Driving etiquette: "dive bombing" corners.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Blank_Redge
  • 145 comments
  • 37,195 views
What a silly comment. if the opportunity presents itself then you're going take it. people being soft and petty if you ask me.
Petty? Look who's talking, with all the petty insults and comeback attempts.
 
i dont see a problem with dive bombing. it shows the drivers willing to push and risk his race. that to me is a true hard racer. if you know what i mean.
if you use your common sense then it can work. see a gap go for it. if you hit someone, least then you know not to be silly and try it again in that way. just find a way to do it safely and it can be done.
But GT6 isn't real life is it. I'm a respectful clean racer on GT6 but I'm hard racer at the same time. if you are not willing to take a chance on a gap then your never going to get any were.
Im sure many real hard racers would not try and risk themselves, others and there cars in real life.

Bolded parts, if you hit someone and spoil there race in GT6 its ok, if you are a respectful clean racer on GT6 why would you take chances that could ruin yours and another drivers fun ?.

It's called taking a chance, like any racing driver will tell you.

Well your soft then.
What a silly comment. if the opportunity presents itself then you're going take it. people being soft and petty if you ask me.

Taking a chance that has a minimal chance of spoiling another drivers fun yes. By taking a chance that could ruin another drivers race no.


Have you seen the view F1 drivers get? They can't see much looking sideways because of the head protection of the cockpit. They can't see much past their side mirrors, and with a helmet on you literally do have tunnel vision.

Yes, literally (note literally) you have tunnel vision with a helmet but even in a F1 car you still have movement of your head and eyes and some peripheral view. The TV screen does not move, its set to your central view.


I agree you haven't got a great view in sims, but there are quite a few race cars that, while wearing a helmet, you've got even poorer vision. Also a lot of racing games have a warning indicator when someone is close by, so you can see them in your mirror and then they disappear and an indicator appears on your side, you're not exactly blind.

There is a lot of extra features in a sim to help, but same as changing the view not everyone is going to use them so for most people not allowing dive bombing keeps it clean and fun. Its worked well so far in the races i've joined.
 
Holy crap people!! Can we get a little more civil?? Sorry for playing e-cop :(

There's been some great discussion in this thread, I've learned a lot from reading it....but the personals on the last couple of pages are distracting :(.

Let's all remember that we're playing a video game here...if someone likes to play the game slightly different than you, that's not a big deal.

Anyways....


After reading the many interesting perspectives here, I've come to my own conclusion regarding divebombing.

Basically, I now see a divebomb as a move which is impossible to pull off without making contact. For me, that's always a no-no.

However, anything shy of contact is technically "fair game". The biggest determining factor in how aggressively I drive is WHO I am racing with.
-if I'm partaking in friendly racing with people I am unfamiliar with, then I will usually not attempt late dives. Even though I may pull the move off, I find it better to avoid an overly aggressive move which may cause drama, or change the mood of the room for successive races.
-if I'm with friends (again, depends which friends), then sometimes anything and everything (to a limit) goes. If we wreck, we laugh, learn, and move on.

The third scenario, one that I have yet to actually partake in myself, is if you are racing in a league. In this case, I would say it is up to the league organizer to define what is acceptable. From there, it is up to each driver to tiptoe the line provided by the organizer. Any incidents which seem questionable can be reviewed, and action taken if necessary.


Some people have made the point "you shouldn't drive more aggressively than you would in real life", while others have provided the counter point "it's a video game, it's no big deal if there's contact/wrecks".

Both of these are valid points, and valid approaches to playing the game. Some people use video games to mimick real life as accurately as possible, while others use them as a seperate platform to deviate from reality. Neither are wrong.
 
Last edited:
The S.N.A.I.L. OLR

07: Corner Rights:

A:
When approaching the turn/apex of turn, the car which "holds" the inner side of turn has entrance-advantage and other driver(s) must refrain from endangering him by his actions.

