No because what if someone came from last place and won it in the second race, and only got 10 points for it.. Oo
For Race 1 and 2 the same points if only the Top 8 would start in reversed order. Otherwise it isn't fair. 
Hrmm... Reversed grid is too confusing. Arrow do you wanna just have simple normal grids? It's alright i'm sure there will be good racing still 
If we aint going to have reverse grids then there aint really any point in have sprint races we myaswell have 1 long race for each round like last season expet make the races roughly 1 hour long
I think 1 race rounds are more prestiges as well
I think 1 race rounds are more prestiges as well
The reverse Top 8 grid and the fact that you get more points for the much longer 2nd race added a lot of excitement in the point standings in owrl. So you dont really have 1 or 2 drivers pulling away from everybody else in the standings. It makes the whole thing more interesting even though its maybe a disadvantage for faster teams.
And you have it in real life racing series that people bag off in the first race just to have a better position in the second race and the chance for higher points for example last wtcc race. There in the first race you could see that some didnt really want to overtake in the last laps.
And you have it in real life racing series that people bag off in the first race just to have a better position in the second race and the chance for higher points for example last wtcc race. There in the first race you could see that some didnt really want to overtake in the last laps.
Yeah.
I still think we should have little sprint races, sure enduro's are more tactical, but sprints are also pretty hard. In enduro's you don't have to be full speed all the time, and you can get yourself into a groove or rythm. Sprint races you have to be flat out from the green light and make no mistakes. One mistake in a 10 lap race is worse than the same mistake in a 50 lap race.
I don't mind what we do, I'm just stating my opinion (which is never taken anyway...).
I still think we should have little sprint races, sure enduro's are more tactical, but sprints are also pretty hard. In enduro's you don't have to be full speed all the time, and you can get yourself into a groove or rythm. Sprint races you have to be flat out from the green light and make no mistakes. One mistake in a 10 lap race is worse than the same mistake in a 50 lap race.
I don't mind what we do, I'm just stating my opinion (which is never taken anyway...).
This points system would be fair. This is the same kind of points distribution that is used for a reversed grid in real life. Check out GP2 for example.
Yes but the system does not work with lots of good drivers. In real life you do have reversed grids, but not with the OWRL style points system. If you are racing against someone who is your equal, then beating them by 1 point in the first race and having them start 2 points ahead of you in the second race is completely unfair and illogical. I don't mean to sound insulting, but there's a reason no real life series use a simliar points distribution to the OWRL.
IMO, that shows that their points system is crap. The reason that happens is that difference between each position from 3rd to 8th is only 1 point, so with the reverse grid they would be gaining 1 point to potentially lose 2 if they passed anyone from 6th to 8th. This is what happens when using the same points system for both races. In the OWRL, if there are a few good drivers, you are better off dropping several places in the sprint and then cruising to a much higher points-paying first place in the second race whilst your competitors pass all the other cars.
The only fair way to have a reversed grid is to use something similar to the GP2 system.
I wouldnt say its unfair, the point system applies to everyone, but the admins have to decide what they want here since its a method of keeping the league interesting and keep motivation for more then 2-3 Top-Teams.
n1lyn showed impressive at the eps finals that if you are the best you will still win everything and the point system is just not important then. And i wouldnt say that the 10 guys competing there were the worst racers in lfs.
Like i said its a question what the admins want. I just can say out of my experience the OWRL got a lot of more exciting with the new system in DivB with battle for the championship up to the last race and many drivers close in standings and the skill fighting with someone else got more important then driving alone in front of the field.
BTW: I totally understand your point out of the view of the top driver who wants to score as much points as possible. Its somehow like a penalty weight.
n1lyn showed impressive at the eps finals that if you are the best you will still win everything and the point system is just not important then. And i wouldnt say that the 10 guys competing there were the worst racers in lfs.
Like i said its a question what the admins want. I just can say out of my experience the OWRL got a lot of more exciting with the new system in DivB with battle for the championship up to the last race and many drivers close in standings and the skill fighting with someone else got more important then driving alone in front of the field.
BTW: I totally understand your point out of the view of the top driver who wants to score as much points as possible. Its somehow like a penalty weight.
If you are the best you won't necessarily come from the back to win, that's just wrong. The point is that the OWRL will not reward the best driver if there are lots of good drivers in the field, only if there are one or two who are much better than the rest.
N1lyn obviously stood out in EPS, you can't use that one example to definitively say that "if you are the best you will still win everything". I'm sorry to sound rude but that is just an ignorant thing to say.
GP2 also uses a reversed system, it just doesn't use a ridiculous points system. I don't see why excitement has to go hand-in-hand with unbalance.
