Notice: We request that you don't just set up a new account at this time if you are a previous user.
If you used to be one of our moderators, please feel free to reach out to Chris via the facebook Outerlimits4x4 group and he will get you set back up with access should he need you.
If you used to be one of our moderators, please feel free to reach out to Chris via the facebook Outerlimits4x4 group and he will get you set back up with access should he need you.
Recovery:If you cannot access your old email address and don't remember your password, please click here to log a change of email address so you can do a password reset.
Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
Moderator: evanstaniland
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
^ thats cause 2 cars broke first track and didnt drive tracks 2 or 3 Cheers for the weekend Ben i had a ball, the tracks where very challenging to me, even getting past the 100 point mark was a struggle, really enjoyed watching the other drivers aswell as there was some awsome drives, look forward to round 2
Lj80 tuff truck "mr Grumpy"
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
Unfortunately probably wont be anymore stages for the next Round as it will be a trial and no one at Tough Tracks has tried this yet.brooksy wrote:Dover-
would this mean more stages as well ??
If we had one thing to comment it would be the stop penalty as this killed us on the first day which cost us a possible win on stage 2 & maybe a higher result in stage 1 even with Dave trying to take me out I think a 3 count would be a good idea as you do a 60 count for stacking so basically the same.
Both Dave & I agree that the rear steer penalty could be higher & maybe the cones penalty reduced to maybe a matching penalty of 100.
Just food for thought
brooksy
As for the official counting to 3 for someone to stop and change gears or do whatever, then you know my answer on that one ,and apart from that if i started to do that NO ONE would get stop penalties as most cars dont stop for any longer than 3 counts anyway. You guys did a hell of alot better on track 3 with your stops and they were 1/2 the amount of track 2, I will bring it up at a meeting and see what everyone else thinks.
YES to all you rear steer guys disgust we will be lifting the rear steer penalty up for each track and this will be discussed at a committee meeting and if you want to know why then look at the difference in penalty points between the non rear steers to the rear steer guys(approx 150-250) penalty difference.
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
'dislike'Dover wrote:Unfortunately probably wont be anymore stages for the next Round as it will be a trial and no one at Tough Tracks has tried this yet.brooksy wrote:Dover-
would this mean more stages as well ??
If we had one thing to comment it would be the stop penalty as this killed us on the first day which cost us a possible win on stage 2 & maybe a higher result in stage 1 even with Dave trying to take me out I think a 3 count would be a good idea as you do a 60 count for stacking so basically the same.
Both Dave & I agree that the rear steer penalty could be higher & maybe the cones penalty reduced to maybe a matching penalty of 100.
Just food for thought
brooksy
As for the official counting to 3 for someone to stop and change gears or do whatever, then you know my answer on that one ,and apart from that if i started to do that NO ONE would get stop penalties as most cars dont stop for any longer than 3 counts anyway. You guys did a hell of alot better on track 3 with your stops and they were 1/2 the amount of track 2, I will bring it up at a meeting and see what everyone else thinks.
YES to all you rear steer guys disgust we will be lifting the rear steer penalty up for each track and this will be discussed at a committee meeting and if you want to know why then look at the difference in penalty points between the non rear steers to the rear steer guys(approx 150-250) penalty difference.
you cant change half way thru the series... all the new people entering rd 2 & 3 would be at a disadvantage
as for stops, i thought if it was obvious that it was a , stop and rev, for disconnect only, that it was ok.... obviously up to stage managers decision
michael
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
Any new entries for rounds 2 & 3 won't be able to win the overall for the year anyway.11_evl wrote:
'dislike'
you cant change half way thru the series... all the new people entering rd 2 & 3 would be at a disadvantage
as for stops, i thought if it was obvious that it was a , stop and rev, for disconnect only, that it was ok.... obviously up to stage managers decision
Redlands 4WD Centre
GU Wagon - for Touring & Towing
Landrover County 110 D/C Styleside
SBC, Nissan drivetrain, twin sticks etc. etc.
GU Wagon - for Touring & Towing
Landrover County 110 D/C Styleside
SBC, Nissan drivetrain, twin sticks etc. etc.
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
That's basically what Ben did - as soon as a competitor got past the 500 point marker he handed the score sheet to another official and started the next competitor off. If we were to do this as well as run 2 tracks simultaniously, we would need to have 12 officials, (plus lots more pink jackets ), a 2nd lot of track markers, and the spectators would be split as to which track to go to.brooksy wrote:Dover-
What if you split the competitors in 1/2 & run 2 stages simultaniously & would this mean more stages as well ??
brooksy
I think that Ben's approach to make the track longer, run 2 cars per track and keep everyone together gives the best outcome. Although it requires more officials than with the shorter track, I am thinking of implementing this style of track over the other classes in the competition.
