rec.autos.simulators

by **David Butte** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

The question mark in the title is because I am undecided about this...

Because GPLRank's handicaps work on a straight "add up the time
differences in seconds" basis, being 5% slower than the benchmark at
the Ring will make a massive difference to your handicap, far more than
being 5% slower at Monaco.

You can argue both ways here: either you think that the Ring's effect
is so out of proportion to the rest that it negates the point of trying
too hard elsewhere; or you can say that the Ring is the ultimate test
of GPL driving, and as such should have the lion's share of the points.

It seems to me that there are only two sensible ways of doing the
handicaps - as they are now, on a straight adding-up basis, or by
changing to a percentage score. The latter would give all tracks equal
weight, so shaving 6s off your Ring PB would be about the same as
shaving 1s off your Monza one, instead of six times as valuable.

Anyone got any views on this?
--
David.
"After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
really."
(Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh)

by **Uncle Feste** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

> The question mark in the title is because I am undecided about this...

> Because GPLRank's handicaps work on a straight "add up the time
> differences in seconds" basis, being 5% slower than the benchmark at
> the Ring will make a massive difference to your handicap, far more than
> being 5% slower at Monaco.

> You can argue both ways here: either you think that the Ring's effect
> is so out of proportion to the rest that it negates the point of trying
> too hard elsewhere; or you can say that the Ring is the ultimate test
> of GPL driving, and as such should have the lion's share of the points.

> It seems to me that there are only two sensible ways of doing the
> handicaps - as they are now, on a straight adding-up basis, or by
> changing to a percentage score. The latter would give all tracks equal
> weight, so shaving 6s off your Ring PB would be about the same as
> shaving 1s off your Monza one, instead of six times as valuable.

> Anyone got any views on this?

I think you're right on this, Spa & The Ring are the lion's share of the
handicap score. OTOH, it's equal insofar as everyone has the same
hurdle to navigate. I'd like to adopt your viewpoint in this way:
Total miles of the 11 courses/Your total time. The output could be an
avg mph figure for all the circuits. Any fairer handicapping ideas out
there, because this too may still be weighted too much towards the big
tracks.

--
Chuck Kandler
GPL F1 Handicap of +210.00 as of 6/15
GPL F3 Handicap of +481.29 as of 6/18
K&S Racing
http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195

by **Jim Dombrowsk** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

Maybe have a feature in GPLrank that allows you to select which tracks you
want to add into the handicap totals. For those who don't want to include
the 'Ring, then they could uncheck it. Unfortunately for me, unchecking the
'ring would throw me even further down the ranks since that's the track I do
best at in the GPLrank comparisons.

Jim D.

>> The question mark in the title is because I am undecided about this...

>> Because GPLRank's handicaps work on a straight "add up the time
>> differences in seconds" basis, being 5% slower than the benchmark at
>> the Ring will make a massive difference to your handicap, far more than
>> being 5% slower at Monaco.

>> You can argue both ways here: either you think that the Ring's effect
>> is so out of proportion to the rest that it negates the point of trying
>> too hard elsewhere; or you can say that the Ring is the ultimate test
>> of GPL driving, and as such should have the lion's share of the points.

>> It seems to me that there are only two sensible ways of doing the
>> handicaps - as they are now, on a straight adding-up basis, or by
>> changing to a percentage score. The latter would give all tracks equal
>> weight, so shaving 6s off your Ring PB would be about the same as
>> shaving 1s off your Monza one, instead of six times as valuable.

>> Anyone got any views on this?

>I think you're right on this, Spa & The Ring are the lion's share of the
>handicap score. OTOH, it's equal insofar as everyone has the same
>hurdle to navigate. I'd like to adopt your viewpoint in this way:
>Total miles of the 11 courses/Your total time. The output could be an
>avg mph figure for all the circuits. Any fairer handicapping ideas out
>there, because this too may still be weighted too much towards the big
>tracks.

>--
>Chuck Kandler
>GPL F1 Handicap of +210.00 as of 6/15
>GPL F3 Handicap of +481.29 as of 6/18
>K&S Racing
>http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195

by **Don Scurlo** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

Hey David. I came up with the scale that GPLRank uses. It's all it
what your trying to get a measure of. Schubi's is a great place to
see individual track expertise. This, on the other hand, is a gauge
of overall mastery. Don't think of it as one track having more
emphasis than another. Think of every kilometer of track being just
as important as every other kilometer of track.
Imagine all 11 tracks hooked end to end to make one long 48.484
mile long track. You have to master this track. How can you then take
a 14 mile section, the Ring, out of the lap, and discount it? The
Ring is not only 29% of the lap, it's the most difficult 29%. It
doesn't matter how fast you are on the other 71%, if you're not just
as competent at the Ring, your lap time, and your GPLRank score, is
going to suffer, and you have not mastered gpl, overall.

