R/C Tech Forums

Go Back   R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Electric On-Road

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-30-2005, 05:26 AM   #586
Tech Master
 
veecee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,439
Trader Rating: 34 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nnick
I figured it out why Dresher won the tie!!

If you notice at the pdf futureal was kind enough to post there are some columns named Tie1, Tie2-8. That means Tie1 number of 1st places, Tie2 number of 2nd places etc.
So both of them have same number of 1st, and 2nd none 3rd BUT Jilles had 2 4th compared to Craig with one so Craig won!!!

Bad luck

Nick
Craig only had 1x 4th because he also managed 1x 8th placing! So Jilles actually had a better overall record. I hope that's not how the points system works... Where are the rules? Can't find them anywhere...
veecee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 05:28 AM   #587
Tech Master
 
Anders Myrberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Manīs best friend: Hugo Myrberg
Posts: 1,987
Default

6 out of 8.
First decider: How many 1:st, 2:nd etc. Then, fastest 1:st place, and it was Craig. Just.
Anders Myrberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 06:17 AM   #588
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 414
Default

Matt, thanx for your explanation. I'll trust you ;-)

Again some critisism. How can you decide on placing but after 2nd place look at fastest times? Why not keep looking at placing? Or only look at times from the beginning. Completely illogical if you ask me how it is done now....
Santosh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 06:23 AM   #589
Tech Champion
 
TryHard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW
Posts: 5,284
Trader Rating: 4 (100%+)
Default

going off the results, the thrown out results (ie craigs 4th and 8th, and jilles 2 4ths) dont come into consideration at the tie break stage....

Ed
__________________
| THard.co.uk | Xray | MuchMore |
TryHard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 06:30 AM   #590
Tech Apprentice
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 52
Default

Because out of their 6 rounds they both had equal amounts of 1st's and 2nd's, eg. 3 1st's each and 3 2nd's. The next decider is the fastest time for each driver as it is the most logical, if that was equal it would go to the next quickest time for each driver, etc. It can't be decided on throw away results because they are thrown away results, they do not count towards anything.
cockerill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 06:37 AM   #591
Tech Master
 
johnbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Malta. G.C.
Posts: 1,762
Default

The Reedy system is one of the best there is. It gives everybody a chance to race against everybody else.Fourty of the World's best drivers were there, and we saw them all race each other, at least twice.

It was used at the World championships in 1998 - in fact I think that's where it started, with over 120 drivers and 15 rounds, and it was such a resounding success then, that it has been copied in many countries since.

The system gives guys like you and me, who normally wouldn't ever have a chance to do so, an opportunity to race against the likes of Masami, Hara, etc. Let's face it, who of you wouldn't like to be able to say you raced in the same race as Masami.

At this weekend's Reedy race the rules were very simple and clear. Eight rounds. Two drop scores. In the case of a tie in points the driver with most 1st places wins. In the case of a further tie, 2nd places, etc. etc. In the case of a further tie, the driver who drove the fastest race is the winner.

I don't see much wrong with that. The fastest guy over 6 races won. It was a close thing, which is probably better proof how good the system is.

I certainly prefer it to the qualifying system presently in use. With the qualifying system, if for arguments sake, just as you get your car set up well you happen to run your qualifying heats in the wet, you might as well pack up and go home. As it is you could start off in the D final, win it and make the fastest race time of the day, and still be placed 31st. What's so fair about that.

When Michael Schumacher qualifies badly and starts at the back of the grid, then drives a brilliant race to win, we think that's great - which of course it is. With the present qualifying system used in Rc he would never be able to win, despite being quicker than everybody else.

Every system has it's faults, but I feel that the Worlds 98 system - I believe it was invented by Peter Winton and the BRCA team at the time, has less faults than the present system which gives undue importance to qualifying.

I have no doubt that this will create quite a few pages of discussion, but constructive discussion is the best thing for any sport.

In the meantime, may I take the opportunity to congratulate every single one of the drivers at the Reedy race. They are all heroes.
johnbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 06:39 AM   #592
Tech Master
 
John Doucakis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 1,108
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

I tried to avoid posting since this argument can go on and on for ever, but taking the best time of each drivers win is not fair as Drescher's win may have been achieved at better racing conditions than Jilles. In this respect it would have been easier for him to make a faster 5 minute run...
John Doucakis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 06:41 AM   #593
Tech Master
 
johnbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Malta. G.C.
Posts: 1,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Santosh
Matt, thanx for your explanation. I'll trust you ;-)

Again some critisism. How can you decide on placing but after 2nd place look at fastest times? Why not keep looking at placing? Or only look at times from the beginning. Completely illogical if you ask me how it is done now....
They do keep looking at placings, but if you look at Craig and Gilles best 6 races you will see that they had 3 firsts, and 3 seconds each. That's their 6 races covered. There are no 3rds or 4ths in the 6 counting results, so you go to the next tie breaker. And that's where Craig was faster.
johnbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 06:52 AM   #594
Tech Champion
 