Hmm - further discussion required. Yeaah Ben Good idea.
Pete
Redlands 4WD Centre
GU Wagon - for Touring & Towing
Landrover County 110 D/C Styleside
SBC, Nissan drivetrain, twin sticks etc. etc.
GU Wagon - for Touring & Towing
Landrover County 110 D/C Styleside
SBC, Nissan drivetrain, twin sticks etc. etc.
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
We got so many stops on track 2 it wasnt funny, 85% of them were ONLY for disengaging or engaging front or rear drive for digs.11_evl wrote: as for stops, i thought if it was obvious that it was a , stop and rev, for disconnect only, that it was ok.... obviously up to stage managers decision
Getting rid of stops all together would be my pick, makes a scorers job so much easier. Its very easy to miss a stop or 2. We got rid of stops in ozrock scoring very early on and in the end it makes no real differance. The one area it did make a difference was it made scoring so much easier. The easier your scoring system is the more accurate it becomes.
You would be way better off having a DNF time of 12 mins per track then having stops. With this it helps manage the time it takes to run all rigs through a stage and keeps everyone moving anyway as no one wants to time out. Now just incase you were woundering, every track you had there on the weekend could have been finished with about a 6 - 8 min dnf time so 12 mins is a huge amount of time, but if you start making mistakes the time gets eaten up very quickly and before you know it its TIME UP.
Just out of interest the 2nd TTC way back in 2002 had 6 (or was it 8) min DNF times on every stage, now they are all 10 mins.
As for rear steer, it should be about 100 points. Having it the same as a cone is too much, but at 30 well that was just laughable.
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
A few problems with running 2 cars at once on the same track.
1 it means its not the same person scoring the same car for the same track, which means 2 cars could be scored very differently for the same thing.
2 if car one gets hung up in a spot for so long it means car 2 could catch up and have to stop which means a penility.
Better off running 2 tracks very close to each other.
A track only needs 4 officals max.
But at the end of the day I am just there to have fun and will do that no matter how its run. Plus it means I get to drive instead of work
1 it means its not the same person scoring the same car for the same track, which means 2 cars could be scored very differently for the same thing.
2 if car one gets hung up in a spot for so long it means car 2 could catch up and have to stop which means a penility.
Better off running 2 tracks very close to each other.
A track only needs 4 officals max.
But at the end of the day I am just there to have fun and will do that no matter how its run. Plus it means I get to drive instead of work
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
Guts ring me 0418222722 and i can answer all your questions,there are way to many questions here that i am NOT going to answer on a public forum so that people can take what i type and turn it around to cause an argument.
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
KEEP THE IDEAS COMING - THEY WILL ALL BE CONSIDEREDGuts wrote:We got so many stops on track 2 it wasnt funny, 85% of them were ONLY for disengaging or engaging front or rear drive for digs. DIG LESS11_evl wrote: as for stops, i thought if it was obvious that it was a , stop and rev, for disconnect only, that it was ok.... obviously up to stage managers decision
Getting rid of stops all together would be my pick, makes a scorers job so much easier. Its very easy to miss a stop or 2. We got rid of stops in ozrock scoring very early on and in the end it makes no real differance. The one area it did make a difference was it made scoring so much easier. The easier your scoring system is the more accurate it becomes.
You would be way better off having a DNF time of 12 mins per track then having stops. WE CAN'T HAVE ANYTHING TIMED IN THE EVENT - EVEN ROCKSTACKING IS ONLY A '60 COUNT' - WE COULDN'T AFFORD THE INSURANCE. BUT I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING - WE COULD MAYBE START EACH COMPETITOR AT SAY 10 MINUTE INTERVALS AND IF SOME-ONE WAS LEFT ON THE TRACK THEN THEY WOULD BE DNF With this it helps manage the time it takes to run all rigs through a stage and keeps everyone moving anyway as no one wants to time out. Now just incase you were woundering, every track you had there on the weekend could have been finished with about a 6 - 8 min dnf time so 12 mins is a huge amount of time, but if you start making mistakes the time gets eaten up very quickly and before you know it its TIME UP.