--
Don Scurlock
Vancouver,B.C.
GPLRank -1.90

Come see how you rate, at the GPLRank site
http://newgplrank.schuerkamp.de/

by **Andrew MacPhers** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

You're right about the Ring having a disproportionate effect and it might
be nice to have a separate screen with results minus the Ring. But the
"serious" score should include the Ring because... well, because I used to
really *hate* it! I couldn't see why anyone would want to waste hours
learning it.

Then I got sick of seeing people I respect say how satisfying it was. Sat
down one day and after a couple of hours was lapping without too many
stupid mistakes. From there on it's always been the track I return to when
I need a serious challenge and an even more serious buzz from racing.

GPLR's best feature is it gives reluctant drivers the best excuse ever to
put in the practice time and discover why many of us would rather race a
full field at the Ring instead of Monza any day... a full field at Monza's
more fun than two drivers at the Ring though, especially when the other
guy disappears into the landscape and you're on your own for the next half
hour <g>.

Andrew McP

PS Another reason for leaving the Ring in is purely for KISS purposes.
Leave one out and then someone'll want Mexico leaving out...and
MosSport... and.... we'll end up with multiple GPLR versions and a less
cohesive benchmark. Of course I might think different if I didn't have an
8:22 <vbg>.

by **Andrew MacPhers** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

Now there's an idea! Where's Noonan when you need him? <g>

Andrew McP

by **Mark Robert** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

I wonder if one way of doing this is a type of ranking system where all
tracks would have a roughly equal ranking is to look at a sequence of laps
driven together, rather than a single hot lap for each circuit. For example
you have to drive 10% of the entire race distance (rounded to the highest
number of complete laps) as a single sitting. So you have 108 laps at the
Glen for the race which equates to 11 laps, 68 race laps at Monza equates to
7 laps, 14 laps at the Ring equates to 2 laps and so on. Because of the huge
variation in lap lengths this still isn't perfect but the differenence in
distances you drive at one circuit compared to another should be
dramatically reduced.

The obvious problem is that the player.ini file cannot be used and people
aren't going to want to consistently upload several MB of replays. However,
if the likes of Martin Granberg can write utilities like Replay Analyser
then surely somebody could write a utility for extracting lap times creating
some kind of validation checksum and this could be uploaded.

I've always felt that current hotlapping competitions favoured those drivers
who are good at qualifying, while this would favour those good at
racing/driving consistently. It would be interesting to see how various
people performed on the different types of competition.

--
Regards,
Mark.
--
"Why do I get the feeling that someday I'll be describing this to a
psychiatrist?" - Lisa Simpson.
Remove no.junk.please when replying.
--

> > The question mark in the title is because I am undecided about this...

> > Because GPLRank's handicaps work on a straight "add up the time
> > differences in seconds" basis, being 5% slower than the benchmark at
> > the Ring will make a massive difference to your handicap, far more than
> > being 5% slower at Monaco.

> > You can argue both ways here: either you think that the Ring's effect
> > is so out of proportion to the rest that it negates the point of trying
> > too hard elsewhere; or you can say that the Ring is the ultimate test
> > of GPL driving, and as such should have the lion's share of the points.

> > It seems to me that there are only two sensible ways of doing the
> > handicaps - as they are now, on a straight adding-up basis, or by
> > changing to a percentage score. The latter would give all tracks equal
> > weight, so shaving 6s off your Ring PB would be about the same as
> > shaving 1s off your Monza one, instead of six times as valuable.

> > Anyone got any views on this?

> I think you're right on this, Spa & The Ring are the lion's share of the
> handicap score. OTOH, it's equal insofar as everyone has the same
> hurdle to navigate. I'd like to adopt your viewpoint in this way:
> Total miles of the 11 courses/Your total time. The output could be an
> avg mph figure for all the circuits. Any fairer handicapping ideas out
> there, because this too may still be weighted too much towards the big
> tracks.

> --
> Chuck Kandler
> GPL F1 Handicap of +210.00 as of 6/15
> GPL F3 Handicap of +481.29 as of 6/18
> K&S Racing
> http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195

by **Gene Boni** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

Hi Don,

It's hard to argue with the GPLR handicap system when you look at it the way
you described it. Make's sense to me and as someone else has mentioned it
sure as hell gives a slowpoke like me the motivation to get out to the Ring
and practice, even Monaco!

As a matter of fact, wouldn't it be great if someone could actually put all
the tracks together. What a lap that would be!

Gene

> >The question mark in the title is because I am undecided about
> >this...

> >Because GPLRank's handicaps work on a straight "add up the time
> >differences in seconds" basis, being 5% slower than the benchmark at
> >the Ring will make a massive difference to your handicap, far more
> >than being 5% slower at Monaco.

