Round 9 / Rudi Raser

[eggmann]

Should they be held to the strictest letter of an obscure rule, or be allowed to race. I think, the latter, in both cases.

My team (and others maybe) drove to the strictest letter of this obscure rule. If it now becomes ok to overshoot the corners and use all the tarmac, then I could produce a faster time in Round 8.

 

[NoQuarter]

I do want to point out that it is up to the winning board to decide who gets to run the next BC. At least, that's been the tradition so far.

I wasn't aware of any such tradition, but if that's the case, I'll defer to which ever team wins, and apologize for my presumptuousness.

Back OT: My point about the "obscurity" of the white line rule, was that if Rudi's run was deemed good, samoht's should be, as well. His run was made in the alotted time, and if the ruling was to be overturned, it's not the same thing as what anyone "could produce" after the fact.

As it is, I missed the discussion about that particular section of track, and concede that if that section was previously ruled as illegal, regardless of whether a driver maintained contact with the tarmac or not, then the issue is not whether the white line rule is applied, but that the particular section of track is off limits. I withdraw any implied protest about Tom's replay.

 

[Arwin]

Well, just to be a smug bastard, I want to point out this post of mine, somewhere back in the discussion before round 1 was due:

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showpost.php?p=1866871&postcount=63

 

[bobkart]

I think the difference between the two situations is that in Rudi's case there was a "track extension" (cobblestones/rumble strips) which are absent at that point on the Autumn Ring track. The rules indicate that the white/yellow line prevails except where the track width is extended by these cobblestones or rumble strips, then it is their outer edge that counts.

 

[IforceV8]

Just watched veilsidebr's run and he did the same thing that Rudi did at the very next turn.

The only thing wrong with veil's replay is his car had NOS equiped,but i didnt notice any change in the gauge during the run.

 

[Mistral]

Just watched veilsidebr's run and he did the same thing that Rudi did at the very next turn.

The only thing wrong with veil's replay is his car had NOS equiped,but i didnt notice any change in the gauge during the run.

Did you hear anything due to the usage of nitrous?

 

[bobkart]

1.4.15: GT Mode modifications: "Full Modifications" shall include all engine, transmission, suspension, chassis, or aerodynamic modifications available for the car, except NOS / nitrous oxide systems. NOS/NOX is prohibited and may not be installed on any GT Mode car. If a wing is installed it must be wing selection #1, at the farthest left of the selection screen.

Don't shoot the messenger!

 

[Mistral]

Here it comes again.

Good night everyone! I'm done...

 

[bobkart]

Just pointing out the rule. Not implying what should be done with his run.

 

[Arwin]

Well, just to be a smug bastard, I want to point out this post of mine, somewhere back in the discussion before round 1 was due:

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showpost.php?p=1866871&postcount=63

Sorry, here I was referring not to a comparable situation, but to the comment I make about these rules deviating from most database rules and that this should be communicated with extreme prejudice to prevent confusion ...

 

[IforceV8]

Did you hear anything due to the usage of nitrous?

No i didnt hear any nor did the red gauge appear to change from full.

 

[Duke]

Hey Duke,do these rules apply for this round or not.


Quote:
3.9.3: Long Races (more than 10 laps) and Long Track Races: Offs, Wall Touches, and non-beneficial AI Touches shall be assessed a penalty as follows:

2 or less Offs or Touches: no penalty
3 Offs or Touches: 0.5 second total penalty
4 Offs or Touches: 1.0 second total penalty
5 Offs or Touches: 2.0 second total penalty
6 Offs or Touches: 4.0 second total penalty
7 or more Offs or Touches: DQ

3.10 Failure to comply with the rules above, or failure to follow the specified car, setup, track, and race conditions for the Round, will result in a Did Not Finish (DNF) and zero points for the Round.

Yes, these rules also apply, Nurburgring being one of the 'long tracks'. I didn't mean to imply that this rule didn't apply - just that it was not required to be invoked in the case of Rudi's potential off.

