May 18th & 19th Lime Rock Double

[gran racing]

I keep thinking that it would be really cool to have a different type of race weekend format. I know in the past we've discussed some ideas, and the inverted starting order quickly comes to mind. At first I thought it might disrupt the points chase, but the other night I was watching the British Touring races and they use the inverted grid so why can't we?

We have a perfect opportunity to do something like this at the Lime Rock double event. My thought was Friday do the qual. and race, then on sat. do a brief practice in the morning and then race using the inverted grid. I'm not sure what the MoHud region has planned for the event, but this would not only be a blast and something a bit different, but it would elminate any notion of having another qual. session on Sat. (The region might be planning on using the fastest race lap time from Friday's race to grid the Sat. race, but that's not the primary purpose of this.)

What are your thoughts about doing something like this, even if it's just for the IT classes? How could we make this happen (anyone with any ties to the MoHud region)? I'd love to see it happen!

[Doc Bro]

Dave it sounds like a good idea, as long as the guys who don't race/ finish on friday don't start up front on saturday.

R

Dave it sounds like a good idea, as long as the guys who don't race/ finish on friday don't start up front on saturday.

R

[Andy Bettencourt]

Dave,

Each race for a Double has to have it's own individual qualifier. So factor that in when scheming new ideas. This format IS new for LRP...two qualifiers on Friday and two races on Saturday. I love it!

I am not a big fan of an inverted start. Why create a INSTANT lapped traffic situation? This is Regional IT. The difference in laps is huge. 10 seconds from first to worst in ITA at the NARRC Runoffs. Thats over 16% difference. You won't see even half that at a Pro race. Besides, who has more fun when the faster guys are all over you from the green flag? Not the faster guys - and not the slower guys IMHO.

If you really want to invert, how about in sections? 3 rows at a time? Pole starts 6th. 6th starts first. 7th starts 12th and 12th starts 7th. This may be unnecessarily complicated but it does keep cars of like speed in the same zone. Even doing this (using NARRC runoff race results - qual was in the rain) you have alomost a 4 second spread from 1st to 6th.

And if you DO do something like this, you need to give some bonus points for qualifying. Why would a Pole sitter have even a remote interest in this? Heck - some would start sand-bagging qual. With my lap-timer, I could pick my qual time within a half second. 1:03.5 at LRP - no problem - and get closer to the front as a result.

On edit: You probably didn't see the format in the other thread:

Friday will be qual in the morning for the Sat morning race, Friday PM will be qual for the Sat PM race. No racing on Friday.[/b]

[lateapex911]

Well, I love the idea, always have.

I know many will shoot it down, but..

I might not ivert the whole field,or anything prdictable like that. I'd make it more fun...here's my idea:

Normal qualifying. After qualifying is posted and official, we have a drivers meeting. The pole sitter reaches into a hat, and pulls a number (blindly) from these choices:0,0,1,2,3,4,5,6

Whatever number he pulls is the inversion. So, if he pulls 0, we race as we qualified. if he pulls 6, the top six cars flip. Obviously the middle cars 3 and 4, will be least affected,and just swap sides.

Now, becuase it's unknown, there can be no sandbagging, and because ther are two zeros, the odds are better that there might be no inversion, which further reduces any tempation to sandbag.

A further idea wiuld be to have the pole sitter choose the inversion as above, but then have the inverted guys draw straws for the actual position rather than a pure inversion.

I like shaking things up. ;)

[Doc Bro]

Jake,

I like the idea.

Bettencourt,

Everyone (including you) knows you'll sweep LRP this year. Quit your belly-aching and do it from the rear like a MAN!! :happy204:

R

AB....By the way I'm adding outriggers to my Z like a Hawaiin canoe....good luck trying to lap me!!

[ner88]

How about at pregrid throwing car numbers in a hat and drawing for a car and starting position?
Now that would be different!

[gran racing]

Quit your belly-aching and do it from the rear like a MAN!! [/b]

Nice Rob.

