A criticism of cloverleaf rallying

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

A lot, I'm sure.

---

Yes, what I meant was that the increase in tv-numbers is not because of the qualities of the promotor and the changes they urged for, but because the new tvnetworks need to broadcast something.

Quote:

---

I'm afraid I do think mjh had a point here. The regulations that particularly affect rallying would tend to be imposed on a national basis, I should think. I would certainly imagine this is the case in the UK.

---

I still don't understand what you two are saying? With a cloverleaf-rally it means that all the stages have to be close to the rally-HQ. If the rally format is let free then organisers could find stages in a much wider area.
For example, the Rally GB organisers could do the first day in North Wales, the second day around Chester, and the third day somewhere further east. This way the costs are split over three local authorities, spectators are better spread and the nuisance for local people is minimal. I am convinced local goverments would be more willing to comply if the WRC only came by for one stage not repeated and then quickly wrapped everything up to go to the next stage somewhere else.
A Rally-HQ in the cloverleaf format needs a lot of infrastructure. Since there are only three stages per day that are repeated, all the specatators go to these stages so the roads need to be equipped for that. All the spectators, officials, press and teams need to stay for three days around rally-hq so a lot of hotels and foodshops are needed. Since the rally is often the time when the area is most visited, there is overcapacity on all the other days of the year, which would make the rally a bad investment.
I think you can compare this a little bit with the Tour de France. Some towns want to be a start or finish place and make the investments for that. While others are more happy just to have the circus pass through and organise some celebrations for locals and other spectators.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lousada

I still don't understand what you two are saying? With a cloverleaf-rally it means that all the stages have to be close to the rally-HQ. If the rally format is let free then organisers could find stages in a much wider area.
For example, the Rally GB organisers could do the first day in North Wales, the second day around Chester, and the third day somewhere further east. This way the costs are split over three local authorities, spectators are better spread and the nuisance for local people is minimal. I am convinced local goverments would be more willing to comply if the WRC only came by for one stage not repeated and then quickly wrapped everything up to go to the next stage somewhere else.
A Rally-HQ in the cloverleaf format needs a lot of infrastructure. Since there are only three stages per day that are repeated, all the specatators go to these stages so the roads need to be equipped for that. All the spectators, officials, press and teams need to stay for three days around rally-hq so a lot of hotels and foodshops are needed. Since the rally is often the time when the area is most visited, there is overcapacity on all the other days of the year, which would make the rally a bad investment.
I think you can compare this a little bit with the Tour de France. Some towns want to be a start or finish place and make the investments for that. While others are more happy just to have the circus pass through and organise some celebrations for locals and other spectators.

---

Really, someone more knowledgeable than I should clarify this, but I was under the impression that the British Forestry Commission is something of a stumbling block to forest rallying in big parts of the UK, no matter what local areas might wish to do. In other countries where government is less centralised, it might well be less of a problem.

I do take your general point, certainly.

But other events as Roger Albert Clark don't seem to have problems with Forestry Commission and marshalls?

And the freedome with remote service does not seem to be applied proper. Rally Argentina today (leg2) delivered yet another perfect example. They are today in a different area. There is a 140km, over 2hrs road section to the first stage of the loop. Sending a couple of Boxer or Transit vans could have meant we can include a few more stages on the way up there, while we get rid of the 4hrs(!) for the sake of only a 20min service mid day break as well!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris_B

But other events as Roger Albert Clark don't seem to have problems with Forestry Commission and marshalls?

---

I was definitely under the impression that it was a problem in Yorkshire. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable can come and clarify this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I was definitely under the impression that it was a problem in Yorkshire. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable can come and clarify this.

---

Dalby I think - only the Trackrod is able to use Dalby - though I stand to be corrected. They make more money from Leisure activities, e;g Mountain bikers, walkers, etc Which I'm not convinced about.

