Margin of victory - MOV

[Chris Huggins]

What is your opinion on the MOV penalty applied to the P1 car on day two of “Double” race weekends?

 

 

[Bill Strong]

I think we should add MOV to the top 6. 

[mostmint]

46 minutes ago, Bill Strong said:

I think we should add MOV to the top 6. 

What is rationale of 6 - vs 5 or 7?  I would think podium and class winners might make sense if it were to be expanded.

 

[chip]

The original rule didn't make any sense- the MOV was applied to the next 3 races.

The new rule- which is better, still doesn't make any sense.  Why is one car handicapped for a prior performance from the previous day?  All races are considered individual races.  So why on a double weekend the winner gets penalized on the second race, but if it's just a single race weekend, the winner doesn't get penalized their next race.

 

Can someone explain the logic behind this rule?

 

I think the rule should just be removed- is there any legitimate racing series that has a similar rule?

[LuckyKid]

11 minutes ago, chip said:

The original rule didn't make any sense- the MOV was applied to the next 3 races.

The new rule- which is better, still doesn't make any sense.  Why is one car handicapped for a prior performance from the previous day?  All races are considered individual races.  So why on a double weekend the winner gets penalized on the second race, but if it's just a single race weekend, the winner doesn't get penalized their next race.

 

Can someone explain the logic behind this rule?

 

I think the rule should just be removed- is there any legitimate racing series that has a similar rule?

World challenge had weight penalties for winners.

 

The root question needs to be "Is parity a goal of the series"?  Then dive deeper into that to question at the various levels where parity could be regulated and you'll see the basis of alot of rules or lack of rules.

 

Currently it seems the board does want parity and is going to great strides to slow down certain cars/teams. 

 

I like MOV because it's a default parity mechanism that is "blind".  Winning a CCES race overall is a big accomplishment and the MOV allows more opportunity for more winners.

[CoachMK21]

2 hours ago, chip said:

The original rule didn't make any sense- the MOV was applied to the next 3 races.

The new rule- which is better, still doesn't make any sense.  Why is one car handicapped for a prior performance from the previous day?  All races are considered individual races.  So why on a double weekend the winner gets penalized on the second race, but if it's just a single race weekend, the winner doesn't get penalized their next race.

 

Can someone explain the logic behind this rule?

 

I think the rule should just be removed- is there any legitimate racing series that has a similar rule?

 

Not endurance racing, but GridLife does a weight penalty for subsequent races during the weekend.

[Bill Strong]

I am up for adding a few hundred pounds to the Huggins cars that have dominated VIR this year. lol
Maybe make Chip wear this 60 pound weight suit.

 

[petawawarace]

13 minutes ago, Bill Strong said:

I am up for adding a few hundred pounds to the Huggins cars that have dominated VIR this year. lol
Maybe make Chip wear this 60 pound weight suit.

 

In the car?  Or all weekend all the time?

[Andrew D Johnson]

Historically I have not been a fan of the MOV at all. However, I think at Indy it worked very well for once. 

[JDChristianson]

The rule is fine the way it is this is supposed to be fun.   It makes more challenge for day one winner and opens the door a little for others.  

[MMiskoe]

My opinion is that applying a penalty on Sunday for winning on Saturday is a "sour grapes" move. 

 

You don't look at a 24 hour race and see who is up at the half way point and apply a penalty then.  You don't look at the winner of a single day race and declare that they have to take penalty laps at their next event.  So why are 2 day events different?

 

How is applying penalty laps to the Sunday portion of the weekend different than just flatout requesting that the winner doesn't come back? 

 

 

[MR2 Biohazard]

6 hours ago, chip said:

The original rule didn't make any sense- the MOV was applied to the next 3 races.

The new rule- which is better, still doesn't make any sense.  Why is one car handicapped for a prior performance from the previous day?  All races are considered individual races.  So why on a double weekend the winner gets penalized on the second race, but if it's just a single race weekend, the winner doesn't get penalized their next race.

 

Can someone explain the logic behind this rule?

 

I think the rule should just be removed- is there any legitimate racing series that has a similar rule?

You all win almost every single time you go out and I would expect you all to not like it, but it gives the rest of us a chance for the next race day and some hope to do well against the winner. Heck, if you are that good then the next day you can make it up and do fine, plus the 2nd day is less competition due to less entries and failures.

 

When it was 3 races or 6 moths it was terrible. We won Nelsons by 7 laps and pulled out of the next two events because there was no point.