[dominojd]

Quit your belly-aching and do it from the rear like a MAN!! :happy204:

[/b]

Yeah Leave it to Rob about comments about men and from the rear. :P

[RSTPerformance]

Dave-

I hope it is your first "pole position" that gets inverted :unsure: opps did I say that!!! lol

But in reality, I do like the idea, but I don't think it is a good one. The Goal of Qualifying is to put yourself as close to the front as possible, by having the fastest time. It is a very very good feeling being on pole, I have had the opportunity a few times, and I have inverted the field a few times also starting from the outside instead of the inside... It certainly is fun... but I will admit, If at the NARRC runoffs that spot in fron of all those ITS cars was taken away from me I would have been unhappy... as for one lap (be it behind the pacecar or not) I was in my glory!!!

Now, as for having a 2nd race and taking times/positions etc. and inverting them from the first race, I am all for it. In a "Race" that sets the stage for the next race my goal is that individual race, not the next race.

Basicaly a true qualifying session the spotlight is on the fastest qualifyer, as it should be. In a qualifying race, the spotlight is on the winner (or your finishing position), not the qualifying position they are "awarded" for thier performance, so however you "award" a spot for the next race if fine with me.

Raymond

[lateapex911]

yea, but think about the PA chatter....the pole sitter would be talked about MORE than he normally would, and inverting the top X cars would be SUCH a big deal, as it NEVER happens, that it would be the talk of the weekend. EVERYONE would be watching.

Plus, it's a hoot to watch the fast guy try to move up. ;)

[Andy Bettencourt]

Jake,

I like the idea.

Bettencourt,

Everyone (including you) knows you'll sweep LRP this year. Quit your belly-aching and do it from the rear like a MAN!! :happy204:

R

AB....By the way I'm adding outriggers to my Z like a Hawaiin canoe....good luck trying to lap me!! [/b]

As has been pointed out, this comment is fodder for so many jokes it's crazy. As far as lapping the Z, looks like your outriggers will have to be about 6 feet long... :)

http://www.the16v.com/SCCA/06/narrc/images/DSC_4290.jpg



I am all for doing something unique...Jake's idea sounds cool, and it is similar to mine above...let's just not 'reward' the front row with a back-row start without some additional incentive. It just doesn't make sense. It's a disincentive to perform. Make it random, make it resonable, and it will be fun and exciting.

[gran racing]

My original thought was using the finishing race results and inverting that order, not qual. results. I didn't see (or remember) that the format was already determined. I still think it would be fun to use some non-traditional formats.

Some of my most fun races have been when I started waaaaay in the back. Once because a part broke and I was busy trying to get it fixed and missed qualifying. Another because I was new to the track and I just sucked. It's to the point where I've been giving some thought about qualifying, then "accidently" coming to false grid too late causing me to be put dead last. I've also thought about trying to convince a few competitors to do the same, unless you're chicken Ray. :o
<div align="center">http://planetchicken.com/img/chickens/clio.JPG </div>

I will admit that a part of me wonders if mid-pack / back markers would think I&#39;m being a jerk for doing this. I&#39;m not sure how I would have felt.

[lateapex911]

I too have had fun races when I had qualifying "issues" and started in the back. Last year at Watkins Glen when the rib snapping "incident" that occurred on lap 1 of qualifying caused me to start near the back......
(thats right...even though I hit the guardrail, and limped the car home on three wheels though the pits, my lap time was better than TWO others..imagine the laps THEY had, sheesh!)
......and the run to the front included moving from 66th to 26th in 7(?) green flag laps...Never got a clean lap, but it sure was fun! (And by no means was this brilliant or anything like Greg Amys blast up through the field in ONE lap)

Dan Sheppard once pulled that game. He qualified 7th at NHIS, in his RX-7, and before the race came up to me, and said, "Listen, I&#39;m going to start last, because you&#39;re ahead of me, and I know I can&#39;t get by you, so I&#39;m just going to start back there and have fun"

"yeah..suuuure he is" I thought.

And sure enough, when it comes time to grid, Mr Mind Games is right to my left where he qualified, LOL

How many of us would REALLY do it if we didn&#39;t have to though?