I think the difference between the two situations is that in Rudi's case there was a "track extension" (cobblestones/rumble strips) which are absent at that point on the Autumn Ring track. The rules indicate that the white/yellow line prevails except where the track width is extended by these cobblestones or rumble strips, then it is their outer edge that counts.

This is correct. To me the cobbles constitute a rumble strip. In samoht's case, also, there is substantially more flat paving/runoff area outside the white line. He's got the whole car on the paving to the right of the defined track edge, a fair distance from the white line marking the edge. I realize these two situations are highlighting the perceived oddity of the rule, but I think the way I've applied them is fair.

 

[IforceV8]

Yes, these rules also apply, Nurburgring being one of the 'long tracks'. I didn't mean to imply that this rule didn't apply - just that it was not required to be invoked in the case of Rudi's potential off.

Good to know.

 

[Mr P]

Seems like Veilside still had the original idea that all cars were to be equipped with NOS ..... as long as he never used it! ... thats the main part 👍

What happens from here? does it still get a pass or is something to made of the oversight?

Thanks in advance 👍

 

[Duke]

Yeah, given the 180 degree turn in the NOX rule I'm going to let it pass. While it is theoretically possible to get a microscopic advantage by giving it just enough of a shot to not show on the use meter just before you cross the start line, A) I think the advantage would be nil and B) I don't believe it happened here anyway.

 

[Mr P]

OK thanks Duke 👍

 

[Ricolamb]

rules are rules eh Ron...
I wonder what would have happened if it was us 👍
but...I understand veilside effort, and no way should make him lose his 2nd place for what regards me...Samuel has been fair good to see him and Rudi are oki
hehe, but if I find something similiar in one of the replays I'm going to check....

(goddamn if I'll change idea on those)

 

[Arwin]

Yes, these rules also apply, Nurburgring being one of the 'long tracks'. I didn't mean to imply that this rule didn't apply - just that it was not required to be invoked in the case of Rudi's potential off.

Sorry, but this I cannot agree with.

All Scenarios above will be run in either Short Race (2-5 laps) or Hot Lap (single fast lap on open track; no AI) format except the Long Race.

A Long Track race is any Race on the Ring, Long or Short, fine, but not a hot lap. Although the rules don't state it (it specifies 2-5 laps), I could maybe agree with a one lap race being counted on the Ring or Le Mans, if it were also a race in GT4, including AI.

But this round's race on the Nurburgring is a hotlap.It should be 100% clean. If "2 or less Offs or Touches: no penalty" would apply to this run, that would be ridiculous.

 

[Mr P]

rules are rules eh Ron...
I wonder what would have happened if it was us 👍
but...I understand veilside effort, and no way should make him lose his 2nd place for what regards me...Samuel has been fair good to see him and Rudi are oki
hehe, but if I find something similiar in one of the replays I'm going to check....

(goddamn if I'll change idea on those)

I was waiting for you to say something Rico! ...... yes rules are rules ... if it was getting a DQ then that would have been that end of story. ..... Thanks for the little dig at me anyway 👍

I like mentally predicting a reply

 

[Ricolamb]

good
I also said...it's no problem and it's out of the world to be DQ for something like this...
but if we had to be strict...I'd say rues are rules, and rule say no NOX installed, so it'd be DQ....
but seeing I'm not mad, like many of u...
u were the one saying RULES ARE RULES yesterday evening, weren't u?when Jean asked for something different from DQ...
but seeing I don't wanna be like the others, it doesn't give me any problem, cos I know Samuel was fair...

live and learn I guess...(for me, not for u)

 

[Duke]

Sorry, but this I cannot agree with.

But this round's race on the Nurburgring is a hotlap.It should be 100% clean. If "2 or less Offs or Touches: no penalty" would apply to this run, that would be ridiculous.

I disagree. A single lap at the 'Ring (less so, Le Sarth) requires the same length and intensity of concentration as 3 laps at any other circuit. More, even, since there is no repetition.