Matt Howard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Abilene TX
Posts: 5,952
Trader Rating: 6 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Doucakis
I tried to avoid posting since this argument can go on and on for ever, but taking the best time of each drivers win is not fair as Drescher's win may have been achieved at better racing conditions than Jilles. In this respect it would have been easier for him to make a faster 5 minute run...
Do you have a better way for the tie breaker? There has to be some way and it seems fair to me the way it is done.
__________________
Official member of The Guild of Calamitous Intent and proud supporter of Conjectural Technologies.
Serpent S411 LE kit #192
RCTech #361
Matt Howard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 06:53 AM   #595
Tech Master
 
johnbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Malta. G.C.
Posts: 1,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Doucakis
I tried to avoid posting since this argument can go on and on for ever, but taking the best time of each drivers win is not fair as Drescher's win may have been achieved at better racing conditions than Jilles. In this respect it would have been easier for him to make a faster 5 minute run...
For the sake of accuracy, Gilles round 2 race finished at 12.14pm. Craig's round 2 race, in which he made his best race time of 23.507 finished at 12.22 - 8 minutes later.

I wasn't there to say whether the weather had changed dramatically in 8 minutes. If it did, then you have a valid point, but I doubt it.

But they are both brilliant drivers anyway. I have said on more than one occasion that I think Gilles is presently Europe's best, and has been for the last 3 years.
johnbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 06:57 AM   #596
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 286
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

I understand the way it apparantly worked, but I think it is a bit silly. This is a points race in final format to get close racing. People start at different positions on the grid each round. Since it is quite normal for any given track to be fastest at a specific part of the day (usually in the morning) only those that start from the front row in the morning runs have a true chance to set a truly fast time. In my opinion in this race format times should be the last possible tie-breaker and throw away results should count first.

BTW, the official end-results that FutureAl posted (http://www.rctech.net/forum/attachme...chmentid=72529) doesn't even contain a column for the fastest time but only 7 tie-breaker columns for finishing positions. Funny that...

Anyway, many congratulations to Craig on a well deserved win. Also well done Jilles! Once again sooooo close
__________________
Tony Vredenberg
tonyv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 06:58 AM   #597
Tech Master
 
John Doucakis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 1,108
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Howard
Do you have a better way for the tie breaker? There has to be some way and it seems fair to me the way it is done.
Yes, count the drop out score. Just as it is done in EFRA, IFMAR and JMRCA.

The two best finals count and if there is a tie in all respects then they count the drop out score.

Whats wrong with that?

For example Drescher's best run in which he won was:
23 laps in 5:08:307 with a best lap of 13.076
Jilles best run where he came 2nd to Jimmy Jackobson was
23 laps in 5:08:189 with a best lap of 12.966

So who is fastest?
Get my point regarding different racing conditions now?
John Doucakis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 07:01 AM   #598
Tech Champion
 
RCGaryK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 7,331
Trader Rating: 3 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Howard
Do you have a better way for the tie breaker? There has to be some way and it seems fair to me the way it is done.
You know why this is a completely fair tie breaker? Because everyone knows about it during the opening driver's meeting because it's announced.
__________________
Site Content Specialist- Surface
HorizonHobby.Com

Horizon Hobby is on YouTube with hundreds of different videos! Visit us at
http://www.youtube.com/HorizonRCdotCom
RCGaryK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 07:03 AM   #599
Tech Apprentice
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 52
Default

A drop-out score is preciesly that, a score that is dropped and shouldn't count towards anything
cockerill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2005, 07:06 AM   #600
Tech Regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 286
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbull
I certainly prefer it to the qualifying system presently in use. With the qualifying system, if for arguments sake, just as you get your car set up well you happen to run your qualifying heats in the wet, you might as well pack up and go home. As it is you could start off in the D final, win it and make the fastest race time of the day, and still be placed 31st. What's so fair about that.
John, I understand where you are going with this, but I see a flaw. If you are unlucky you will have to make 8 runs in the rain. Since you are racing for points that's no problem. However you will never be able to set a fast run compared to those that happen to have one or more dry runs. The Reedy rules disregard two perfectly good points results in favor of using a time-based tie breaker. This argument adds to the the argument I just made that if you have to start from the middle or even rear of the grid in the runs that the track is fastest you also have no prayer of getting a really good time unless you're lucky.

Doesn't detract from Craig's win though as it could have gone either way. We would have had the same discussion of the coin fell on the other side...
__________________
Tony Vredenberg
tonyv is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
10th annual REEDY TC Race of Champions @ Tamiya America Mr. Postman Racing Forum 2 04-06-2007 08:05 AM
Izzy's 2005 Reedy TC Race of Champions - DVD izzyracer Electric On-Road 123 09-14-2005 06:24 PM
2005 Reedy Race of Champions Europe WorldCup2004 Electric On-Road 118 06-23-2005 06:42 AM
2005 Reedy Race of Champions! speedxl Racing Forum 4 04-11-2005 03:18 PM
R/C Tech Live @ the 2004 Reedy Race of Champions futureal Electric On-Road 576 06-23-2004 09:05 AM



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. It is currently 01:56 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Powered By: vBulletin v3.9.2.1
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Advertise Content © 2001-2011 RCTech.net