you just invented the rallysprint.Quote:
Originally Posted by PLuto
Printable View
you just invented the rallysprint.Quote:
Originally Posted by PLuto
Let's go further, since we have just the one stage how about we make it just 3km but 2 times wider and we let 4 cars race at the same time so they can pass each other! Now that would be exciting!Quote:
Originally Posted by PLuto
amd without co-drivers, to make cars lighter!Quote:
Originally Posted by seb_sh
Never let it happen once again that 2nd placed o/a driver gets more points than the winner. The driver who stod on highest place in podium celebrating, but got less points.
New point scoring system no matter what it could be at the best, shouldn´t end up rallies like Rally Sweden.
Why wasn´t Evans on step one on Podium, then?
RIDICULOUS IT WAS!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by seb_sh
And make half the stage tarmac & the other half gravel. I think we're really on to something here guys!Quote:
Originally Posted by TypeR
Well, if he wanted more points, he should've pushed on Sunday. Yet, he didn't. He just wanted the win and that's what he got.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rallyper
It's true that Lappi should do more if his main objective would be maximizing points gain instead of win but it doesn't change ridiculousness of situation when it's possible to be rally winner and not be points winner.Quote:
Originally Posted by JRodrigues
Currently rally from WRC standings point of view, is not a rally but series of mini-rallies where winning whole thing doesn't matter. It shouldn't be like that.
He completed the entire rally in the overall shortest time. That should always be worthy of the most pointsQuote:
Originally Posted by JRodrigues
Why? Because it's "fair"? Is it also "fair" that he got road advantage?Quote:
Originally Posted by HKSjbg
because that's what rally is and always has been. driving a certain distance faster than you opponents.Quote:
Originally Posted by JRodrigues
I think it's being overlooked that in the age of 'part-time' drivers, this points system is actually best at rewarding those doing the full championship.
Lappi didn't push on Sunday because he had a rally win and a large financial bonus waiting for him at the end. Points were completely irrelevant for him.
Neuville and Evans are season-long competitors so push and reaped the reward of the maximum points they could score.
If anything, this minimised the impact of part-time Lappi on those running for the actual championship.
There's nothing wrong with that in my book. I dislike the number of part-time drivers chasing rally wins and money.
Not exactly true, but yes the rally that always was in WRC.Quote:
Originally Posted by denkimi
The same thing was said at the invention of the power stage, restarting and whatever other rule change.
Someone has to start first on the road and someone has to start last on the road. Now its fair to argue whether the current system is the best or not, whether qualifying or old-fashioned seeding would be better - but that is not even in the same ballpark as ‘lowest overall time isn’t necessarily worth greatest overall points’.Quote:
Originally Posted by JRodrigues
Imagine if F1 introduced something similar in the early 2000s because Michael Schumacher was ‘too dominant’. Extra points for the first few laps of the race because Montoya was often on pole but the Michelins didn’t last the distance like the Bridgestones.
Schumacher passes the finish line first, Barrichello retired and the Williams BMWs were second and third. Montoya’s extra points for staying in the lead from the start plus his second position overall, 1m15s down on Schumacher, actually earn him 9 points and Schumacher only gets 6. But its completely fair because Schumacher got to start on the clean side of the track…
Nice reply. But this was not done because someone was dominant. It was done for drivers not cruising around on Sunday. Task achieved.Quote:
Originally Posted by HKSjbg
However leading by 1 m 15 s (yes I know it´s an example) makes leading driver to cruise as well. Or should he not?Quote:
Originally Posted by JRodrigues
Depends if he needs the points or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rallyper
There's nothing wrong with cruising around - it happens in all motorsports. If people have a problem with it, maybe it's not the sport for them; current rally fans possibly have too short attention spans that would be better suited to Rallycross.....Quote:
Originally Posted by JRodrigues
Changes done to make sport more interesting happens elsewhere too. Sometimes for better, sometimes for worse. If you will miss cruising, you can always go to road close to your home and watch cars pass through.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
This system was created by the powers that felt it necessary, not by fans. Perhaps that says something about who the more valued/majority fans are.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
So having a big lead in F1 (that´s what latest example was) you should loose points if you cruise and still wins?Quote:
Originally Posted by JRodrigues
The best thing about cruising is that nobody really notices it except by looking at the time sheets. Those small differences between pushing and driving safe are almost invisible to spectators.
Well, at least it was not noticeable untill they needed to drive extremely slow to save their tyres for the powerstage.