Just out of interest the 2nd TTC way back in 2002 had 6 (or was it 8) min DNF times on every stage, now they are all 10 mins.
As for rear steer, it should be about 100 points. Having it the same as a cone is too much, but at 30 well that was just laughable.
Redlands 4WD Centre
GU Wagon - for Touring & Towing
Landrover County 110 D/C Styleside
SBC, Nissan drivetrain, twin sticks etc. etc.
GU Wagon - for Touring & Towing
Landrover County 110 D/C Styleside
SBC, Nissan drivetrain, twin sticks etc. etc.
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
Guts wrote:A few problems with running 2 cars at once on the same track.
1 it means its not the same person scoring the same car for the same track, which means 2 cars could be scored very differently for the same thing.NOT SO - BEN SCORED EVERY CAR TO THE 500 POINT MARK THEN DARRYN (I THINK) SCORED THE CAR FROM THE 500 ONWARDS - SO EVERYONE WAS SCORED CONSISTENTLY
2 if car one gets hung up in a spot for so long it means car 2 could catch up and have to stop which means a penility.NOT SO - IF AN OFFICIAL STOPS A VEHICLE THEN THERE IS NO PENALTY
Better off running 2 tracks very close to each other.
A track only needs 4 officals max. 3 PER SECTION - 1 SCORING, 1 TO WATCH THE OTHER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE AND ONE TO FOLLOW THROUGH & REPLACE ANY CONES THAT ARE MOVED AND TO KEEP SPECTATORS OFF THE TRACK - THAT'S IT - SO 6 PER TRACK IF WE SPLIT THE TRACK THE WAY BEN DID
But at the end of the day I am just there to have fun and will do that no matter how its run. Plus it means I get to drive instead of work
Redlands 4WD Centre
GU Wagon - for Touring & Towing
Landrover County 110 D/C Styleside
SBC, Nissan drivetrain, twin sticks etc. etc.
GU Wagon - for Touring & Towing
Landrover County 110 D/C Styleside
SBC, Nissan drivetrain, twin sticks etc. etc.
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
Peter you really only need 2 officials per course. Putting cones back in place can easily be done by them.
You guys are breaking new ground for Tough Tracks, but you're not breaking new ground. It's been done before and done successfully, but sadly none of the rock crawling comps exist anymore, so you guys are basically it. Having been an official and competitor in WE ROCK and XRCC in the past, I know that you guys can run more courses with less effort than you put in now, and have them completed faster by the competitors.
I also agree with Guts. You're scoring system is way too complicated.
For example, in WE ROCK (and I know you're not trying to be WE ROCK) there was very simple scoring, but more points meant you did worse. DNS was 50 points. So if you didn't pass the start gate or attempt the course you got 50 points. DNF was 40 points, minus any progress points you got. Each gate was worth 1 point. So if you DNF'd but passed through 3 gates, you got a score of 37. That way, a competitor that attempted a course could NEVER score worse than another that didn't attempt. There were no stopping penalities. Reverse was 1 point. Hitting a cone was 10 points. Rear steer was 5 points.
It's a much simpler system that has worked for around 10 yrs.
I understand the difficulty with Insurance for a timed event, and your solution is probably a good way around that. And the best part is, you would still only need 2 officials to regulate it. So you could run more courses faster, and with less people.
You could also double the number of courses by running them in reverse direction. That way you do no more setting up work, but have more tracks. A few subtle changes in cone location can dramatically change things, and I bet the competitors would love to drive more and sit around less.
My 2 cents...but for you, its free.
You guys are breaking new ground for Tough Tracks, but you're not breaking new ground. It's been done before and done successfully, but sadly none of the rock crawling comps exist anymore, so you guys are basically it. Having been an official and competitor in WE ROCK and XRCC in the past, I know that you guys can run more courses with less effort than you put in now, and have them completed faster by the competitors.
I also agree with Guts. You're scoring system is way too complicated.
For example, in WE ROCK (and I know you're not trying to be WE ROCK) there was very simple scoring, but more points meant you did worse. DNS was 50 points. So if you didn't pass the start gate or attempt the course you got 50 points. DNF was 40 points, minus any progress points you got. Each gate was worth 1 point. So if you DNF'd but passed through 3 gates, you got a score of 37. That way, a competitor that attempted a course could NEVER score worse than another that didn't attempt. There were no stopping penalities. Reverse was 1 point. Hitting a cone was 10 points. Rear steer was 5 points.
It's a much simpler system that has worked for around 10 yrs.