2 hours ago, red0 said:

Historically I have not been a fan of the MOV at all. However, I think at Indy it worked very well for once. 

 

At Indy it sure did work well in help making it obvious. What if GBU never gets a MOV+1?

 

29 minutes ago, MMiskoe said:

My opinion is that applying a penalty on Sunday for winning on Saturday is a "sour grapes" move. 

 

You don't look at a 24 hour race and see who is up at the half way point and apply a penalty then.  You don't look at the winner of a single day race and declare that they have to take penalty laps at their next event.  So why are 2 day events different?

 

How is applying penalty laps to the Sunday portion of the weekend different than just flatout requesting that the winner doesn't come back? 

 

 

Do you think we should change it to MOV for the next race, may it be that weekend or the next one someone enters?

 

I have won on Saturday, got the MOV of 1 lap and also won on Sunday. It is harder for sure and does make the win that much more meaningful. 

 

Someone can put a petition suggestion of no more MOV and see if it gets approved.

[veris]

1 hour ago, MMiskoe said:

My opinion is that applying a penalty on Sunday for winning on Saturday is a "sour grapes" move. 

 

You don't look at a 24 hour race and see who is up at the half way point and apply a penalty then.  You don't look at the winner of a single day race and declare that they have to take penalty laps at their next event.  So why are 2 day events different?

 

How is applying penalty laps to the Sunday portion of the weekend different than just flatout requesting that the winner doesn't come back? 

 

 

MOV assists in current year / weekend leveling of the playing field. In a level playing field no team should have a 3+ laps on the field. MOV doesn't work well on poorly attended races, but otherwise it works the way it should. Either way it makes it more challenging for the winning team to repeat. I've won back to back races with MOV, I didn't think it was a sour grapes move.  My team was faster that race due to experience and it made winning the second day much more difficult. Racing is suppose to be a challenge. 

 

Your last question is ridiculous in regards to MOV. It would be accurate for a discussion around large VPI updates for cars without large MOV wins [which I disagree with]. In this discussion it just comes off as sour grapes. 

Edited December 7, 2020 by veris

[Andrew D Johnson]

59 minutes ago, MR2 Biohazard said:

 

When it was 3 races or 6 moths it was terrible. We won Nelsons by 7 laps and pulled out of the next two events because there was no point.

 

At Indy it sure did work well in help making it obvious. What if GBU never gets a MOV+1?

 

Yea, that was just terrible. Glad that multi event MOV is gone. If it was still around I probably wouldn't have come back to Champ. 

Well, they should have been moved to EC just based on spirit and intent of the rules IMO. 

[Snorman]

58 minutes ago, veris said:

MOV assists in current year / weekend leveling of the playing field. In a level playing field no team should have a 3+ laps on the field. MOV doesn't work well on poorly attended races, but otherwise it works the way it should. Either way it makes it more challenging for the winning team to repeat. I've won back to back races with MOV, I didn't think it was a sour grapes move.  My team was faster that race due to experience and it made winning the second day much more difficult. Racing is suppose to be a challenge. 

 

Your last question is ridiculous in regards to MOV. It would be accurate for a discussion around large VPI updates for cars without large MOV wins [which I disagree with]. In this discussion it just comes off as sour grapes. 

What CCES race(s) did you win back to back days with an MOV? Winning back to back at Road America is clearly much different than Laguna or Nelsons, where a lap is much shorter. The argument could be made that "time is time" regardless of the lap penalty, but there are FCY impacts as well. 

[Team Infiniti]

The multi event MOV about crushed team morale one year, we won a not so well attended event by something like 12 laps when 2nd and 3rd place dropped out right before the end, concerned, we brought it up w/officials and were told they were aware and thought nothing of it till we were spanking it @ Daytona a couple races later, only to have the laps applied around 4pm... Really glad to see it gone... Unfortunately we have yet to spank Daytona like that since.

 

As for the weekend MOV, not sure what happened w/Huggy, but this is amateur racing, it generally works if the mostly volunteer staff misses their mark, if/when one of us builds a better, but questionable mousetrap. (see Indy)

 

Not perfect for half a dozen reasons, but its there and no surprise.

Edited December 8, 2020 by Team Infiniti

[MMiskoe]

1 hour ago, veris said:

Your last question is ridiculous in regards to MOV. It would be accurate for a discussion around large VPI updates for cars without large MOV wins [which I disagree with]. In this discussion it just comes off as sour grapes. 

 

I am taking it to a bit of an extreme, in an effort to show what can happen, just extrapolate out to see how far the same intent and approach would lead you.  I didn't say it was reasonable or that it would take place.

