Tired of being penalized for being a single driver car!

[Marshall Grice]

If twenty of the forty cars in a group are two-driver, we don't really have this issue.

Let's look at this numerically:

40 cars, 60 drivers.
As it currently runs:
20 two driver cars go out, two lines 10 cars each.
One single driver line then goes.
2 driver line goes again, under current rules it could still be the first driver (and if your smart and want to take advantage of the rules this is what you would do and if you bought X runs this is by default the way its run) and the first car in line has waited for 30 cars to run and will get his second run. So two driver cars that have all runs done by by first driver first averages 30 cars between runs for both drivers throughout the run group.
2nd single driver goes out after the first 50 cars have run before their first run.

2nd time through
two driver line goes and 1st drivers are finishing their third run while single drivers still haven't completed second run. Still have to wait an average of 30 cars between runs.
1 driver line 1 goes next and the first driver has waited 50 cars for their second run and will have that wait until the end of the run group.
two driver goes again and 1st drivers are completing their fourth run prior to 2 single driver line who hasn't even done their second run yet.
2nd single driver line goes out for 2nd runs

Under my proposal, there will still be an advantage for 2 driver cars because the car will go more often on warm tires but the wait between runs will be equal for the drivers and you won't get a competitive advantage by buying X runs (which is totally not what we want).

so yes, the multi driver cars in your example have half the time between runs (car goes out every 30th car for multi's vs every 60 for singles), but anyone is able to be in the multi driver line by purchasing x-runs or by having a co driver. so the "unfair advantage" of shorter times between runs is available to all. I don't see how that isn't fair.

So the answer to your question of how to not be penalized for being a single driver car is to buy x-runs. the bonus is you get twice the number of runs as your competition so you'll get better than them!

And in my opinion the unfair advantage is the single drivers having the competition be completely done with their runs with "you" still having half of your runs left to beat their time. At that point the time target is known and you can gauge your risk level accordingly (throw a hail mary through the gusty part because you're say .7 out or put in a solid but conservative time knowing you only have to improve say a tenth)

[Art Rinner]

Art,

How do you propose to change the protocol for extremely hot days, when it will be to your disadvantage to go out frequently?

Mike

Mike the proposal is to even out the time between runs for everybody. Not have a built in advantage for one group of drivers.

[Art Rinner]

If twenty of the forty cars in a group are two-driver, we don't really have this issue.

Let's look at this numerically:

40 cars, 60 drivers.
As it currently runs:
20 two driver cars go out, two lines 10 cars each.
One single driver line then goes.
2 driver line goes again, under current rules it could still be the first driver (and if your smart and want to take advantage of the rules this is what you would do and if you bought X runs this is by default the way its run) and the first car in line has waited for 30 cars to run and will get his second run. So two driver cars that have all runs done by by first driver first averages 30 cars between runs for both drivers throughout the run group.
2nd single driver goes out after the first 50 cars have run before their first run.

2nd time through
two driver line goes and 1st drivers are finishing their third run while single drivers still haven't completed second run. Still have to wait an average of 30 cars between runs.
1 driver line 1 goes next and the first driver has waited 50 cars for their second run and will have that wait until the end of the run group.
two driver goes again and 1st drivers are completing their fourth run prior to 2 single driver line who hasn't even done their second run yet.
2nd single driver line goes out for 2nd runs

Under my proposal, there will still be an advantage for 2 driver cars because the car will go more often on warm tires but the wait between runs will be equal for the drivers and you won't get a competitive advantage by buying X runs (which is totally not what we want).

so yes, the multi driver cars in your example have half the time between runs (car goes out every 30th car for multi's vs every 60 for singles), but anyone is able to be in the multi driver line by purchasing x-runs or by having a co driver. so the "unfair advantage" of shorter times between runs is available to all. I don't see how that isn't fair.

So the answer to your question of how to not be penalized for being a single driver car is to buy x-runs. the bonus is you get twice the number of runs as your competition so you'll get better than them!

And in my opinion the unfair advantage is the single drivers having the competition be completely done with their runs with "you" still having half of your runs left to beat their time. At that point the time target is known and you can gauge your risk level accordingly (throw a hail mary through the gusty part because you're say .7 out or put in a solid but conservative time knowing you only have to improve say a tenth)

Only a limited number of X runs are allowed in each group. I tried to buy some and they were sold out.

[Art Rinner]

Just to make my position clear, this is what I am proposing:

1: X runs are run at the end of the run group, not during competition runs.
2: Two driver cars must alternate drivers and second runs for either driver can not be made before every other driver in the run group has completed their first run.

I'll admit that I may not be fully understanding what Art is trying to accomplish. And, further, I will admit that I may not be clear on what our local rules say regarding when each driver makes their runs in a two-driver car. But here's my view...

Single drivers pay for 4 runs (sometimes 3, but not often). And, aside from the time between runs, they get their runs back-to-back.

Two-driver cars also EACH pay for 4 runs. And, like single driver entries, they should ALSO get their runs back-to-back aside from the time between runs.

