Well as long street cars is a really big fun in AC, I say yes for Nordshleife, otherwise I would say NO, because of the case TVE mentioned. It's just overrated track, fun for hotlapping, but nothing else.
I don't get why anyone for whom the idea of a close "battle" with a few other cars in a race appeals would not enjoy that at the Nordschleife. For me it's not the track particularly, but that style of confined narrow constantly twisting track that is so much more excting in sim racing than the Tilke style long straight-hairpin-chicane stuff with barriers half a mile away.
Oulton Park should have been on the list.
There is nothing wrong with the track, its who is driving it.. If you have 4 good drivers its going to be far better racing than 20 shit players.. So it doesnt matter how many people are on the track, all that matters is how good they are.
I used to race gt5 with 8/10 ppl on nubby and only 2 people used to finish.. You litterally got round the first section ok and then people just stoped being able to drive.
I cant say ive ever enjoyed a race ive done on nubby just because ive never really played anyone good enough to keep it on the track..
Indeed, I second this - I have no idea why it's not an appealing track to race on, that makes no sense. If the track is too long for remembering () then treat it like a point to point race - which people have been asking for on this forum forever.
No reason at all not to include it - the more diversity the better!
EDIT: Also the first time in forum history that I've disagreed with Tristan and Shot in one thread I think
Well to an extent that's true but if you honestly picture the nordschleife and do a lap in your head I garentee you'll miss a few corners out.
That's teh beauty of the Nordschleife. You do know the track, when on track you know whats coming next, but you couldn't possibly remember all 140~ corners by memory in the correct order. It's just not really possible for the human brain to do it.
Imo, tracks like the Nordschleife and Bathurst are a no-brainer, and they're not much more "one-line" that some others. The close scenery provides a great sense of speed. Coupled with interesting and challenging corners in a simulator thats actually fun to drive - must have.
Are you serious? You're saying that even professional racing drivers and development drivers who have done literally thousands or tens of thousands of laps there don't remember exactly what's coming next? Also, if you think remembering a race track is impossible for the human brain then you really need to take a look at some serious feats of memory recall.
But remember - his comments come from the context of HIS brain, and thus you can see the dilemma here: according to him, everyone's brain is similar to his and never forget he knows YOU better than you do.
If you read. You'll notice that I said when you're ON the track you'll know whats coming next but it's almost impossible without proper mental training to recall from your memory alone all 140~ corners because it's theoretically impossible to process 140 images in your mind successively.
If you had a picture of each corner of the Nordschleife and were asked to put them all in order I bet even professionals would get a few corners wrong. It's just the way the human brain works.
Just like if you visualize in your mind a trip to the shops. Guaranteed you will miss things out from the images in your head, be it something small like a shop window or lamp post or something a bit more significant like the length of the road or the width of it.
Much like trying to draw a track map from memory on a piece of paper, you'll probably draw something completely shite, but it doesn't mean that you don't know the track like the back of your hand.
It's along the lines of when you smell/hear or taste something that reminds you of something else but it's never triggered by anything other than that specific sensory input. It's exactly the same when talking about the Nordschleife. It's the images of what you see there and further down the road that trigger your memory to tell you what is next. A still image is probably not enough information to tell you what is next as your eyes have memorized the 3d images of the track rather than 2d ones. And unlike a shorter track there are too many short term elements to stack in your mental RAM [so to speak].
I actually do read what people write if I intend to comment on what's written, unlike some people.
Have you never heard of visualisation as a key technique in racing? Drivers often sit in the car before going out on a qualifying run (or even the night before the session) and 'drive' a 'perfect' lap in their mind, before going out to actually attempt to do it. To have any use there has to be a significant degree of detail in this approach, so for many it includes more than just "what corner is coming up next", but things like camber/surface changes, braking/turn-in markers and other points of significance. Again, you don't think professional racing drivers and development drivers who've done thousands or tens of thousands of laps don't know what's coming up next when they're sitting in pitlane or at home? Also, I like the fact that you're now attempting to retroactively qualify what you said so that it basically comes in line with what I said before about professional or development drivers who are clearly 'properly trained' to remember a high degree of detail about the tracks they drive on. However, you still think it's 'theoretically impossible' to remember 140+ successive images.
Ever read anything about the loci memory training method? In essence, it works by training the brain to associate certain keys (such as places, people, memorable objects) with the data you have to remember. Simply put, adding a visual element to the challenge (i.e. giving someone pictures of all the corners and asking them to place them in the correct order) should be significantly easier for the human brain than simply asking someone to visualise a lap in their own mind.
It's pretty easy to draw fairly detailed circuit maps of tracks that you've seen hundreds of times before. Even I (as an untrained monkey) could probably draw pretty decent versions of the current F1 tracks that have been in service for 10+ years. I can't think of a way for me to prove that assertion in a fashion that would make cheating impossible, though...
Again, for a driver who does this for a living (a racing or development driver) that skill of recall is quite a crucial part though. Think about when a driver debriefs with their engineer after a session. They communicate corner names/numbers (modern drivers tend to use numbers because it's shorthand) and the behaviour of the car at multiple points (e.g. braking, turn-in, mid-corner, exit) through the corner.