B:
You must establish substantial overlap with the car ahead before they reach the corner’s turn-in point to have the right to drive up their inside, or to expect them to leave inside room for you. At least the front of your car should be up to the driver’s position in the ahead car. The ahead driver has the right to be fully committed to the racing line of their choice without any interference if there was no substantial overlap before he turned in.

C:
If sufficient overlap is established before the turn-in point, then the behind driver has the right to sufficient side room. The ahead driver must also leave sufficient side room for the behind driver. This means that each driver has a right to their respective "line", or side of the track, right up to the exit point. Neither driver should squeeze the other toward the inside or outside of the corner during the apex or exit.

D:
The turn in point is the point at which the leading car begins their turn into the corner–this may vary from the point at which you turn into the corner.

E:
If an ahead driver has clearly made an error to warrant a passing move, a behind driver may attack their position, with due caution and care, regardless of whether there was any pre-existing overlap. However, the overtaking driver must still avoid contact. Small errors by the ahead driver may not necessarily justify a passing move. The ahead driver getting a bit out of shape at times doesn’t give you an automatic right to force a pass. You still have to pass safely and without undue contact.

F:
Drivers are expected to set buttons up for side views as "I didn't see you" is not an excuse if you collide with another driver when racing.

The Good Racecraft Guide

Defending & Attacking
An experienced racer will take whatever line he feels necessary into any given corner in order to defend & maintain his place, he is entitled to do so as he has track position over the pursuing driver, remember that the fastest line is not always the winning one. It is the other chaps job to force him into an error, whilst still driving cleanly of course, or wait for one to occur naturally & then take advantage of it, albeit in the proper fashion. An inexperienced racer will, in his endless optimism, tend to stuff it up the inside at every unavailable opportunity when trying to pass, imagining he is driving well but making far too much contact & causing many unnecessary incidents. Also, some lacking in good racecraft tend to drive right up to & into the driver in front, as they do not have the common sense to adjust their throttle & braking to account for following in the slipstream of another. You will notice that drivers who have good racecraft make very little contact when following & passing others on track.




The following is from another forum -ukgpl.com. Same message, with pictures.

Corner Rights

If you watch the odd few GPL drivers in action you might think the rule for corner rights goes something like, " Whatever piece of ground I can barge my way into I have the right to ". Well, ... not so. There is actually an etiquette for corner rights. It's not just for GPL, or racing sims, but is basically the same for every level of real-world motor racing - from Formula Ford to Formula 1 and everything in between. " What ! ", you say. " You mean I don't have the right to throw my car into any gap I see ? ". Actually no, you don't - and if you raced in any real-world competition the way you may race in GPL, instead of being hailed as a motor racing genius you may find yourself banned from even the lowest levels of the sport. Some of the everyday things you see in GPL simply aren't tolerated where real cars are damaged, real money is the cost of repair, and real lives are at risk.

In brief, the concept is, you must establish substantial overlap with the car ahead before a corner's turn-in point to have the right for room to be left for you by the ahead driver. Substantial overlap means at least that the front of your car is up to say the driver's position in the ahead car - and that's at the very least. You probably should have more in many circumstances. The ahead driver has ever right to be fully committed to the racing line of his choice without any interference if there was no overlap before he turned in.

If sufficient overlap is established before the turn-in point, then the behind driver has the right to room. The ahead driver can still battle for the place of course but must do so from a wider-out position, leaving room for the behind driver.