If there are allowed offs in the multi-hot-lap scenarios then to me it is logical that there are allowed offs in the single-long-lap scenarios. The technical definition of "hot lap" is not significant compared to the required length/intensity of concentrated effort, which is similar between a single lap of the 'Ring and, say, 5 laps of Midfield. That was the intent of the rule and that's why Long Tracks were listed with Long Races - and, elsewhere in the rules (the scenario descriptions) the long tracks were specifically prohibited from the multi-lap races, which is why I took care to make sure they were indicated in the allowed offs section.

 

[Mr P]

good
I also said...it's no problem and it's out of the world to be DQ for something like this...
but if we had to be strict...I'd say rues are rules, and rule say no NOX installed, so it'd be DQ....
but seeing I'm not mad, like many of u...
u were the one saying RULES ARE RULES yesterday evening, weren't u?when Jean asked for something different from DQ...
but seeing I don't wanna be like the others, it doesn't give me any problem, cos I know Samuel was fair...

live and learn I guess...(for me, not for u)

I never replied yesterday after Jeans comment/suggestion if you care to check

I also stated if we get a DQ then so be it! and lastly I cant be arsed answering to you anymore because you can become an irritating little $hit very quickly and I dont really want to get too mad in public! ... so go and annoy someone else or we have it out on msn .... laters Dicko

 

[Arwin]

I disagree. A single lap at the 'Ring (less so, Le Sarth) requires the same length and intensity of concentration as 3 laps at any other circuit. More, even, since there is no repetition.

Which is why the same rules apply for a short race on the Ring, as on a long normal race. But, if you will, a hot lap on the Ring equals to a short race on a normal track.

This is also how it is currently defined in the rules. I don't think many people even considered that the single lap on the Ring was allowed to have 2 offs, to be honest.

If there are allowed offs in the multi-hot-lap scenarios then to me it is logical that there are allowed offs in the single-long-lap scenarios. The technical definition of "hot lap" is not significant compared to the required length/intensity of concentrated effort, which is similar between a single lap of the 'Ring and, say, 5 laps of Midfield.

But there is no A.I. It is a hotlap. And with 20km, it matches some 5 lap races, and some short tracks would require up to 10 laps and maybe a little bit more to equal it, but the Long Race scenario was defined as 10 laps and upwards. And the more laps, the more trouble the AI would give.

Considering multiple lap racing rules for a non-AI hotlap is very, very unprecedented in OLR. I don't think you'll find many people here who have been racing the Ring in other competitions that have allowed something like that ever before. And there are really, really many competitions for hotlaps on this track.

That was the intent of the rule and that's why Long Tracks were listed with Long Races - and, elsewhere in the rules (the scenario descriptions) the long tracks were specifically prohibited from the multi-lap races, which is why I took care to make sure they were indicated in the allowed offs section.

EDIT: I looked it up precisely. That was to make sure that Short Races on Long Tracks were to be treated equal to Long Races. Otherwise, you clearly made a distinction between 2-5 lap races, 10+ races, and hotlaps. And even dealt with the possibility of 6-9 lap races.

Also, this rule:

3.9.1: Hot Laps and FTODs: Given the nature of Hot Lap scenarios, these laps shall be 100% clean. Any Offs or Wall Touches shall result in disqualification of the submitted time. Driver may submit an alternate lap as Hot Lap or FTOD provided it is 100% clean. Alternate times must be submitted prior to the original deadline for consideration. Multiple Hot Lap scenarios shall fall under the same rules as a Race of similar length as described below.

If you now no longer consider the Ring a hotlap, a backup time will also not be allowed to be submitted for it.

Please don't take the 'intent' part of the rules too far. We have to be able to rely at least a little bit on the actual wording.

You're the boss here, but I'm not happy with it. I'm sure that like we did, almost every driver took great care here to make sure their laps at the Ring were 100% clean.

 

[Ricolamb]

allright Ron

 

[Duke]

You're the boss here, but I'm not happy with it. I'm sure that like we did, almost every driver took great care here to make sure their laps at the Ring were 100% clean.

