Ballast Rule is it worth it?

[FIA]

Does anyone actually like the Ballast Rule in WTCC?

Does it make the WTCC more interesting, or should it be scrappe?

[Les]

it's the only thing that keep it interesting

[Lee Roy]

What is the ballast rule?

[VkmSpouge]

I don't like the ballast system in the WTCC as it often will throw the championship leaders into midfield obscurity for an entire weekend. As it is though it is giving the BMWs and Chevrolets a chance to beat the diesel SEATs.

[AndySpeed]

Do you enjoy watching motorsport where the leader disappears into the lead race after race?

[racer69]

Too contrived in my opinion, and i just fail to see why the people doing a good job (ie..winning the races) need to be penalised, whilst those doing a bad job get giving a helping hand.

[Les]

well to my mind you have a choice of one make of car just powering off into the distance at every round and then the others get the hump and leave or you interfere.
So you either restrict the numbers of each make/model and equalise them or you allow everyone in and penalise the good uns.

[SEATFreak]

What is the ballast rule?

Good question. I have looked on the 2008 FiA WTCC Regulations, via Adobe Reader, and it is as follows. This is based on what I know. Appologies if I miss anything out or get anything wrong.

1st = 40kg
2nd = 30kg
3rd = 20kg
4th = 10kg
5th = 0
6th = -5kg
7th = -10kg
8th = -15kg
9th+ = -20kg

* Those points are allocated according to the sum of points obtained in the 2 races.

* All drivers start the season with 20kg. The maximum is set at +60kg and the minimum set at -20kg.

* In the event multiple drivers finish a race with the same number of points they will both have the weight allocated to that position (ie. 10kg if they share 4th, 30kg if they share 2nd, etc.). But the 10kg for sharing 4th are not applied.

* To all drivers who score points is is 5kg for every 10pts scored (i.e. 0kg from 0-9pts, 5kg from 10-19pts, 10kg from 20-29pts). That weight is only applied only when a drivers has collected points equal to 10 or a multiple of 10.

* The weight specified will be applied to the following event. This includes scrutineering, timed practice, qualifying and the race.

All very confusing as I copied some and interpreted some of what I put down from the official regs. I hope someone can clarify the regs.

[ShiftingGears]

Do you enjoy watching motorsport where the leader disappears into the lead race after race?

Do you like motorsport where drivers that lose are the ones who are advantaged?

That sounds like a contrived joke to me.

[racer69]

I agree.

I can live with parity in terms of equipment (say make sure the cars are as even as possible at the start of the season), but its silly that the ones that put the effort in to test & develop their cars better than others are the one's that get penalised, whilst others doing a poorer job get a leg up...

[MrJan]

Before the ballast system came into the BTCC there was a year when Audi turned up with a 4WD A4 and made everything a bit boring for a year.

People really bitched and moaned when Schumi was dominating F1 and it would be exactly the same in touring cars if the ballast was removed.

So while I'd rather watch a fair race I just don't like watching a sport where it is the people with the deepest pockets who win. Given the minnows a chance I say, even if it means penalising the others.

[Daniel]

Before the ballast system came into the BTCC there was a year when Audi turned up with a 4WD A4 and made everything a bit boring for a year.

People really bitched and moaned when Schumi was dominating F1 and it would be exactly the same in touring cars if the ballast was removed.

So while I'd rather watch a fair race I just don't like watching a sport where it is the people with the deepest pockets who win. Given the minnows a chance I say, even if it means penalising the others.

Yes but the A4's had an advantage over the other cars as they had a different drive configuration. There was a reason they were ballasted and I don't disagree with that.

With regards to ballast in the WTCC it's a joke.

[MrJan]

Yes but the A4's had an advantage over the other cars as they had a different drive configuration. There was a reason they were ballasted and I don't disagree with that.

With regards to ballast in the WTCC it's a joke.

My point was that when Audi were wiping the floor with everyone it was a bit dull. Touring cars is about close racing and it seems the only way to keep cars close now is to ballast the quick ones.

I agree that it's stupid but am not too sure I'd want to see a championship without it.

[Daniel]

My point was that when Audi were wiping the floor with everyone it was a bit dull. Touring cars is about close racing and it seems the only way to keep cars close now is to ballast the quick ones.

I agree that it's stupid but am not too sure I'd want to see a championship without it.

Thing is with the ballast rule the teams are pushed to develop their cars as much. Seat brought out a stonking new engine with the TDi engine which gave them a big advantage and now they're ballasted so the advantage is lessened. Now I actually agree with them being ballasted because it's a totally different engine to the petrol's but why should you push your team for that bit of extra performance when it's only going to be ballasted into nothingness?

I think there are some cases when there should be ballast (Seat for their engines, Audi for 4wd and BMW for RWD). If one team has simply done a better job than the others I don't see why they should be ballasted.

[Les]

the cars should be equalised but not the drivers but how you do that I have no idea.
Personally WTCC ballast is too much, too complicated - the BTCC way is pretty good.

[MrJan]

the cars should be equalised but not the drivers but how you do that I have no idea.
Personally WTCC ballast is too much, too complicated - the BTCC way is pretty good.

I suppose the only way would to be to have a championship test driver run an extended time in each type of car and estimate it from that. Of course you would then have to limit development or have a set date when revised cars could be brought in (which would then have the same test again). But as Daniel says it just puts back all development by the teams meaning that there would be no point in bothering.