With the OWRL system, if there were a LOT of good drivers in the field, as there will likely be in the BoTT, they would all be trying to finish 8th. We don't want some kind of crappy system where people aren't racing for the win in the 1st race.
Edit: Also, in EPS the points system was uniformly increasing, not exponentially increasing. With that kind of points system there is no advantage to dropping positions on purpose, as there is in OWRL.
You didnt get my quite correct i think, but i think its due to language barrier.
My point is admins have to decide what they want, keep the league interesting not only for 2-3 top teams but for more. Or just run a normal league with the 2-3 top teams running away from everyone else.
I would never say, if you have the same race length do more points for the 2nd race, that would be just crap i agree. But if you have more or less the same race length and the same points (for example EPS or real life WTCC). Then you could see it like something similar like a weight penalty.
So every league (lfs + real life) running, weight penalties, reversed grids + same or more points in second race is unfair and crap in your opinion.
To take your example:
if you have the same skill, but place one place ahead of the other car (you score more points), you get the penalty of starting one place behind this car the next race (which has the same length and the same points). Nothing else does a weight penalty. You have the same skill without the penalty but with the penalty you are slighlty slower. Which means in reverse grid that you start a place behind this car.
I am not voting for one thing just to give that into admins mind what they want.(a) A balanced league (same points 1st and 2nd race with reversed grid) - (b) a mixed thing (maybe half points for 2nd race) - (c) or start grid complete by race and qualy finish (no reversed grid same points both races)
Possibility (a) would keep definately more motivation for more teams and would result into a more interesting season for drivers and spectators, but you wouldnt always have the best 3 drivers on the podium, possibilty (b) half thing and (c) would maybe result into an early decided championship and the group of drivers on the podium would be less, but you would have always the best 3 drivers on the podiums.
The owrl example i didnt want to say its the perfect system, i just wanted to give that example what that system gave to that league compared to earlier seasons.
Not everything is good or bad about something i rather like to reflect both sides of the coin then just watch at one side.
Both methods are accepted methods in real life and sim racing, so the admins just need to decide.
My point is admins have to decide what they want, keep the league interesting not only for 2-3 top teams but for more. Or just run a normal league with the 2-3 top teams running away from everyone else.
I would never say, if you have the same race length do more points for the 2nd race, that would be just crap i agree. But if you have more or less the same race length and the same points (for example EPS or real life WTCC). Then you could see it like something similar like a weight penalty.
So every league (lfs + real life) running, weight penalties, reversed grids + same or more points in second race is unfair and crap in your opinion.
To take your example:
if you have the same skill, but place one place ahead of the other car (you score more points), you get the penalty of starting one place behind this car the next race (which has the same length and the same points). Nothing else does a weight penalty. You have the same skill without the penalty but with the penalty you are slighlty slower. Which means in reverse grid that you start a place behind this car.
I am not voting for one thing just to give that into admins mind what they want.(a) A balanced league (same points 1st and 2nd race with reversed grid) - (b) a mixed thing (maybe half points for 2nd race) - (c) or start grid complete by race and qualy finish (no reversed grid same points both races)
Possibility (a) would keep definately more motivation for more teams and would result into a more interesting season for drivers and spectators, but you wouldnt always have the best 3 drivers on the podium, possibilty (b) half thing and (c) would maybe result into an early decided championship and the group of drivers on the podium would be less, but you would have always the best 3 drivers on the podiums.
The owrl example i didnt want to say its the perfect system, i just wanted to give that example what that system gave to that league compared to earlier seasons.
Not everything is good or bad about something i rather like to reflect both sides of the coin then just watch at one side.
Both methods are accepted methods in real life and sim racing, so the admins just need to decide.
I said that the EPS system is ok, because the gap in points between each position is constant. If that is not the case, then yes it's totally illogical imo. If people are deciding not to overtake drivers because overall it would be a disadvantage, like you mentioned in WTCC, then of course that's not a good system.
I support a reversed grid system, just with a fair points system. Also, if some teams are much better then they _should_ score a lot more points in the championship. If some teams are way off the pace, they don't deserve to fight for the championship. I don't see how this would mean the season is boring for any teams not fighting for the championship, look at most leagues. There's usually only a small number of drivers competing for the win, but the others don't just give up and stop racing, do they?
Nothing else was proposed here.
Sorry, we are running in circles.
2 last things since i dont think i have mor to say, just wanted to give my independent view on things, since my team is not involved.
If a team is way of the pace they will not win even with a reverse grid.
There is still a huge differnece between "keeping motivation up" and "boring" and "giving up races", it would just make differences smaller and therefore more interesting.
