Are the GTP OLR rules accurate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter turnupdaheat
  • 5 comments
  • 2,134 views
Messages
1,820
Ireland
Ireland
Messages
turnupdaheat
There's already been a lot of discussion and differing opinion about corner cutting and driving outside the white line in the GT Academy TT and I'm not going there now. However, it was interesting to see this notice that Synraith photographed at UK finals in Brands Hatch:

31654wj.jpg

It clearly indicates that they do not consider the rumble strips as part of the track in the same way as the GTP OLR rules do according to this: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=111906.

So what would be considered clean driving by GTP would not be by the Brands Hatch authorities. This begs the question, do different tracks have different views on this and make their own rules accordingly or is it a standard rule at every track that the rumble strips are not part of the track which would mean that the GTP OLR rules are inaccurate?
 
It clearly indicates that they do not consider the rumble strips as part of the track in the same way as the GTP OLR rules do according to this: https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=111906.

So what would be considered clean driving by GTP would not be by the Brands Hatch authorities. This begs the question, do different tracks have different views on this and make their own rules accordingly or is it a standard rule at every track that the rumble strips are not part of the track which would mean that the GTP OLR rules are inaccurate?

I think the sign is aimed at trackdays, race experience days and driver training. Every competitor would have been called up to the stewards office for braking those guidelines in all the races i've ever seen at Brands.
 
I think the main gist of that sign was to preserve the work that had been done trackside and not cause wastage in terms of all the money that had been spent. To quote from the sign itself "These edges are being abused, leading to degredation in terms of safety and presentation which ultimately means further expenditure".

I don't really think the above reasoning has as much relevance to Gran Turismo Prologue or GT5 online play for obvious reasons 👍

Alex and Lucas were abusing the kerbs quite a lot during the passenger laps, as I imagine all professional race drivers do when at Brands.

All the best
Maz
 
If you read the bit above the pictures you'll see that this is in relation to 'circuit presentation' rather than drivers gaining an advantage... and we don't have to deal with the issue of presentation in the game.

Lucas was waaaay outside ther kerbs at several points during my passenger laps with him.

EDIT: and as Tracker says... if you ever watch racing at Brands almost every car runs wide on the exit of Paddock Hill and Graham Hill... they'd have to DQ the entire grid :lol:
 
The OLR rules and guidelines have been in place for a number of years, and have served us well.

"2 wheels on track, rumble strips are considered part of the track" is a very black and white statement.

Notice the picture on the right at Druids. Now, imagine you are reviewing a lap and have to determine whether it's clean or dirty. What's the rule? Wheels must be outside the white line? No more than 50% of the car over the rumble?

We establish race specific rules for corners or areas of track that may be abused. But I believe the base OLR rules and Guidelines provide a clear cut, black and white guide to the rules we expect to have followed. And that's their intent.
 
Yeah, I don't suppose that there will be any landscape artists complaining about unruly drivers ruining the edges of the tracks in GT!

Someone recently posted a video of a DTM race held at Dijon and it looked like the majority of drivers left the track at one stage or another so penalising them all would be impossible. Of course, speaking of Dijon reminds me a couple of drivers having a go at each other back in 1979. They didn't exactly stick to the racing line either and aren't we all glad of it! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kre35Pct0yA&feature=related
 
Last edited:
Back