You can see here why overlap established after the turn-in point isn't really valid and therefore isn't honored in car racing rules. Its actually false overlap that's created by the turning movements of the cars. Its not due to one being faster than the other or one out-braking the other. In positions 1, 2, and 3, below, you can see that the Lotus has no overlap at all if you consider the straight ahead direction - shown by the blue lines. But if you take a perpendicular from the attitude of the cars, shown by the red lines, there is some overlap at position 2 and substantial overlap at position 3. This overlap is entirely false of course as the Lotus here hasn't actually out-braked or out-sped the Eagle by any amount what-so-ever - as I hope you can see form this diagram. Unfortunately many drivers think that if they do this they are some kind of out-braking genius, when in fact they are not out-preforming the other driver at all. Its a geometric illusion that has nothing to do with a driver's ability or performance. If they could really out-brake the other, they would have made some overlap before the turn-in point, not after it.
corner_rights_002.gif


1 Before the turn-in point there's no overlap - therefore the Lotus has no right to room or to interfere with the Eagle's normal racing line in any way.

2 But, as often happens, the Lotus sees this empty zone along the inside and thinks they can zoom up into it, probably believing this to be the move of a talented racing genius.

3 Its possible to get apparent overlap after the turn-in point. The point is you shouldn't.

4 The Lotus may actually achieve their objective, forcing the Eagle out wide, who may actually not press the issue for the sake of not crashing - if they can.

5 But, if the Eagle doesn't back away, and holds their line, as they're entitled to do, this is what happens as often as not.
The issue is that the Eagle has the right to be fully committed to the racing line. In this case, the entire inside area ought to have been a no-go zone for the Lotus, who should have tucked in behind and followed the Eagle around. Of course, late braking barge drivers often end up in the hay bails, hopefully without taking you with them.
 
In a GT context and having to use blind spot indicators, the late lunge relies too much on the defending driver seeing you in time but in a real world scenario, if you're even slightly past the lead cars rear axle or close to level with them by the time you hit the apex, a collision would be classed as a racing incident. The defending driver knows they're compromised for the corner by that point and have to surrender the ideal line or collide.

This isn't real world though. You have to be pretty damn close to set off the blind spot indicators and the lead car won't know anything about an overtake until just before the corner. Almost guaranteeing a racing incident and probably harming both drivers race.

I've done some late lunges myself but only if the lead car isn't thinking about the trailing car at all and still going for the optimum racing line. The lead car should be defending more (if the trailing car is 2 or 3 lengths back) so if I can safely get to the apex at the same time as them, at roughly the same speed as them, I'd say it was a viable move going into the slower corners. 4 or 5 car lengths is too far back back to pull the same move. A desperation move. Faster corners, the late lunge is pure gamesmanship and unethical.
 
Knock knock.

hows the hell is that being insulting? if i was saying stuff like "you're stupid and you dont have a clue what you are talking about you fool" then yes then id be insulting but not saying anything like that. but saying people are soft and petty. that's my opinion not being insulting. god
 
hows the hell is that being insulting? if i was saying stuff like "you're stupid and you dont have a clue what you are talking about you fool" then yes then id be insulting but not saying anything like that. but saying people are soft and petty. that's my opinion not being insulting. god
Your opinion can be an insult.
For example, "I think XXX is a retard". See how that's both an opinion, and an insult?
 
It's not.
I can tell you that moves like that are generally not condoned online, even if they are pulled off cleanly. If you tried that move online, the 'Ericsson' would turn into you as he'd have no way of seeing you coming.

Do you think this overtake is acceptable?

It would be in real life, but in GTP online racing, you require overlap before the braking zone prior to trying a move down the inside. Otherwise, there would be contact on most moves and driving standards would quickly deteriorate.


Honestly I'd err on the side of this being just acceptable. He/she was early on the brakes and as far as I can tell had time to see you and alter his/her line- though I'd need to see his/her point of view to be sure. That corner is a bit of a difficult one though, since the racing line is so wide. At any other corner it would not be acceptable, but because of the nature of the corner it just about is (as far as I can tell).

The Verstappen overtake on Ericsson is a divebomb.
 
Never knew this thread will be popular.

*seeing thread*

Ah what?

This is possibly what happened when you drivebomb irl. The first two crashes.
 
