Dave
11-12-2002, 02:44 PM
Below is an e-mail I have recently sent out to everyone on the Solo 1 listserve. If, for whatever reason, you did not receive this e-mail but you'd like to respond to the poll, please read over the options below and e-mail me your feedback at dpratte4@cogeco.ca Thanks!
____________________________________________________
To All Solo 1 Competitors:
Based on the results of the Solo 1 Competitor Survey as well as the car classification proposals and feedback received at the annual Solo Workshop, we are requesting that you review the four classification options presented below and give us your feedback as to their implementability for the 2003 season. Please send your feedback directly to dpratte4@cogeco.ca (please do not spam the entire Solo 1 listserve) so that we can determine what the majority of Solo 1 competitors prefer for 2003 and beyond.
For those of you who were unable to attend the Workshop, I am attempting to have the results of the Competitor Survey posted to the soloontario.com website.
OPTIONS:
1. Make no changes to the current system.
2. Minor changes to the existing system. This could include such adjustments as moving Pony Cars to B-family and/or moving a few of the very high index cars like the new M3 to 'Super Car' group in A-family. Another proposed adjustment to the current system is to start very high index cars (ie. 'super cars') at the SS1 or SP level or have them move from A1 to SP so that they can no longer proposition SS1 (making this a more viable class for A2 and A3 cars to compete in).
PROS: we maintain strong continuity with the existing system and prevent most competitors from having to go back to the drawing board to develop a competitive car. We also maintain a prep point schedule which received very positive feedback on the competitor survey.
CONS: we have a large number of disadvantaged cars in the so-called "bottomless pits" of A3, B3 and C3, which have too wide an indexed performance gap from top to bottom thus rendering the bottom 2/3rds of cars in these classes uncompetitive.
3. A two-family system based on an engine displacement split (adjusting for forced induction and rotary engines). Other methods of collapsing the existing 3 families into 2 were discussed (simply merging A & B; using a driveline split), but the displacement break idea received the strongest support due to the fact that it's based on a performance variable that is strongly associated with performance potential and creates two families with less performance spread from top to bottom. A displacement split of 2.8 litres could be used since this would create roughly equal sized families and is the the cut-off used in many other series such as the Speed Channel World Challenge (SWC) (creating their Touring and GT groups).
PROS: a reduction in the total number of classes (something the survey results indicated as a strong competitor preference), a compression of performance potential within each family since they are limited by displacement, and a potentially valuable design link (possibly making the series more marketable) to existing series like the SWC and the new ontario Touring Car Challenge series. The current prep point system would remain largely unchanged as well.
CONS: there will still be large "bottomless pits" at the lowest root class level in each family and there will still be wide performance potential gaps from top to bottom in each class (making it difficult for low index cars to have a competitive class to run in). Additionally, this system represents a fairly major departure from the existing system and therefore disrupts the continuity of the series.
4. A straight index system, where all cars are put in one of 12 root classes based solely on their performance index score (calculated using curb weight, horsepower, torque and suspension rating). This system would use a "step up" approach to dealing with car prep, where X number of prep points spent would "step" you up into the root class above your initial one. For example, if an Acura Integra LS starts in class 8 (out of 12 root classes) and makes 4 prep points worth of modifications it moves up to class 7 to compete against other 4 point cars that started in class 7 as well as completely stock cars that start in class 7 (say an Integra GSR) as well as more heavily modified cars that started in classes 9, 10, 11 or 12.
PROS: fewer total classes, a more competitive starting class for all cars (eliminates the "bottomless pit" problem) and the potential to compete against a wide variety of cars with different levels of modification depending on their starting root class. It also does away with the problematic notion of "families" or "types" of cars and the perceived need to group these together somehow.
CONS: the potential challenges of developing a fair and accurate prep point system that recognizes that different types of cars react differently to various types of modification. For example, starting a V8 powered LS1 Camaro and a 4 cylinder Integra Type R in the same root class presents some challenges, since the Camaro will be able to make considerably more power with the same number of prep points invested in engine modification. This
system also represents a major departure from the existing system and therefore disrupts the continuity of the series.
____________________________________________________
The description of each option is by no means exhaustive, but rather my best attempt to summarize each of them fairly. I have tried to list the basic PROS and CONS of each, but I'm sure each of you could add to these lists based on your own perspectives and experiences. Feel free to do so here, though I'd prefer not to clutter up people's e-mail inboxes with a lot of listserve discussion. This forum would be a better place to do that, thus this post :)
If anyone would like a more detailed description of the 4 options above, just say the word and I'll do my best to get you whatever additional info I can.
