RASCAR: Quality of Racing

I have no ideas how to improve the quality of racing or everyone's level of awareness on the track beyond the following, and I don't like the idea. Beyond imposing artificial 9and stupid) rules about when you can/can't pass, or going to single-file restarts, this is the only thing I can think of, and it admittedly sucks (especially for the guy I'm about to describe). A race steward - someone that sits and watches the race without racing, and that awards a one-lap penalty to anyone that wrecks or spins on a restart (maybe even a lap for every car that is involved as well), and that black flags anyone for chatting beyond the auto- chat keys. The race steward's word will be final. I think that might prompt people into driving better, especially on restarts. We're not racing for points, so something else has to be done to jerk people back into line. I don't like the idea because that means someone isn't going to be able to race. However, if the restarts don't improve radically, I will fill in as the race stward for the first few races, and because I'll be babysitting instead of racing, I can almost guarantee I'll be in a bad mood. If you guys don't want me to consider this action any further, the restarts had better start improving. I haven't ironed out all the details, but if I feel the need to implement this, I will.

A good idea, John. Becoming a good racer at first sight appears to be very easy - it's by almost 100% a purely mental effort. All you have to do is, before the race, focus your mind on 'I must avoid any accident' rather than the 'I want to pass I want to pass I want to pass' that seems to reverberate through the heads of many average online racers. However, making that simple switch seems to be impossible for many. A race stewart may help them focus on the right issues. Another good way of educating drivers is to disable yellows. Yellows reward bad driving, as in addition to helping the very few innocent victims of accidents (in most accidents, even those who consider themselves victims could have helped avoid them) keep the consequences in terms of losing time moderate, they prevent all those who cause accidents from losing all chances of finishing anywhere but near-to-last. I know, many are worried about losing 'the strategic component' yellows introduce. But IMHO it would be a lot more 'strategic' to learn to drive a race without accidents, to know when to be fast and when not to, to avoid accidents and other dangers, and to stay clean and fast throughout the race. Anyway, good luck with that race stewart scheme John! Achim "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> I have no ideas how to improve the quality of racing or everyone's > level of awareness on the track beyond the following, and I don't > like the idea. Beyond imposing artificial 9and stupid) rules about > when you can/can't pass, or going to single-file restarts, this is > the only thing I can think of, and it admittedly sucks (especially > for the guy I'm about to describe). > > A race steward - someone that sits and watches the race without > racing, and that awards a one-lap penalty to anyone that wrecks or > spins on a restart (maybe even a lap for every car that is involved > as well), and that black flags anyone for chatting beyond the auto- > chat keys. The race steward's word will be final. > > I think that might prompt people into driving better, especially on > restarts. We're not racing for points, so something else has to be > done to jerk people back into line. > > I don't like the idea because that means someone isn't going to be > able to race. However, if the restarts don't improve radically, I > will fill in as the race stward for the first few races, and because > I'll be babysitting instead of racing, I can almost guarantee I'll be > in a bad mood. > > If you guys don't want me to consider this action any further, the > restarts had better start improving. I haven't ironed out all the > details, but if I feel the need to implement this, I will. > > >

In article <bg2l0l$k6tci$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > A good idea, John. Not really, but it's the only thing I can think of. > Another good way of educating drivers is to disable yellows. That's an artificial rule I was talking about. Ain't gonna happen.

In principle, I like the idea although I wouldn't fancy being the steward! I do have a couple of problems though. I cannot get my head around what the problem is with chat under yellow. Given how many we get lately, this would mean spending over an hour driving at 50 mph and not even communicating. This is not fun. I think Achim is dead right regarding yellows. They only reward poor driving at the moment and have absolutely no 'strategic effect' as there are so many of them. I know you said 'it ain't gonna happen' but my mum used to say that a lot and I learned it was worth keeping going 'cos I'd win occasionally ;) I've listened to Jan about quitting early and I agree with what he says. Unless the fun element starts to improve though, I think you'll find the numbers dropping off again. Just lately I've become tempted to take some time out myself as the fun and challenge have deteriorated markedly since the time change. I'll support any idea that puts a few more green laps into our races and strongly recommend a trial period of no yellows to get us going. Fire away ;) [snip] > A race steward - someone that sits and watches the race without > racing, and that awards a one-lap penalty to anyone that wrecks or > spins on a restart (maybe even a lap for every car that is involved > as well), and that black flags anyone for chatting beyond the auto- > chat keys. The race steward's word will be final.[snip]

What's so bad about appointing a Race Steward? Why should you think it sucks? It's done in real life and, if anyone bitches about it, just remind them that it's a step closer to simulating very thing that you blokes strive for in your simulations. Bruce. "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... >this is > the only thing I can think of, and it admittedly sucks (especially > for the guy I'm about to describe).

Should read:- ....simulating THE very thing..... Bruce.

Because the race steward will be babysitting instead of racing. I know I would rather race than make sure everyone plays nice. In article <3f25029f$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> What's so bad about appointing a Race Steward? Why should you think it > sucks? > It's done in real life and, if anyone bitches about it, just remind them > that it's a step closer to simulating very thing that you blokes strive for > in your simulations. > > Bruce. > > "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > >this is > > the only thing I can think of, and it admittedly sucks (especially > > for the guy I'm about to describe). > > >

In article <bg2su8$nt3$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > In principle, I like the idea although I wouldn't fancy being the steward! > > I do have a couple of problems though. I cannot get my head around what the > problem is with chat under yellow. Given how many we get lately, this would > mean spending over an hour driving at 50 mph and not even communicating. > This is not fun. The whole problem is that we shouldn't be cruising around under yellow so often. If people would worry more about their own driving, we wouldn't have so many cautions. > I think Achim is dead right regarding yellows. They only reward poor driving > at the moment and have absolutely no 'strategic effect' as there are so many > of them. I know you said 'it ain't gonna happen' but my mum used to say that > a lot and I learned it was worth keeping going 'cos I'd win occasionally ;) Again, our goal isn't to have more cautions, it's to have fewer. Cautions cannot be completely eliminated, but running 50% of a race under caution is bullshit.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I've listened to Jan about quitting early and I agree with what he says. > Unless the fun element starts to improve though, I think you'll find the > numbers dropping off again. Just lately I've become tempted to take some > time out myself as the fun and challenge have deteriorated markedly since > the time change. I'll support any idea that puts a few more green laps into > our races and strongly recommend a trial period of no yellows to get us > going.

No yellows is not a viable. BTW, I wanted to thank you for backing off a couple of times in the race this weekend. I was trying to mix my no-prisoners approach to driving with the knowledge that you were eventually going to pass me. I charged into each corner as normal, but planned on staying high if you stuck your nose under me and kept it there. Good racing. :)

says... The whole problem is that we shouldn't be cruising around under yellow so often. If people would worry more about their own driving, we wouldn't have so many cautions. Again, our goal isn't to have more cautions, it's to have fewer. Cautions cannot be completely eliminated, but running 50% of a race under caution is bullshit. No yellows is not a viable. BTW, I wanted to thank you for backing off a couple of times in the race this weekend. I was trying to mix my no-prisoners approach to driving with the knowledge that you were eventually going to pass me. I charged into each corner as normal, but planned on staying high if you stuck your nose under me and kept it there. Good racing. :)

i've driven two rascar races so far, finished neither of them. Went wrong on a restart myself saturday, due to a combination of impatience and concentrationloss after all that yellows. When i make a big mistake, i leave. A race stewart seems a good idea to me, it would probably make me sharper, more alert. Hope to finish a rascar race soon ;-) Guido

>What's so bad about appointing a Race Steward? Why should you think it >sucks? >It's done in real life and, if anyone bitches about it, just remind them >that it's a step closer to simulating very thing that you blokes strive for >in your simulations. NASCAR doesn't step in and say, "Rusty, you can't race this weekend. It's your turn in the barrel as race steward." No, appointing someone would not be fair, IMO. It wouldn't even work on a rotating schedule, because all drivers don't race every week. I'm thinking that maybe we have to make changes to make the races MEAN more. That way people would have more to lose if they screw up... Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

>I do have a couple of problems though. I cannot get my head around what the >problem is with chat under yellow. Given how many we get lately, this would >mean spending over an hour driving at 50 mph and not even communicating. >This is not fun. People still run into each other under yellows. IMO, that's one of the *stupidest* things to do. Yes, I've done it once, and it was stupid THEN. Chatting is a distraction for some people, and hard to do for others. While guys are busy composing their witty comebacks, they're not paying attention to what their car is doing 100%. Combine that with most of the field not being able to maintain a pace speed, and it can(and often does) cause trouble. I've been in leagues that had NO chat during the race. Curiously enough, there were no incidents under yellow... Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

>I have no ideas how to improve the quality of racing or everyone's >level of awareness on the track beyond the following, and I don't >like the idea. Beyond imposing artificial 9and stupid) rules about >when you can/can't pass, or going to single-file restarts, this is >the only thing I can think of, and it admittedly sucks (especially >for the guy I'm about to describe). I don't like the artificial rules, either. The single-file rule screws drivers who might be fast enough to compete, but end up a lap down for some reason. Single-file restarts practically eliminate the chance to get the lap pack. One driver(Ian?) got caught a lap down early last time we ran no yellows. With 20+ drivers on the lead lap, he was NEVER going to be able to get his lap back. So he dropped out. Can't say that I blame him in that case... And, the single file restart doesn't solve the problem either. As long as some drivers restart better than others, there will be opportunities to make up spots on the green. Human nature to get ahead will put us right back where we started. Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

How about gettng rid of damage, then half the cars will make it past lap 1 and get more practice. Just a thought. (-: "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> I have no ideas how to improve the quality of racing or everyone's > level of awareness on the track beyond the following, and I don't > like the idea. Beyond imposing artificial 9and stupid) rules about > when you can/can't pass, or going to single-file restarts, this is > the only thing I can think of, and it admittedly sucks (especially > for the guy I'm about to describe). > > A race steward - someone that sits and watches the race without > racing, and that awards a one-lap penalty to anyone that wrecks or > spins on a restart (maybe even a lap for every car that is involved > as well), and that black flags anyone for chatting beyond the auto- > chat keys. The race steward's word will be final. > > I think that might prompt people into driving better, especially on > restarts. We're not racing for points, so something else has to be > done to jerk people back into line. > > I don't like the idea because that means someone isn't going to be > able to race. However, if the restarts don't improve radically, I > will fill in as the race stward for the first few races, and because > I'll be babysitting instead of racing, I can almost guarantee I'll be > in a bad mood. > > If you guys don't want me to consider this action any further, the > restarts had better start improving. I haven't ironed out all the > details, but if I feel the need to implement this, I will. > > >

>Are you using Realistic damage btw? We've been using this in every league I >raced in - GPL and N2003 - it's in general beneficial to the overall self >restraint of the drivers. We started out with Realistic damage, but were losing too many people to 'random' damage. People who got hit from behind would lose engines, guys would lose gears on the pace lap, etc. So, we went to Moderate in an effort to keep more people in the race... I don't think it made a difference in driver mentality, though. The first couple of races after I switched, I didn't tell anybody.<g> Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

John Simmons <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > A race steward - someone that sits and watches the race without > racing, and that awards a one-lap penalty to anyone that wrecks or > spins on a restart (maybe even a lap for every car that is involved > as well), and that black flags anyone for chatting beyond the auto- > chat keys. The race steward's word will be final. Aside from having a remote control mechanical arm to bitch slap folks with, this is probably the best thing you can do to help keep people straight. There used to be some public servers that I ran in N4 that always had an admin or two watching over things, booting people who caused problems, etc. It worked well. They rotated the admin every race or so. Enforced practice is another way, but takes more time obviously, and someone who is willing to steward that as well... The idea is to watch how someone does during the practice session and if they are not up-to-snuff, then they are invited to leave before the race begins. The trick is you never tell the person when they will be under the scope. This ensures that the racers pretty much have to practice a majority of the session in a serious way (more seat time is GOOD)... if they go off to take a phone call, or decide that it would be fun to blast down pit road at full speed when the admin decides it is their turn to be scrutinized, well, too bad. Good luck, Gerald

"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<3f25029f$[email hidden]>... > What's so bad about appointing a Race Steward? Why should you think it > sucks? The fact that someone who would probably rather be actually racing has to do it :) Regards, Mark

"EldredP" said: > > We started out with Realistic damage, but were losing too many people to > 'random' damage. People who got hit from behind would lose engines, guyswould > lose gears on the pace lap, etc. So, we went to Moderate in an effort tokeep > more people in the race... I don't think it made a difference in driver > mentality, though. The first couple of races after I switched, I didn'ttell > anybody.<g> IMHO, going to moderate damage only made things even worse as more people would stay in the races and cause more pain... -- ed_

John Simmons wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> In article <bg2l0l$k6tci$[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] says... > >>A good idea, John. > > > Not really, but it's the only thing I can think of. > > >>Another good way of educating drivers is to disable yellows. > > > That's an artificial rule I was talking about. Ain't gonna happen. >

Not awarding point is artificial, and, IMO, encourages a careless attitude in a few driver. It only takes a few, of course. Gerry

John, you are seriously OCD (obsessive compulsive) about chatting yet there are much larger issues involved. How about respect and sportsmanship which seem to have disappeared in this group. Yeah everyone respects Eldred but thats about it ;) Your/our racing back to the yellow (even though I used to lift) also contributes to the bad attitudes. Thats the ROOT of my suspension remember?. I mean hell I slow to avoid a wreck and get passed by 5 cars. IMO we shouldnt need a no racing to the line rule cause we should all have the respect/sportsmanship to slow as required to be SAFE getting to the flag. The way it is now a yellow is nothing more than a way to gain spots. Restarts also fall into this scenario. If youre real slow and want to let the faaster guys by no problem but the way it is now its all about who can "dive pass" T1. This lack of sportsmanship is the root of the problem and needs attention more than any fn no chatting rule. Shit rolls downhill Simmons :) Mitch "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> I have no ideas how to improve the quality of racing or everyone's > level of awareness on the track beyond the following, and I don't > like the idea. Beyond imposing artificial 9and stupid) rules about > when you can/can't pass, or going to single-file restarts, this is > the only thing I can think of, and it admittedly sucks (especially > for the guy I'm about to describe). > > A race steward - someone that sits and watches the race without > racing, and that awards a one-lap penalty to anyone that wrecks or > spins on a restart (maybe even a lap for every car that is involved > as well), and that black flags anyone for chatting beyond the auto- > chat keys. The race steward's word will be final. > > I think that might prompt people into driving better, especially on > restarts. We're not racing for points, so something else has to be > done to jerk people back into line. > > I don't like the idea because that means someone isn't going to be > able to race. However, if the restarts don't improve radically, I > will fill in as the race stward for the first few races, and because > I'll be babysitting instead of racing, I can almost guarantee I'll be > in a bad mood. > > If you guys don't want me to consider this action any further, the > restarts had better start improving. I haven't ironed out all the > details, but if I feel the need to implement this, I will. > > >

I agree Ed. I also agree we need a REASON to remain in the race even if we have no chance at a victory. Points system of some sort...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> IMHO, going to moderate damage only made things even worse as more people > would stay in the races and cause more pain... > > -- > ed_ > >

EldredP wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

>>What's so bad about appointing a Race Steward? Why should you think it >>sucks? >>It's done in real life and, if anyone bitches about it, just remind them >>that it's a step closer to simulating very thing that you blokes strive for >>in your simulations. > > > NASCAR doesn't step in and say, "Rusty, you can't race this weekend. It's your > turn in the barrel as race steward." No, appointing someone would not be fair, > IMO. It wouldn't even work on a rotating schedule, because all drivers don't > race every week. I'm thinking that maybe we have to make changes to make the > races MEAN more. That way people would have more to lose if they screw up... > > Eldred

Points! Gerry PS. it's the way forward.

No yellows would get rid of all of these problems, and add an incentive not to wreck.