Honestly I'd err on the side of this being just acceptable. He/she was early on the brakes and as far as I can tell had time to see you and alter his/her line- though I'd need to see his/her point of view to be sure. That corner is a bit of a difficult one though, since the racing line is so wide. At any other corner it would not be acceptable, but because of the nature of the corner it just about is (as far as I can tell).

The Verstappen overtake on Ericsson is a divebomb.
There's no interpretation in the GTP OLR. Either you have overlap when the lead car begins to turn in or you don't. If the race was run under the OLR then the pass was not legal by definition, since there was no overlap at all by the turn in point of the corner - picture attached.

If the lead car braked early (which it didn't if the brake lights are an indication) it's still irrelevant. Once there is no overlap the lead car has the right to the driving line of their choice, and the following car has to adapt. The following car can take advantage of the early braking, if any, and go around the outside if it's possible to do so or even slip inside with an over/under move entering the second corner.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2015-4-26_12-26-5.png
    upload_2015-4-26_12-26-5.png
    103.8 KB · Views: 11
There's no interpretation in the GTP OLR. Either you have overlap when the lead car begins to turn in or you don't. If the race was run under the OLR then the pass was not legal by definition, since there was no overlap at all by the turn in point of the corner - picture attached.

If the lead car braked early (which it didn't if the brake lights are an indication) it's still irrelevant. Once there is no overlap the lead car has the right to the driving line of their choice, and the following car has to adapt. The following car can take advantage of the early braking, if any, and go around the outside if it's possible to do so or even slip inside with an over/under move entering the second corner.

I think you misinterpreted the target of my post. :)
 
*snip*
According to the FIA sporting regulations, if the outside driver has half a car length lead when turning in, they have a right to stay alongside the inside car. If they are side by side, and the outside car is not leading, then the inside car does NOT have to provide racing room and is allowed to use the entire track width on exit. It is up to the outside car to ensure contact is not made, which is why you'll see real racers yield in these circumstances, because they'd get a penalty if there was contact.

The car making a move on the inside has to have the front of their car at least half way alongside the car on the outside to be allowed racing room. If they are only front wheel to rear wheel it is up to them to avoid contact, and they have no claim to the racing line, so they have to yield if the outside driver chooses to cut in to the apex. A good example would be Rosberg v Hamilton at Spa last year, Rosberg didn't yield in time before hamilton's rear tyre went over his FWEP, so that was Rosberg's fault.*snip*
So first, you took a comment in which I was responding to someone else, and I explained in great detail what I consider a divebomb to be, and what the actual FIA rules on such overtaking situations are, and you said this:
Interesting that you quote a single racing organization and use them to define the rules of all racing.

Is there anything different about (open-wheel) racers that might make them use slightly different rules than cars with covered wheels?
Despite the fact that the FIA sanctions a lot of different motorsports, and not just F1, and the fact that most other governing bodies in the world follow largely the same rules as the FIA.

You realise the FIA is the world's governing body of motorsport, not just Formula 1. FYI CAMS in Australia follow the same regulations regarding overtaking.

So I kindly reminded you they aren't just about open wheelers, and offered an example of another regulator that follows the same rules regarding overtaking, to which you completely ignored and came up with this:

So are you saying that every racing series in the world follow "FIA rules", or just trying to give that impression?
I'm just curious, after watching an F1 race and a BTCC race, maybe you can explain to me how they're following the same rule set?
Again, ignoring what I actually said, and coming up with what you thought I meant in your own head and arguing with that. So again, I kindly reminded you of what I actually said, and stated that I didn't know of a series that didn't follow those rules on overtaking, which gave you something to actually respond to:

I was responding to your post saying that the FIA rules only applied to open wheel racing, which is untrue. I never said every series in the world is sanctioned by the FIA, but if you look at the rules on overtaking in all top motorsport series, they are largely the same. In the instance of overtaking under brakes, I don't know of a series that doesn't follow the rules I stated earlier.

