[WRC] News & rumours (part IV) 2016

[Eli]

btw has anyone seen this? http://www.autosport.com/news/report...-wrc-rules-row

[Fast Eddie WRC]

btw has anyone seen this? http://www.autosport.com/news/report...-wrc-rules-row

Yes, but no-one says anything as all have to hate Ogier and call him a whinger... even when Loeb says he's right.

Nice to see Ogier agreeing with my view that qualifying was the best solution.

[Jack4688`]

Hahahaha, does he agree with you personally Eddie?

Loeb has a point but then speaks total bollocks by comparing it to a 100m sprint - a sport which inherently is on equal track conditions, something that rallying can never be.

[stefanvv]

Loeb has a point but then speaks total bollocks by comparing it to a 100m sprint - a sport which inherently is on equal track conditions, something that rallying can never be.

Track yes, but what if there is a side wind, then the athletes from aside will keep others from it. But this is one of the things You can't avoid, it's not like to mount power vents there on purpose to disadvantage some of them, right? Who decides who will run on which track number in such case, and what influence it'll have upon the whole race and each individual performance?

[GravelBen]

Nice to see Ogier agreeing with my view that qualifying was the best solution.

Ogier agrees with whatever view Ogier thinks will result in Ogier winning the most.

[Mirek]

Yes, but no-one says anything as all have to hate Ogier and call him a whinger... even when Loeb says he's right.

Nice to see Ogier agreeing with my view that qualifying was the best solution.

I haven't noticed anybody here who would argue that current rules are fair. The point is that there are plenty of reasons why fair rules are often unwelcomed from the promoter and that under certain conditions fair rules can easily kill the marketing value of said championship which is something what naturally no rulling body wants.

By the way handicaps are British invention already from 18th century horse racing

[stefanvv]

The point is that there are plenty of reasons why fair rules are often unwelcomed from the promoter and that under certain conditions fair rules can easily kill the marketing value of said championship which is something what naturally no rulling body wants.

So, what are they promoting? The sport or artificial competition (well, "competition" term is quite over estimated)? I know "everybody must be happy" = socialism/communism, is the best social order in theory, but we all know already it doesn't work in practice.

BTW, I wonder how much 2017 cars will devaluate this problem. I think there will be in some degree, but how much I guess we just have to wait and see.

[Mirek]

So, what are they promoting? The sport or artificial competition (well, "competition" term is quite over estimated)?

I only told You how it is. You won't change it by writting anything on the internet.

I know "everybody must be happy" = socialism/communism, is the best orden social in theory, but we all know already it doesn't work in practise.

It has totally nothing to do with Your socialism/communism thinking. This idea first appeared in heavily capitalistic society of Great Britain during the industiral revolution and it appeared in the circles of the richest class of people. Since then it's been used in various forms for 300 years. Personally I wouldn't dare to say that something doesn't work in practise if it's been used for three centuries.

BTW, I wonder how much 2017 cars will devaluate this problem. I think there will be in some degree, but how much I guess we just have to wait and see.

2017 cars will change nothing on the general principles. They give everybody a new starting pointing or a new motivation if You want to call it like that. If no results come in two-three years the unsuccessful team is going to leave unless some new motivation is introduced. By result I don't mean only sporting results but also economical/marketing results which can't be precisely evaluated by any external beholder.

[leighton323]

I just find it crazy how in circuit racing to handicap cars they use added weight systems and in rallying we have a such a perfect natural system that is already embedded and a part of the sport since its very beginning in that the fastest seeded driver starts first. And here people are trying to say it's creating artifical handicap when it's the way it always has been. But in saying that I do think the best solution or compromise in this case is the Qualifying stage. Or that the number 1 seed only opens the rally on the first day. With no splits in the cars now slowing down in the stage to gain a better road order is near impossible. Sport will never be 100% fair and that's why we love it. It's about overcoming the challenges that are put in front of you.

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

[Jack4688`]

I don't profess to know what the solution is but, as you say, there is a natural handicap in rallying i.e. the road conditions. Ogier may be right about how much the handicap is placed on the championship leader (though, like a true champion, he is arrogant enough to say it is him personally who is handicapped), but why complain about leading the championship and having to deal with worse conditions?

Someone has to drive first on the road and it just seems illogical to say "you've won the first couple rounds, now we're giving you further advantage". In circuit racing you have the age old problem of the fastest car qualifying first and therefore likely leading from the front but at least that pole posiition has to be earned at each race weekend.