Mark wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<3f25029f$[email hidden]>... > >>What's so bad about appointing a Race Steward? Why should you think it >>sucks? > > > The fact that someone who would probably rather be actually racing has to do it :) > > Regards, > > Mark

Well, I bet if you asked, you could find someone who would actually LIKE to be the steward! Gerry

Joachim Trensz wrote: > Are you using Realistic damage btw? We've been using this in every league I > raced in - GPL and N2003 - it's in general beneficial to the overall self > restraint of the drivers. Well actually, we didn't use realistic damage in Legends, IIRC, which I do. ;) But thinking back to Legends, this probably prove your point anyway. Gerry

>I agree Ed. I also agree we need a REASON to remain in the race even if we >have no chance at a victory. Points system of some sort... I have considered that... Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

>IMHO, going to moderate damage only made things even worse as more people >would stay in the races and cause more pain... If there was a points system, that would ALSO prompt more people to stay in the races... Low number of drivers staying compared to higher numbers of incidents. Tough choices. Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

>John, you are seriously OCD (obsessive compulsive) about chatting yet there >are much larger issues involved. How about respect and sportsmanship which >seem to have disappeared in this group. Yeah everyone respects Eldred but >thats about it ;) Not everyone, but I guess I'll have to live with it... >Your/our racing back to the yellow (even though I used to lift) also >contributes to the bad attitudes. Thats the ROOT of my suspension >remember?. I mean hell I slow to avoid a wreck and get passed by 5 cars. Yep, been there. I've given up lots of spots before by slowing for caution, and not racing back to the line. For me, it's a little different. I'm usually near the back anyway, so lifting just puts me back where I would be speed-wise. For the faster guys, that could be killer. So, some take a chance that they won't get caught up in whatever clusterfunk occurs on the track, and floor it.

Quoted text (9 lines)

>IMO we shouldnt need a no racing to the line rule cause we should all have >the respect/sportsmanship to slow as required to be SAFE getting to the >flag. The way it is now a yellow is nothing more than a way to gain spots. >Restarts also fall into this scenario. If youre real slow and want to let >the faaster guys by no problem but the way it is now its all about who can >"dive pass" T1. > >This lack of sportsmanship is the root of the problem and needs attention >more than any fn no chatting rule. Shit rolls downhill Simmons :)

I still think the chatting is distracting, and excessive at times. If we were all on Roger Wilco, people could crack their jokes without having to stretch for a keyboard that may not be in the most efficient location. Of course, people could then be a lot more efficient at cussing out their adversary, too...<g> Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

>Points! > >Gerry > >PS. it's the way forward. Yeah, it's been suggested before. But, that also adds a level of administration that I'm not sure any of the 3 of us has time to sort out. Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

"Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:n%bVa.1378$[email hidden]... > I agree Ed. I also agree we need a REASON to remain in the race even ifwe > have no chance at a victory. Points system of some sort... Well these are rated races so there are the Papy points

"Mitch_A" said: > John, you are seriously OCD (obsessive compulsive) about chatting yetthere > are much larger issues involved. How about respect and sportsmanshipwhich

Quoted text (9 lines)

> seem to have disappeared in this group. Yeah everyone respects Eldred but > thats about it ;) > > Your/our racing back to the yellow (even though I used to lift) also > contributes to the bad attitudes. Thats the ROOT of my suspension > remember?. I mean hell I slow to avoid a wreck and get passed by 5 cars. > IMO we shouldnt need a no racing to the line rule cause we should all have > the respect/sportsmanship to slow as required to be SAFE getting to the > flag. The way it is now a yellow is nothing more than a way to gain

spots. > Restarts also fall into this scenario. If youre real slow and want to let > the faaster guys by no problem but the way it is now its all about who can > "dive pass" T1. > > This lack of sportsmanship is the root of the problem and needs attention > more than any fn no chatting rule. Shit rolls downhill Simmons :) Very well said Mitch. -- ed_

"EldredP" said: > I still think the chatting is distracting, and excessive at times. If wewere > all on Roger Wilco, people could crack their jokes without having tostretch > for a keyboard that may not be in the most efficient location. > Of course, people could then be a lot more efficient at cussing out their > adversary, too...<g> I've used "TeamSpeak 2" a lot while playing BF1942 clan matches - and that worked perfectly! TS2 was also a bit better than Wilco when we tested things. Anyone tried it with NR2003? -- ed_

"frederickson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:NhcVa.10176$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:n%bVa.1378$[email hidden]... > > I agree Ed. I also agree we need a REASON to remain in the race even if > we > > have no chance at a victory. Points system of some sort... > > Well these are rated races so there are the Papy points >

I keep that in mind while I am racing. LPI and rating are good reasons to try and race clean. I also think that a points system in RASCAR is doable without too much work. We already have results posted and awarding points to finishing order and laps led should be easy enough. Yes, I would be willing to administer that for the group. Guidelines and the server results would be all I need. Perhaps the "current" leader could *win* choice of track for off-week racing. I may consider taking over the forum. I have had some experience creating and maintaining webpages. Sean

Do we have a RW server thats commonly used Eldred? I have a hell of a time getting my point across from a keyboard. School was a long long time ago and I wasnt a real word wiz then either <g>. We had our 20 yr reunion saturday as a matter of fact. Mitch "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > I still think the chatting is distracting, and excessive at times. If we were > all on Roger Wilco, people could crack their jokes without having tostretch

Quoted text (7 lines)

> for a keyboard that may not be in the most efficient location. > Of course, people could then be a lot more efficient at cussing out their > adversary, too...<g> > > Eldred > -- > Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on

my > homepage) > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

"Mitch_A" said: > I agree Ed. I also agree we need a REASON to remain in the race even ifwe > have no chance at a victory. Points system of some sort... Well, I've had this idea in my heads for some years now but it never became much of it... I wanted to setup a league or a club if you like - where the main objective would be to have fun races and quality racing... (sound familiare?) And the drivers would be awarded for being keeping out of troubles and for getting the car home in one piece. There would be a championship and a champion... but with a little twist.. Instead or rewarding speed and preformance I would reward endurace, patience and safety. So each driver who managed to get his car home (in one piece too perhaps?) would be rewarded 1 single point - regardless of finishing posistion. And thats it. A championship ranking would be based upon points or a formula of points allocated divided by races particeipated (or something like that). The champion then being the one who finishes the most (or often) races. In case of a tie in points one could look at most races run as a secondary decider and/or no. of laps completed. The other could be used as a third time tie decider too.. The point is to reward consistence and safety - not speed and ingnorace. And yes - there would be some rules too, but no steward. There's 20+ "stewards" out there (on the track)- so I see little need for another pair of watchful eyes. Pluss, in event of problems - one can always look at the replay later... There's lots of of leagues out there that race with various sets of rules and I think very few of them run with race-stewards watching the action. People have done this for years with little or no probles so I cannot see why it would be so hard for RASCAR to make it work too. Any driver who clearly have problems obeying the rules would ofcourse get the boot - pronto. -- ed_

EldredP wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

>>Points! >> >>Gerry >> >>PS. it's the way forward. > > > Yeah, it's been suggested before. But, that also adds a level of > administration that I'm not sure any of the 3 of us has time to sort out. > > Eldred

Does replay analyzer have a point awarding mode yet? Gerry

"frederickson" said: > No yellows would get rid of all of these problems, and add an incentivenot to wreck. Fred, Lay back, close your eyes, think of a race without cautions and then imagine.. Bristol! -- ed_

"EldredP" <[email hidden]> skrev i melding news:[email hidden]... > >IMHO, going to moderate damage only made things even worse as more people > >would stay in the races and cause more pain... > > If there was a points system, that would ALSO prompt more people to stayin the > races... > Low number of drivers staying compared to higher numbers of incidents.Tough > choices. See replay to Mitch's post Eldred.. -- ed_

I really don't want a bunch of extra stupid rules for restarts either... I don't think they would work anyway. The race steward or race official is not a bad idea John, although it puts a TON of pressure on this person. Plus, if you are watching replays from a client, you might not always have the drivers in question in your replay. This person would have too make some pretty snappy judgement calls w/ very little time to do it. Plus look at all the debate that goes on anyway. What happens when someone gets loose, drifts up the track but saves it, but causes the guy behind him to check up a little and the guy behind him punts him... who is a fault then (Chicago anyone). I don't like the idea of black-flagging someone for talking under the yellow, but then again it doesn't bother me like it bothers you. Not trying to totally dismiss the idea, I think it has some merit. What I would almost like to see instead of a 1 lap penalty for violators is an EOLL penalty... anyone know if you can force this type of penalty in the admin console? This would accomplish 2 things: penalize the guy for a mistake and get him out of the pack. Brian Oster On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 06:56:38 GMT, John Simmons <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (28 lines)

>I have no ideas how to improve the quality of racing or everyone's >level of awareness on the track beyond the following, and I don't >like the idea. Beyond imposing artificial 9and stupid) rules about >when you can/can't pass, or going to single-file restarts, this is >the only thing I can think of, and it admittedly sucks (especially >for the guy I'm about to describe). > >A race steward - someone that sits and watches the race without >racing, and that awards a one-lap penalty to anyone that wrecks or >spins on a restart (maybe even a lap for every car that is involved >as well), and that black flags anyone for chatting beyond the auto- >chat keys. The race steward's word will be final. > >I think that might prompt people into driving better, especially on >restarts. We're not racing for points, so something else has to be >done to jerk people back into line. > >I don't like the idea because that means someone isn't going to be >able to race. However, if the restarts don't improve radically, I >will fill in as the race stward for the first few races, and because >I'll be babysitting instead of racing, I can almost guarantee I'll be >in a bad mood. > >If you guys don't want me to consider this action any further, the >restarts had better start improving. I haven't ironed out all the >details, but if I feel the need to implement this, I will. > >

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 09:57:38 GMT, John Simmons <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>In article <bg2l0l$k6tci$[email hidden]>, >[email hidden] says... >> A good idea, John. > >Not really, but it's the only thing I can think of. > >> Another good way of educating drivers is to disable yellows. > >That's an artificial rule I was talking about. Ain't gonna happen.

Plus it really penalizes the guy that gets punted, not necessarily the guy who is at fault. Brian Oster

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 11:25:55 GMT, John Simmons <[email hidden]> wrote: >Again, our goal isn't to have more cautions, it's to have fewer. >Cautions cannot be completely eliminated, but running 50% of a race >under caution is bullshit. > Sorta OT here, but it would be cool if there was a way to force the sim to do a quickie yellow that way we would only have 2 laps instead of 3. Brian Oster

But have we been having incidents while we cruise around under yellow? I don't seem to remember them. I say if a driver can drive under yellow and type... so be it. I can't do it. Brian Oster On 28 Jul 2003 12:11:42 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>>I do have a couple of problems though. I cannot get my head around what the >>problem is with chat under yellow. Given how many we get lately, this would >>mean spending over an hour driving at 50 mph and not even communicating. >>This is not fun. > >People still run into each other under yellows. IMO, that's one of the >*stupidest* things to do. Yes, I've done it once, and it was stupid THEN. >Chatting is a distraction for some people, and hard to do for others. While >guys are busy composing their witty comebacks, they're not paying attention to >what their car is doing 100%. Combine that with most of the field not being >able to maintain a pace speed, and it can(and often does) cause trouble. I've >been in leagues that had NO chat during the race. Curiously enough, there were >no incidents under yellow... > >Eldred

On 28 Jul 2003 12:16:46 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: >I don't like the artificial rules, either. The single-file rule screws drivers >who might be fast enough to compete, but end up a lap down for some reason. >Single-file restarts practically eliminate the chance to get the lap pack. One >driver(Ian?) got caught a lap down early last time we ran no yellows. With 20+ >drivers on the lead lap, he was NEVER going to be able to get his lap back. So >he dropped out. Can't say that I blame him in that case... Boy I sure second that point Eldred. I have made laps up on numerous occasions that just would not have happend with single file. Case in point... Pocono, I disco'd and was one lap down... first caution I got it back. Brian Oster

On 28 Jul 2003 13:33:23 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: >So, we went to Moderate in an effort to keep >more people in the race... I don't think it made a difference in driver >mentality, though. The first couple of races after I switched, I didn't tell >anybody.<g> Very true. I had not noticed at all. Brian Oster

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 12:46:14 GMT, "Mike Grandy" <[email hidden]> wrote: >How about gettng rid of damage, then half the cars will make it past lap 1 >and get more practice. Just a thought. (-: Gotta disagree there. I don't think going from realistic to moderate makes any difference, but going too no damage would really throw safe driving out the window. Brian Oster

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 12:18:05 -0400, "frederickson" <[email hidden]> wrote: >No yellows would get rid of all of these problems, and add an incentive not >to wreck. > > No, it just screws the guy that guts punted... the punter gets too keep going. Last year we ran w/ no yellows at pocono and I got punted in the first couple of laps so I left since there was no chance in hell of getting any kind of decent finish. Brian Oster

"John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (28 lines)

> I have no ideas how to improve the quality of racing or everyone's > level of awareness on the track beyond the following, and I don't > like the idea. Beyond imposing artificial 9and stupid) rules about > when you can/can't pass, or going to single-file restarts, this is > the only thing I can think of, and it admittedly sucks (especially > for the guy I'm about to describe). > > A race steward - someone that sits and watches the race without > racing, and that awards a one-lap penalty to anyone that wrecks or > spins on a restart (maybe even a lap for every car that is involved > as well), and that black flags anyone for chatting beyond the auto- > chat keys. The race steward's word will be final. > > I think that might prompt people into driving better, especially on > restarts. We're not racing for points, so something else has to be > done to jerk people back into line. > > I don't like the idea because that means someone isn't going to be > able to race. However, if the restarts don't improve radically, I > will fill in as the race stward for the first few races, and because > I'll be babysitting instead of racing, I can almost guarantee I'll be > in a bad mood. > > If you guys don't want me to consider this action any further, the > restarts had better start improving. I haven't ironed out all the > details, but if I feel the need to implement this, I will. > >

I know what you mean John. I am not a part of RASCAR, but have been around since before you guys formed it up and all I can say is that you are experiencing first hand THE major problem I see with online racing. I ran a league for a while and we got things basically under control, but more times than not, even in other leagues where I have just raced and not been in a position of authority, folks just can't control their cars. They are too dead-set on gaining every position they can in every corner on every lap. It really screws up what could be a great past time and hobby for us speed junkies IMHO. A race steward is a good and crappy idea, as you said. It may help with your woes, but shouldn't be necessary. Granted, some issues come from the code, bad collision detection and all, also some comes from lag, but a lot comes from not understanding how toactually 'race'. To a lot of online 'racers', racing is getting in the car, steering occasionally and keeping the gas matted. That is like saying all there is to playing chess is sitting down at the board and just randomly moving the pieces around, hoping that in the end you'll end up winning. They try to make a game out of something that indeed involves some strategy and skill. You can't fake either IMO, and like Harvick quipped some time ago, a lot of them run out of talent early on, like T1 Lap 1.

That was more sarcasm than anything. There really is no answer to the problem other than like was suggested. I'm not sure what the patch holds in store as I haven't had much time to look over the readme but I think the race steward is the way to go. If you are able to have cautions turned off but throw one as needed that may help. Or be able to go green without having to run the extra laps. I would suggest continous rule breakers and guys that can't admit fault be excluded from the racing so as not to ruin it for all. "Brian Oster" <bgoster@swbell**nosmap**.net> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 12:46:14 GMT, "Mike Grandy" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >How about gettng rid of damage, then half the cars will make it past lap1

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >and get more practice. Just a thought. (-: > > Gotta disagree there. I don't think going from realistic to moderate > makes any difference, but going too no damage would really throw safe > driving out the window. > > Brian Oster

Are you using Realistic damage btw? We've been using this in every league I raced in - GPL and N2003 - it's in general beneficial to the overall self restraint of the drivers. Achim "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > I don't like the artificial rules, either. The single-file rule screwsdrivers > who might be fast enough to compete, but end up a lap down for somereason. > Single-file restarts practically eliminate the chance to get the lap pack.One > driver(Ian?) got caught a lap down early last time we ran no yellows.With 20+ > drivers on the lead lap, he was NEVER going to be able to get his lapback. So > he dropped out. Can't say that I blame him in that case... > > And, the single file restart doesn't solve the problem either. As long assome > drivers restart better than others, there will be opportunities to make up > spots on the green. Human nature to get ahead will put us right backwhere we > started.