Consequently, I am NOT in favor of requiring two-driver entries to be forced to alternate between drivers after each run if that is what is being proposed. That would create an unfair advantage because that would be different than other single driver competitors. Alternating drivers between runs in two-driver cars would, and is, psychologically disruptive to what is already a tremendous mind game.

I'm not sure what alternating accomplishes anyway, as long as EVERY DRIVER gets 1 run before ANY driver gets a 2nd run regardless of single or two-driver cars.

Ed,
National events require driver change, between runs.

[Art Rinner]

Just a point, if being in the two driver lane is not an advantage, then why are you fighting so hard to keep it. I have demonstrated that we can do things differently and not affect event quality or length of time running. Whats the problem with leveling the playing field?

[Mike Simanyi]

Art,

My point was there *isn't* any single, perfect solution. You're complaining about it right now due to cold tires. Put a wrap around your car between runs and park on some plywood in order to retain the heat. Problem solved, as best it can be.

As for a rule that two-driver cars alternate (or don't alternate) drivers in our local competition, there's simply no requirement. We let the drivers decide. I know I've done it both ways, and particularly when they're nearly hot-lapping us it's far easier *not* to change drivers between each run.

Nationally, drivers have to rotate. That is a hard and fast rule.

Why not get a co-driver? Your Z is probably a blast to drive. I'm sure you could find someone interested...

Mike

[Marshall Grice]

Just a point, if being in the two driver lane is not an advantage, then why are you fighting so hard to keep it. I have demonstrated that we can do things differently and not affect event quality or length of time running. Whats the problem with leveling the playing field?

i openly admit that being in the two driver lane is an advantage. I'm fighting against adding even more complexity to arguably one of the most difficult jobs we have to negate something that I don't see as a competitive factor. the time between when a given driver takes their runs is of no consequence once the car is at operating temp.

for what it's worth, I prefer to alternate drivers in multi driver cars because that is the rhythm of national events and it's good to get used to it and the strategy that goes along with it. I do however on occasion like to evaluate car setup changes during a championship that aren't worth entering a practice for, in which case i'll take a couple runs back to back myself to evaluate how the car is behaving before starting our usual driver cycle.

[Art Rinner]

i openly admit that being in the two driver lane is an advantage. I'm fighting against adding even more complexity to arguably one of the most difficult jobs we have to negate something that I don't see as a competitive factor.

I guess you were for it before you were against it. In one sentence you state it is an advantage, but then say having an advantage is not a competitive factor.

Which is it.

I would just be ok with not allowing x runs in the two driver line. This is the root of the problem. Make them take their X runs as hot laps at the end if they want them so bad.

[Rick Brown]

Just to make my position clear, this is what I am proposing:

1: X runs are run at the end of the run group, not during competition runs.
2: Two driver cars must alternate drivers and second runs for either driver can not be made before every other driver in the run group has completed their first run.

Consequently, I am NOT in favor of requiring two-driver entries to be forced to alternate between drivers after each run if that is what is being proposed. That would create an unfair advantage because that would be different than other single driver competitors. Alternating drivers between runs in two-driver cars would, and is, psychologically disruptive to what is already a tremendous mind game.

I'm not sure what alternating accomplishes anyway, as long as EVERY DRIVER gets 1 run before ANY driver gets a 2nd run regardless of single or two-driver cars.

Um, those two statements conflict with each other. The only way the second statement works is if you do force alternating drivers. With smaller groups than National events, that's difficult. And have you ever watched drivers swap in a C-Mod car? Can barely be done in 5 minutes.

There are no written rules for our local events for grid procedure, it's just procedure. What makes a grid work is a grid chief that understands the dynamic and adjusts as necessary to balance single drivers and multi-drivers and keep things flowing.

[Michael Wood]

NorCal troll alert

You guys have two fundamental issues:
"X runs" should not be allowed in the same run group as competition runs.
Two driver cars, by National supps, require driver switch between runs.

...now back to your regular programming...and, No, nobody asked my opinion... ;)

[Jayson Woodruff]

National supps

National Tour supps are not national rules.

Go back under the bridge

Jay W

[Michael Wood]

National supps

National Tour supps are not national rules.

Go back under the bridge

Jay W

yeah, but...supps or rules, right is right

...back under my bridge, now...

[George Schilling]

Marshall and Mike have been arguing my points just fine. I'll just add that in order to be competitive nationally, one usually seeks a co-driver (tire warmer). Locally, most folks that are taking X runs are doing it for fun, not for a competitive advantage.

Here's a summation of their arguments:

There is no perfect system that is fair in all cases.

Most of us are here to have fun.

Having to change drivers between runs is no more fair than staying behind the wheel. In fact, if could more easily be argued that changing drivers between runs is a disadvantage, especially for those in cars like mine that take a considerable amount of time to change drivers. In fact, in a small run group, you'd be guaranteed to be waiting on us.

Our present system, when run correctly, is about as fair can be expected without becoming unnecessarily burdensome.

Having an experience grid person who understands the goals, the complexities and nuances of running a grid solves all but one or the problems Art mentioned. Getting a co-driver (same as nationals) or buying X runs solves the other.

Next.......