I'm not sure who will agree with you there. Was always clear to me even when stood stage side with no signal who is pushing or cruising.Quote:
Originally Posted by denkimi
It was noticeable but nobody really cared until every stage was broadcast live and there were only a handful of top class cars.
that's not true. there are level of it. you can always tell if someone is conservative or not, but somehow on pace and no one complains. In the last couple of years there was an extreme that was really disappointing.Quote:
Originally Posted by WRCStan
What's not true? If not the AllLive factor, what else do you put your disappointment down to? Many here have said cruising was always a part of motorsport, so what changed?Quote:
Originally Posted by wyler
it changed the way of it. losing 10s in 10 km is way different than losing 1 min in the same distance. all live has nothing to do with it. i was very disappointed to see sunday live on stage, not on tv/pc, only to find half of rally1 car going as slow as broken. i totally don't mind "normal" cruising, a bit more when is like "road mode" on special stage. and the latter happened a lot of time in the last couple of years.Quote:
Originally Posted by WRCStan
So cruising is more extreme now than in the past? Maybe you are right, and maybe it has something to do with not enough top cars. I still think that it's only a problem to anybody watching live.Quote:
Originally Posted by wyler
yes, definitely been more extreme in the last 2 years, and yes not enough top car doen't help whern you have 8 car and 4/5 are really slow. i already said this, last 2/3 wrc rounds i saw live, lots of people just skipped sunday because of extreme cruising.Quote:
Originally Posted by WRCStan
Thing is, it doesn't make a difference why the distance is big. If we believe Neuville and Hyundai reg. the tech issues. And Evans spinning once at high speed, not getting stuck, and not loosing more time when he scooped snow in the air intake. Then we were very close to every driver except Lappi and Fourmaux having some sort of issue. Lappi would still drive safe due to this, but now his lead would be based on others making mistakes, not conditions. He would still score less points, and his win being literally pointless, even though it had all to do with him driving best and not making mistakes, not conditions...Quote:
Originally Posted by JRodrigues
In the age of part-time drivers? I mean. The vast majority of years in rally were part-time drivers. I don't think there's been more than 5-6 seasons, possibly 7 where we've had double digit amount of drivers doing a full season. (That is including e.g Burns in 2003 and Martin 2005 as a full season)Quote:
Originally Posted by rallyfiend
New points system seems to make sundays more interesting but we have also another rally where winning whole thing is undervalued in points.
Points - Driver (position in rally):
20 - Rovanpera (1)
19 - Neuville (5)
18 - Katsuta (2)
17 - Fourmaux (3)
16 - Evans (4)
12 - Tanak (8)
6 - Greensmith (6)
4 - Solberg (7)
4 - Lappi (12)
3 - Kajetanowicz (10)
2 - Serderidis (9)
2 - G. Munster (15)
Well we can't do anything about it. Drivers can only benefit from it. And I think that after 3 rounds the season looks exciting as it should always be, but I think it's not due to points system, but more level playing field. Sorry Kalle, but you and Sebs are unfortunately too good for the rest. Look how Neuville, Evans, Katsuta, Lappi, Tanak and Adrien are so close in battles without those three for scoring points. That make each round so exciting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Backa
F1 is so boring just because of that dominant force. And it looks like it will not change anytime soon.
Does anybody have the alternative traditional table? Obviously knowing incentives may have been different.
Does anybody have similary example from any sport ?
Driver theoreticaly win all 13 rally in the season , and lose championship!
For Kenya:Quote:
Originally Posted by WRCStan
27 Rovanpera
18 Katsuta
15 Neuville
15 Fourmaux
13 Evans
8 Tanak
8 Greensmith
6 Solberg
3 Lappi
2 Serderidis
1 Kajetanowicz
WRC standings after 3 rounds with old point system:
60 Neuville (in reality he has 67)
52 Evans (61)
40 Fourmaux (46)
32 Rovanpera (31)
28 Katsuta (30)
28 Lappi (23)
23 Tanak (33)
22 Ogier (24)
For now, Tanak seems to benefit the most from new system as his friday/saturday problems don't hurt his overall points as much as it would with old system.
Going from 7 to 5 on Sunday, 20 on Saturday, would that be better?
Rugby six nations had me wondering recently. Not totally sure how you can be champions in theory, but you can score more tries yet still lose the game whilst scoring bonus points in the tournament. All designed to reward those pushing and not the teams 'cruising', whilst keeping the matches traditional.Quote:
Originally Posted by ik1911
No idea how it is in non-motorsport, but I think the closest would be NASCAR where you can win 35 races, and get one 2nd out of the 36 races, and not win the title.Quote:
Originally Posted by ik1911
Just like you can finish without a single top 10 the whole season, and still become a champion. In theory. It will never happen, but it is quite... special.
Not for me. I want the actual rally winner/rally standings to matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by SubaruNorway