>Sounds like Rascar's not an easy case :-) > More like a nutcase...<g> Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Quoted text (7 lines)

>> Yeah, it's been suggested before. But, that also adds a level of >> administration that I'm not sure any of the 3 of us has time to sort out. >> >> Eldred > >Does replay analyzer have a point awarding mode yet? >

I don't know - I haven't bought it... Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Just a thought, Any league that wanted to settle a dispute gave each driver the chance to protest. Perhaps RASCAR could benefit from this in the future. You don't have to add any new rules, or add ons to racing etiquette. And since RASCAR already uploads the server replay, it would be even easier here. What you might consider without the admins having to do much more work than they already do now is allow any driver to protest an incident ... 1) Only deal with incidents properly protested. If no one files a protest there was no incident. 2) Handle it all on the RASCAR website, any postings here about disputes could be considered some infraction by the admins. 3) Decide in advance the possible penalties, and stay consistent with them. Really, you can narrow down penalties to 3 basic infractions 1) Over aggressive driving 2) Intentional stupidity, carelessness, driving in such a manner your experience could not handle 3) Flaming on the track. 4) Create a folder on the forum for venting, no penalties. Just bring it there and get it out of your system. Our own little punching bag so-to-speak. 5) If a driver wants to protest an incident ... in another place other than venting ... A) Within 24 hours (1 day) of the race, list the lap number, the car number(s) involved, and a short description of why you think there should be some penalty. B) 1) John, Eldred and Ed vote privately (best of 3 votes) within 3 days and post your response in the RASCAR forum from the website 2) Use the forum to put it to a public vote for 48 hours (2 days) 6) End of protest. No further discussion from the accuser or the accused (you could file those under flaming). If you use a public vote only drivers from RASCAR, including those named in the incident, should participate. This would require Ed to get the replay up a lot quicker than it is being done now but otherwise you have set guidelines for properly channeling of disputes, and taken quite a load off the admins Two other issues if I may, 1) imho it's really too easy sometimes to simply call something just 'one of them racing deals'; no one really at fault or everyone is to blame. That happens way too often, in any online racing, and it never truly satsifies anyone. If it does, then that person can't honestly care about the quality of racing online. With a proper way to protest several things can occur ... A) Admins get real time experience in what consistent judgement really entails, along with the thought process that goes into it B) The drivers, whether they win or lose a protest, will learn over time how a given incident could be dealt with in the future C) A driver who feels they are always on the losing end will know why, who, when, where, and how. Whatever experience they take from that is up to them. But for me, who wins is the overall group. 2) It's been my experience, for what it's worth, that wrecks on restarts tend to be from the same drivers over a period of time. Whether they are new at online racing, or just overly aggressive hard heads, some sort of protest system will allow those suffering from repeated wrecks as well as the ones who are causing them to have a chance to redeem themselves through healthy conversation, attitude, and a concerted effort to improve. Being that the basic focal point for RASCAR has been for novice skills, I can't think of another league that penalizes rookie mistakes by making them race with the group more often. Rather than whoopin' up on the inexperienced, once penalized in a Saturday race, one way to penalize them for further infractions would be to expect to see them in practice races on the RASCAR servers weekly. All said, it probably was only a matter of time that something in RASCAR would blow up like this. Hopefully RASCAR can gain from this incident. Any league, any of them that stick around, is really only measured by the fairness each driver thinks they receive and RASCAR does a good job. But while it may be true you can't please everyone all the time, anything more you can do to insure everyone feels they're being treated equal is time well spent. I apologize that I was the one to bring out the ugly in an online race, but I did in my heart what I felt was right at the time. Anyone who really knows ne, and knows how I race understands that just because there is no caution and no real harm was done, there's no way I could be the racer I am/was and not have something like that get under my skin. No, I'm sure I would not have gone after him, and yes, I'm still pissed about it. But too many nice guys race here and while I'll miss that, it would be even more satisfying if RASCAR actually benefited from my temporary insanity :) -- Tim White www.intracmotorsports.com

>Do we have a RW server thats commonly used Eldred? I have a hell of a time >getting my point across from a keyboard. School was a long long time ago >and I wasnt a real word wiz then either <g>. We had our 20 yr reunion >saturday as a matter of fact. Not that I know of. I've never used RW during races - never got my microphone configured properly, so I haven't tried it again. It should be easy enough to press another desktop into service as a communications server, though. 20 years?!? Damn, you're old. My 20 year won't be until...um, 2000... :-) Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

>There would be a championship and a champion... but with a little twist.. >Instead or rewarding speed and preformance I would reward endurace, patience >and safety. So each driver who managed to get his car home (in one piece >too perhaps?) would be rewarded 1 single point - regardless of finishing >posistion. And thats it. However, 1 point is not enough incentive to keep someone driving around 30mph off the pace for the remainder of the race. Maybe a bonus over and above the normal finishing position - maybe 25-35 extra points? Ask Mark Martin how he would have liked 35 more points near the end of last season...<g> Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3f25029f$[email hidden]... > What's so bad about appointing a Race Steward? Why should you think it > sucks? > It's done in real life and, if anyone bitches about it, just remind them > that it's a step closer to simulating very thing that you blokes strivefor > in your simulations. Nascar doesn't give one lap penalties for self spins. I think if everyone would remember what Rascar is about, "we're an international group of racing enthusiasts who were looking for clean sim-racing and camraderie without the formal trappings of a league. The main objective for us is to have fun, while racing cleanly in a 'gentlemanlike fashion'.." and just take it easy for a lap or two on restarts(and this includes the hotshoes) we wouldn't have quite so many yellows. I think the only thing this will do is reduce the number of competitors, especially the people that are newer to online racing. Even the guys who get paid to race screw up. Kyle

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 18:57:39 GMT, "Mike Grandy" <[email hidden]> wrote: <snip> > I would suggest continous rule breakers and guys that >can't admit fault be excluded from the racing so as not to ruin it for all. This may be the ultimate solution. I love large fields, the larger the better, but I hate spending 50% the game under caution. You don't have too be fast to be in RASCAR but you DO have to be able to control your car. If you can't figure out how to do that and repeatedly cause problems then maybe you shouldn't be racing. Brian Oster

"Gerry Aitken" wrote... > <snip> > Not awarding point is artificial, and, IMO, encourages > a careless attitude in a few driver. It only takes a > few, of course. This problem would be so easy to solve if only a few drivers caused trouble. However, we take it in turns to cock-up. <g> Jan. =---

That doesnt include the full 7 yrs I spent in HS ;) Or it's the kids that make ya mentally old (17 and 19) heh. Ya geezer <vbseg> Seriously though a RW or Teamspeak (which I havent actually used before but if Ed says its good then Im sure it is) would be a great way to communicate during the race and add to the fun to boot. "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > 20 years?!? Damn, you're old. My 20 year won't be until...um, 2000... :-) > > Eldred

In a perfect world it would be cool. A couple of things you may want to consider while making a decision ... Ask anyone who ran in the TSW 500 races how well that worked. They would sometimes have 3 people watching the race and guess what you got from their chat 90% of the time : "Looked like a racing incident. No Infraction" :( Yeah right, like that wasn't programmed in your autochat keys, thanks for nothing. Even more difficult than 3 guys watching a race at Daytona, in RASCAR your asking one guy to watch a live replay of 20+ drivers of extreme differences in skills at short tracks and road courses with no cautions! OUCH :) Here's one scenario; To a steward having to make a split second decision, what is a mistake from someone like Brian or Mike, and the same occurrence by a novice driver would not only have to be looked at two different ways, but while the steward is looking at the replay, out comes another incident, someone is chatting "I'm soory, my fault, really", then someone else goes "Okay, no problem". Who's chatting that? The guys whose wreck I now don't have to resolve? Was there another incident while I'm laboring over this replay? Seriously, I think your asking one guy to go from sitting there doing nothing to all at once possibly having to handle several bombs going off at once, trying to figure out which one is killing the most people :) Great idea in theory, but sorry, I don't know of any one person from 8 years of online racing who can handle that and feel they've helped. Tim White www.intracmotorsports.com

Isn't that sort of like saying "Hey buddy, you in front of me, yeah you slowass. Now I KNOW you don't want to wreck, so if you want to keep racing on the lead lap, wanna get out of my way?". :))) Seriously, I have Never seen an online race with no cautions where guys who are patient, and don't mind getting taken advantage of, come out on top. To say, not that your implying such, that aggressive drivers like that usually end up taking themselves out later on, is like playing the Turtle and the Hare, just waiting around for someone elses failure. Also, in a good race with just a few cautions and some long green runs, pitting and deciding what to change while on pitroad is/can be half the fun of a race. That's the goal anyway :) -- Tim White www.intracmotorsports.com "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bg41hh$jeeba$[email hidden]... > Those who get punted often could have done something to avoid the accident > as well, or at least to avoid getting tangled up in it. This is one of the > things I've learnt during all those years of online racing. > > Turning yellows off might lead to an in general more 'accident avoidance' > orientated attitude. >

Here goes pandoras box. I have seen these rules help out. Consider them if you will. I would prefer though that there be no rules except what the game provides. 1. no passing before the first turn. I actually like this one. the hotdogs hated it. 2. no racing back to line. gentlemans agreement thing. 3. single file restarts. this sux if you are a lap down. 4. two wrecks and you are out, voluntary. I didn't like this one either but it help get the wreckers off the field. I pitty the poor racer who got caught up in two wrecks of someone else's doing. Usually it was me as I tend to attract wrecks. 5. Wreck in two races in a row, and you must sit out one. I really hate this one because we all "just want to have fun" and this rule sucks. As I stated, I would prefer that the group get a heighten awareness from all theses races and everyone try harder to not make bone headed moves. Good luck on what ever rule you guys agree on. You have my complete support on whatever decision you make. grub "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> In article <bg2l0l$k6tci$[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] says... > > A good idea, John. > > Not really, but it's the only thing I can think of. > > > Another good way of educating drivers is to disable yellows. > > That's an artificial rule I was talking about. Ain't gonna happen. >

I have to agree. Moderate damage has helped me stay in a race but it would have really cut down the field. "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bg37tk$jt4e8$[email hidden]... > Are you using Realistic damage btw? We've been using this in every leagueI

Quoted text (15 lines)

> raced in - GPL and N2003 - it's in general beneficial to the overall self > restraint of the drivers. > > Achim > > > > "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > ... > > I don't like the artificial rules, either. The single-file rule screws > drivers > > who might be fast enough to compete, but end up a lap down for some > reason. > > Single-file restarts practically eliminate the chance to get the lap

pack.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> One > > driver(Ian?) got caught a lap down early last time we ran no yellows. > With 20+ > > drivers on the lead lap, he was NEVER going to be able to get his lap > back. So > > he dropped out. Can't say that I blame him in that case... > > > > And, the single file restart doesn't solve the problem either. As long

as > some > > drivers restart better than others, there will be opportunities to makeup > > spots on the green. Human nature to get ahead will put us right back > where we > > started. > >

I would love to have the wilco but never could get it to work. Even bought a headset with a mic. "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > >John, you are seriously OCD (obsessive compulsive) about chatting yetthere > >are much larger issues involved. How about respect and sportsmanshipwhich > >seem to have disappeared in this group. Yeah everyone respects Eldredbut

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >thats about it ;) > > Not everyone, but I guess I'll have to live with it... > > >Your/our racing back to the yellow (even though I used to lift) also > >contributes to the bad attitudes. Thats the ROOT of my suspension > >remember?. I mean hell I slow to avoid a wreck and get passed by 5 cars. > > Yep, been there. I've given up lots of spots before by slowing for

caution, > and not racing back to the line. For me, it's a little different. I'musually > near the back anyway, so lifting just puts me back where I would bespeed-wise. > For the faster guys, that could be killer. So, some take a chance thatthey > won't get caught up in whatever clusterfunk occurs on the track, and floorit. > > >IMO we shouldnt need a no racing to the line rule cause we should allhave > >the respect/sportsmanship to slow as required to be SAFE getting to the > >flag. The way it is now a yellow is nothing more than a way to gainspots. > >Restarts also fall into this scenario. If youre real slow and want tolet > >the faaster guys by no problem but the way it is now its all about whocan > >"dive pass" T1. > > > >This lack of sportsmanship is the root of the problem and needs attention > >more than any fn no chatting rule. Shit rolls downhill Simmons :) > > I still think the chatting is distracting, and excessive at times. If wewere > all on Roger Wilco, people could crack their jokes without having tostretch

Quoted text (7 lines)

> for a keyboard that may not be in the most efficient location. > Of course, people could then be a lot more efficient at cussing out their > adversary, too...<g> > > Eldred > -- > Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on

my > homepage) > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Maybe the dude that gets put on suspension has to be the steward until the next bonehead surfaces. That way, nobody would want to be stuck doing it. "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> I have no ideas how to improve the quality of racing or everyone's > level of awareness on the track beyond the following, and I don't > like the idea. Beyond imposing artificial 9and stupid) rules about > when you can/can't pass, or going to single-file restarts, this is > the only thing I can think of, and it admittedly sucks (especially > for the guy I'm about to describe). > > A race steward - someone that sits and watches the race without > racing, and that awards a one-lap penalty to anyone that wrecks or > spins on a restart (maybe even a lap for every car that is involved > as well), and that black flags anyone for chatting beyond the auto- > chat keys. The race steward's word will be final. > > I think that might prompt people into driving better, especially on > restarts. We're not racing for points, so something else has to be > done to jerk people back into line. > > I don't like the idea because that means someone isn't going to be > able to race. However, if the restarts don't improve radically, I > will fill in as the race stward for the first few races, and because > I'll be babysitting instead of racing, I can almost guarantee I'll be > in a bad mood. > > If you guys don't want me to consider this action any further, the > restarts had better start improving. I haven't ironed out all the > details, but if I feel the need to implement this, I will. > > >

Sounds like Rascar's not an easy case :-) Achim "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > We started out with Realistic damage, but were losing too many people to > 'random' damage. People who got hit from behind would lose engines, guyswould > lose gears on the pace lap, etc. So, we went to Moderate in an effort tokeep > more people in the race... I don't think it made a difference in driver > mentality, though. The first couple of races after I switched, I didn'ttell > anybody.<g>

"EldredP" : > > However, 1 point is not enough incentive to keep someone driving around30mph > off the pace for the remainder of the race. Maybe a bonus over and abovethe > normal finishing position - maybe 25-35 extra points? Ask Mark Martin howhe > would have liked 35 more points near the end of last season...<g> The objective isn't to have persons driving around in wrecks, but to avoid the wrecks in the first place.. Perhaps a 20 points bonus to everyone not *involved* in a wreck will do the trick? -- ed_

You guys are going about this all the wrong way. I have the rule that will solve all of these problems. Force the roof view only! (just trying to lighten the mood. You know a sim is good when it even simulates anger.) "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bg43vv$kl568$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> Tim, I think we agree that goal and reality in online racing don't always > match ;-) ...hence my suggestion. > > Achim > > > > "Tim" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:p%fVa.297920$[email hidden]... > > Isn't that sort of like saying "Hey buddy, you in front of me, yeah you > slowass. > ... > >

--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 7/24/2003

In article <3f255bf5$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > > Well, I've had this idea in my heads for some years now but it never became > much of it... When I ran IGPS, I would heavily penalize people (points) for any contact at all, especially if it was on the first lap. There were also points deductions for stupid moves that resulted in contact of any kind. On the other hand, there were also bonus points for not hitting anything or anyone, not spinning, and not leaving the racing surface. Even if warp was the cause of the contact, it was counted as contact since one or both parties were aware of the warp, and they therefore shouldn't have been racing so close. I could come up with something similar for rascar if we want to go to a points system. Another thing we did was specified that the previous week's leader had to start in the back on the next week's race so that one guys a) couldn't run away with the points, and b) had to demonstrate an equal ability to drive in traffic as he had to win a race. I still have the rules page for IGPS here, and can do a modification to fit nascar racing with it's multiple restarts.

