

Moderator: evanstaniland
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 outI 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
'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 outI 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.
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
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 jacketsbrooksy wrote:Dover-
What if you split the competitors in 1/2 & run 2 stages simultaniously & would this mean more stages as well ??
brooksy
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
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.
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
- 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.
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 bigfor adding the Outlaw Class to your comp. Hope to get out to Cruiser to watch the next round.Thanks mate
Micka
Have a look on the Tough Tracks website.nissanbender wrote:any one get pics of the weekend -"Shane"?
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.
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Google [Bot] and 6 guests