Target Times

[John Loudon - Sponsorship Liaison]

From the draft regs-

d) To take account of new venues and wet events the following may be applied. The

decision to apply these rules is at the sole discretion of the championship coordinator.

i) If conditions at a round are such that 51% or more of the WSCC entry have times which

are 113% or more than the target times, then regulation 6(e) will apply.

ii) Where no target time exists for a 'new' venue (i.e. where no speed event records exist for

the classes defined in these regulations) or if an existing venue has been revised, then rule

6(e) will apply.

iii) If conditions at a round are such that 51% or more of the WSCC entry score more than

103% of the Target times, then rule 6(e) will apply.

[davidgh]

Annie

You are highlighting two anomalies with the new system:

Firstly, the old "percentage versus time" argument. The logic of using percentages to avoid a penalty at long (and therefore mostly better) courses has been rehearsed countless times on this forum (as well as being discussed in SSOT), and is irrefutable. Unfortunately, it seems more difficult to administer than taking off seconds  

Secondly, the arbitrary definition of a wet sprint (which is a percentage: hallelujah) and could clearly lead to exactly the situation you describe. Luckily though, It would seem that the criterion refers to over 50% of all SS driver present, so truly anomalous results should not be produced. It does however mean that really wet events will score more highly than merely slick/slippery/mildly damp events  --  but no system is perfect.

An interesting third anomaly may be produced by the perceived relative attractiveness of the target times at different events. Trawling back, and looking especially at Class E (where a few drivers have historically produced some interesting aberrations) we may look at a couple of examples.

Take Goodwood; it has never been well attended by the Class E glitterati as they are mostly northern based. The fastest time recorded in a Westfield in Class E over the last four years appears to be  the 103.2s produced by Richard Green. The fastest time by a competitor in Class E was Guy in 95.2s in 2006 (although he did produce a 91.8s lap in the same car (on radials) in 2007 after he had been promoted to Class J). This would indicate that Andy (if returning to E), Matt or a member of the Jones clan should be in that ballpark in a Westfield. As an additional reference, John Loudon has been under 97s in Class C (List 1A tyres). The committee is going to have an interesting conundrum setting a target time. Use 103s and they're going to have a very popular event with Class E competitors (despite the cost) and may see some drivers score 25 points or more unless prevented by the small print. Conversely, if the choice is 92s, the event may well be even more poorly attended than usual.

A second interesting example is Hethel. The current layout has been used only once, in 2009. The only Class E competitor was Paul P, who, by his own admission, messed up all of his timed runs royally to produce a 76.6s best (Keith Adams in Class C produced a 76.3s best). Again, being a Southern round, the Jones brothers (generally the pace-setters in E during 2009) were absent. However, Chris (who had been within a tenth or two of the Jones boys at other events all season) pedalled the  Striker round Hethel in 69.3s. Again, set 76.6s as the target and you may have a large number of people discovering Norfolk for the first time

[cast iron]

Annie

You are highlighting two anomalies with the new system:

Firstly, the old "percentage versus time" argument. The logic of using percentages to avoid a penalty at long (and therefore mostly better) courses has been rehearsed countless times on this forum (as well as being discussed in SSOT), and is irrefutable. Unfortunately, it seems more difficult to administer than taking off seconds  

Secondly, the arbitrary definition of a wet sprint (which is a percentage: hallelujah) and could clearly lead to exactly the situation you describe. Luckily though, It would seem that the criterion refers to over 50% of all SS driver present, so truly anomalous results should not be produced. It does however mean that really wet events will score more highly than merely slick/slippery/mildly damp events  --  but no system is perfect.

An interesting third anomaly may be produced by the perceived relative attractiveness of the target times at different events. Trawling back, and looking especially at Class E (where a few drivers have historically produced some interesting aberrations) we may look at a couple of examples.