Good lock with spdo in this series, i am sure you will finish in one of the top positions no matter which system will be used
. I just disagreed, with you that the same points for each sprint round would be unfair its just a different approach in concept of racing.I don't mean using the same points system for both races, I mean the difference between each position.
i.e. In the EPS finals there was a difference of 2 points between each position in both races, so there was nothing to be gained by dropping a position. That was the point I was trying to make.
Here you should keep in mind that this only applied to the races of the finals.
Finals: 10 drivers -> Top 10 reversed -> 18,16,14,12,10,8,6,4,2,0
Regular season: 20 drivers -> Top 8 reversed -> 31,27,24,22,20,18,16,14,12,11,10,...,1
If there is a sprint race and a main race in an event with top8 or whatever reversed, the sprint race should be worth less or just equal amount of points rather than the main race.
In the end you still score more points the higher you finish.
Making the "strategic" choise of dropping a position in sprint race just puts you in a risk of losing that already achieved point(s) incase of accident or such in the main race.
Having both races the same length and somewhat reversed grid, indeed should have the same difference in points of a positions, except the first position.
Just my two cents.
In the end you still score more points the higher you finish.
Making the "strategic" choise of dropping a position in sprint race just puts you in a risk of losing that already achieved point(s) incase of accident or such in the main race.
Having both races the same length and somewhat reversed grid, indeed should have the same difference in points of a positions, except the first position.
Just my two cents.
Mr Jones expresses an opinion different to that of my own, therefor he is sacked 
MrJ, AFAIK both races are of equal length, there are sprint rounds (2 'half' races) and enduro rounds (1 'full' race) i dont think its been mentioned there would be different lengths.
I still think with the number of cars on the track at any given time that the results is going to be heavily balanced by luck more than the scoring system. Its going to be a REAL pain in the ass with a reversed grid having the fastest driver starting behind 30 slower drivers (in all likelyhood).
I'd prefer to see equally spread points, top 8/10 reversed.
IMO, any system that rewards you with a high starting grid spot for having a crap racing is just stupid! Ballast is one thing that can be used to compress the differences between the fastest and the slowest to keep things entertaining, but to me making someone start in last because they're fast is wrong, why not make them race with only one arm, blind folded or with only 2 wheels?
The 'if your good enough you'll come through the field' stuff is just nonsense too, sure if your that good you'll win every race, but how about the fact that maybe if you've just come 3rd then perhaps you DESERVE to start 3rd!? I just dont get the idea of taking pity on people because they're not good enough to get high finishes otherwise, its nonsense, want to start on pole? well f***ing win then you muppet!
MrJ, AFAIK both races are of equal length, there are sprint rounds (2 'half' races) and enduro rounds (1 'full' race) i dont think its been mentioned there would be different lengths.
I still think with the number of cars on the track at any given time that the results is going to be heavily balanced by luck more than the scoring system. Its going to be a REAL pain in the ass with a reversed grid having the fastest driver starting behind 30 slower drivers (in all likelyhood).
I'd prefer to see equally spread points, top 8/10 reversed.
IMO, any system that rewards you with a high starting grid spot for having a crap racing is just stupid! Ballast is one thing that can be used to compress the differences between the fastest and the slowest to keep things entertaining, but to me making someone start in last because they're fast is wrong, why not make them race with only one arm, blind folded or with only 2 wheels?
The 'if your good enough you'll come through the field' stuff is just nonsense too, sure if your that good you'll win every race, but how about the fact that maybe if you've just come 3rd then perhaps you DESERVE to start 3rd!? I just dont get the idea of taking pity on people because they're not good enough to get high finishes otherwise, its nonsense, want to start on pole? well f***ing win then you muppet!
Yes Paulie, I wasnt talking about fully reversed grid neither but top8 or so 
And the idea behind reversing the top, is to make it a bit more intresting race rather than just follow the leader for two laps and then just hotlap it till the end.
ESCC at least has provided very intresting and good racing using that method.
And the idea behind reversing the top, is to make it a bit more intresting race rather than just follow the leader for two laps and then just hotlap it till the end.
ESCC at least has provided very intresting and good racing using that method.
The aim of BOTT is to find the the best teams in LFS
- I dont think adding weight is a good idea
- Top 8 reverse i dont think is a good idea
i find it unfair for the teams in 9th 10th and 1st 2nd ect
If your going to reverse the grid why not have full reverse grid?
This is my suggestion of running sprint race (just come up with it)
This is very similar to how Kart Races are run over here
Qualifying 10-20min
Race 1 10 laps - qualifying position
Race 2 10 laps - Reverse grid
Final 15 laps - Grid position determined by R1 and R2 points added
Points from the final only count
- I dont think adding weight is a good idea
- Top 8 reverse i dont think is a good idea
i find it unfair for the teams in 9th 10th and 1st 2nd ect
If your going to reverse the grid why not have full reverse grid?
