|
|
Post by Eduardo Lorente on Mar 28, 2015 16:45:32 GMT
So while we were planning the series, Paul D, Tony K, Glenn S and I talked about the pro's and con's for implementing an Incident~Penalty Point system. After looking to see what other leagues did, we identified three option: - Don't implement any system: (which speaks for itself)
- Incidents Per Lap Penalty Points: a metric based on dividing the # of drivers incidents earned by the laps driven. Then applying penalty points based on a threshold: under 40% (0), 40-60% (-1), 60-80% (-2), over 80% (-4)
- Ratio of Y Incidents to - X Penalty Points: every 5 incidents earned results in -1 penalty point
Unfortunately, I haven't had the time to do any analysis on it until this week. Coincidentally, some of you asked about this during our first test at Sebring, so I wanted to show the results of my "what if" analysis and open this up to debate.
Regardless of which mechanic (B or C), at it's core, it's an dis-incentive that tries to modify on-track behavior.
B. Incidents Per Lap Penalty PointsResults: Sebring Test-Day, minimum distance to score points is 50%, no negative points Penalty Points: 0-40% (0), 40-60% (-1), 60-80% (-2), >80% (-4) Finish
Position
| Driver Name
| Incidents
Earned
| Laps
Completed | IPL Metric
| Penalty
Points (A)
| Race
Points (B)
| Total Points
(A+B)
| | 1 | Jaden Conwright | 8 | 29 | 28% | 0 | 35 | 35 | | 2 | Michael Lane3 | 4 | 29 | 14% | 0 | 32 | 32 | | 3 | Claude Belval | 1 | 29 | 3% | 0 | 30 | 30 | | 4 | Mario Girard | 3 | 29 | 10% | 0 | 28 | 28 | | 5 | James Mason | 2 | 29 | 7% | 0 | 26 | 26 | | 6 | Eduardo Lorente | 14 | 28 | 50% | 1 | 25 | 24 | | 7 | Steven O'Donohue | 12 | 24 | 50% | 1 | 24 | 23 | | 8 | Rob Thaeler | 3 | 16 | 19% | 0 | 23 | 23 | | 11 | Michael Dao | 2 | 12 | 17% | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 10 | Josef Hento | 10 | 16 | 63% | 2 | 21 | 19 | | 9 | Glenn Sidman | 25 | 16 | 156% | 4 | 22 | 18 | 12
| Alvin Nieves
| 1
| 9
| 11%
| 0
| 0
| 0
| | 14 | Chris Payne | 3 | 9 | 33% | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 13 | Alfonso Rodriguez | 7 | 9 | 78% | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 15 | Darek Gress | 3 | 5 | 60% | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 16 | Tim Rieberger | 11 | 5 | 220% | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 17 | Peter Hebron | 9 | 4 | 225% | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 18 | William Kreutzer | 6 | 3 | 200% | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Results: Sebring Test-Day, minimum distance to score points is 50%, no negative points Penalty Points: -1 Point per 5 Incidents Finish
Postion
| Driver Name
| Incidents | Laps Completed | Penalty
Points (A)
| Race
Points (B)
| Total Points
(A+B)
| | 1 | Jaden Conwright | 8 | 29 | 1 | 35 | 34 | | 2 | Michael Lane3 | 4 | 29 | 0 | 32 | 32 | | 3 | Claude Belval | 1 | 29 | 0 | 30 | 30 | | 4 | Mario Girard | 3 | 29 | 0 | 28 | 28 | | 5 | James Mason | 2 | 29 | 0 | 26 | 26 | | 6 | Eduardo Lorente | 14 | 28 | 2 | 25 | 23 | | 8 | Rob Thaeler | 3 | 16 | 0 | 23 | 23 | | 7 | Steven O'Donohue | 12 | 24 | 2 | 24 | 22 | | 11 | Michael Dao | 2 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 10 | Josef Hento | 10 | 16 | 2 | 21 | 19 | | 9 | Glenn Sidman | 25 | 16 | 5 | 22 | 17 | 12
| Alvin Nieves
| 1
| 9
| 0
| 0
| 0
| | 13 | Alfonso Rodriguez | 7 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 14 | Chris Payne | 3 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 15 | Darek Gress | 3 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 16 | Tim Rieberger | 11 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 17 | Peter Hebron | 9 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 18 | William Kreutzer | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
(I'll withhold my opinion until the end so as not to bias the discussion) |
|
F0NZ
New Member
Posts: 28 
|
Post by F0NZ on Mar 28, 2015 23:17:12 GMT
I like the penalty system. I'd like for it to be even more strict, drivers are allowed a maximum number of incidents in a race. So, for example, a 30 lap race would have an allowance of 15 incidents total, exceed 15 incidents and you are disqualified. Really let drivers think before making a reckless pass and/or stop the systematic cutting of the track, in that "special" section, in order to make up time in a race.