If I screamed a random corner number at a random track you think anybody would just instantly know what it was? Of course they wouldn't. They'd have to play out a few corners in their mind before getting close and even then they have a great chance of being wrong.
There are probably very few techniques where visualizing will a whole lap would help. Nobody is going to simulate [real-time] mentally driving the Nordschleife or Le Sarthe back-straights for instance. They're just focusing on the important aspects, braking points, turn in, peripheral references.
This Loci method only seems to be applicable to those who are gifted with an insanely large and accessible memory bank. But before now I hadn't read anything about that.
You're right in terms of having pictures vs visualizing in your mind though. I guess it was a bad example. But I think sports people get too much benefit of the doubt in that respect in that they know every aspect of teh track they're racing on and every little camber change and tiny bump. The reality is they probably remember the track just as anyone else would with the same amount of experience on that said track. Just cos they can drive a car fast as hell doesn't make them a superhuman brain too. I mean, look at Maldonado...
I would argue that most LFS drivers (bar the extremely newb) possess the basic skills that you describe. Able to visualize a reasonably nuanced and detailed mental model of a circuit, and what the "ideal" lap would look like in terms of braking points, etcera.
For the memorable (or oft-mentioned) corners (such as 'turn 8' at Turkey, 'Eau Rouge' at Spa, 'The Corkscrew' at Laguna Seca, 'Skyline' at Bathurst, 'Karussell' at the Nordschleife etc) most of this forum's members would be able to picture them in their minds immediately, without having to visualise the preceding corners or any of the rest of the lap. That's for 'untrained' enthusiasts, not people who make their living from driving. Do you really think it's that difficult for racing drivers to visualise corners in isolation?
It doesn't really work as an exercise unless you try to do it as close to the real thing as possible, so skipping the straights doesn't make sense. Additionally, just because you're on a straight doesn't mean you're necessarily inactive (i.e. you could be making a brake bias/anti-roll bar etc change (depending on the rules of the category)).
Actually, it forms part of the training in a number of memory courses 'normal' people might attend. Just Google for "memory training" and you'll find numerous instances where it's mentioned as part of a course. An aunt of mine (who wouldn't mind me mentioning that she's not especially mentally gifted) used a loci-based course to help her remember a speech that she was going to give so that she didn't need to take notes with her (she was nervous about appearing to read from the notes too much and wanted to give a more fluid delivery). The loci-based method worked particularly well in her case; she remembered the speech flawlessly and the confidence she gained made it easier to overcome her nervousness.
The difference is you're mentioning ICONIC turns. The landmarks of those particular tracks. If you mention a relatively minor corner or a corner not alot of people pay attention to such as Stavelot at Spa or Cascades at Oulton or Craner Curves at Donington. But if you gave the corner numbers before the name it's alot harder to visulize depending on what system you're used to of course. [numbers as opposed to corner names]
Also in relation to the last paragraph you wrote. It's impossible to 'prove' that unless an experiment was done. Say, take Marc Basseng as an example or someone like that with extensive knowledge and then get someone else with little or no knowledge to do as many laps as the pro driver has done [approximately] and then do various memory tests about the circuit to each of the people and see how results compare. Although I'd say it would be pretty impossible to rack up as many miles at the ring as some of these VLN drivers because they've been driving there all their lives.
But lets not stray off topic here, my original point was you may not know the track inside out but it doesn't stop you from knowing what corners/sections DO come next. Personally there's too many versions of Nordschleife. GT's epic version, Forzas weird version and rFactors shit version for someone here to say they know it inside out anyway..
I actually know a few people who do know the name of every turn/section on the Nordschleife as they drive there every month several times (if track is open). Why make a whole discussion out of it, it's possible wether you believe it or not. I guess you can easily draw out or imagine most of LFS' tracks no? Same thing...
I do the same thing in drifting in real life, look at the section of the track I have to drift. Look at the clipping points, line, etc... And sometimes do it in my mind and see where I can improve. For the first entry sometimes I take a reference point, but mostly it's on feeling.
If you read, I specifically gave examples of corners which were memorable and said that even people who are untrained enthusiasts (i.e. most of this forum's members) would be able to picture them. The point was that if even untrained people can do it for memorable corners then why wouldn't trained professionals (i.e. people who make their living driving) be able to do it for all corners on the tracks they regularly drive?
I struggle to relate corner numbers to corners on real tracks, but I think I'm pretty decent at putting corner names to images of those corners. The thing is that most corners you care to name at F1 tracks that have been in use for any length of time have had incidents occur at them. So, even the 'minor' corners are memorable for the incidents that have occurred there, even if they aren't because they're interesting corners in and of themselves. For instance, during the 2000 Belgian GP (the one in which Hakkinen and Schumacher both passed Zonta up to Kemmel and Hakkinen came out in the lead of the race), Hakkinen had lost the lead earlier when he half-spun on the exit of Stavelot after catching a white line in the damp conditions (I remember that without looking it up, incidentally, but you can choose not to believe that if you wish).
Do you still refuse to believe that some people know the Nordschleife corner-by-corner in-sequence from memory, though? That's the annoying claim which you made, and I hope you've come to reconsider it.