This is my suggestion of running sprint race (just come up with it)
This is very similar to how Kart Races are run over here
Qualifying 10-20min
Race 1 10 laps - qualifying position
Race 2 10 laps - Reverse grid
Final 15 laps - Grid position determined by R1 and R2 points added
Points from the final only count
Race Format
If the aim is to find the best team then you need to have mixed format races. I suggest these as your two formats:
Format One
15 mins Quali followed by top ten shoot out
20 mins Sprint Race (rev top 8-10 for main)
40 mins Main Race
Format Two
15 mins Quali followed by top ten shoot out
One-Two hour enduro race with compulsory driver changes. Three drivers represent each team.
I love the idea of the top ten shoot out but it has to be slickly run. i.e. on Xfg Kyoto you would have two cars on warm up/outlap whilst one is on thier flying lap. You dont want 20 teams sat there watching one car on its warm up lap. In a nutshell, keep it action packed for the spectators.
You can use the formats above as little or as often as you want it does'nt have to be half & half. The democratic/fair way to do it would be to draw up a list of possible formats & then each team (not driver)gets a vote. Reversing the whole grid does not work as the carnage of a 32 car grid would be to much. IMO the differences in speed & skill level throughout the grid would just cause too many accidents.
Format One
15 mins Quali followed by top ten shoot out
20 mins Sprint Race (rev top 8-10 for main)
40 mins Main Race
Format Two
15 mins Quali followed by top ten shoot out
One-Two hour enduro race with compulsory driver changes. Three drivers represent each team.
I love the idea of the top ten shoot out but it has to be slickly run. i.e. on Xfg Kyoto you would have two cars on warm up/outlap whilst one is on thier flying lap. You dont want 20 teams sat there watching one car on its warm up lap. In a nutshell, keep it action packed for the spectators.
You can use the formats above as little or as often as you want it does'nt have to be half & half. The democratic/fair way to do it would be to draw up a list of possible formats & then each team (not driver)gets a vote. Reversing the whole grid does not work as the carnage of a 32 car grid would be to much. IMO the differences in speed & skill level throughout the grid would just cause too many accidents.
**** ant ur coming up with the goods tonight arent ya!! another nice post 
i also think we should just have XFG at rd1. ( u cant say were bias becoz qstomeq has wr in xrg anyway )
otherwise itd be too hard to sort out the weight or pwr restriction for xrg.
i also think we should just have XFG at rd1. ( u cant say were bias becoz qstomeq has wr in xrg anyway
)otherwise itd be too hard to sort out the weight or pwr restriction for xrg.
thanks, I got so carried away I forgot to enter my team!
I see that fusion drivers hold both WR's on that particular combo
. As the XRG is more difficult to drive I think it about evens it out as it is. Another idea would be that Div1 use XRG & Div2 XFG then you get extra close one make racing. Duck, you ain't dropping the xrg
I iz
WOW, Jonesy gets fired twice in 24hrs!! :P
Jonesy, shut up, if the chap wants to drop the crappy RWD car let him!!
I was ranting on our forum just an hour or so ago (hadnt had emails saying thread had been replied to, so hadnt looked for replies here) that most of the rounds are RWD only cars and the XFG/XRG opener the XRG would win without doubt even if it was 0.5sec slower round there because of the size of the straight there, its impossible to stop them overtaking you down the straight and impossible to keep up with them, and the infield unless they leave the door open it wont be easy to pass them, and even if you do you'll lose the place yet again down the straight anyway. You can defend corners if they're your weak-spot, but you cannot defend a 30sec straight without breaking rules to do so, its simply impossible, it might as well be a BF1 vs UF1, give it up.
Jonesy, shut up, if the chap wants to drop the crappy RWD car let him!!
I was ranting on our forum just an hour or so ago (hadnt had emails saying thread had been replied to, so hadnt looked for replies here) that most of the rounds are RWD only cars and the XFG/XRG opener the XRG would win without doubt even if it was 0.5sec slower round there because of the size of the straight there, its impossible to stop them overtaking you down the straight and impossible to keep up with them, and the infield unless they leave the door open it wont be easy to pass them, and even if you do you'll lose the place yet again down the straight anyway. You can defend corners if they're your weak-spot, but you cannot defend a 30sec straight without breaking rules to do so, its simply impossible, it might as well be a BF1 vs UF1, give it up.
just done some quick tests, inside of 3 laps i'm in the 1:16's in the XRG so i'm looking forward to getting owned by the Fusion. guys
Method of Racing Discussion
(102 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG