be in the top half of the grid. And the Q50 looks good.

I'd like to keep up with the series, but struggle to see it from Australia, last year I was able to watch the next day on YouTube, but ITV shut the sites down before the end of the season and I never got to see the last couple of rounds. Looks like an interesting year ahead, hopefully I'll get to see some of it

Sent from my 0PJA10 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robinho

I'd like to keep up with the series, but struggle to see it from Australia, last year I was able to watch the next day on YouTube, but ITV shut the sites down before the end of the season and I never got to see the last couple of rounds. Looks like an interesting year ahead, hopefully I'll get to see some of it

Sent from my 0PJA10 using Tapatalk

---

Sign up to a proxy server, like I did while I was living abroad! There are various ones from which to choose.

Why oh why do Toca insist on f***ing around and include confusing rules that don't seem to serve a purpose? The new way for deciding grids for the second race is just backwards and makes it more difficult for new fans to understand what's going on. It also means that successful drivers are going to be penalised twice, once by having the weight added and again by not being able to put in a quick lap in the first race because of the ballast.

The tyre thing is just added pointlessness too, especially seeing as they have to use the softs in 3 race 1s, 3 race 2s etc. Yet again it's something that baffles the casual viewer and doesn't really add anything to the racing...in fact as Prilaux showed in race 1 it just means that a quick car and driver fall off the edge and get easily passed in the second half of the race.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrJan

Why oh why do Toca insist on f***ing around and include confusing rules that don't seem to serve a purpose? The new way for deciding grids for the second race is just backwards and makes it more difficult for new fans to understand what's going on. It also means that successful drivers are going to be penalised twice, once by having the weight added and again by not being able to put in a quick lap in the first race because of the ballast.

---

Potentially more, given the knock-on effects from race to race. I'm absolutely convinced that there's no need for any of it, and that the racing would be perfectly good without any of the success penalties. For the race-winning car from race one, when it had no weight, to end up 16th in race two through no obvious fault of the driver is just ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrJan

The tyre thing is just added pointlessness too, especially seeing as they have to use the softs in 3 race 1s, 3 race 2s etc. Yet again it's something that baffles the casual viewer and doesn't really add anything to the racing...in fact as Prilaux showed in race 1 it just means that a quick car and driver fall off the edge and get easily passed in the second half of the race.

---

Anything that confuses the mind of the casual viewer is a bad thing. F1 qualifying rules in recent years are a perfect example. And there's no entertainment for said casual viewer in watching a car's pace fall off a cliff, allowing it to be passed easily.

It's all a shame, because the elements are there for the BTCC to be really good — the field of drivers this year is excellent, in my opinion — but TOCA can't help but muck around with the sporting regulations.

Agree completely that the racing would still be good without a lot of the messing around. It's almost like they're trying to artificially create 'competition' by getting as many names as possible to win races, instead of letting the same 4 or 5 drivers have great racing and share the spoils between them. Back when I started watching the BTCC in about 93-94 the racing was close, the cars were much closer to their roadgoing counterparts and it was simple to follow. Even when the sprint and feature race idea came in you had a fair idea of what you were watching. These days it's a real pain, even as a touring car fan, to have to learn a new set of rules every year.

Nice bit of chaos in the Porsches, bit of a rarity as it tends to be a bit processional

Good bit of cheating by Whorton-Eales to win the Clio race, I can understand why Sutton is pissed off, having been nudged out of the way rather than passed fair & square.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrJan

Agree completely that the racing would still be good without a lot of the messing around. It's almost like they're trying to artificially create 'competition' by getting as many names as possible to win races, instead of letting the same 4 or 5 drivers have great racing and share the spoils between them. Back when I started watching the BTCC in about 93-94 the racing was close, the cars were much closer to their roadgoing counterparts and it was simple to follow. Even when the sprint and feature race idea came in you had a fair idea of what you were watching. These days it's a real pain, even as a touring car fan, to have to learn a new set of rules every year.

---

Any sporting regulation that takes more than a moment to explain is too complicated. That certainly goes for the BTCC tyre rules.

Give it a few years and the whole grid will be reversed for race three, I'd almost be willing to bet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrJan

Good bit of cheating by Whorton-Eales to win the Clio race, I can understand why Sutton is pissed off, having been nudged out of the way rather than passed fair & square.

---

Talking of cheating, what about Rob Austin's grid draw...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrJan

It's almost like they're trying to artificially create 'competition'

---

What, in the BTCC? Surely not! :rolleyes:

I've suggested before that if they want an element of reverse griddery they should just go the whole hog - randomise the entire grid for one of the races, reverse said grid for one of the others. Qualifying would still decide the order for the remaining race. And I'd have a further random draw to decide which race got which grid - drawn about 10 minutes before the start, just to keep everyone on their toes (OK, you lose the element of surprise for race 3, but still...). I'd do away with ballast at the same time, as it should no longer be necessary - or perhaps keep it for qualifying, then ditch it.

As it stands the ballast rules and partially reversed grids do annoy, though at least the random reverse is better than just a flat ten (or any other number). I don't mind the new race two grid set-up (British Superbikes adopt the same system, and it works well for them) but with the combined effect of the ballast it'll just mean it's unlikely the race one winner will win any other races on the weekend (unless they get it done early, they'll be too busy winning to make an assault on fastest lap, which means they'll be down the grid for race two and heavily ballasted to boot, meaning they'll likely be down the grid for race three as well). As good as that is for driving the number of winners up, it's not exactly rewarding the best drivers.

Indeed, it's possible that the way to win the BTCC this year may not be to win that many races, but fly just under the radar and acculmulate big points that don't necessarily include first places. And that can't be quite right.