> >You can argue both ways here: either you think that the Ring's
> >effect is so out of proportion to the rest that it negates the point
> >of trying too hard elsewhere; or you can say that the Ring is the
> >ultimate test of GPL driving, and as such should have the lion's
> >share of the points.

> >It seems to me that there are only two sensible ways of doing the
> >handicaps - as they are now, on a straight adding-up basis, or by
> >changing to a percentage score. The latter would give all tracks
> >equal weight, so shaving 6s off your Ring PB would be about the same
> >as shaving 1s off your Monza one, instead of six times as valuable.

> >Anyone got any views on this?

> Hey David. I came up with the scale that GPLRank uses. It's all it
> what your trying to get a measure of. Schubi's is a great place to
> see individual track expertise. This, on the other hand, is a gauge
> of overall mastery. Don't think of it as one track having more
> emphasis than another. Think of every kilometer of track being just
> as important as every other kilometer of track.
> Imagine all 11 tracks hooked end to end to make one long 48.484
> mile long track. You have to master this track. How can you then take
> a 14 mile section, the Ring, out of the lap, and discount it? The
> Ring is not only 29% of the lap, it's the most difficult 29%. It
> doesn't matter how fast you are on the other 71%, if you're not just
> as competent at the Ring, your lap time, and your GPLRank score, is
> going to suffer, and you have not mastered gpl, overall.

> --
> Don Scurlock
> Vancouver,B.C.
> GPLRank -1.90

> Come see how you rate, at the GPLRank site
> http://newgplrank.schuerkamp.de/

by **Woodie** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

>As a matter of fact, wouldn't it be great if someone could actually put all
>the tracks together. What a lap that would be!

I have enough trouble with setups already, thank you.

Don McCorkle

by **Don Scurlo** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

Why reinvent the wheel? You don't have to go any futher than the game itself
for a ranking system that gives equal weight to all tracks, and rewards
consistency as well as speed. It's called a "full season's championship".

Generally people that are fast hotlappers are successful racers. There's plenty
of evidence for this. A lot of the people you see high up on Schubi's hotlap
pages are the same people you see doing well in the leagues.

--
Don Scurlock
Vancouver,B.C.
GPLRank -1.90

Come see how you rate, at the GPLRank site
http://newgplrank.schuerkamp.de/

by **Roger Walke** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

There was a competion similar to this.
http://members.xoom.com/gplmad/gplmad.htm
It appears to have ended due to apathy?

The idea was to drive an offline novice race at each track and in each
chassis against the AI. I think it was good idea, but seemed to be labor
intensive. With the success of GPLRank, perhaps some one would start it
up again.

Roger

> I wonder if one way of doing this is a type of ranking system where
all
> tracks would have a roughly equal ranking is to look at a sequence of
laps
> driven together, rather than a single hot lap for each circuit. For
example
> you have to drive 10% of the entire race distance (rounded to the
highest
> number of complete laps) as a single sitting. So you have 108 laps at
the
> Glen for the race which equates to 11 laps, 68 race laps at Monza
equates to
> 7 laps, 14 laps at the Ring equates to 2 laps and so on. Because of
the huge
> variation in lap lengths this still isn't perfect but the differenence
in
> distances you drive at one circuit compared to another should be
> dramatically reduced.

> The obvious problem is that the player.ini file cannot be used and
people
> aren't going to want to consistently upload several MB of replays.
However,
> if the likes of Martin Granberg can write utilities like Replay
Analyser
> then surely somebody could write a utility for extracting lap times
creating
> some kind of validation checksum and this could be uploaded.

> I've always felt that current hotlapping competitions favoured those
drivers
> who are good at qualifying, while this would favour those good at
> racing/driving consistently. It would be interesting to see how
various
> people performed on the different types of competition.

> --
> Regards,
> Mark.
> --
> "Why do I get the feeling that someday I'll be describing this to a
> psychiatrist?" - Lisa Simpson.
> Remove no.junk.please when replying.
> --

> > > The question mark in the title is because I am undecided about
this...

> > > Because GPLRank's handicaps work on a straight "add up the time
> > > differences in seconds" basis, being 5% slower than the benchmark
at
> > > the Ring will make a massive difference to your handicap, far more
than
> > > being 5% slower at Monaco.

> > > You can argue both ways here: either you think that the Ring's
effect
> > > is so out of proportion to the rest that it negates the point of
trying
> > > too hard elsewhere; or you can say that the Ring is the ultimate
test
> > > of GPL driving, and as such should have the lion's share of the
points.

> > > It seems to me that there are only two sensible ways of doing the
> > > handicaps - as they are now, on a straight adding-up basis, or by
> > > changing to a percentage score. The latter would give all tracks
equal
> > > weight, so shaving 6s off your Ring PB would be about the same as
> > > shaving 1s off your Monza one, instead of six times as valuable.