[RSTPerformance]

My original thought was using the finishing race results and inverting that order, not qual. results. I didn&#39;t see (or remember) that the format was already determined. I still think it would be fun to use some non-traditional formats.

Some of my most fun races have been when I started waaaaay in the back. Once because a part broke and I was busy trying to get it fixed and missed qualifying. Another because I was new to the track and I just sucked. It&#39;s to the point where I&#39;ve been giving some thought about qualifying, then "accidently" coming to false grid too late causing me to be put dead last. I&#39;ve also thought about trying to convince a few competitors to do the same, unless you&#39;re chicken Ray. :o
<div align="center">http://planetchicken.com/img/chickens/clio.JPG

I will admit that a part of me wonders if mid-pack / back markers would think I&#39;m being a jerk for doing this. I&#39;m not sure how I would have felt.
[/b][/quote]

I can&#39;t find any proof on any websites, but... I remember starting the 2004 NARRC Runoffs from last 4? on grid as I didn&#39;t qualify... we got about 6 or maybe 7 green flag laps and I gained 20 something spots in those 6 or 7 laps!!! It was a blast, and most were gained on the 1st lap :) Someday I will get to posting the video :) Certainly the most fun races are certainly starting from the back, but hier is an increased risk to worry about!!!

As said before, I do like the idea of inverting the grid after the first race :)

Raymond

[JLawton]

If you guys have so much fun starting from the back, how about if you let me sit on the pole and then try to catch me!!! :P

[philstireservice]

If you guys have so much fun starting from the back, how about if you let me sit on the pole and then try to catch me!!! :P
[/b]



You are always such a progressive thinker Jeff..... :114:

[Greg Amy]

Is this suggested reverse-start a NARRC or NERRC points race? Probably, huh? That creates quites a problem for those working towards a championship (for reference, I won&#39;t be). This creates a volatile situation where some folks may be willing to take chances whereas they normally would not...

While I like to run up from the back (witness Glen July &#39;06) I strongly recommend against it.

[RKramden]

No matter what format you come up with, there is one rule you must live with:

<div align="center">NO RACES on Friday.</div>

[Ed Funk]

One fast driver starting at the back is fun (been there done that, got the T shirt), starting all the fast drivers at the back is a recipe for disaster. Think how much fun it would be working on your destroyed car early in the season, after having worked on it most of the winter.

Reminds me of Steph&#39;s first school at Summit Point. She was in a well sorted and prepared car, she had a fair amount of track experience, so she was one of the faster drivers in her group. When it came time for the practice starts and the grid was posted, she was starting near the back. We asked her instructor how the grid was set---the answer? "Maximum instructor entertainment at turn one"!!

Ask yourself, who do you want to entertain?

Merry Christmas :114: , Happy Hanukah, Kool Kwanza, Feisty Festiva, Winter Solstice etc, ad infinitum (miss any?)

[lateapex911]

I too started dead last (40th, LOL) at my school. My instructor, the esteemed Kurt Weiss, and close friend (then and now), was sharper than to admit the instructor entertainment issue. He merely reminded me that I was trying to get signed off in one school, and I needed to impress.

(Yes, the car was totalled, but not until the 6th lap, when I was running 4th side by side with 5th, on the Pocono turn one banking, when the 1st place car lost it and then failed to hold his brakes, rolling down in front of us. Ugg...just a racing deal, but one I never forgot)

Now, nobody is seriously considering inverting the WHOLE field. That would be a bit nuts. And you can never do an "inversion program" if the results are either known, or predictable through statistics. The inversion must be random to some degree, or people will attempt to manipulate the results in qualifying.

I would suggest that luck always plays a role in any race series, and the NERRC, or NARRC is no different. Rain qualifying, dry race. Or vice versa. To win any series, you need to be not just fast, but adapatable, and have good racecraft.

So, I still think a random inversion of up to 6, heck, maybe even 8....spots fits the bill for making the format different and interesting, as well as fitting the overall championship series concept.