"EldredP" wrote... > > <snip> > Yeah, it's been suggested before. But, that also adds > a level of administration that I'm not sure any of the > 3 of us has time to sort out. http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-pointscalc Jan. =---

In article <[email hidden]>, John Simmons <[email hidden]> writes >If you guys don't want me to consider this action any further, the >restarts had better start improving. I haven't ironed out all the >details, but if I feel the need to implement this, I will. > > Having read all this thread it gave me an idea about how to reduce yellows. It goes something like this: Anyone who gets involved in a wreck that causes a yellow gets 1 point Once someone has accumulated X number of points they are excluded from the next race and their points total is reset to 0. If they accumulate X number of points again then they are excluded from the next 2 races and their points total is reset back to 0. Do so again and they miss the next 3 and so on. Obviously you would have to set the X factor high enough to be only likely to mount up over a number of races, unless someone really drives like an ass. -- Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -21.77

In article <$cpkfKAW4ZJ$[email hidden]>, Peter Ives <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted text (26 lines)

>In article <[email hidden]>, >John >Simmons <[email hidden]> writes >>If you guys don't want me to consider this action any further, the >>restarts had better start improving. I haven't ironed out all the >>details, but if I feel the need to implement this, I will. >> >> > >Having read all this thread it gave me an idea about how to reduce >yellows. It goes something like this: > >Anyone who gets involved in a wreck that causes a yellow gets 1 point > >Once someone has accumulated X number of points they are excluded >from >the next race and their points total is reset to 0. > >If they accumulate X number of points again then they are excluded from >the next 2 races and their points total is reset back to 0. > >Do so again and they miss the next 3 and so on. > >Obviously you would have to set the X factor high enough to be only >likely to mount up over a number of races, unless someone really drives >like an ass.

Just to follow up on my own post... sorry :) As an afterthought: If anyone goes through a race with no incidents then their total is set back to 0. -- Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -21.77

"John Simmons" said: > When I ran IGPS, I would heavily penalize people (points) for any > contact at all, especially if it was on the first lap. IGPS... That was with GPL right? > There were also points deductions for stupid moves that resulted incontact of any kind. Good idea, but time consuming? Also what defines a stupid move? Sometimes accidents "just happens". > On the other hand, there were also bonus points for not hitting > anything or anyone, not spinning, and not leaving the racing surface. > > Even if warp was the cause of the contact, it was counted as contact > since one or both parties were aware of the warp, and they therefore > shouldn't have been racing so close. Stockcar racing is a *very* different game tho - with close door to door racing at times. I do not think a rule for warping would be fair - especially to those who got "shaky" connections... > Another thing we did was specified that the previous week's leader > had to start in the back on the next week's race so that one guys a) > couldn't run away with the points, and b) had to demonstrate an equal > ability to drive in traffic as he had to win a race. This is a good idea. I *think* the FFRL practice something similare where the 3 podium finishers of one race ain't allowed to qual for the next event they enter. > I still have the rules page for IGPS here, and can do a modification tofit nascar racing with it's multiple restarts. A few rules can do a lot. For startes I would prohibit racing back to the yellow (this is a must if you want peope to slow down when a caution flies!) and quite possibly add a 'no passing until the backstraight' rule on starts on restarts (for now). I'm quite certain the if you analyze replays - a vast majority of yellows occured within 2 laps of a restart. One also need "driver briefings" before each race. Where dirvers are told - just like big boys, what to do and what not to do at any given track. -- ed_

"Peter Ives" wrote...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> <snip> > Having read all this thread it gave me an idea about how > to reduce yellows. It goes something like this: > > Anyone who gets involved in a wreck that causes a yellow > gets 1 point > > Once someone has accumulated X number of points they are > excluded from the next race and their points total is > reset to 0. > > If they accumulate X number of points again then they are > excluded from the next 2 races and their points total is > reset back to 0. > > Do so again and they miss the next 3 and so on. > > Obviously you would have to set the X factor high enough > to be only likely to mount up over a number of races, > unless someone really drives like an ass.

ESCORS employs something called the yellow counter. If race review deems you to have caused a yellow in a non-fifty-fifty incident, your counter is increased by one, running 3 clean races decreases it by one. It normally carries a points penalty (which gets bigger if your counter is higher) and I don't remenber at what level race suspentions come in, but it's in the rules somewhere. Something to possibly think about... the site is http://escors.racesimcentral.com. In the VRL (Flemisch GPL league) we employ the Hall of Shame... brain dead moves get you points towards that total 3 if it's on the first lap, 2 if the other guy has to reset and 1 if you both drive away from it (or somesuch). I have it on Wouter Naessens' authority it sucks to lead that table (which is posted on the front page of the website). ;-)) Jan. =---

"Jan Verschueren" wrote... > "EldredP" wrote... > > > <snip> > > <snip> > > http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-pointscalc Sorry, forgot to tell you what it does. It takes results exports and produces overall standings and stats in html format. Relies on people keeping the same player name in the game, I think, but I think this is not an issue in RASCAR. And it's free. Jan. =---

Dont go off the deep end with the rules now John. All that is way over the top for this bunch me tinks. We need to make a few fundamental changes not create more controversies. "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:MPG.198f57f97cb613139899be@news-> When I ran IGPS, I would heavily penalize people (points) for any

Quoted text (22 lines)

> contact at all, especially if it was on the first lap. > > There were also points deductions for stupid moves that resulted in > contact of any kind. > > On the other hand, there were also bonus points for not hitting > anything or anyone, not spinning, and not leaving the racing surface. > > Even if warp was the cause of the contact, it was counted as contact > since one or both parties were aware of the warp, and they therefore > shouldn't have been racing so close. > > I could come up with something similar for rascar if we want to go to > a points system. > > Another thing we did was specified that the previous week's leader > had to start in the back on the next week's race so that one guys a) > couldn't run away with the points, and b) had to demonstrate an equal > ability to drive in traffic as he had to win a race. > > I still have the rules page for IGPS here, and can do a modification > to fit nascar racing with it's multiple restarts.

"grub" said: > > I have seen these rules help out. Consider them if you will. I wouldprefer > though that there be no rules except what the game provides. > > 1. no passing before the first turn. I actually like this one. the hotdogshated it. Good rule. A vast majority of our cautions happens within 2 laps of a green > 2. no racing back to line. gentlemans agreement thing. A must IMO - and the only way to get people to slow down when a caution flies. I would make it a rule though - not just an agreement. > 3. single file restarts. this sux if you are a lap down.Well it would help - but I'm not that for it.. > 4. two wrecks and you are out, voluntary. I didn't like this one eitherbut > it help get the wreckers off the field. I pitty the poor racer who got > caught up in two wrecks of someone else's doing. Usually it was me as Itend > to attract wrecks. Not sure if I like this one.. A 2 *self-caused* accidents (including spins!) and your out, sounds much better to me. > 5. Wreck in two races in a row, and you must sit out one. I really hatethis > one because we all "just want to have fun" and this rule sucks. Not quite sure if I quite like this one either. -- ed_

"grub" said: hated it. Good rule. A vast majority of our cautions happens within 2 laps of a green A must IMO - and the only way to get people to slow down when a caution flies. I would make it a rule though - not just an agreement. Well it would help - but I'm not that for it.. Not sure if I like this one.. A 2 *self-caused* accidents (including spins!) and your out, sounds much better to me. Not quite sure if I quite like this one either. -- ed_

EldredP wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> I don't like the artificial rules, either. The single-file rule > screws drivers who might be fast enough to compete, but end up a lap > down for some reason. Single-file restarts practically eliminate the > chance to get the lap pack. One driver(Ian?) got caught a lap down > early last time we ran no yellows. With 20+ drivers on the lead lap, > he was NEVER going to be able to get his lap back. So he dropped > out. Can't say that I blame him in that case... > > Eldred

Yeah, that was me :) I missed the start so was running a lap down, I'd have hung around if we had DF restarts cause I'm sure the front runners would have returned a favour and let me have the lap back ;) As it was I was a lap down on a track I don't like with no chance of getting back on the lead lap, so I quit the race. As it stands now, after a few poor showings in RASCAR I've decided to concentrate my efforts on F1C in preparation for RASF1 :) -- Ian P <email invalid due to spammers>

EldredP wrote: > > We started out with Realistic damage, but were losing too many people > to 'random' damage. People who got hit from behind would lose > engines, guys would lose gears on the pace lap, etc. > > Eldred I've only ever lost a gear once in RASCAR and that was my own fault, forgot to lift off the gas, no random breakdowns. Maybe I've just been lucky :) -- Ian P <email invalid due to spammers>

I think weve all been in a leagues with extreme rules. I raced with the self proclaimed race Nazi's (it started as the winvites on TEN) and believe me the extreme rules just destroy the fun for all but the masochistic admins. Actually John might like that bunch hehe, j/k John. "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:tkhVa.38541$[email hidden]... > ESCORS employs something called the yellow counter. If race review deemsyou > to have caused a yellow in a non-fifty-fifty incident, your counter is > increased by one, running 3 clean races decreases it by one. It normally > carries a points penalty (which gets bigger if your counter is higher) andI > don't remenber at what level race suspentions come in, but it's in therules > somewhere. Something to possibly think about... the site is > http://escors.racesimcentral.com. > > In the VRL (Flemisch GPL league) we employ the Hall of Shame... brain dead > moves get you points towards that total 3 if it's on the first lap, 2 ifthe > other guy has to reset and 1 if you both drive away from it (or somesuch).I > have it on Wouter Naessens' authority it sucks to lead that table (whichis > posted on the front page of the website). ;-)) > > Jan. > =--- > >

We are talking Rascar here right? Granted, I have not been able to race lately, but the last time I did was some of the cleanest racing I have seen. I saw a lot of give and take, and patience - more so than in some better leagues out there. Don Burnette Bruce Kennewell wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> What's so bad about appointing a Race Steward? Why should you think it > sucks? > It's done in real life and, if anyone bitches about it, just remind > them that it's a step closer to simulating very thing that you blokes > strive for in your simulations. > > Bruce. > > "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> this is >> the only thing I can think of, and it admittedly sucks (especially >> for the guy I'm about to describe).

In article <3f25a0d9$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > "John Simmons" said: > > > When I ran IGPS, I would heavily penalize people (points) for any > > contact at all, especially if it was on the first lap. > > IGPS... That was with GPL right? Yeah... :) > > There were also points deductions for stupid moves that resulted in > contact of any kind. > > Good idea, but time consuming? Also what defines a stupid move? Sometimes > accidents "just happens". Well, to be honest *I* decided what was a boneheaded move in IGPS (and yes, I awarded that penalty to myself on a couple of occasions). The rule was, I made the rules, and if you didn't like it, you could go race somewhere else. I know it sounds kinda abrupt, but I don't recall that we lost anyone over it. Governing by committee is not a good thing unless the committee is small.

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > On the other hand, there were also bonus points for not hitting > > anything or anyone, not spinning, and not leaving the racing surface. > > > > Even if warp was the cause of the contact, it was counted as contact > > since one or both parties were aware of the warp, and they therefore > > shouldn't have been racing so close. > > Stockcar racing is a *very* different game tho - with close door to door > racing at times. I do not think a rule for warping would be fair - > especially to those who got "shaky" connections...

Well, the warping is part of our problem. If people are warping or passing a warping car, they shouldn't be door-to-door, should they?

Quoted text (17 lines)

> > Another thing we did was specified that the previous week's leader > > had to start in the back on the next week's race so that one guys a) > > couldn't run away with the points, and b) had to demonstrate an equal > > ability to drive in traffic as he had to win a race. > > This is a good idea. I *think* the FFRL practice something similare where > the 3 podium finishers of one race ain't allowed to qual for the next event > they enter. > > > I still have the rules page for IGPS here, and can do a modification to > fit nascar racing with it's multiple restarts. > > A few rules can do a lot. For startes I would prohibit racing back to the > yellow (this is a must if you want peope to slow down when a caution flies!) > and quite possibly add a 'no passing until the backstraight' rule on starts > on restarts (for now). I'm quite certain the if you analyze replays - a vast > majority of yellows occured within 2 laps of a restart.

We don't seem to have nearly the problem with racing back as we do with restarting. I would not be in favor of artifical rules because there's bound to be misinterpretations. > One also need "driver briefings" before each race. Where dirvers are told - > just like big boys, what to do and what not to do at any given track. In IGPS, each race was preceded by a an email from me going over the nuances of the upcoming race. I freely admitted to not being an expert, and figured that other non-experts might get some benefit from the briefings.

Darn you gave me away <g> Achim "Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > Well actually, we didn't use realistic damage in Legends, IIRC, which I > do. ;) But thinking back to Legends, this probably prove your pointanyway.

Here's a version of the old igps rules, hastily massaged as an example of what I was talking about.

I general I disagree w/ any *racing* rule not enforced by the sim because how else are we gonna enforce it? Take away points? Suspension. Many of the rules below are not black and white and I can give special circumstances for most of them. On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:56:40 -0400, "grub" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Here goes pandoras box. > >I have seen these rules help out. Consider them if you will. I would prefer >though that there be no rules except what the game provides. > >1. no passing before the first turn. I actually like this one. the hotdogs >hated it.

Dont think it would work. What happens when a guy spins his tires in front of me... should I slam on my brakes? I think the only thing that would happen is someone would get a real bad start the field would bunch up behind him and we would all wreck in T1 or if we made it through we would all wreck in T3. >2. no racing back to line. gentlemans agreement thing. Good idea to do, bad to make a rule. At pocono a couple of cars were spinning in front of me and the yellow came out. The guy in front of me went low to avoid the accident and hit the brakes, I went high and stayed on the gas (not trying to gain positions, just trying to clear the wreck). As a result I passed the guy in front of me... should I be penalized... should I have stood on the brakes and probably been punted by the guy behind me? Use common sense people. If you haven't passed the guy in front of you for the last 40 laps, what makes you think you will get him coming back too the flag. I usually do let up and maintain my position... gotta have a car to finish the race. >3. single file restarts. this sux if you are a lap down. Yes, it does suck and anyone who gets a lap down will probably just bail since there will be little hope of getting the lap back. >4. two wrecks and you are out, voluntary. I didn't like this one either but >it help get the wreckers off the field. I pitty the poor racer who got >caught up in two wrecks of someone else's doing. Usually it was me as I tend >to attract wrecks. This could be good. Only 2 a fault incidents and you are gone. Still gonna have problems though. Say me and another guy go into a turn side by side and we touch doors and do to micro-warp he goes flying into the stands. He thinks it's my fault, I think it's his fault... its really just one of those racing deals... >5. Wreck in two races in a row, and you must sit out one. I really hate this >one because we all "just want to have fun" and this rule sucks. Yup, some variation on this could be good as long as an incident only counts against you if it is determined it was your fault. Brian Oster

"Don Burnette" wrote... > We are talking Rascar here right? Granted, I have not been able > to race lately, but the last time I did was some of the > cleanest racing I have seen. I saw a lot of give and take, and > patience - more so than in some better leagues out there. You should watch the replays... most of the time it *almost* goes right. I groan a lot watching the replays for the reviews. Jan. =---

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 23:51:32 +0200, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> wrote: > >The objective isn't to have persons driving around in wrecks, but to avoid >the wrecks in the first place.. >Perhaps a 20 points bonus to everyone not *involved* in a wreck will do the >trick? How about this: Every driver starts off his first race of the season with 3 points. After the race all incidents are reviewed. All drivers at fault for an inident receive -1 point. All drivers not involved in any incident (their fault or otherwise) recieve +1 point. Points max out at 5. A driver who reaches 0 points will have to sit out the next race after which he recieves (4 points Less the number of races forced to sit out that season). This means after you sit out 4 races you are done for the season and each time you sit out a race you have fewer chances. Any variation of this is fine, but you get the idea. This would really suck for the guy that gets to review the races and keep up with all of this, but if we need some sort of system... Brian Oster

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 00:19:59 +0200, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> >> Another thing we did was specified that the previous week's leader >> had to start in the back on the next week's race so that one guys a) >> couldn't run away with the points, and b) had to demonstrate an equal >> ability to drive in traffic as he had to win a race. > >This is a good idea. I *think* the FFRL practice something similare where >the 3 podium finishers of one race ain't allowed to qual for the next event >they enter. >

This is actually a pretty cool idea. Maybe 3 podium finishers and 3 top qualifiers... really mix things up. Brian Oster

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 23:29:59 +0100, "Ian P" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

>EldredP wrote: > >> >> We started out with Realistic damage, but were losing too many people >> to 'random' damage. People who got hit from behind would lose >> engines, guys would lose gears on the pace lap, etc. >> >> Eldred > >I've only ever lost a gear once in RASCAR and that was my own fault, forgot >to lift off the gas, no random breakdowns. Maybe I've just been lucky :)

You know I haven't really ever had any random damage either. You know how after the command to start engines is given everyone likes to do an top fuel dragster burn out? I don't do that, I also keep it off the rev limiter when going through the gears during a re-start, I wonder if that has anything to do with it. Brian Oster

> >Also, in a good race with just a few cautions and some long green runs, pitting >and deciding what to change while on pitroad is/can be half the fun of a race. Agreed. Leave the non-yellow races for papy pickup racing. Brian Oster

On the other hand, it would put more pressure on those who cause the accidents as the consequences are even more severe. This could cause a learning effect. Achim "Brian Oster" <bgoster@swbell**nosmap**.net> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > Plus it really penalizes the guy that gets punted, not necessarily the > guy who is at fault.