 

If someone does all the right things, puts in all the effort and money, why should they be penalized?  If there is a gap in the rulebook that allows them to have an advantage, that should not be their fault for exploiting it.  It should be shame on the writers of the rule book how allowed it and shame on everyone else who didn't exploit it.  But don't penalize someone for being clever and skilled.

[enginerd]

I like it. It’s amateur racing. I like seeing different podiums. We’ve worn the ‘penalty lap badge of honor’ a few times and once achieved the double win. Big sense of accomplishment there. Bottom line: It has negatively affected us (and will in the future) but I still like the rule. 

Edited December 7, 2020 by enginerd

[wvumtnbkr]

1 hour ago, Snorman said:

What CCES race(s) did you win back to back days with an MOV? Winning back to back at Road America is clearly much different than Laguna or Nelsons, where a lap is much shorter. The argument could be made that "time is time" regardless of the lap penalty, but there are FCY impacts as well. 

I know that mov was applied with a multiplier for shorter and longer tracks and for time length of races.  This was back when it would be carried from 1 track to another.

 

That being said, if there was a 2 day event that had a 12 hour race and then a 4 hour race, I would expect the mov for day 2 to be modified.

 

 

As to your direct question, I believe there have been a few teams at a few different tracks that have won both days.

Edited December 7, 2020 by wvumtnbkr

[Snorman]

3 minutes ago, wvumtnbkr said:

I know that mov was applied with a multiplier for shorter and longer tracks and for time length of races.  This was back when it would be carried from 1 track to another.

 

That being said, if there was a 2 day event that had a 12 hour race and then a 4 hour race, I would expect the mov for day 2 to be modified.

 

 

As to your direct question, I believe there have been a few teams at a few different tracks that have won both days.

I think in the end, there may be little difference as the actual timed MOV is the same whether or not the laps are variable. However, when FCY's and off-strategy pits occur, that sort of goes out the window. 

On the extreme end, I see a place for MOV. But with a more even field, I don't. 

[JDChristianson]

29 minutes ago, enginerd said:

I like it. It’s amateur racing. I like seeing different podiums. We’ve worn the ‘penalty lap badge of honor’ a few times and once achieved the double win. Big sense of accomplishment there. Bottom line: It has negatively affected us (and will in the future) but I still like the rule. 

It didn’t really negatively impact your fun did it. 

[veris]

2 hours ago, Snorman said:

What CCES race(s) did you win back to back days with an MOV? Winning back to back at Road America is clearly much different than Laguna or Nelsons, where a lap is much shorter. The argument could be made that "time is time" regardless of the lap penalty, but there are FCY impacts as well. 

 

A Canadian Champcar race; medium fish small pond.  Really immaterial to the discussion. 

 

The lap MOV is not different track to track. It would be an issue if you used a MOV from a small track on a large track on a different weekend. It isn't different as is. It is exactly proportional unless a different layout is run. That is VERY rare though.  I have only seen it done once by Champcar.

[Clifford Beisler]

I think it should be more like.  Win 2 in a row start the third a lap down or something like that.  What we have now stinks.  

[veris]

2 hours ago, MMiskoe said:

If someone does all the right things, puts in all the effort and money, why should they be penalized?  If there is a gap in the rulebook that allows them to have an advantage, that should not be their fault for exploiting it.  It should be shame on the writers of the rule book how allowed it and shame on everyone else who didn't exploit it.  But don't penalize someone for being clever and skilled.

 

So if there is a gap in the rule book and no MOV what is the outcome for that entire year? You penalize EVERY other car in the series. At least this way if the first race is a blow out the second race will be competitive. 

 

If you want to bring a bazooka to a knife fight then race one of the series which is bracket racing. I'd prefer to see competitive racing. MOV guarantees that when the rule book isn't perfect. 

 

Indy should have demonstrated why this rule is needed. I'm shocked this is even being discussed. 

 

 

Edited December 7, 2020 by veris

[mostmint]

I don't enjoy when the same teams win with frequency.  I empathize with Ed's situation but I don't think we can write perfect rules.  While there could be some tweaking (MOV by minutes not laps) to accommodate for short vs longer tracks, I thing the MOV rule should carry for at least a few races.  

 

MOV only says "we don't want you to show up" if that is how you want to see it.  What it also says is "our team did great and the bar is raised for us to win the next one".  

 

It's like you people are only focused on winning.  So many teams show up to run on great tracks, hang with their buddies, get a lot of seat time, and maybe see how well they stack up.