I understand the difficulty with Insurance for a timed event, and your solution is probably a good way around that. And the best part is, you would still only need 2 officials to regulate it. So you could run more courses faster, and with less people.
You could also double the number of courses by running them in reverse direction. That way you do no more setting up work, but have more tracks. A few subtle changes in cone location can dramatically change things, and I bet the competitors would love to drive more and sit around less.
My 2 cents...but for you, its free.
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
- Thanks MickaMicka wrote:Peter you really only need 2 officials per course. Putting cones back in place can easily be done by them.
You guys are breaking new ground for Tough Tracks, but you're not breaking new ground. It's been done before and done successfully, but sadly none of the rock crawling comps exist anymore, so you guys are basically it. Having been an official and competitor in WE ROCK and XRCC in the past, I know that you guys can run more courses with less effort than you put in now, and have them completed faster by the competitors.
I also agree with Guts. You're scoring system is way too complicated.
For example, in WE ROCK (and I know you're not trying to be WE ROCK) there was very simple scoring, but more points meant you did worse. DNS was 50 points. So if you didn't pass the start gate or attempt the course you got 50 points. DNF was 40 points, minus any progress points you got. Each gate was worth 1 point. So if you DNF'd but passed through 3 gates, you got a score of 37. That way, a competitor that attempted a course could NEVER score worse than another that didn't attempt. There were no stopping penalities. Reverse was 1 point. Hitting a cone was 10 points. Rear steer was 5 points.
It's a much simpler system that has worked for around 10 yrs.
I understand the difficulty with Insurance for a timed event, and your solution is probably a good way around that. And the best part is, you would still only need 2 officials to regulate it. So you could run more courses faster, and with less people.
You could also double the number of courses by running them in reverse direction. That way you do no more setting up work, but have more tracks. A few subtle changes in cone location can dramatically change things, and I bet the competitors would love to drive more and sit around less.
My 2 cents...but for you, its free.
Yes we could get away with 2 officials on most of our tracks - or 4 the way Ben was running his.
We know that there have been a number of rockcrawling events been & gone (I used to sponsor Rockcrawling Qld and one of our senior members, Pete Forsyth, was also a founding member of Rockcrawling Qld) - but the club didn't sit down and decide that we wanted to run a rockcrawling event. We were receiving a number of requests to include truggies & buggies in our existing competition. Our comp already included 3 classes and these vehicles didn't fit into any of the existing classes - so we created a new class.
If you look at our rules, section 3 is on Scoring. This is how all the classes are scored. We know that this is not how other rockcrawling events are scored, but through-out our events we have people who compete accross different class with dfferent vehicles, or navi for some-one in a different class - and this is the case with Michael & Sonya - Sonya navis for Mick, and the Mick navis for Sonya in Trophy Class.
It is something that I have always considered as a competitor (driver & navi), sponsor, and official that the 'drive time' is too short in our events. Ben has successfully trialled a method of increasing the drive time and I will be submitting this to the club for consideration by the other classes. And that is another thing - it is a club. It is not being run like the winch challenges or TT where a head honcho makes the rules. The rules are all voted upon. There are some rules in there that I don't like, but that is how the club has voted. As members change and the club progresses, some of these rules have changed or been overturned - that is also why we have a large and fluid set of rules.
But the rules are there, and we find that a number of competitors have not even read the rules - they didn't know that their navis had to wear hi-vis vests or that they are required to have a front recovery point - or what colour the point had to be. They certainly didn't read the scoring rules and that is why they find it difficult. If you haven't played poker before and you decide that you won't read the rules or listen to some-one about how it is played, that learning as you go is quite confusing and seems overly difficult. The same here.
Our event is not new, it is only new to some of our competitors. But after a couple of rounds they will get used to it. The Trophy, Modified & Challenge classes have no problems in less capable vehicles. As for Digs - sometimes the dig doesn't achieve what you thought it would and it would have been better to stop & reverse a few times - this is a judgement call. From what I am hearing, Rear Steer will be more heavily penalised to try to even up the field a bit - sorry Mick & Rhett - it will be voted on.
This is Tough Tracks - not Tough Obstacles - and yes with a set of cones you can make a carpark difficult. We set out a course with cones as gates to direct where you are required to drive an obstacle (not how - that is up to the driver & navi). It is not a case of driving the obstacles 'at will' but through the track we have laid out - and yes the cones can be a pain in the butt - and yes we sometimes get it wrong - but in the end we are all volunteers and we all give up our time to set up each event, and to set up tracks in a natural bush environment, and to run the event in a club environment. If competitors want to change the rules - make suggestions and they will be taken on board - OR - join the club and have a vote.