Yup, I think Tim is right. It might be a good idea in theory but God help the guy that has to referee the next Bristol or Martinsville race. You probably would need at least 2 guys to handle it. If we do it though I volunteer for Infinity and Homestead. I hate <sniff, sniff> to miss those races, but I will do it for the good of RASCAR if that what it takes. Brian Oster On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 20:29:10 GMT, "Tim" <[email hidden]> wrote: <snip>

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >Seriously, I think your asking one guy to go from sitting there doing nothing to >all at once possibly having to handle several bombs going off at once, trying to >figure out which one is killing the most people :) > >Great idea in theory, but sorry, I don't know of any one person from 8 years of >online racing who can handle that and feel they've helped. > > >Tim White >www.intracmotorsports.com > > >

"John Simmons" said: > We don't seem to have nearly the problem with racing back as we do > with restarting. I would not be in favor of artifical rules because > there's bound to be misinterpretations. What is so artificial about a no racing back to yellows rule? There are literally 100's of leagues thats been using this rule. I cannot see any reason why this should cause so many problems in RASCAR. In fact I wouldnt be supprised if there's more leagues out there that prohibit racing back to the line - than there are those that allow it. If you want people to slow down during cautions - this rule is a *must*. Drivers wont slow down as long as there's a good chance they'll loose posistions 'cause some other driver just floors it (or just dont see what's going on and driver faster) This has happend to me several times this season and it pisses me off every time it happends - Seery being the last one to put me down a posistion at Pocono. Infact this was indirectly the reason why I blew my engine at Daytona... Larry passed be down the BS after the yellow and that pissed me off.. so when he slowed down out of 4 I wanted to repass him... and that's when I shifted down to 2nd by error and blew the engine. So much for having a race-plan... :-/ -- ed_

Try again John.. :-) "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> skrev i melding news:[email hidden]... > Here's a version of the old igps rules, hastily massaged as an > example of what I was talking about.

"Brian Oster" said: > I general I disagree w/ any *racing* rule not enforced by the sim > because how else are we gonna enforce it? Take away points? > Suspension. If you don't follow the rules - you're out. End of story. [Now before some smart ass reply come's up... Use your head dammit! Of course there are ways to add warnings or other penalties before a one get's kicked out - of the race and/or of the invite list [read: RASCAR].

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Dont think it would work. What happens when a guy spins his tires in > front of me... should I slam on my brakes? I think the only thing > that would happen is someone would get a real bad start the field > would bunch up behind him and we would all wreck in T1 or if we made > it through we would all wreck in T3. > Good idea to do, bad to make a rule. At pocono a couple of cars were > spinning in front of me and the yellow came out. The guy in front of > me went low to avoid the accident and hit the brakes, I went high and > stayed on the gas (not trying to gain positions, just trying to clear > the wreck). As a result I passed the guy in front of me... should I > be penalized... should I have stood on the brakes and probably been > punted by the guy behind me?

OH FOR FUCKS SAKE - USE YOUR HEAD! There are, ofcourse, situations and times where rules must be broken and rule-books thrown aside. If the guy infront of you spin or screw up badly on a restart - you pass him. If you pass someone in avoidance under yellow - you let the guy re-pass you either before you take the yellow, under the caution (in the pits) or after the green if there problems. (You can be damned sure *he'll* let you know! :-)) There's 1000's of leagues that successfully run their own rules out there, so why should this be such a big problem for RASCAR? What will make people follow them? If they wanna be in RASCAR (or any other league for that matter) they will have to follow the rules or they'll history before you can say "Bobs your uncle"! -- ed_

"Brian Oster" wrote... > > <snip> > This is actually a pretty cool idea. Maybe 3 podium > finishers and 3 top qualifiers... really mix things > up. No way... one of the major problems, IMO, is having faster drivers forced to come up through the field and trying to make gains when it's the easiest and most dangerous, i.e. on or shortly after restarts. Jan. =---

In article <bg41hh$jeeba$[email hidden]>, "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> writes: >Those who get punted often could have done something to avoid the accident >as well, or at least to avoid getting tangled up in it. This is one of the >things I've learnt during all those years of online racing. I disagree. Most of the time that someone gets punted, their only crime was being slower than the guy behind them. I used to run into that all the time in GPL races. I qualify at the back, a bunch of cars fall off in the first couple of corners, and I pass them. Then I have to dodge as they rush back through the field, pissed of at anyone who DARES get in their way. Never mind the fact that *they're* the ones who screwed up in the first place. It happened to me time and time again, simply because I keep it on the track. My only alternative would be to drive off the track as the catch up, so they wouldn't be tempted to run me over to teach me a lesson. Unfortunately, that just rewards screwup behavior. Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <3f259a34$[email hidden]>, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (14 lines)

>"EldredP" : >> >> However, 1 point is not enough incentive to keep someone driving around >30mph >> off the pace for the remainder of the race. Maybe a bonus over and above >the >> normal finishing position - maybe 25-35 extra points? Ask Mark Martin how >he >> would have liked 35 more points near the end of last season...<g> > >The objective isn't to have persons driving around in wrecks, but to avoid >the wrecks in the first place.. >Perhaps a 20 points bonus to everyone not *involved* in a wreck will do the >trick?

That just benefits the people near the front more. Because if a wreck happens between two cars fighting for 6th, the top 5 cars aren't even affected by it. Those of us constantly stuck near the back have to dodge shit created as the mid-pack guys trip over each other. The leaders motor on, blissfully unaware, with LPI ratings intact... Statistics come into play here. Say there are 10 crashes in every race. If I have a 90% avoidance rate, I'm still getting involved in one wreck every race. If *every* wreck happens in front of you, you're gonna get caught in some of them. If they all happen behind you, why would that driver care? That just eliminates more competition... Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

>e had our 20 yr reunion >saturday as a matter of fact. > > >Mitch Mitch you child.....My 30th is next month. Yeppers....teeth are in the cleaners now :) Dan

In article <SyjVa.38706$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> "Brian Oster" wrote... > > > <snip> > > This is actually a pretty cool idea. Maybe 3 podium > > finishers and 3 top qualifiers... really mix things > > up. > > No way... one of the major problems, IMO, is having faster drivers forced to > come up through the field and trying to make gains when it's the easiest and > most dangerous, i.e. on or shortly after restarts. >

The whole point is to make them do what they normally don't have to do - live in the back for a few laps, and give someone else a chance to win. In IGPS, we had a couple of times where the previous weeks winner started in the back and still won the race.

Those who get punted often could have done something to avoid the accident as well, or at least to avoid getting tangled up in it. This is one of the things I've learnt during all those years of online racing. Turning yellows off might lead to an in general more 'accident avoidance' orientated attitude. Achim "Brian Oster" <bgoster@swbell**nosmap**.net> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > No, it just screws the guy that guts punted... > the punter gets too keep going.

Interesting. This group here is averaging around 20 - 30 years since high school. You marketing people should take notice. Im sure you can make some money knowing this. grub "Bamadano" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >e had our 20 yr reunion > >saturday as a matter of fact. > > > > > >Mitch > > Mitch you child.....My 30th is next month. Yeppers....teeth are in the

cleaners > now :) > Dan

Geeez, Kyle....that credo appears to have been thrown out the window after the crap that was posted here after Pocono! :) Bruce. "Kyle Roberts" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:qXeVa.17777$[email hidden]... > ..... "we're an international group of racing > enthusiasts who were looking for clean sim-racing and camraderie withoutthe > formal trappings of a league. The main objective for us is to have fun, > while racing cleanly in a 'gentlemanlike fashion'.."

In article <3f25be87$[email hidden]>, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Try again John.. :-) > > >"John Simmons" <[email hidden]> skrev i melding >news:[email hidden]... >> Here's a version of the old igps rules, hastily massaged as an >> example of what I was talking about.

I think he enjoyed that massage a bit too much...<g> Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, John Simmons <[email hidden]> writes: >> Stockcar racing is a *very* different game tho - with close door to door >> racing at times. I do not think a rule for warping would be fair - >> especially to those who got "shaky" connections... > >Well, the warping is part of our problem. If people are warping or >passing a warping car, they shouldn't be door-to-door, should they? Then when the hell do you pass? A lot of these tracks are pretty much two-groove tracks in the turns. And most of them don't have straights long enough to complete a pass before the turn. Passing is going to require side-by side racing in at least ONE turn in that situation. Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, Brian Oster <bgoster@swbell**nosmap**.net> writes: >You know I haven't really ever had any random damage either. You know >how after the command to start engines is given everyone likes to do >an top fuel dragster burn out? I honestly don't understand that habit that some have. No sense in it that *I* can see... I don't do it either, and I don't think I've ever had any random damage. Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <3f25a644$[email hidden]>, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>> 4. two wrecks and you are out, voluntary. I didn't like this one either >but >> it help get the wreckers off the field. I pitty the poor racer who got >> caught up in two wrecks of someone else's doing. Usually it was me as I >tend >> to attract wrecks. > >Not sure if I like this one.. A 2 *self-caused* accidents (including spins!) >and your out, sounds much better to me. > >> 5. Wreck in two races in a row, and you must sit out one. I really hate >this >> one because we all "just want to have fun" and this rule sucks. > >Not quite sure if I quite like this one either.

I don't like those either. I've been involved in wrecks 3 weeks in a row before - none of them of my own doing. To get crashed out of a race is bad enough. But then to get banned from the next one because of it seems over the top. Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <3f25a0d9$[email hidden]>, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>> Another thing we did was specified that the previous week's leader >> had to start in the back on the next week's race so that one guys a) >> couldn't run away with the points, and b) had to demonstrate an equal >> ability to drive in traffic as he had to win a race. > >This is a good idea. I *think* the FFRL practice something similare where >the 3 podium finishers of one race ain't allowed to qual for the next event >they enter.

I disagreed with a similar rule in MoG. I feel that it puts faster guys in the back, who now have to fight their way through the field to get to the front where they think they *should* be. Possibly running everyone over in the process. I also don't like fast guys who don't qualify on purpose. Yeah, they usually do it to give someone else a chance, or for the challenge of carving through the field. But us slow guys at the back still have to deal with their charge towards the front. Also, in NASCAR racing, the yellow flags really make starting position moot, IMO. Hell, we could skip qual altogether, and the same guys would be near the front at the checker...

Quoted text (11 lines)

>> I still have the rules page for IGPS here, and can do a modification to >fit nascar racing with it's multiple restarts. > >A few rules can do a lot. For startes I would prohibit racing back to the >yellow (this is a must if you want peope to slow down when a caution flies!) >and quite possibly add a 'no passing until the backstraight' rule on starts >on restarts (for now). I'm quite certain the if you analyze replays - a vast >majority of yellows occured within 2 laps of a restart. > >One also need "driver briefings" before each race. Where dirvers are told - >just like big boys, what to do and what not to do at any given track.

Were there any less incidents when I posted a DM message stating pace speed, pit speed, exhorted everyone to just have fun? Were there any less when John berated people that they'd better practice because the track or setup was wicked, or pit entry was difficult? Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

If you want a professional opinion, I will offer one up free of charge. Any process change, will induce variation that may or maynot be expected. Conpound that with many process changes, and you could really induce variation in the game that could be totally unpredictable. One way to mitigate this is to praeto out the top changes being considering in order of importance, inplement one change (or factor) and judge the inpact on the race. Since OFAT (one factor at a time) is really not the preferred way of problem solving, it is still commonly used in the racing industry. You may, over time find out which factor is significant and then you can implement it and then throw out the other factors (or proposed rules) so that you dont make the racing experience more trouble than its worth. Nobody likes a bunch of rules and they have a justifiable reason. Change for the sake of change pisses everybody off and change with the hopes of inpacting the outcome usually fall short without a true logical and practical scienctific approach. As I recall, last year about this time, when everyone was screaming rules, and Eldred had to take a break, we managed to make it through it. We are half way through the racing season, and we are all adjusting and attempting to improving our driving and finishes. I would chaulk this whole mess of events as common variation in the process, do absolutely nothing, and see if the driving improves. My guess is that the racing improves without any added process changes. Do you have to stomach to wait and see? Stay tuned to next weeks episode of : As the RASCAR Churns. grub "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> In article <SyjVa.38706$[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] says... > > "Brian Oster" wrote... > > > > <snip> > > > This is actually a pretty cool idea. Maybe 3 podium > > > finishers and 3 top qualifiers... really mix things > > > up. > > > > No way... one of the major problems, IMO, is having faster drivers

forced to > > come up through the field and trying to make gains when it's the easiestand

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > most dangerous, i.e. on or shortly after restarts. > > > > The whole point is to make them do what they normally don't have to > do - live in the back for a few laps, and give someone else a chance > to win. In IGPS, we had a couple of times where the previous weeks > winner started in the back and still won the race. >

If you want a professional opinion, I will offer one up free of charge. Any process change, will induce variation that may or maynot be expected. Conpound that with many process changes, and you could really induce variation in the game that could be totally unpredictable. One way to mitigate this is to praeto out the top changes being considering in order of importance, inplement one change (or factor) and judge the inpact on the race. Since OFAT (one factor at a time) is really not the preferred way of problem solving, it is still commonly used in the racing industry. You may, over time find out which factor is significant and then you can implement it and then throw out the other factors (or proposed rules) so that you dont make the racing experience more trouble than its worth. Nobody likes a bunch of rules and they have a justifiable reason. Change for the sake of change pisses everybody off and change with the hopes of inpacting the outcome usually fall short without a true logical and practical scienctific approach. As I recall, last year about this time, when everyone was screaming rules, and Eldred had to take a break, we managed to make it through it. We are half way through the racing season, and we are all adjusting and attempting to improving our driving and finishes. I would chaulk this whole mess of events as common variation in the process, do absolutely nothing, and see if the driving improves. My guess is that the racing improves without any added process changes. Do you have to stomach to wait and see? Stay tuned to next weeks episode of : As the RASCAR Churns. grub "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> In article <SyjVa.38706$[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] says... > > "Brian Oster" wrote... > > > > <snip> > > > This is actually a pretty cool idea. Maybe 3 podium > > > finishers and 3 top qualifiers... really mix things > > > up. > > > > No way... one of the major problems, IMO, is having faster drivers

forced to > > come up through the field and trying to make gains when it's the easiestand

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > most dangerous, i.e. on or shortly after restarts. > > > > The whole point is to make them do what they normally don't have to > do - live in the back for a few laps, and give someone else a chance > to win. In IGPS, we had a couple of times where the previous weeks > winner started in the back and still won the race. >

Tim, I think we agree that goal and reality in online racing don't always match ;-) ...hence my suggestion. Achim "Tim" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:p%fVa.297920$[email hidden]... > Isn't that sort of like saying "Hey buddy, you in front of me, yeah youslowass. ...

hehe <g> Achim "btgoss" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:cZgVa.222760$[email hidden]... > You guys are going about this all the wrong way. > I have the rule that will solve all of these problems. > Force the roof view only!