This is a "sim," right? In the real racing world, you act reckless and you will destroy your equipment, which costs lots of $; or worse, you will injure yourself and/or others. I race in real life, and it would never occur to me to systematically cut the track, not even during a practice session, or even come close to colliding with someone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Payne AKA (ziptie) on Mar 29, 2015 13:09:28 GMT
i agree with Fonz but in real world guys do put tires off …and there is no penalty for using all of the track…all 4 off is cutting the track.but we all have that corner where we tend to put a tire off and thats going to happen in real world
i worked as a flag man with SCCA for a few years i witnessed a lot of tires off and there where no penalties also some tracks are worse than others as far as off tracks go,
one of the reasons i joined the group was to race and not sweat the small stuff like i tire off here and there……..i agree if some one is abusing it and gaining time by it every lap or driving reckless it should be looked at…..as a review after the race.
we have all had a incident here and there some more than others but thats racing and it will happen……example:SPA
Just my thoughts on this topic………
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2015 14:12:03 GMT
I'me with you on this,Chris, Spa, was the perfect example for the off track gaining times abuse, but Iracing off tracks are kind of wird, some times, my fear if we make it to strict,is that we're gone scare most of the guys,and they will quit the series, i know that it's a sim, but, we mostly are here to have a good competitive and respectful race, and to have fun doing it, so far it's working great, PS:iThink that Iracing is mostly a hobby for a lot of guys, but,hey, this is a great hobby, Cheers |
|
|
|
Post by miller1533 on Mar 29, 2015 15:57:51 GMT
Why are we trying to reinvent the wheel. Iracing takes care of the off tracks and way off tracks for a slow down, every real life racing series doesn't penalize for every tire off track I don't believe the off track inc's are an issue, unless it's Spa we are talking about which is an Iracing issue that needs to be addressed and we can govern that race independently from all others due to that issue. If you're talking about me I backed that race up at road Atlanta with the second fewest off tracks and still won the race so I don't see what the real concern is here! Or maybe I do! If you start governing everything in a racing league you'll lose interest, I've seen it in all 6 leagues I've been apart of. The mid pack drivers have some of the closest finishes and closest racing in this league and haven't heard a complaint yet amongst them whatsoever other than " man I almost had you" that's what you want! if it's trying to slow me down well I can find other leagues to run with and you can have your heyday and there will be something else to chime in on that's not going right in somebody's opinion! Have fun trying to get new recruits on a penelization approach rather than a rewarding approach for those who don't go off track. Anytime someone is looking to throw a penalty in for something it usually is to slow a team or a driver down how about giving a higher rewarding system to those who don't go off track because racing is racing and when you try to limit more (which Iracing does fault those who exceed the boundaries) then you lose interest in what we are here for and it sounds like those that finish around each other AKA mid pack are enjoying the heck out of it just my two cents or call it five cents! Like Claude said we are here for fun we should find ways of making it more enjoyable not less enjoyable!
|
|
F0NZ
New Member
Posts: 28
|
Post by F0NZ on Mar 29, 2015 16:35:29 GMT
Why are we trying to reinvent the wheel. Iracing takes care of the off tracks and way off tracks for a slow down, every real life racing series doesn't penalize for every tire off track I don't believe the off track inc's are an issue, unless it's Spa we are talking about which is an Iracing issue that needs to be addressed and we can govern that race independently from all others due to that issue. If you're talking about me I backed that race up at road Atlanta with the second fewest off tracks and still won the race so I don't see what the real concern is here! Or maybe I do! If you start governing everything in a racing league you'll lose interest, I've seen it in all 6 leagues I've been apart of. The mid pack drivers have some of the closest finishes and closest racing in this league and haven't heard a complaint yet amongst them whatsoever other than " man I almost had you" that's what you want! if it's trying to slow me down well I can find other leagues to run with and you can have your heyday and there will be something else to chime in on that's not going right in somebody's opinion! Have fun trying to get new recruits on a penelization approach rather than a rewarding approach for those who don't go off track. Anytime someone is looking to throw a penalty in for something it usually is to slow a team or a driver down how about giving a higher rewarding system to those who don't go off track because racing is racing and when you try to limit more (which Iracing does fault those who exceed the boundaries) then you lose interest in what we are here for and it sounds like those that finish around each other AKA mid pack are enjoying the heck out of it just my two cents or call it five cents! Like Claude said we are here for fun we should find ways of making it more enjoyable not less enjoyable! Take a chill pill dude. Ed asked for opinions and that's what the people who responded have given. I don't think anyone is trying to slow you down, no need to take things personal. |
|
|
|
Post by miller1533 on Mar 29, 2015 17:04:05 GMT
And I gave my opinion
|
|
|
|
Post by miller1533 on Mar 29, 2015 17:04:45 GMT
Don't wanna hear me then get rid of me
|
|
|
|
Post by Eduardo Lorente on Mar 29, 2015 18:59:12 GMT
Chris - don't feel like this is targeted at you - everyone had an abnormal # of incidents that race (including me). Plus several other leagues use this or something like it (Spirit of VLN, NEO, Rumblestrip, to name a few).