Even if we have some sorts of remote service already, something goes wrong with it. After my Argentina example above, I checked the next event and it seems I find an example first look at every rally there is.

http://www.rallyitaliasardegna.com/2009/pdf/table_1.pdf

http://www.rallyitaliasardegna.com/2009/pdf/map_1.pdf

So do I see this right. 3 stages run twice, which excuse me, but I think is a bit slim for a day’s rallying in the series identifying the best driver and the best car in the WORLD. Between the 2 loops, after only 3 stages, we have a 4hours lunch break!

Now watch this, there is actually a remote refuel point near the stages! After SS3 refuel, then a 65km road section back to service, then a 65km road section back to the very same refuel point!

130km of road driving and we even have to fill up the cars extra to last this sightseeing tour! And 65km each way is not that much compared to other events.

Sorry, even if some think some of us are too much stuck to the old times, I don’t think I have gone completely gaga complaining about just this in my article.

If service staff goes there for 2! Refuels anyway, you can’t tell me we can’t avoid a 3hours road drive for the sake of a 20min service and fill the 3hrs gap with action instead!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris_B

Even if we have some sorts of remote service already, something goes wrong with it. After my Argentina example above, I checked the next event and it seems I find an example first look at every rally there is.

http://www.rallyitaliasardegna.com/2009/pdf/table_1.pdf

http://www.rallyitaliasardegna.com/2009/pdf/map_1.pdf

So do I see this right. 3 stages run twice, which excuse me, but I think is a bit slim for a day’s rallying in the series identifying the best driver and the best car in the WORLD. Between the 2 loops, after only 3 stages, we have a 4hours lunch break!

Now watch this, there is actually a remote refuel point near the stages! After SS3 refuel, then a 65km road section back to service, then a 65km road section back to the very same refuel point!

130km of road driving and we even have to fill up the cars extra to last this sightseeing tour! And 65km each way is not that much compared to other events.

Sorry, even if some think some of us are too much stuck to the old times, I don’t think I have gone completely gaga complaining about just this in my article.

If service staff goes there for 2! Refuels anyway, you can’t tell me we can’t avoid a 3hours road drive for the sake of a 20min service and fill the 3hrs gap with action instead!

---

You have my vote! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris_B

If service staff goes there for 2! Refuels anyway, you can’t tell me we can’t avoid a 3hours road drive for the sake of a 20min service and fill the 3hrs gap with action instead!

---

There are no service staff (if you mean mechanics et al. by that) at the refuel points. Other than that - I totally hear your concern.

Remember Rally Norway with three days almost equal in lenght - and it was total fight until the last corner. Even if there aren't as many drivers left on Day 3 (though we have superrally) as there are in the beginning, Day 3 should have more 100 kms in competetive lenght.

Though it must be said that a short day three will quell tactics on day two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hartusvuori

There are no service staff (if you mean mechanics et al. by that) at the refuel points. Other than that - I totally hear your concern.

Remember Rally Norway with three days almost equal in lenght - and it was total fight until the last corner. Even if there aren't as many drivers left on Day 3 (though we have superrally) as there are in the beginning, Day 3 should have more 100 kms in competetive lenght.

---

Rally Norway was actually an example of how to make cloverleaf rallying function quite well. As you said, three days with nearly equal stage length. Actually sunday was the longest with 128 km SS. On the friday, when the stages were farthest away from Hamar (base), they used the remote service in Kongsvinger to make that day a tough eight stage in a day loop, without returning to and from service with long road sections. During saturday and sunday the distance from Hamar was never more than 50 kms, which meant acceptable road sections (in length and time) to get to and from services.

So it is actually possible to make cloverleaf rallying work. It is allowed to use remote service, and it is allowed to make a proper day of rallying on the sunday.

Then they should use this remote service proper, as by my examples before. A 4 hours lunch break for road sections is an utter joke. If you see my article, I show an example in which I actually managed to include every stage of 2 days into 1 day and the day did not take longer! This should also allow us to include more classic stages, which is important for the WRC and its events.

You call 8 stages a day a tough day? 8 stages should be the absolute minimum!