OK Dan you win you old bastage <g>. Eldred comes in a close 2nd :) Hell I may not even make the podium. In message <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Bamadano) wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >e had our 20 yr reunion > >saturday as a matter of fact. > > > > > >Mitch > > Mitch you child.....My 30th is next month. Yeppers....teeth are in the

cleaners > now :) > Dan-- Posted with Ink Spot (for PocketPC) from DejaVu Software, Inc. Usenet wherever you are - http://www.dejavusoftware.com/

>OK Dan you win you old bastage <g> Hey I'll wear the crown proudly! Red Farmer won a feature at a local track here last weekend at 70+ years young. Somebody take the keys if I start goin 35mph in the preferred groove with my blinker on though :) Dan

"Brian Oster" <bgoster@swbell**nosmap**.net> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 00:19:59 +0200, "Ed Solheim" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > >This is a good idea. I *think* the FFRL practice something similare where > >the 3 podium finishers of one race ain't allowed to qual for the next

event > >they enter. > > > > This is actually a pretty cool idea. Maybe 3 podium finishers and 3 > top qualifiers... really mix things up. > Thanks Brian :-) We do it to stop Greger from being on pole every damn week, and also it gives the weaker guys (like me!) a chance to get a few lead laps.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> In article <3f25be87$[email hidden]>, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> > writes: > > >Try again John.. :-) > > > > > >"John Simmons" <[email hidden]> skrev i melding > >news:[email hidden]... > >> Here's a version of the old igps rules, hastily massaged as an > >> example of what I was talking about. > > I think he enjoyed that massage a bit too much...<g> > > Eldred >

I think I should mention that I'm getting tired of trying. I was willing to help admin this because the only issues we had was keeping the roster up to date, and posting replays and results. Ed's no-passing rules are not adequate. No passing before the backstretch, no racing back to the yellow, and single-file restarts are all bogus. Why don't we all just switch to a F1 sim and call it a fuckin' day? I ran a similar ruleset to the massaged ones I posted in IGPS, and everyone seemed to be okay with it. Sure, they might appear to be over the top, but we certainly didn't have any of the freaky bullshit that RASCAR has going on right now, and everyone seemed to be fairly confident that I gave fair and impartial reviews of the few race incidents we experienced. We only had one guy that was ejected from the league because he just wouldn't follow the rules. If you ask ANY of the guys that were in IGPS, I think you'll find that while I was a bit of a fascist admin, to a man, they won't have any complaints about the actual racing we did. It's unfortunate, but it seems that people need their necks stepped on in order to stay in line and play nice. If y'all aren't serious about making it happen, let's stop batting the bullshit back and forth and not do anything at all, because I'm getting tired of discussing changes that nobody's serious about and that nobody can agree on. Hey, I have an idea! Everyone in RASCAR should put their left arm in a sling and not use it at all, and race that way for a few weeks.

>OK Dan you win you old bastage <g>. Eldred comes in a close 2nd :) Hell >I may not even make the podium. Have you forgotten about Bruce..? :-) Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Quoted text (22 lines)

>In article <[email hidden]>, >[email hidden] says... >> In article <3f25be87$[email hidden]>, "Ed Solheim" ><[email hidden]> >> writes: >> >> >Try again John.. :-) >> > >> > >> >"John Simmons" <[email hidden]> skrev i melding >> >news:[email hidden]... >> >> Here's a version of the old igps rules, hastily massaged as an >> >> example of what I was talking about. >> >> I think he enjoyed that massage a bit too much...<g> >> >> Eldred >> > >I think I should mention that I'm getting tired of trying. I was >willing to help admin this because the only issues we had was keeping >the roster up to date, and posting replays and results.

No, we were joking with you because your post didn't contain anything. In other words, the rules you were trying to post never showed up... Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > >I think I should mention that I'm getting tired of trying. I was > >willing to help admin this because the only issues we had was keeping > >the roster up to date, and posting replays and results. > > No, we were joking with you because your post didn't contain anything. In > other words, the rules you were trying to post never showed up... Oh... :-} (sheepish grin) Here's the link I omitted: http://www.paddedwall.org/rascar2003

"Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:HrmVa.395$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> OK Dan you win you old bastage <g>. Eldred comes in a close 2nd :) Hell > I may not even make the podium. > > In message <[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] (Bamadano) wrote: > > >e had our 20 yr reunion > > >saturday as a matter of fact. > > > > > > > > >Mitch > > > > Mitch you child.....My 30th is next month. Yeppers....teeth are in the > cleaners > > now :) > > Dan > -- > Posted with Ink Spot (for PocketPC) from DejaVu Software, Inc. > Usenet wherever you are - http://www.dejavusoftware.com/ >

I got all of you beat. 35th coming up next year. bluestringer

"bluestringer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:h%rVa.9077$[email hidden]... > > "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:HrmVa.395$[email hidden]... > > OK Dan you win you old bastage <g>. Eldred comes in a close 2nd :)Hell

Quoted text (23 lines)

> > I may not even make the podium. > > > > In message <[email hidden]>, > > [email hidden] (Bamadano) wrote: > > > >e had our 20 yr reunion > > > >saturday as a matter of fact. > > > > > > > > > > > >Mitch > > > > > > Mitch you child.....My 30th is next month. Yeppers....teeth are in the > > cleaners > > > now :) > > > Dan > > -- > > Posted with Ink Spot (for PocketPC) from DejaVu Software, Inc. > > Usenet wherever you are - http://www.dejavusoftware.com/ > > > > > I got all of you beat. 35th coming up next year. > > bluestringer

Well, since I'll never get near to even a podium finish in RASCAR I may as well take out my frustration in this "competition". 40th this year. Elrikk I used to be thought of as young and foolish. Now, I'm just old and stupid. ;o)

Does this mean you've left High School 40 years ago? I'm not entirely sure what type of reunion you guys are talking about? Achim "elrikk" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3isVa.19513$[email hidden]... > ... > 40th this year. > ...

I didn't race with RASCAR last year, and only a couple of races this year. I can tell you this though, I hate the FAST setup in N2003. I don't think I have heard anyone mention this as a cause for all the yellows, especially on restarts. What about trying a race with the easy setup? I know its infinately slower, but its also more stable. And with all the cars on the track, wouldn't the racing be a little better? Don't know, just a suggestion. Myself, I wouldn't want to use it on a superspeedway, because it just seems so slow, (on the other hand that may be the perfect place to try it) but again, just a thought. Mike

Here we go again... Disabling Yellows is NOT the answer. Yellows, especially in long races that require pit stops, are a major part of pit strategy and a major part of racing in general. -Larry "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bg2l0l$k6tci$[email hidden]... > A good idea, John. > > Becoming a good racer at first sight appears to be very easy - it's by > almost 100% a purely mental effort. All you have to do is, before therace,

Quoted text (8 lines)

> focus your mind on 'I must avoid any accident' rather than the 'I want to > pass I want to pass I want to pass' that seems to reverberate through the > heads of many average online racers. > > However, making that simple switch seems to be impossible for many. A race > stewart may help them focus on the right issues. > > Another good way of educating drivers is to disable yellows. Yellows

reward > bad driving, as in addition to helping the very few innocent victims of > accidents (in most accidents, even those who consider themselves victims > could have helped avoid them) keep the consequences in terms of losingtime > moderate, they prevent all those who cause accidents from losing allchances > of finishing anywhere but near-to-last. > > I know, many are worried about losing 'the strategic component' yellows > introduce. But IMHO it would be a lot more 'strategic' to learn to drive a > race without accidents, to know when to be fast and when not to, to avoid > accidents and other dangers, and to stay clean and fast throughout therace.

Quoted text (40 lines)

> > Anyway, good luck with that race stewart scheme John! > > Achim > > > > "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > I have no ideas how to improve the quality of racing or everyone's > > level of awareness on the track beyond the following, and I don't > > like the idea. Beyond imposing artificial 9and stupid) rules about > > when you can/can't pass, or going to single-file restarts, this is > > the only thing I can think of, and it admittedly sucks (especially > > for the guy I'm about to describe). > > > > A race steward - someone that sits and watches the race without > > racing, and that awards a one-lap penalty to anyone that wrecks or > > spins on a restart (maybe even a lap for every car that is involved > > as well), and that black flags anyone for chatting beyond the auto- > > chat keys. The race steward's word will be final. > > > > I think that might prompt people into driving better, especially on > > restarts. We're not racing for points, so something else has to be > > done to jerk people back into line. > > > > I don't like the idea because that means someone isn't going to be > > able to race. However, if the restarts don't improve radically, I > > will fill in as the race stward for the first few races, and because > > I'll be babysitting instead of racing, I can almost guarantee I'll be > > in a bad mood. > > > > If you guys don't want me to consider this action any further, the > > restarts had better start improving. I haven't ironed out all the > > details, but if I feel the need to implement this, I will. > > > > > > > >

Hi Eldred, there's of course a limit to what the victim can do, but in RASCAR as I remember it, drivers in general respected their opponents, and accidents usually happened because two guys made minor mistakes. One may have been the active part, the other one the passive part, but the passive could also often have helped avoid the accident, by recognising the danger in time, and then _actively_trying_ to avoid the accident. I've analysed lots of accidents in my leagues over the years, and in many cases the 'victim' could have helped avoid the accident. Often 'victims' only become victims because they don't pull back. Of course, when it gets as extreme as you describe, it becomes difficult to avoid accidents. But I've become pretty good at staying out of trouble meanwhile myself, even when I'm plowing through the backmarkers, based on those theories, so they seem to work to an extent. Achim "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > Most of the time that someone gets punted, their only crime was > being slower than the guy behind them. I used to run into that all thetime in > GPL races. I qualify at the back, a bunch of cars fall off in the firstcouple > of corners, and I pass them. Then I have to dodge as they rush backthrough > the field, pissed of at anyone who DARES get in their way. Never mind thefact > that *they're* the ones who screwed up in the first place. It happened tome > time and time again, simply because I keep it on the track. My only > alternative would be to drive off the track as the catch up, so theywouldn't > be tempted to run me over to teach me a lesson. Unfortunately, that just > rewards screwup behavior.

We also have a larger mixture of varying skill drivers this year. Last year we were fortunate to have mainly higher-echelon drivers running. This year there are drivers of all skill levels. Mixing drivers of different skill levels can't help but create a larger incident rate. In short, IT AIN'T THAT BAD folks. What we are seeing is what RASCAR was actually supposed to be. A mixture of racing talents trying to have a good time on Saturday afternoon. In a way, it has achieved what it was after. We shouldn't let the tail wag the dog or let a few particularly noisy incidents invoke unwanted changes. And, I hate to say this, but I think it _might_ be time to go back to realistic damage (except for road courses). I don't think moderate damage is helping this situation. We may see a few more random break-downs, and they piss me off as much as the next guy, but it might just be time to go back to accepting that. And like Jan said, we ALL screw-da-pooch every now and then. Larry "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:lhfVa.38297$[email hidden]... > "Gerry Aitken" wrote... > This problem would be so easy to solve if only a few drivers causedtrouble. > However, we take it in turns to cock-up. <g> > > Jan. > =--- > >

Not really. -Larry "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bg3o3c$kt1rm$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> On the other hand, it would put more pressure on those who cause the > accidents as the consequences are even more severe. This could cause a > learning effect. > > Achim > > > "Brian Oster" <bgoster@swbell**nosmap**.net> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > ... > > Plus it really penalizes the guy that gets punted, not necessarily the > > guy who is at fault. > >

Agreed... However the major issue with Random Damage prompted us to go to moderate damage. It seems to have cut way back on the SIM taking people's valves and tranny's away for no reason. Still happens, but not nearly as much as it used to. -Larry "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bg37tk$jt4e8$[email hidden]... > Are you using Realistic damage btw? We've been using this in every leagueI > raced in - GPL and N2003 - it's in general beneficial to the overall self > restraint of the drivers. > > Achim

I'm afraid I have to agree with Ed here, thus my earlier recomendation we just eat the Random Damage and go back to Realistic. I'm sure I'll get knocked out of races because of it, but I just can't help but feel things were overall better before the switch. And that's HARD for me to say because I was a big pro-ponent of the move to moderate damage. But, we don't have the same group we had last year. It's grown, and the skill levels vary considerably now. -Larry "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3f2533ef$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> "EldredP" said: > > > IMHO, going to moderate damage only made things even worse as more people > would stay in the races and cause more pain... > > -- > ed_ > >

To be honest, I like the points idea too... I think the biggest roadblock to that has been the fact that not everyone can attend every single race. I've missed only two this year, one to a down internet connection and one to a underestimated home project. I suspect the only realistic answer to this is "Oh, well", and everyone will miss races so it will probably balance out anyway :) Larry "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > >I agree Ed. I also agree we need a REASON to remain in the race even ifwe

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >have no chance at a victory. Points system of some sort... > > I have considered that... > > Eldred > -- > Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on

my > homepage) > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

For those of us who have been racing 7+ years, the easy setup would probably kill us :) -Larry "Race1530" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I didn't race with RASCAR last year, and only a couple of races this year.I > can tell you this though, I hate the FAST setup in N2003. I don't think Ihave > heard anyone mention this as a cause for all the yellows, especially on > restarts. > > What about trying a race with the easy setup? I know its infinatelyslower, > but its also more stable. And with all the cars on the track, wouldn'tthe > racing be a little better? Don't know, just a suggestion. > > Myself, I wouldn't want to use it on a superspeedway, because it justseems so > slow, (on the other hand that may be the perfect place to try it) butagain, > just a thought. > > Mike

Really? Achim "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:JUuVa.10595$5b7.1806@lakeread01...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Not really. > > -Larry > > "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:bg3o3c$kt1rm$[email hidden]... > > On the other hand, it would put more pressure on those who cause the > > accidents as the consequences are even more severe. This could cause a > > learning effect.

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 02:48:21 +0200, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> wrote: >[Now before some smart ass reply come's up... Use your head dammit! Of My whole point was *use your head dammit*. I don't need a rule to tell me that dive bombing under 3 guys at Martinsville on a Restart is a bad idea and you can probably count the number of times on John's good fingers the times I have passed someone when a caution comes out because I am using my head. But if other people can't figure out how to drive then maybe rules might help... Having said that, the only people that have to agree on a rule-set are you, John, Eldred and anybody else that donates their time to make RASCAR happen. Obviously we will all live by them, I just don't like artificial *on the track* rules. Brian

I usually blame myself for any mechanical failure, but have been wondering at times whether Papy was trying to have a random factor on purpose, as you've got a certain amount of 'random' failures in real racing as well. Achim "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:p_uVa.10596$5b7.5761@lakeread01... > Agreed... However the major issue with Random Damage prompted us to go to > moderate damage. It seems to have cut way back on the SIM taking people's > valves and tranny's away for no reason. Still happens, but not nearly as > much as it used to. > > -Larry

IMHO yellows as they occur in RASCAR most of the time have little in common with the tactical factor they pose in real Nascar races, because they occur so often that you can pretty much do whatever you want in terms of pit 'strategy' - the next yellow will occur so soon that whatever mistake you make, can be ironed out in no time at all. It doesn't matter much anymore how you use them, or how the others use them, because there are so many of them. But I was only suggesting this as a way to make drivers who have accidents pay a larger penalty for these accidents, to help motivate them to focus more on avoiding accidents. And knowing the majority of RASCARs drivers, I think for this purpose, it would work. I personally feel, btw, that real strategy is in running a full distance race without any yellows, with realistic damage, without driving aids, without getting involved in any accidents, but to finish in the top 5 against quality opponents. During such a race I need, and see, strategy to my hearts content :-) Achim "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:OOuVa.10593$5b7.9763@lakeread01...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Here we go again... > > Disabling Yellows is NOT the answer. > > Yellows, especially in long races that require pit stops, are a major part > of pit strategy and a major part of racing in general. > > -Larry

John Simmons <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] says... > > >I think I should mention that I'm getting tired of trying. I was > > >willing to help admin this because the only issues we had was keeping > > >the roster up to date, and posting replays and results. > > > > No, we were joking with you because your post didn't contain anything. In > > other words, the rules you were trying to post never showed up... > > > Oh... :-} (sheepish grin) > > Here's the link I omitted: > > http://www.paddedwall.org/rascar2003

Cool. Mind if I "massage" sections of that to fit V8 Thunder? Regards, Mark

"Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:HrmVa.395$[email hidden]... > OK Dan you win you old bastage <g>. Eldred comes in a close 2nd :) Hell > I may not even make the podium. >My 20th would have been four years ago Sean

Quoted text (7 lines)

>To be honest, I like the points idea too... > >I think the biggest roadblock to that has been the fact that not everyone >can attend every single race. I've missed only two this year, one to a down >internet connection and one to a underestimated home project. I suspect the >only realistic answer to this is "Oh, well", and everyone will miss races so >it will probably balance out anyway :)

I led the champinoship all season in one of my leagues because I drove every race, drove cleanly, and finished in the points. Problem is, this league had "scratch' results. After the scratch results were applied, I lost the championship to a guy who missed several races. Grrr... Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

I cant believe you guys are considering doing all this work, just to maintain yellows that add so much "strategy" to a race.

