CASC Ontario Region Message Forums  

Go Back   CASC Ontario Region Message Forums > CASC-OR Divisions > Time Attack Specific Forum

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #15  
Old 10-29-2017, 05:11 PM
jimmo-san's Avatar
jimmo-san jimmo-san is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 81
Re: Proposed Rule Changes for 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowpoke View Post
Undeclared mods are happening but the problem isn't what I would call rampant. Our change from a 5PI wide class with equal PAX to an iPAX a couple of years ago (Individual PAX system) means that even a small amount of undeclared modification can result in a different championship finishing position. This is really just one rule catching up to match others.

It's not as automatically harsh as the current/past rule which is an automatic bump to MOD1 for the event no matter what class you started in. That is what WAS in place for the last decade or more, but only if you had enough unclaimed PIP's that you should be bumped to the next class. We never updated that for the iPAX system because we missed it and protests are so rare in OTA that it went several years without being noticed. Undeclared PIP penalties right now that aren't enough to bump you a class are handled by guidelines in the GCR's which, lets be honest, most competitors DON'T read.
The following suggestion is not just in response to the rule change proposed above, but also to make the scoring clearer to all competitors. Or "transparent", using the current corporate buzz-word.

Before the introduction of iPAX in 2016 a competitor’s PAX factor was clear: if your car was in, for example, T3 then your PAX factor was 0.880 (I’m taking this from the copy of the 2013 Rules and Regs. Hopefully it’s correct).

With iPAX your iPAX factor depends on your PIP schedule submitted for the event. Your iPAX factor can vary from event to event depending on the mods you make between events. This introduces an extra bit of administrative burden to the volunteers doing the scoring but it generally seems to have worked out.

To make everything clearer to all competitors, I suggest that instead of listing the iPAX factor used for each competitor in calculating the interim results during competition, the competitor’s PI be listed.

The advantage is that it would be clear to the competitor if the PIP schedule he (or she) submitted for the event was used (or not used) to calculate the result. It might also be clearer to the competitor (and others) if undeclared mods were present on the car.

While you can also calculate your PI from your iPAX factor:

Slow tracks:

PI = (iPAX – 0.76024) / 0.0024

Fast tracks:

PI = (iPAX – 0.64036) / 0.0036

But not everyone is going to bring a calculator to the track and want to do this. So it would make everything much clearer to the competitors to just list the PI for each competitor.

I suggest the PI for each competitor be listed in both the interim results, shown on the TV during competition and in the final results published on the results archive web site. This way, if a competitor’s PI for the event was not correct, it would be immediately obvious to the competitor. It would not place any additional administrative burden on the scorers – just list the PI instead of the iPAX. But it would be clearer to the competitors which PI was being used for the event.

As Stephen points out, undeclared mods may not be rampant, but if someone made a mod before the event and inadvertently forgot to include it in his or her PIP schedule, it would be more obvious.
__________________
Jim (aka "Lawrence") Mazda Miata OTA #78
Reply With Quote
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.