In response to your suggestion, I don't want to have a "Spa-only" rule because it's one more thing that I have to manipulate/adjust in the scoring, which creates an opportunity for something to go wrong. IMO, it has to be an all or nothing rule. To be frank, I would prefer to remove Spa from the schedule than have a Spa-only rule.
Anyways, I tossed this question out there so I could "check-in" and see what you guys thought about the idea. If I don't ask questions like these then I'm going to miss some opportunities (and/or I'll make some mistakes) that we may regret later.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eduardo Lorente on Mar 29, 2015 19:22:50 GMT
I'll add one more thought ...
To be completely transparent on this, I'm more interested in avoiding the ~50% attrition we had at the Sebring test-day. I don't intend for us to continue to use "free tows" next season - I haven't used them in either of our test races at Sebring or Sonoma last night - so I was curious to incident points were a good incentive to encourage some cleaner driving.
Can I hear from a few more drivers on this?
|
|
bill
Junior Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by bill on Mar 29, 2015 19:31:42 GMT
hello ed. did sebring test race have a fast repair? i think that may help the attrition has i had a 40 min repair for one costly off. real racing im done but sim game seems to need a fast repair. our v8 series has it and no incidents and i have fun with that. if someone wants to cut the course to win is it really winning? anyway i will race with whatever you come up with. cheers bill
|
|
|
|
Post by Eduardo Lorente on Mar 29, 2015 20:51:03 GMT
Hi Bill - thanks for chiming in.
I had set the Sebring server with 0 fast repairs - this was another thing we had debated last season, so I wanted to give it a try during a race that didn't impact our championship (like Sebring and last night's Sonoma race).
In 20/20 hindsight, I try to find a balance between "realism" and fun. If I add/remove a few options (like free tows or penalty points) it can have the effect of enhancing or ruining the races. In reading everyone's comments, it seems like the majority of you are telling me you want to keep the status-quo by keeping 1 free tow and not doing penalty points?
|
|
mario
Junior Member
Posts: 57
|
Post by mario on Mar 29, 2015 23:59:12 GMT
Ed, It was surely the best thing to do trying differents options before the new season based on comments and feedbacks from everyone.
From my point of view, based on the last few races, We should keep a fast repair and not monitoring incidents or maybe give a Mr Clean reward to the one with the less incident points.
I found that a lot of drivers were leaving Seibring race because of not having a fast repair and that is not what we are looking for. I want to have every drivers to stay and have fun until the end of the race.
I'm really looking forward to the star of the new season what ever you decide to do.
Thanks Ed !
|
|
|
|
Post by Glenn Sidman on Mar 30, 2015 4:25:31 GMT
I'm impartial to any system. Just pick something and let's start  I think just having something documented and enforced consistently is the key. I can live with anything, but if I really had to choose something I'd lean toward option "a" no system. But, if there's no system, then we need to agree that there's no system and 100 incident points at Spa is fine. |
|
|
|
Post by Tim Rieberger(aka lonewolf) on Mar 30, 2015 6:22:29 GMT
The problem with incident penalties is that there are too many things considered 'incidents' that shouldn't be. The only time in real racing where you hear the phrase
'racing incident' is when there is inadvertent contact between 2 cars, otherwise you hear 'he's got a wheel off' or 'he's had a spin', and so forth. iRacing needs to
make its stewarding smarter, period. It's penalties are too punitive and inconsistent. Drivers who have offs or spins or contact with barriers have been penalized enough with
lost time and repairs, they shouldn't be DQ'd for that. As long as they have not negatively affected someone's race then no harm, no foul. I do like the idea of reward points
for least offs...incentives work better than disincentives I think. Cheers.
|
|
I think just having something documented and enforced consistently is the key. I can live with anything, but if I really had to choose something I'd lean toward option "a" no system. But, if there's no system, then we need to agree that there's no system and 100 incident points at Spa is fine. 