But once again, you ignored that, and came up with this, which is not only completely off topic, but is just clearly trying to bait me into an argument with you:

If I'm not mistaken, FIA holds some of the most ***-up racing in the world, races where people intentionally let other people win, and if they don't, they can get fired. (teammates)
Pardon me, I couldn't care less what that ridiculous organization does. I like real racing.

Because I didn't want to go wildly off topic discussing team orders in motorsport, which exist outside of FIA events, unlike what you suggest, I came to the conclusion you were just here to troll people, because as we can see, you ignored everything I said, came up with your own versions of what you thought I meant, and argued with that instead. Then once you had nothing left to argue about, you started bagging out FIA sanctioned series' to try and bait me into a new argument with you, hence my comment that you are just trolling. So I gave you a chance to tell me what you consider "real racing", and offered a list of less than half of the series' that the FIA sanctions, so you could see what you are dismissing as "fixed" and not "real racing":

I'm not going to bother trying to explain when and where team orders is useful in motorsport, and it doesn't just exist in FIA sanctioned series' so I guess you're just trolling now. I'd love to know what you think "real racing" is when you don't consider F1, WEC, F3, Fe, Karting World Championship, ETCC, WTCC, Historic F1 and Sports Cars, WRC, WRX, and about 20 other series "real racing"...


Anyway this is going around and around in circles and I think we've all had our say.

My comment about this going around in circles was about this off topic argument you were trying to create, so I thought perhaps we should let the thread get back on topic.

Wow, now I'm tolling?

I'm sorry this didn't go the (waaaa) way you wanted (sniff sniff) I'll leave you win now. 👍

Again, you ignored everything I said, and decided to troll some more. Hence this:

Lol what do you call that then? nvm, just conveniently ignore everything and go for the immature, yet poor, attempt at a comeback. Good job 👍

To which you responded with more of the same:

You just said you don't want to talk about it, and accused me of trolling because you didn't like what I said.
No, no response for you. Go watch fixed races. 👍

Nope, I accused you of trolling, because you never, at any point, argued with anything I actually said. You came up with your own interpretations of my posts to try and be clever, and when it didn't work, you resorted to indirectly calling me a cry baby and claiming all FIA santioned events are "fixed" and not "real racing".

So, what is real racing then?

Also, Ayrton Senna's death wasn't the result of "driving too fast", his car left the road at a corner that could be taken flat out, in an odd fashion that could only be the result of a failure of his car. The fact you're claiming his death was his own fault, or a failure of his driving, shows your ignorance.
 
Yes, literally (note literally) you have tunnel vision with a helmet but even in a F1 car you still have movement of your head and eyes and some peripheral view. The TV screen does not move, its set to your central view.

There is a lot of extra features in a sim to help, but same as changing the view not everyone is going to use them so for most people not allowing dive bombing keeps it clean and fun. Its worked well so far in the races i've joined.

Yeah I was never condoning dive bombing, was just stating real racers don't always have a better view. This also reminds me that GT6 doesn't have the rear view mirror available for views other than cockpit and bumper, which would help if people who used bonnet cam for example could turn that on. Without a mirror you pretty much are driving blind.
 
Yes, you don't like what I said, now I could argue it out with you, but I already did with Tornado, funny thing is, enough of you guys want to complain about off-topic, but banter about it for 3 pages, and eventually report me, for continuing. Because I'll be the guy that's always involved, right?
I don't like FIA, and I don't agree with blindly following their rules for GT, as you did imply, if not state directly. I couldn't care less if that pisses you off.
No, I don't know 🤬 about F1 or anything involved, nor do I care, it's great that you love them, and you can follow their guidelines and do whatever you please in that regard, but you can't make me agree with you.