[Marshall Grice]

i openly admit that being in the two driver lane is an advantage. I'm fighting against adding even more complexity to arguably one of the most difficult jobs we have to negate something that I don't see as a competitive factor.

I guess you were for it before you were against it. In one sentence you state it is an advantage, but then say having an advantage is not a competitive factor.

Which is it.

I would just be ok with not allowing x runs in the two driver line. This is the root of the problem. Make them take their X runs as hot laps at the end if they want them so bad.

in one sentence I say that a car taking runs 2x as often is an advantage (most of the time), In the other I say that I don't care in what order the drivers decide to take those runs because the order doesn't provide any advantage. Nothing you are suggesting is going to change the time between runs for single drivers with no x-runs.

[John Stimson]

Pros for requiring that 2-driver cars alternate drivers:

* That's how National events run, and I suppose that CSCC would like to give people an experience that simulates the National style to help them prepare.
* Having less time between your runs helps you retain what happened on the last run so that you can better remember what you want to improve for the next run

Cons for requiring that 2-driver cars alternate drivers:

* Some cars, or at least some teams, take a very long time to switch drivers. This can delay the event.

Note that whether you require 2-driver cars to alternate drivers or not, drivers with same-group X runs would still have half the wait between runs compared to single drivers.

The San Francisco Region compromised on this:
No driver can be more than 1 run ahead of any other driver. That helps ensure that changing conditions can't really be exploited, and keeps drivers from getting all their runs with only a short delay between them, but it doesn't force a driver change between every single run of a 2-driver car. It allows two driver cars to take the runs in this order:
A-B-B-A-A-B (for three runs) or A-B-B-A-A-B-B-A (for four runs).

That still wouldn't fix the X-run unfairness, but SFR doesn't have X runs.

Forcing X-runs to run hot laps at the end of the group doesn't seem practical either. Some cars just can't run back to back like that, and others are likely to dig in and wait as long as they can get away with in order to let their tires cool. From the perspective of a course worker standing out in the hot sun, that's just a terrible way to run things! It also wastes time where you could have had cars running every 20 seconds, but are running once a minute instead, so that you get fewer total runs in the day for everyone to share.

The goal of national competition is to be as fair as possible. Local competition can choose to compromise some fairness for other goals, like efficiency (more runs = more fun), driver training (passenger ride-alongs, instructional runs, X-runs), or less stress & complexity (letting 2-driver cars run drivers in whatever order).

Requiring X-runs to happen in a different group than regular runs is an option. Other clubs allow time only run cards to be bought, but they have to be run in a different, later run group, and the driver has to work an additional shift. Even without the additional work shift, having to run X runs in a separate run group means that you're there for a full day instead of a half day, because you have to work a shift in addition to your two shifts of driving. Cal Club offering same group X runs with no extra work is damned convenient, and I really appreciated it yesterday. I'd hate to see that convenience go away. Being able to pack 8 runs each for myself and my wife into half a day, while being able to have our daughter along with us at the site was great. We probably couldn't manage a full day with the baby, and getting only half as many runs would make it less attractive to come out.

[Aaron Goldsmith]

These also work pretty well:
http://www.amazon.com/Reflectix-BP24025 ... B0022NH3E4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Art Rinner]

i openly admit that being in the two driver lane is an advantage. I'm fighting against adding even more complexity to arguably one of the most difficult jobs we have to negate something that I don't see as a competitive factor.

I guess you were for it before you were against it. In one sentence you state it is an advantage, but then say having an advantage is not a competitive factor.

Which is it.

I would just be ok with not allowing x runs in the two driver line. This is the root of the problem. Make them take their X runs as hot laps at the end if they want them so bad.

in one sentence I say that a car taking runs 2x as often is an advantage (most of the time), In the other I say that I don't care in what order the drivers decide to take those runs because the order doesn't provide any advantage. Nothing you are suggesting is going to change the time between runs for single drivers with no x-runs.

Then to be fair, you need to not limit the number of X runs. Let anybody buy them and we'll all be in the 2 driver line.

[Marshall Grice]

Then to be fair, you need to not limit the number of X runs. Let anybody buy them and we'll all be in the 2 driver line.

I agree. I'm not sure why we would be limiting X-runs when we're well under the number of entrants we are able to support.

[John Stimson]

One reason to limit the number of X runs in a given run group is so that you don't get everyone who wants X runs signing up in the same run group and screwing up the worker balance. That does have the side effect of limiting the total number of X runs available.

Maybe there's a way to enforce even distribution of X runs without limiting the total available. Maybe when all the groups fill up, you add extra slots. Or if a group has 5 more X runners signed up than the group with the least X runners, don't let anyone sign up for that group.

[Jayson Woodruff]

I'm not sure why we would be limiting X-runs when we're well under the number of entrants we are able to support.

Are they still 'no work'?

Jay W

[Vince Rinner]

I think Art needs a co-driver.

[Art Rinner]

I think Art needs a co-driver.

I keep trying to get you to come out, if you want it the seat is yours.

[Robert Puertas]

I think Art needs a co-driver.

I keep trying to get you to come out, if you want it the seat is yours.

I think Vince meant that as a euphemism...
}:)