Enjoy and play nice!
Dave
____________________________________________________
To All Solo 1 Competitors:
Based on the results of the Solo 1 Competitor Survey as well as the car classification proposals and feedback received at the annual Solo Workshop, we are requesting that you review the four classification options presented below and give us your feedback as to their implementability for the 2003 season. Please send your feedback directly to dpratte4@cogeco.ca (please do not spam the entire Solo 1 listserve) so that we can determine what the majority of Solo 1 competitors prefer for 2003 and beyond.
For those of you who were unable to attend the Workshop, I am attempting to have the results of the Competitor Survey posted to the soloontario.com website.
OPTIONS:
1. Make no changes to the current system.
2. Minor changes to the existing system. This could include such adjustments as moving Pony Cars to B-family and/or moving a few of the very high index cars like the new M3 to 'Super Car' group in A-family. Another proposed adjustment to the current system is to start very high index cars (ie. 'super cars') at the SS1 or SP level or have them move from A1 to SP so that they can no longer proposition SS1 (making this a more viable class for A2 and A3 cars to compete in).
PROS: we maintain strong continuity with the existing system and prevent most competitors from having to go back to the drawing board to develop a competitive car. We also maintain a prep point schedule which received very positive feedback on the competitor survey.
CONS: we have a large number of disadvantaged cars in the so-called "bottomless pits" of A3, B3 and C3, which have too wide an indexed performance gap from top to bottom thus rendering the bottom 2/3rds of cars in these classes uncompetitive.
3. A two-family system based on an engine displacement split (adjusting for forced induction and rotary engines). Other methods of collapsing the existing 3 families into 2 were discussed (simply merging A & B; using a driveline split), but the displacement break idea received the strongest support due to the fact that it's based on a performance variable that is strongly associated with performance potential and creates two families with less performance spread from top to bottom. A displacement split of 2.8 litres could be used since this would create roughly equal sized families and is the the cut-off used in many other series such as the Speed Channel World Challenge (SWC) (creating their Touring and GT groups).
PROS: a reduction in the total number of classes (something the survey results indicated as a strong competitor preference), a compression of performance potential within each family since they are limited by displacement, and a potentially valuable design link (possibly making the series more marketable) to existing series like the SWC and the new ontario Touring Car Challenge series. The current prep point system would remain largely unchanged as well.
CONS: there will still be large "bottomless pits" at the lowest root class level in each family and there will still be wide performance potential gaps from top to bottom in each class (making it difficult for low index cars to have a competitive class to run in). Additionally, this system represents a fairly major departure from the existing system and therefore disrupts the continuity of the series.
4. A straight index system, where all cars are put in one of 12 root classes based solely on their performance index score (calculated using curb weight, horsepower, torque and suspension rating). This system would use a "step up" approach to dealing with car prep, where X number of prep points spent would "step" you up into the root class above your initial one. For example, if an Acura Integra LS starts in class 8 (out of 12 root classes) and makes 4 prep points worth of modifications it moves up to class 7 to compete against other 4 point cars that started in class 7 as well as completely stock cars that start in class 7 (say an Integra GSR) as well as more heavily modified cars that started in classes 9, 10, 11 or 12.
PROS: fewer total classes, a more competitive starting class for all cars (eliminates the "bottomless pit" problem) and the potential to compete against a wide variety of cars with different levels of modification depending on their starting root class. It also does away with the problematic notion of "families" or "types" of cars and the perceived need to group these together somehow.
CONS: the potential challenges of developing a fair and accurate prep point system that recognizes that different types of cars react differently to various types of modification. For example, starting a V8 powered LS1 Camaro and a 4 cylinder Integra Type R in the same root class presents some challenges, since the Camaro will be able to make considerably more power with the same number of prep points invested in engine modification. This
system also represents a major departure from the existing system and therefore disrupts the continuity of the series.
____________________________________________________
The description of each option is by no means exhaustive, but rather my best attempt to summarize each of them fairly. I have tried to list the basic PROS and CONS of each, but I'm sure each of you could add to these lists based on your own perspectives and experiences. Feel free to do so here, though I'd prefer not to clutter up people's e-mail inboxes with a lot of listserve discussion. This forum would be a better place to do that, thus this post :)
If anyone would like a more detailed description of the 4 options above, just say the word and I'll do my best to get you whatever additional info I can.
Enjoy and play nice!
Dave