Here's some fun:
It isn't dirty driving it's called racing, which is why it's allowed in ALL forms of real motorsport.
All forms huh?
If you get into the turn in point on the inside of the other driver it's up to them to alter their line to avoid contact.
Nobody ever argued that... did they?
This is common in all forms of motorsport, and leaving the inside line open for it is the fault of the defending driver. If there is a driver close behind you, you should alter your line to cover the inside.
What is common, dive bombing? The context you typed sure is dive bombing. Dive bombing is common? I disagree strongly.
You don't just stay on the racing line out wide and cut in towards the apex when a car is attempting an overtake - THAT is dirty driving. If you leave the door open, don't cry when someone takes up the invitation.
Wow, we agree on something!

If the attacking driver can't make the corner because of how big a dive they've made, and it results in either contact with the other car, or if the other car isn't there they can't stop their car before the track limits and run off track or into the barrier, then it's diveboming,
Right, which is "allowed in ALL forms of motorsport", and "Common in all forms of motorsport" right?
not if they simply put their car up the inside in the braking zone.
Nobody ever said that...(not that I saw :odd: )
Some people try to claim that any late move up the inside is dive bombing, and that is plain wrong.
Who? Who claimed that? I might have missed something, I didn't ever see anyone claim that, not ever. :confused:

The only way a divebomb works is when the defending car is used as a barrier to help slow the dive bomber down so he/she can make the corner.
And it's allowed and common in ALL forms of motorsport?

Call me skeptical :sly:
 
Last edited:
Yes, you don't like what I said, now I could argue it out with you, but I already did with Tornado, funny thing is, enough of you guys want to complain about off-topic, but banter about it for 3 pages, and eventually report me, for continuing. Because I'll be the guy that's always involved, right?
I don't like FIA, and I don't agree with blindly following their rules for GT, as you did imply, if not state directly. I couldn't care less if that pisses you off.
No, I don't know 🤬 about F1 or anything involved, nor do I care, it's great that you love them, and you can follow their guidelines and do whatever you please in that regard, but you can't make me agree with you.

Here's some fun:
All forms huh?
Nobody ever argued that... did they?
What is common, dive bombing? The context you typed sure is dive bombing. Dive bombing is common? I disagree strongly.
Wow, we agree on something!

Right, which is "allowed in ALL forms of motorsport", and "Common in all forms of motorsport" right?
Nobody ever said that...(not that I saw :odd: )
Who? Who claimed that? I might have missed something, I didn't ever see anyone claim that, not ever. :confused:


And it's allowed and common in ALL forms of motorsport?

Call me skeptical :sly:

No you didn't respond to anything I actually said, you went the long way about arguing with yourself. which you've just continued by clipping tiny pieces of large posts I made, where I explained in great detail what the rules were, and what I thought a divebomb was, and you're arguing with single sentences, without showing any other parts of the posts that explain what you're arguing with.

You ignored everything I asked you, and continued to try to bait me into arguing with you for the sake of it.

Even though you originally disagreed with me, and started arguing for no real reason, you went on to agree with what I said I considered to be dive bombing, and what I thought was a fair dive down the inside. I stated my opinion on the matter originally, and used real racing rules I know of to explain my standing. I have nothing more to add to the discussion, so if you want to bait someone into arguing with you, move on to the next person please, because I've got better things to do. Cheers 👍
 
GT6 needs the damage modelling cut and pasted from any of the F1 Series.
stick your nose in a hole that's not big enough and you end up missing a front wing which ruins the aero of the car, or bending a steering arm.

F1 has had is since 1996 on PS1. why can't PD work it out in 2015..
 
Edit* On the subject of sim racing having a limited view compared with real racing, that's not exactly true. In sim racing, even in bumper cam you still can have a large mirror, and you don't have a helmet on giving you a letterbox view of the track. You have a worse view than someone driving a road car on the road, but F1 drivers have an extremely limited view around them, and they can still abide by the rules. You just need situational awareness.

In my experience, the helmet itself doesn't do much to restrict your view. It's more restricted by other stuff (the car, the head and neck restraint, etc.). I've always felt that I have a better ability to see in real life than in GT.
 
Back