Take Goodwood; it has never been well attended by the Class E glitterati as they are mostly northern based. The fastest time recorded in a Westfield in Class E over the last four years appears to be  the 103.2s produced by Richard Green. The fastest time by a competitor in Class E was Guy in 95.2s in 2006 (although he did produce a 91.8s lap in the same car (on radials) in 2007 after he had been promoted to Class J). This would indicate that Andy (if returning to E), Matt or a member of the Jones clan should be in that ballpark in a Westfield. As an additional reference, John Loudon has been under 97s in Class C (List 1A tyres). The committee is going to have an interesting conundrum setting a target time. Use 103s and they're going to have a very popular event with Class E competitors (despite the cost) and may see some drivers score 25 points or more unless prevented by the small print. Conversely, if the choice is 92s, the event may well be even more poorly attended than usual.

A second interesting example is Hethel. The current layout has been used only once, in 2009. The only Class E competitor was Paul P, who, by his own admission, messed up all of his timed runs royally to produce a 76.6s best (Keith Adams in Class C produced a 76.3s best). Again, being a Southern round, the Jones brothers (generally the pace-setters in E during 2009) were absent. However, Chris (who had been within a tenth or two of the Jones boys at other events all season) pedalled the  Striker round Hethel in 69.3s. Again, set 76.6s as the target and you may have a large number of people discovering Norfolk for the first time

well described David, its what I was trying to say, using less words  

[Terry Everall]

I might just start looking at some classH times and events!

[davidgh]

well described David, its what I was trying to say, using less words  

Verbosity my middle name  

Season's greetings Mark  

[V 8]

Verbosity my middle name  

Old loquacious lips  

[greenandmean]

With all this talk about target times just a few thoughts

1) why are we changing the results. This years champion was not decided until the last round,that not close enough for some people.

2) presumably the decision to change was made by the SSOT, so who are the SSOT?

3) were any of the present competitors (ie customers) consulted about changing.

4) if not , why not?

5) why announce these decisions so late when people have already started altering/upgrading there cars. There are howls of protest from everyone when the MSA don't give at least 2 years notice of any changes.

Before the supporters of target times start bombarding this thread with comments about people not liking change (yes I am a believer of if it aint broke don't fix it) these are genuine and reasonably questions that I think need answers before I and maybe other drivers make their decisions on next years competition.

[Mark Stanton]

Paul

I am sure if you send an email direct to Nick with your queries then an answer and clarification will follow - possibly even a mailshot so all competitors are notified not just those that frequent the boardroom      

[Mid life crisis]

No response to who are the SSOT Paul, but I agree it would be nice to know though.

[V 8]

As far as I'm aware, it's always been the Comp sec, directors of WSCC Motorsport Ltd and SS mentors, plus anyone who wants to help.

The target time issue has been discussed in detail over the years at SSOT meetings and in TQ's I believe

[Nick Algar - Competition Secretary]

Paul

I am sure if you send an email direct to Nick with your queries then an answer and clarification will follow - possibly even a mailshot so all competitors are notified not just those that frequent the boardroom      

Absolutely right Mark, I think I mentioned that in my reply and the page before.

Feelings of Deja Vu at the moment    

[Mid life crisis]

Hi Nick who are the members of the SSOT, you can reply as per Mark by mailshot if you feel it more appropriate.

Or would you prefer me to send you an email?

Regards Steve.

[Mark Stanton]

Steve, see Johns post - he knows, as he has done his bit and been involved in some previous tough decisions and aware of how much time, consideration and deliberation is udertaken

As far as I'm aware, it's always been the Comp sec, directors of WSCC Motorsport Ltd and SS mentors, plus anyone who wants to help.

     

A quick search and also speaking with your own class mentor will reveal a veritable plethora of info    

[mark.anson]

For what its worth I think this is a good move for the long term future of the championship.

I dont think Nick and the SSOT are under any illusions that there arent going to be any teething problems initially but im sure that they will be ironed out in a season or two.

As Nick says you cant please everyone all of the time and some people in certain classes will have a harder job than others.

At least those in the classes that are less well supported eg G and H wont have to worry about three competitors attending an event to be able to gain max points.

[Mid life crisis]

SSOT seems to me a bit like a secret society.

What is the problem in just saying these are the members