Bring on Round 2 - LCMP - Queens Jubilee long week-end in June
Peter K
Redlands 4WD Centre
GU Wagon - for Touring & Towing
Landrover County 110 D/C Styleside
SBC, Nissan drivetrain, twin sticks etc. etc.
GU Wagon - for Touring & Towing
Landrover County 110 D/C Styleside
SBC, Nissan drivetrain, twin sticks etc. etc.
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
I'm not criticising your event, Peter. I understand the time that you and your guys put into, and give up, for each event. As would all the competitors.
I know you've had the other classes for a long time. I remember when you used to compete in your 110" Defender on 33" or 35" tyres. All I am saying is, there are a few subtle changes that you guys could make and I believe the number of competitors would almost double in Outlaw class alone.
And as a parting comment let me say a big for adding the Outlaw Class to your comp. Hope to get out to Cruiser to watch the next round.
Micka
I know you've had the other classes for a long time. I remember when you used to compete in your 110" Defender on 33" or 35" tyres. All I am saying is, there are a few subtle changes that you guys could make and I believe the number of competitors would almost double in Outlaw class alone.
And as a parting comment let me say a big for adding the Outlaw Class to your comp. Hope to get out to Cruiser to watch the next round.
Micka
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
any one get pics of the weekend -"Shane"?
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
Peter KMicka wrote:I'm not criticising your event, Peter. I understand the time that you and your guys put into, and give up, for each event. As would all the competitors.Thanks Micka, and all comments are considered - I was just explaining the history & reasons why I think there will be no change (in the immediate future) to the stop penalties etc --- more for the benefit of competitors who don't know how the outlaw class came about
I know you've had the other classes for a long time. I remember when you used to compete in your 110" Defender on 33" or 35" tyres.Yep, that was me - that could even have been in the Short Course days - the old defender is undergoing a huge transformation at the moment All I am saying is, there are a few subtle changes that you guys could make and I believe the number of competitors would almost double in Outlaw class aloneWe are still learning with Outlaw Class and I'm sure that with more members from the Outlaw Class in the club, the more motions will be put forward, discussed & voted on.
And as a parting comment let me say a big for adding the Outlaw Class to your comp. Hope to get out to Cruiser to watch the next round.Thanks mate
Micka
Redlands 4WD Centre
GU Wagon - for Touring & Towing
Landrover County 110 D/C Styleside
SBC, Nissan drivetrain, twin sticks etc. etc.
GU Wagon - for Touring & Towing
Landrover County 110 D/C Styleside
SBC, Nissan drivetrain, twin sticks etc. etc.
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
Have a look on the Tough Tracks website.nissanbender wrote:any one get pics of the weekend -"Shane"?
Re: Tough Tracks 4x4 Challenge Series-Round 1
dig vs reverse.bowtie landie wrote: As for Digs - sometimes the dig doesn't achieve what you thought it would and it would have been better to stop & reverse a few times - this is a judgement call. From what I am hearing, Rear Steer will be more heavily penalised to try to even up the field a bit - sorry Mick & Rhett - it will be voted on.
to reverse it includes 2 stops and a reverse.
a dig should only get 2 stops (thats if you cant disengane and re engagae front or rear outputs on the fly, with an atlast sometimes you can and some times you cant). For a rig like mine that does digs with ease and precision you should be way in front doing a dig over a reverse. Plus crowds love it when we do rear steer digs with about 300hp
I stated my thoughts on rear steer in an earlier post, about 50 to 100 points is what it should be per course.
Now just to clear things up I mostly say remove stop penilties to make it easier to score.
If someone stops 30 times on a course its very easy to miss 3 or 4 of them, makes the scorer very busy and can make people make some silly mistakes which in the long run could make your insurance worse. remove stops and it gives people the time to think about a line etc which could prevent someone getting hert.
A DNF time on a cousre isnt timing someone, its just a max time you can take. Its completly different to timing how long someone takes to complete a course. For starters one has a count DOWN timer, the other has a stop watch timer.
As for joining the club and helping with rules etc, no thanks. I have done my time in helping to run events, now its my time to drive em.
In all honesty I couldnt realy give a shit about rules n scoring systems, I am just out there to drive as much as I can and have fun
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], Semrush [Bot] and 100 guests