Arwin, I hear, understand, and appreciate what you're saying, and while this is a tight set of rules in general, the actual competion has of course exposed unforseen holes. I sincerely apologize for the issues that have crept in.

But all of this is moot because to me, the narrow band of cobblestones constitutes a rumble strip. It's very different from a wide apron of smooth paving. So it's still not a question of whether offs are allowed, because it's not an off.

 

[Arwin]

Arwin, I hear, understand, and appreciate what you're saying, and while this is a tight set of rules in general, the actual competion has of course exposed unforseen holes. I sincerely apologize for the issues that have crept in.

But all of this is moot because to me, the narrow band of cobblestones constitutes a rumble strip. It's very different from a wide apron of smooth paving. So it's still not a question of whether offs are allowed, because it's not an off.

Nope, fortunately this does not affect that issue. But I want to keep out discussions later on when someone discovers a real off with one of the Nurburg runs and we're going to have a discussion whether or not that is allowed, or having to tell Max E. that a backup run isn't in order after all because the Nurburg round turns out to be a race, for which the backup option wasn't available.

See what I mean?

 

[beru]

I do understand all point of view here. But for my point of view, i did understand the rules like they are applied by Duke way befor the races start.

1. Nurb and Le Sarth are considere as long track so they must go with the long race scenario for penality (even if i think we should give a priority to 100% clean run in a futur rules)

2. Cobblestones are consider as rumbles strips so Rudi Raser run must be clean.


Rules must be rules, i know here it's a little confused so we must act on judging, but i think we should apply the rules as much as possible. If we don't then where is the line ??

After this BC ( memory fresh), we may took some time all together to make a complete and simple rules for all Futur BC(on GT4) in same time we may use those rules on our respectif Board. Duke i know you worked hard and i don't say that to complain. But rules are a little confused and it brings some hard discussion for nothing. I'm ready to help out on that even if i have some hard time to undersand all good in english.

a plus

 

[Tony Randall]

After this BC ( memory fresh), we may took some time all together to make a complete and simple rules for all Futur BC(on GT4) in same time we may use those rules on our respectif Board. Duke i know you worked hard and i don't say that to complain. But rules are a little confused and it brings some hard discussion for nothing. I'm ready to help out on that even if i have some hard time to undersand all good in english
a plus

I think that's a good idea Beru. I do think this was duke intention from the start way back in Junso that wecould addapt and hammer out the rules early in time for the competition. which was 99% succsesful (considering the crap that we could have encountered.)
But it seems a lot of small probs and vagueries have happened after the first Race light went green .
One thing I'd persoanly like to see next time, is the final ten races set in stone long before the first race.. not just a few days (True, this gives the chance for competitors to run at them longer).. but it would aslo give time to find any flaws loopholes, bolt down all rules that apply to that race.. including any nuances in a particular track.. so that when the first race officially goes up, we've made sure everyone is reading from the same page.

 

[IforceV8]

I had the same thought today Tony.Maybe the answer in BC6 is for the track list to be set before the racing begins.If that is too restrictive in finding combos in GT Mode then maybe a group should be created with the purpose of going over each track in GT4 and finding the little details that we overlooked this time.Each track is different in its nature and having a set of guidlines to follow for each would avoid any confusion in future events.

 

[eggmann]

One suggestion I have for BC6 is to do away with the race categories for submissions. If one team is going to design 6-7 of the 10 races, what's the point of everyone submitting 10? If each team created 5 races however they want, then we could all vote and pick the top 10 races of the bunch. Along with this I'd like to see the "no more than one official race per board" and "no repeat tracks" rules brought back. If there's a perceived problem with rally in regards to this, then maybe 8 open selection races and 2 rallys, with each board designing 4 road races and 1 rally. Another idea is to limit the hot laps to a single race as it was in the previous two BC's, but maybe by the voting in this BC, that wouldn't be the popular way to go.