Quoted text (9 lines)

>I didn't race with RASCAR last year, and only a couple of races this year. I >can tell you this though, I hate the FAST setup in N2003. I don't think I >have >heard anyone mention this as a cause for all the yellows, especially on >restarts. > >What about trying a race with the easy setup? I know its infinately slower, >but its also more stable. And with all the cars on the track, wouldn't the >racing be a little better? Don't know, just a suggestion.

When I first got N2k2, I had a HELL of a time with the default setups(easy). I kept spinning, and could barely complete a lap. Someone on r.a.s. suggested the <fast> setup. I was able to drive that much better. When I got N2k3, I had the same problem with the <easy> setup. I tried the <fast>, and it was much better. Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

I'm with you on this one Fred. The 'league' seems to be changing from what it used to be. If we let any and all join (and we should) there will be loads of yellows. Just turn the damn things off and let's do some racing. John's already said no one this one and he's earned the right to do things his way. The new-style setup is not for me though (bf for saying thanks?!!?) and I'll probably look for something else for Saturday nights. Regards "frederickson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:6gxVa.50$[email hidden]... > I cant believe you guys are considering doing all this work, just to > maintain yellows that add so much "strategy" to a race. > > >

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >Oh... :-} (sheepish grin) > >Here's the link I omitted: > >http://www.paddedwall.org/rascar2003 >

Interesting. I can agree to most of them, but there were a couple that I might have issues with. I'll question in private, if you wish...<g> Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Can I get one clarification of a rule? "If you are wrecked and end up on your roof you must retire from the race". Retire? Or you must call for a tow-truck? Brian Oster On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 10:38:12 GMT, John Simmons <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>In article <[email hidden]>, >[email hidden] says... >> >I think I should mention that I'm getting tired of trying. I was >> >willing to help admin this because the only issues we had was keeping >> >the roster up to date, and posting replays and results. >> >> No, we were joking with you because your post didn't contain anything. In >> other words, the rules you were trying to post never showed up... > > >Oh... :-} (sheepish grin) > >Here's the link I omitted: > >http://www.paddedwall.org/rascar2003

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 10:04:40 -0400, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: >To be honest, I like the points idea too... Maybe what's really needed is an online sim management game ... not something super complex, but something that mimics real racing a little more closely. I mean ... why do people work hard to avoid accidents in the real world? Health and money. So maybe you start a season with a $1 million budget. After races you have to repair your car. A little wreck might cost you 10 grand, a bad one 200. So the more often you wreck, the more careful you must be in future races to just keep your season alive. Out of money, sorry game over. See you next year. Obviously this penalizes you for accidents regardless of who's at fault, but that's a very good thing! This is so obvious to me, I don't know why everyone's trying to devise systems to only penalize the person "at fault". The reason everyone (in the real world) works so hard to avoid accidents is because they are very bad things, no matter what the cause. At first look it might seem to create animosity ("you bastard, you cost me $45,000!"). But in reality it is the "badness of accidents" that eventually creates a culture of respect among racers. No one wants to be in an accident, so most show a little respect for their peers on the track in order to create a generally safer racing environment. Your thoughts?

Quoted text (10 lines)

> >Here's the link I omitted: > > > >http://www.paddedwall.org/rascar2003 > Can I get one clarification of a rule? > > "If you are wrecked and end up on your roof you must retire from the > race". > > Retire? Or you must call for a tow-truck?

Last lap at Mosport - IGPS1. Considering the rule above, both surviving this one to the flag was quite something: http://www.baldrick.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/gpl/images/aprhp5.jpg Cheers Tony --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 04/07/2003

"John Simmons" said: > Ed's no-passing rules are not adequate. No passing before the > backstretch, no racing back to the yellow, and single-file restarts > are all bogus. Why don't we all just switch to a F1 sim and call it > a fuckin' day? Oh give me a break John... The whole issue here is that *you* like to race back to the line - so you think the rules sucks - just like I like to chat during yellows (whilch *you* hate) and thus I hate your damn chatting rules.. You seemed to be more interrested in people racing in correctly painted cars, keeping their mouths shut than you do in the quality of the races. > I ran a similar ruleset to the massaged ones I posted in IGPS, and > everyone seemed to be okay with it. GPL-racing and NR2003-racing are ***miles*** apart... In GPL you'd be damned lucky if you were within 10 car-lengths of the car infront half the time - in NR2003 you're riding the bumber of the car in front for the entire race at times. Add to that the biggest difference of all; yellows - *the* very problem one's trying to "get rid of".. I am sorry - but I cannot see anything there [in those rules] that will drasticly improve the quality of the racing or reduce the number of yellows. -- ed_

"Brian Oster" said: > Having said that, the only people that have to agree on a rule-set are > you, John, Eldred and anybody else that donates their time to make > RASCAR happen. Obviously we will all live by them, I just don't like > artificial *on the track* rules. Well we all seem too far apart.... :-) Anyway, I've decided to drop out for now... I've just grown to tired of all the yellows and bitching. I plan on waiting until the patch and PWF comes out and then setup a RASCAR-BGN Euroseries. Perhaps by then you've made up a rule set I can nick :-) Anyone who want to take over and maintian the website - let me know and I'll give you the details and files.. -- ed_

"Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bg5kfo$l4c33$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Does this mean you've left High School 40 years ago? I'm not entirely sure > what type of reunion you guys are talking about? > > Achim > > > "elrikk" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:3isVa.19513$[email hidden]... > > ... > > 40th this year. > > ...

Eh ? What's that you said sonny ? / turns up volume on hearing aid. Oh, yes. Anniversary of graduation year - 1963. / returns volume to "off" - falls back to sleep. - zzzz, zzzz, zzzzz Elrikk

"Joe62" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (32 lines)

> On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 10:04:40 -0400, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >To be honest, I like the points idea too... > > Maybe what's really needed is an online sim management game ... not > something super complex, but something that mimics real racing a > little more closely. > > I mean ... why do people work hard to avoid accidents in the real > world? Health and money. > > So maybe you start a season with a $1 million budget. After races you > have to repair your car. A little wreck might cost you 10 grand, a bad > one 200. So the more often you wreck, the more careful you must be in > future races to just keep your season alive. Out of money, sorry game > over. See you next year. > > Obviously this penalizes you for accidents regardless of who's at > fault, but that's a very good thing! This is so obvious to me, I don't > know why everyone's trying to devise systems to only penalize the > person "at fault". The reason everyone (in the real world) works so > hard to avoid accidents is because they are very bad things, no matter > what the cause. > > At first look it might seem to create animosity ("you bastard, you > cost me $45,000!"). But in reality it is the "badness of accidents" > that eventually creates a culture of respect among racers. No one > wants to be in an accident, so most show a little respect for their > peers on the track in order to create a generally safer racing > environment. > > Your thoughts?

In the old dos version of "Mario Andretti Racing" that is exactly what happened. By the time I had earned enough ($500,000 ?) to set up a F1 car I was afraid to run it. ;o) Elrikk

In article <tkhVa.38541$[email hidden]>, Jan Verschueren <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted text (32 lines)

>"Peter Ives" wrote... >> <snip> >> Having read all this thread it gave me an idea about how >> to reduce yellows. It goes something like this: >> >> Anyone who gets involved in a wreck that causes a yellow >> gets 1 point >> >> Once someone has accumulated X number of points they are >> excluded from the next race and their points total is >> reset to 0. >> >> If they accumulate X number of points again then they are >> excluded from the next 2 races and their points total is >> reset back to 0. >> >> Do so again and they miss the next 3 and so on. >> >> Obviously you would have to set the X factor high enough >> to be only likely to mount up over a number of races, >> unless someone really drives like an ass. > > >ESCORS employs something called the yellow counter. If race review >deems you >to have caused a yellow in a non-fifty-fifty incident, your counter is >increased by one, running 3 clean races decreases it by one. It normally >carries a points penalty (which gets bigger if your counter is higher) and I >don't remenber at what level race suspentions come in, but it's in the rules >somewhere. Something to possibly think about... the site is >http://escors.racesimcentral.com. >

<snip> It seems to me that the trouble with some of the other new ideas is that they are just too involved with too many grey areas that are likely to cause disputes. If I recall from last year, John almost quit because there were guys on his back over his and their interpretation of certain racing incidents. I was trying to think up a simple rule structure that would generally penalise the constant offender without any heavy- handedness being required. With this additional rule, all that is required is to review all yellow flag incidents and assign points to those that are involved in those incidents. It would probably need a little tweaking before it became absolutely fair, such as in a race where there were so many yellows that several guys notched up a ban in that one race. Having not yet raced in RASCAR (but soon hoping to) I'm, of course, making some assumptions as to how frequent and how many cars get involved etc. Looking forward to finding out for real though. :) -- Peter Ives (AKA Pete Ivington) Remove ALL_STRESS before replying via email If you know what's good for you, don't listen to me :) GPLRank Joystick -50.63 Wheel -21.77

Thanks for clarifying this for me! :) Achim "elrikk" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:jUzVa.22438$[email hidden]... ...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Eh ? What's that you said sonny ? > > / turns up volume on hearing aid. > > Oh, yes. Anniversary of graduation year - 1963. > > / returns volume to "off" - falls back to sleep. - zzzz, zzzz, zzzzz > > Elrikk

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (25 lines)

> John Simmons <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > > In article <[email hidden]>, > > [email hidden] says... > > > >I think I should mention that I'm getting tired of trying. I was > > > >willing to help admin this because the only issues we had was keeping > > > >the roster up to date, and posting replays and results. > > > > > > No, we were joking with you because your post didn't contain anything. In > > > other words, the rules you were trying to post never showed up... > > > > > > Oh... :-} (sheepish grin) > > > > Here's the link I omitted: > > > > http://www.paddedwall.org/rascar2003 > > > Cool. > > Mind if I "massage" sections of that to fit V8 Thunder? > > Regards, > > Mark

They may be freely adopted by anyone without the need to pay royalties or give me credit for my obvious natural insight into what makes a good league. :) .

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > > >Oh... :-} (sheepish grin) > > > >Here's the link I omitted: > > > >http://www.paddedwall.org/rascar2003 > > > > Interesting. I can agree to most of them, but there were a couple that I might > have issues with. I'll question in private, if you wish...<g> > > Eldred >

Fine with me. :)

Remember this is a hasty adaptation of rules originally used in a GPL league, and is to be viewed as an example/sample/first draft. In article <[email hidden]>, bgoster@swbell**nosmap**.net says...

Quoted text (28 lines)

> Can I get one clarification of a rule? > > "If you are wrecked and end up on your roof you must retire from the > race". > > Retire? Or you must call for a tow-truck? > > Brian Oster > > On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 10:38:12 GMT, John Simmons <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >In article <[email hidden]>, > >[email hidden] says... > >> >I think I should mention that I'm getting tired of trying. I was > >> >willing to help admin this because the only issues we had was keeping > >> >the roster up to date, and posting replays and results. > >> > >> No, we were joking with you because your post didn't contain anything. In > >> other words, the rules you were trying to post never showed up... > > > > > >Oh... :-} (sheepish grin) > > > >Here's the link I omitted: > > > >http://www.paddedwall.org/rascar2003 > >

elrikk wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Eh ? What's that you said sonny ? > > / turns up volume on hearing aid. > > Oh, yes. Anniversary of graduation year - 1963. > > / returns volume to "off" - falls back to sleep. - zzzz, zzzz, zzzzz

Wow, another 20 years and you would have been almost as old as Bruce Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

"Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> > > elrikk wrote: > > > > Eh ? What's that you said sonny ? > > > > / turns up volume on hearing aid. > > > > Oh, yes. Anniversary of graduation year - 1963. > > > > / returns volume to "off" - falls back to sleep. - zzzz, zzzz, zzzzz > > Wow, another 20 years and you would have been almost as old as Bruce > > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy > "goyl at nettx dot no" >

I know. But at least I have a chance at a podium finish. ;o) Elrikk

In article <3f26be7a$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > "John Simmons" said: > > > Ed's no-passing rules are not adequate. No passing before the > > backstretch, no racing back to the yellow, and single-file restarts > > are all bogus. Why don't we all just switch to a F1 sim and call it > > a fuckin' day? > > Oh give me a break John... The whole issue here is that *you* like to race > back to the line - so you think the rules sucks - just like I like to chat > during yellows (whilch *you* hate) and thus I hate your damn chatting > rules.. > > You seemed to be more interrested in people racing in correctly painted > cars,

Hey, if they look good, they'll drive good. > keeping their mouths shut than you do in the quality of the races. Keeping their mouths shut keeps their eyes on the track and their hands on the wheel, thus improving the quality of the racing.

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > I ran a similar ruleset to the massaged ones I posted in IGPS, and > > everyone seemed to be okay with it. > > GPL-racing and NR2003-racing are ***miles*** apart... In GPL you'd be > damned lucky if you were within 10 car-lengths of the car infront half the > time - in NR2003 you're riding the bumber of the car in front for the entire > race at times. Add to that the biggest difference of all; yellows - *the* > very problem one's trying to "get rid of".. > > I am sorry - but I cannot see anything there [in those rules] that will > drasticly improve the quality of the racing or reduce the number of yellows.

Well, those rules povided some of the cleanest racing I've ever seen online (in any genre), so I guess I must have done something right. If everyone wants to race for points, then it's a league. If points aren't an issue, and if there's no other viable way to ensure clean racing, then we just revert back to the status quo and hope it gets better. Remember, I don't (and didn't) want any more rules than are enforced by the sim itself. I don't (and didn't) want to run another league because it's a pain in the fuckin ass, and takes up A LOT of time beyond the racing part. But if everyone wants a real league, then by god, it will be a real league, and they'll have to decide whether or not they want to cowboy up and toe the line in order to achieve better racing, or whimp out and depend on the anarchy of pickup racing for their racing fix. If things do turn more serious, the admins will decide the basic ruleset, and everyone currently registered will have a chance to change *our* minds about any issue they choose. I realize that some of the stuff I've already posted is a little excessive, but believe me - it makes for better racing. One thing I want to do is fully exploit the mods that are about to be released and race trucks, cup, AND trans am races. I heard that someone's doing a Nascar Legends mod as well, so that would hopefully be included in our schedule.

That's a great idea, but it's a massive undertaking. You have to also account for practice, qualifying and warmup sessions. Are we talking about just car damage, or are we talking tires and gas, not to mention race team payrolls? And what transportation costs? R&D, and testing? Ambulance rides cost money too, and so does an extended visit to the hospital. In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (32 lines)

> On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 10:04:40 -0400, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >To be honest, I like the points idea too... > > Maybe what's really needed is an online sim management game ... not > something super complex, but something that mimics real racing a > little more closely. > > I mean ... why do people work hard to avoid accidents in the real > world? Health and money. > > So maybe you start a season with a $1 million budget. After races you > have to repair your car. A little wreck might cost you 10 grand, a bad > one 200. So the more often you wreck, the more careful you must be in > future races to just keep your season alive. Out of money, sorry game > over. See you next year. > > Obviously this penalizes you for accidents regardless of who's at > fault, but that's a very good thing! This is so obvious to me, I don't > know why everyone's trying to devise systems to only penalize the > person "at fault". The reason everyone (in the real world) works so > hard to avoid accidents is because they are very bad things, no matter > what the cause. > > At first look it might seem to create animosity ("you bastard, you > cost me $45,000!"). But in reality it is the "badness of accidents" > that eventually creates a culture of respect among racers. No one > wants to be in an accident, so most show a little respect for their > peers on the track in order to create a generally safer racing > environment. > > Your thoughts?