> > > Anyone got any views on this?

> > I think you're right on this, Spa & The Ring are the lion's share of
the
> > handicap score. OTOH, it's equal insofar as everyone has the same
> > hurdle to navigate. I'd like to adopt your viewpoint in this way:
> > Total miles of the 11 courses/Your total time. The output could be
an
> > avg mph figure for all the circuits. Any fairer handicapping ideas
out
> > there, because this too may still be weighted too much towards the
big
> > tracks.

> > --
> > Chuck Kandler
> > GPL F1 Handicap of +210.00 as of 6/15
> > GPL F3 Handicap of +481.29 as of 6/18
> > K&S Racing
> > http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195

by **Mark Robert** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

> >I wonder if one way of doing this is a type of ranking system where all
> >tracks would have a roughly equal ranking is to look at a sequence of
laps
> >driven together, rather than a single hot lap for each circuit. For
example
> >you have to drive 10% of the entire race distance (rounded to the highest
> >number of complete laps) as a single sitting. So you have 108 laps at the
> >Glen for the race which equates to 11 laps, 68 race laps at Monza equates
to
> >7 laps, 14 laps at the Ring equates to 2 laps and so on. Because of the
huge
> >variation in lap lengths this still isn't perfect but the differenence in
> >distances you drive at one circuit compared to another should be
> >dramatically reduced.

> Why reinvent the wheel? You don't have to go any futher than the game
itself
> for a ranking system that gives equal weight to all tracks, and rewards
> consistency as well as speed. It's called a "full season's championship".

Ahh, but that only lets you see how well you compare to the AI, not the
"legends" that you see driving the blistering laps elsewhere. Surely the
current way of ranking on GPLRank is doing the same (reinventing the wheel)
e.g. rather than races it is simply qualifying sessions. I'm not trying to
say that one way is right or wrong, or even that one is better than the
other. They are merely different ways of testing driving skill. FWIW I
struggled to understand the current ranking concept... until I read the
explanation on the FAQ.

I agree. I bet even with a different type of ranking system most people out
there would _still_ blow my wheels off :-) However there will be
differences. Some drivers race well, some qualify well and the best in the
world do both brilliantly!

--
Regards,
Mark.
--
"Why do I get the feeling that someday I'll be describing this to a
psychiatrist?" - Lisa Simpson.
Remove no.junk.please when replying.
--

by **David Butte** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

I agree. I have no wish whatever to see the Ring taken out entirely -
I'd always want all 11 tracks in there (please don't add any of the
extra ones as not everyone has them). What I was querying was whether
one track should have such a massive effect - I think I could probably
knock 10 seconds off my Ring time in one solid weekend, whereas to
knock a *total* of 10 seconds off the other 10 tracks would take weeks.

But I accept the arguments about how the Ring is worthy of its
disproportinate effect, and on balance, I think GPLRank should probably
be kept as it is.

--
David.
"After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
really."
(Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh)

by **David Butte** » Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:00:00

<snip>

Yes, but only for the very top drivers. If your best time at Zandvoort
is a 1:31 (like me), there's no chance of getting on Schubi's site, so
there's no motivation there. Which means that GPLRank occupies almost
100% of my efforts.

I *never* suggested taking the Ring out entirely - that would be
dreadful - just reducing its somewhat excessive influence.

Yes, but the point I made was slightly different. If you're 1% off the
pace at the Ring, you'll lose hugely more points than if you're 1% off
the pace anywhere else, even though you're no worse - being 10 seconds
off the record at the Ring is great; at Monza it's not. And I would say
that far more people would be within, say, 5 seconds of the record at
Monza than at the Ring.

But I think, on balance, the current system is the best, and I've got
no real problem with keeping it, especially now it's easier to filter
the handicaps to see how you do in different chassis or on particular
tracks. GPLRank has certainly given my motivation a big boost, speaking
as someone for whom VROC is an impossibility because of a bad phone
line.
--
David.
"After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
really."
(Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh)

by **Don Scurlo** » Tue, 20 Jun 2000 04:00:00

The Ring does have a massive effect, because it's a massive track.
We could take the Ring, and chop it up into six "normal" tracks, with
six different names, that had aprox 1:30 laps times. Then no one
would complain about the Ring. And what effect would that have on
your GPLRank number? ZERO. Because the scale that GPLRank uses is
about how fast you can cover the SUM TOTAL distance of ALL the
tracks: 48.454 miles. You can look at it as one long track, or 20
short ones. It would still be about how fast you could drive that
48.454 mile distance.

--
Don Scurlock
Vancouver,B.C.
GPLRank -1.90

Come see how you rate, at the GPLRank site
http://newgplrank.schuerkamp.de/

rec.autos.simulators

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?

GPLRank - Ring given too much emphasis?