But other than that you all are right with the Rally Norway example. I don't think however Rally Norway was more interesting because of clover leaf. It was more interesting for exactly as you said having a proper last day's rallying! And that is in fact part of what I tried to bring across with the article. If the last day is 50km, dragging like crazy for long road sections, last stage a 1km superspecial, of course after another 2hours break for long road sections after non-classic mini stages, well then don't be surprised if last days are boring as hell! If I remember right the last stage of Rally Norway was the longest of the whole event, now that is what I call a finale!

That all is in fact what I tried to indicate as food for thought with my article. Not being silly with chase cars and all. But I feel there is too much tootling around on public roads and too much money invested in the service park. We could actually have a larger area despite less road sections and more action rather than tootling. My food for thought came from my believe - and in Rally GB 2008 delivering a surprising example proving it is realistic - that from what we have now it does not actually take that much to make the show better, a lot better! Why stop at 350km. Why not 500 or 600 (maybe 600 is too much for 3 days, but the article was meant to be food for thought), but impose limits to days and service vehicles and staff, as we partly have already. With only little adjustment and some clever thinking we could have last days with classic stages, 8 or 10 of them, 150kms at least. Where have we saved money in letting WRCars do 200-300kms road sections for a 20min service instead of sending Transit and Boxer vans up the country? Take the emphasis away from long road sections and expensive service park. I don't think financially it makes a difference, organisationally it maybe makes a difference, but not a miracle I believe. The only big difference will be a last day with 8 stages including classics rather than 2 10km stages run twice plus a superspecial. This in turn will provide for more show, more action down to the last km, which means more marketing potential which more than makes up for the little extra cost and effort.

Not to forget, this way ralllies could include more of their classic stages, but also rallies should be vastly different from one another, like night stages. The IRC of course is only 2 days mostly, but still, if the IRC, which is fairly budget orientated, can do such exclusive and excited rally day schedules, why can't the WRC?

Add on to my own post, but then I think I leave you in peace here. Just so you don't misunderstand my article for replies that haven't read the linked article...

"but also rallies should be vastly different from one another, like night stages." Could have expressed myself better. I find one of the biggest problems of WRC today is that public and media don't find corner stones in WRC which serve to identify and recognize the challenge, adventure of WRC and single events. There should be night stages, an African round, and events as Argentine, RAC, they must have recognizeable classic stages, and there is a way of including these further away stages without changing too much and without much additional cost.

Just another example picked from my previous post, for whatever reason we have these 4 hours lunch breaks, do you really believe a Transit van is more expensive in fuel and tyres and less save than a WRCar full of mud, oil leaking, wheels hanging off, for the 200-300kms road sections?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris_B

You call 8 stages a day a tough day? 8 stages should be the absolute minimum!

But other than that you all are right with the Rally Norway example. I don't think however Rally Norway was more interesting because of clover leaf. It was more interesting for exactly as you said having a proper last day's rallying!

If I remember right the last stage of Rally Norway was the longest of the whole event, now that is what I call a finale!



Not to forget, this way ralllies could include more of their classic stages, but also rallies should be vastly different from one another, like night stages. The IRC of course is only 2 days mostly, but still, if the IRC, which is fairly budget orientated, can do such exclusive and excited rally day schedules, why can't the WRC?

---

I thought it was quite tough, anyway, but then I`m an old geezer...

I didn`t write that Rally Norway was more interesting because of cloverleaf. I said that Rally Norway was an example that cloverleaf rallying actually could function quite well. See the difference...?

The last stage of Rally Norway was not the longest. That was in 2007 when they finished with a 42 km "monster". This year the longest stage was third to last, with 30 kms. The last stage was 19 km.

I think we have to accept that centralized servicing has come to stay, with the demand for a commercially viable service area, to entertain sponsors, VIPs, other guests and spectators. The main problem is that it is very often located too far away from the rally action, because of the demands for a proper infrastructure around it. But in a modern world - and as in most other sports - there will be conflicts between the commercial side and the pure sporting preferences. I also think we have to accept that WRC-rallies will not go back to a format with 500-600 km stages any more. It`s just too expensive and personell/marshal-demanding with safety regulations being much stricter than it was only 10 to 15 years ago.