We're not trying to completely eliminate yellows because that's simply an unreasonable expectation. However, if we can cut the number of cautions even in half, that would be a good thing. Don't worry Neil, saying thanks (while it irritates the hell outa me) probably wouldn't get you a black flag. :) In article <bg68rg$mnk$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> I'm with you on this one Fred. The 'league' seems to be changing from what > it used to be. If we let any and all join (and we should) there will be > loads of yellows. Just turn the damn things off and let's do some racing. > > John's already said no one this one and he's earned the right to do things > his way. The new-style setup is not for me though (bf for saying thanks?!!?) > and I'll probably look for something else for Saturday nights. > > Regards > > "frederickson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:6gxVa.50$[email hidden]... > > I cant believe you guys are considering doing all this work, just to > > maintain yellows that add so much "strategy" to a race. > > > > > > > > >

"John Simmons" wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Remember, I don't (and didn't) want any more rules than are enforced > by the sim itself. I don't (and didn't) want to run another league > because it's a pain in the fuckin ass, and takes up A LOT of time > beyond the racing part. But if everyone wants a real league, then by > god, it will be a real league, and they'll have to decide whether or > not they want to cowboy up and toe the line in order to achieve > better racing, or whimp out and depend on the anarchy of pickup > racing for their racing fix.

I think Rascar is somewhere in between the friendly club night get together and a proper league. That is where the potential problem lies. The level of seriousness appears to have outgrown its club night concept. In which case you have to recognise it and set some serious rules. Evolving them from race to race will just frustrate. With most leagues everyone knows where they stood from the outset and it is crystal clear. IGPS is just an example. If you aren't happy with the rules you don't sign up. The difficulty with Rascar as with any league born from an existing group is determining authority, but it would seem pretty clear that the originator is John. He can't speak for RAS and as long as we don't expect him to at least it will be clear. Running by committee just isn't ever going to work IMHO. Cheers Tony --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 04/07/2003

John Simmons wrote: > > One thing I want to do is fully exploit the mods that are about to be > released and race trucks, cup, AND trans am races. I heard that > someone's doing a Nascar Legends mod as well, so that would hopefully > be included in our schedule. "someone" ??? We're reduced to being "someone" now ??? I expected more from you Simmons...... Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

In article <Y3CVa.3538$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (27 lines)

> "John Simmons" wrote: > > > Remember, I don't (and didn't) want any more rules than are enforced > > by the sim itself. I don't (and didn't) want to run another league > > because it's a pain in the fuckin ass, and takes up A LOT of time > > beyond the racing part. But if everyone wants a real league, then by > > god, it will be a real league, and they'll have to decide whether or > > not they want to cowboy up and toe the line in order to achieve > > better racing, or whimp out and depend on the anarchy of pickup > > racing for their racing fix. > > I think Rascar is somewhere in between the friendly club night get together > and a proper league. That is where the potential problem lies. The level of > seriousness appears to have outgrown its club night concept. In which case > you have to recognise it and set some serious rules. Evolving them from > race to race will just frustrate. > > With most leagues everyone knows where they stood from the outset and it is > crystal clear. IGPS is just an example. If you aren't happy with the rules > you don't sign up. > > The difficulty with Rascar as with any league born from an existing group > is determining authority, but it would seem pretty clear that the > originator is John. He can't speak for RAS and as long as we don't expect > him to at least it will be clear. Running by committee just isn't ever > going to work IMHO. >

As much as I'd like to take the blame for inventing RASCAR and being in charge, I can't. It was a group of people, and the only thing that really makes it go is Eldred providing the server. Eldred is ultimately the one in charge, and I'm just a stormtrooper. The only purpose I server is to verbally abuse people in the newsgroup and to maintain my anal retentive paintjob requirements. :)

On 29 Jul 2003 02:44:28 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: No involvement from me, but tuppenceworth just the same. :-) >I disagreed with a similar rule in MoG. I feel that it puts faster guys in the >back, who now have to fight their way through the field to get to the front >where they think they *should* be. Possibly running everyone over in the >process. Need to think "root cause analysis" - these guys are fast so want to be at the front, but there are reasons they will take risks to pass you ; - No respect for other (slower) drivers? - No penalty for crashing? - No reason to drive conservatively? If the old "kudos" is a race win, why drive at the back to pick up points? Heck if there's no damage, and I've spun and am at the back, doesn't it pay off for me to wreck, cause a yellow, and catch up all the fast guys at the front? >I also don't like fast guys who don't qualify on purpose. Yeah, they >usually do it to give someone else a chance, or for the challenge of carving >through the field. But us slow guys at the back still have to deal with their >charge towards the front. I really don't think that should be any problem with the right motivation / punishment. Some drivers race like that normally, and in GPL testing I raced many times Mike, Doug, Alison etc with _no_ problems, wheel-to-wheel, lap-after-lap. There was definitely 100% respect for any other driver. Without that there needs to be an incentive (or to cool the excitement of winning), and if the incentive is individual race wins (no points to concentrate for non-winners) then there should be some way to "name and shame" any wrecker. >Were there any less incidents when I posted a DM message stating pace speed, >pit speed, exhorted everyone to just have fun? Were there any less when John >berated people that they'd better practice because the track or setup was >wicked, or pit entry was difficult? Probably not :-) Respect online is based upon laptimes, and if a faster driver is behind a slower one there is an expectation of getting past, perhaps from both sides - one fights too much, the other resists too much (or overdrives). I've been on both sides :-) I also know there are situation and people I would never do that with, and need to import that situation to RASCAR. John

In article <[email hidden]>, search-apnic-not- [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > > John Simmons wrote: > > > > One thing I want to do is fully exploit the mods that are about to be > > released and race trucks, cup, AND trans am races. I heard that > > someone's doing a Nascar Legends mod as well, so that would hopefully > > be included in our schedule. > > "someone" ??? > > We're reduced to being "someone" now ??? > > I expected more from you Simmons...... > >

Okay. Who told Goy he was allowed to make a comment? :) Seriously, I'm old and I forgot who was doing it. When's it gonna be ready? Why haven't you released it yet? I've checked more than a dozen times today, and it's not available for download yet. What's the freakin' hold up? Oh wait - I know - the wests must be involved. Oh GRAT!! We'll never see this mod!!!

John Simmons wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Okay. Who told Goy he was allowed to make a comment? :) > > Seriously, I'm old and I forgot who was doing it. When's it gonna be > ready? Why haven't you released it yet? I've checked more than a > dozen times today, and it's not available for download yet. What's > the freakin' hold up? Oh wait - I know - the wests must be involved. > Oh GRAT!! We'll never see this mod!!!

Thx.....much better, I can accept whining and complaining, but reducing us to some nameless "someone", that I won't accept Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

"Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:pUuVa.10594$5b7.7995@lakeread01... > We also have a larger mixture of varying skill drivers this year. Lastyear > we were fortunate to have mainly higher-echelon drivers running. Thisyear > there are drivers of all skill levels. Mixing drivers of different skill > levels can't help but create a larger incident rate. > > In short, IT AIN'T THAT BAD folks. What we are seeing is what RASCAR was > actually supposed to be. A mixture of racing talents trying to have agood

Quoted text (15 lines)

> time on Saturday afternoon. In a way, it has achieved what it was after. > > We shouldn't let the tail wag the dog or let a few particularly noisy > incidents invoke unwanted changes. > > And, I hate to say this, but I think it _might_ be time to go back to > realistic damage (except for road courses). I don't think moderate damage > is helping this situation. We may see a few more random break-downs, and > they piss me off as much as the next guy, but it might just be time to go > back to accepting that. > > And like Jan said, we ALL screw-da-pooch every now and then. > > Larry >

I agree Larry, it ain't bad. I have only been racing online for about 2 months. I started out jumping into any server that I could get in, mostly superspeedway stuff. It was terrible, wrecks galore. I then saw a post by jsimmons on the Sierra forums about RASCAR. I said that's what I'm looking for, so I joined up. I think it's great, and way better than the open servers, and I'm learning. Don't change it. bluestringer

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 21:50:13 GMT, John Simmons <[email hidden]> wrote: >That's a great idea, but it's a massive undertaking. You have to also >account for practice, qualifying and warmup sessions. Are we talking >about just car damage, or are we talking tires and gas, not to >mention race team payrolls? And what transportation costs? R&D, and >testing? Ambulance rides cost money too, and so does an extended >visit to the hospital. That's all possible, but the main point is vehicle damage during races ... people currently have little incentive not to crash.

"John Simmons" said: > > Keeping their mouths shut keeps their eyes on the track and their > hands on the wheel, thus improving the quality of the racing. And how many people chat during *racing* 99.9% of everything being said during a race is said while behind a pacecar or after some guy spun off - whilch probably triggered a yellow in the first place. Get rid of the yellows - and you'll get rid of the b.s. chatting. > > I am sorry - but I cannot see anything there [in those rules] that will > > drasticly improve the quality of the racing or reduce the number ofyellows.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Well, those rules povided some of the cleanest racing I've ever seen > online (in any genre), so I guess I must have done something right. > If everyone wants to race for points, then it's a league. If points > aren't an issue, and if there's no other viable way to ensure clean > racing, then we just revert back to the status quo and hope it gets > better.

Couldn't it very well be that it was the combination of driver's that provided the high quality? You must also remember that a lot of the drivers in RASCAR are "first-times" - while most of the drivers that got into GPL were long time sim-races that put alot of time into GPL. And again, GPL and road-course racing is very different from stockcars on ovals. -- eD_

In article <[email hidden]>, Joe62 <[email hidden]> writes: >That's all possible, but the main point is vehicle damage during races >... people currently have little incentive not to crash. My primary incentive is that I don't want to screw up anyone else's race. I've even driven off the track in GPL to avoid punting someone. I've also done it in NASCAR, but the damage to my car is more severe. And you know what? I'll keep doing it. I would *hate* to think that I messed up someone else's day because *I* f'd up. I'd rather take myself out of the race first. I would hope that should be MOST drivers' thinking. Maybe I'm just the only one who thinks that way... :-( Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <Y3CVa.3538$[email hidden]>, "Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> writes: >I think Rascar is somewhere in between the friendly club night get together >and a proper league. That is where the potential problem lies. The level of >seriousness appears to have outgrown its club night concept. In which case >you have to recognise it and set some serious rules. Evolving them from >race to race will just frustrate. Agreed. That's why I'm *seriously* considering making it more 'official'. That way people can see what they have to do, and make their decision. Yeah, we may lose a few drivers, and I'd truly be sorry to see them go, but clearly *something* has to change. This crap is ridiculous. It might be more motivating for me if I was actually in contention. But to drive around at the back of the field all day, THEN listen to people arguing all week? Where's the incentive for me? It just isn't worth it... :-( Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

[email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: >I've even driven off the track in GPL to avoid punting someone. I've also done >it in NASCAR, but the damage to my car is more severe. And you know what? >I'll keep doing it. I would *hate* to think that I messed up someone else's >day because *I* f'd up. I'd rather take myself out of the race first. I would >hope that should be MOST drivers' thinking. >Maybe I'm just the only one who thinks that way... :-( I think it probably is most driver's thinking, amoung serious races. The question is, what is "most"? If it's 90%, you'll get a fairly clean race. If it's only 50%, it'll be a disaster. Joe62

EldredP wrote: > kept spinning, and could barely complete a lap. Someone on r.a.s. suggested > the <fast> setup. I was able to drive that much better. When I got N2k3, I > had the same problem with the <easy> setup. I tried the <fast>, and it was > much better. See? Even after all I've read on r.a.s. the past year, I just *knew* there'd come a day when Eldred wouldn't know how to be slow anymore! ;) Regards, Rudy (GPLRank -1.6)

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Race1530) wrote: > I hate the FAST setup in N2003 To satisfy my curiosity I tried Pocono yesterday with the fast setup... and wasn't surprised there were so many yellows. That setup seems very tail-happy under anything but the gentlest braking. Of course the real question may be what was I doing braking, but that's why I prefer to sit in the stands ;-) Andrew McP

"John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > > > Cool. > > > > Mind if I "massage" sections of that to fit V8 Thunder? > > > > Regards, > > > > Mark > > They may be freely adopted by anyone without the need to pay > royalties or give me credit for my obvious natural insight into what > makes a good league. :)

:) Mark

Very well said John. Achim "John Wallace" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> ...there are reasons they will take risks to pass you ; > > - No respect for other (slower) drivers? > - No penalty for crashing? > - No reason to drive conservatively? If the old "kudos" is a race win, > why drive at the back to pick up points? > > Heck if there's no damage, and I've spun and am at the back, doesn't > it pay off for me to wreck, cause a yellow, and catch up all the fast > guys at the front?

...

On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 01:50:28 +0200, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >Couldn't it very well be that it was the combination of driver's that >provided the high quality? > >You must also remember that a lot of the drivers in RASCAR are >"first-times" - while most of the drivers that got into GPL were long time >sim-races that put alot of time into GPL. And again, GPL and road-course >racing is very different from stockcars on ovals.

I think that is a big part of the problem. Not only are there some drivers who are maybe just starting to race on-line, we have not raced with them enough to get used to their racing style so that we know what to expect. BTW, I do think that the number of really good drivers has significantly increased over last year and there are a lot more drivers that can run well and win. A lot of guys that finished mid-pack last year are now running up front contending for the win. Brian Oster

[email hidden] (EldredP) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, Joe62 > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >That's all possible, but the main point is vehicle damage during races > >... people currently have little incentive not to crash. > > My primary incentive is that I don't want to screw up anyone else's race. > > I've even driven off the track in GPL to avoid punting someone. I've also done > it in NASCAR, but the damage to my car is more severe. And you know what? > I'll keep doing it. I would *hate* to think that I messed up someone else's > day because *I* f'd up. I'd rather take myself out of the race first. I would > hope that should be MOST drivers' thinking. > Maybe I'm just the only one who thinks that way... :-(

I know where you're coming from. I am just *mortified* if I mess up and ruin someone elses run. Are we just old-fashioned or what? Little things like respect and treating others as you would have them treat you. Dated concepts in this anonymous virtual society? By the same token, I get irked to almost John Simmons levels (:op) when the courtesy isn't returned. That's my failing. Real world hurt and cost? On Sunday, this is what happenned to "our" driver (see the rear wing). A privateer on a very restricted budget had a tyre go down on him... http://ascar.motorsportforum.com/forums/attachment.php?s=991fb3990cf6cfd7b6276a01a748d870&attachmentid=4085 Regards, Mark http://www.v8thunder.com/

Old fashioned... well, at least Larry doesn't seem to believe guys like you exist... Achim "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote in messagenews:<[email hidden]>... > > In article <[email hidden]>, Joe62 > > <[email hidden]> writes:... > > My primary incentive is that I don't want to screw up anyone else'srace. > > > > I've even driven off the track in GPL to avoid punting someone. I'vealso done > > ... > > ...I would *hate* to think that I messed up someone else's > > day because *I* f'd up. I'd rather take myself out of the race first.I would

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > hope that should be MOST drivers' thinking. > > Maybe I'm just the only one who thinks that way... :-( > > I know where you're coming from. I am just *mortified* if I mess up > and ruin someone elses run. > > Are we just old-fashioned or what? Little things like respect and > treating others as you would have them treat you. Dated concepts in > this anonymous virtual society?

...

>>Maybe I'm just the only one who thinks that way... :-( > >I think it probably is most driver's thinking, amoung serious races. >The question is, what is "most"? If it's 90%, you'll get a fairly >clean race. If it's only 50%, it'll be a disaster. We're also harmed by the medium we run on. Throwing the car off the track in GPL only affects that one driver. Doing the same thing in N2K3 causes a caution... Eldred -- Help find missing child: Tatianna Ashley Chillcutt from Michigan(info on my homepage) Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.