Jump to content

How does the club want to determine when a car's VPI gets reviewed?


Recommended Posts

  • ChampCar Staff
9 minutes ago, Rodger Coan-Burningham said:

 

Talk about putting words in somebody's mouth.  I don't want to raise points on anybody, I asked how it should be determined whether we should.  What is the process.

OK, I see that as a few options.

 

1- FTD- Do we use an FTD to determine if a car should be reviewed? Does that cause the reaction to review it and then determine if it should be vpi raised? Now when we look at the FTD do we first look at the tires and say, OK, that car set FTD, but was only .5 seconds faster than 2nd place at track A, 2.8 seconds faster than the 2nd place car at track B, but track B had a very very limited teams, but runs really wide cooper tires. Would that say, ok, we can see why it is fast and no worries, or, we do not care how they are fast, they are just fast and need to be reviewed.

2-On that same point if a team runs RS4 tires and sets a FTD within the top 3 and very strong competition that is running fast tires do we review that car then? We know they would be much much faster with the fast tires so that car vpi should be reviewed also.

3-Do we review based on % of wins of a team? If team A wins more than 50% of the races they enter in a year do we review the platforms VPI? Then do we raise it to try to get parity for the entire field, which really just hurt that one team at the top and kills the mid pack teams. Then be danged the with the mid pack teams and hurt them at that cost? 

4-Do we review every single VPI every year to see if it is still right? That would be fair for all and not a knee jerk reaction if a team wins they get the fear of the VPI increase. Though if we have 50 VPI's go up and down then how would teams react to that. I would think total revolt and people would pitchfork and say rules stability dang it. Though if a platform is underperforming due to teams not getting it right yet should we raise the vpi because we know someday, somebody might just go to the extreme in that platform, run the tires and get pro drivers?

 

I do think there is no good answer and trying not piss of anyone is going to be hard. If you see a fast platform that wins people will want to give that platform points so they can do better themselves and screw that team over. That team is pissed and has a high probability of leaving the series. The e36 was popular, got a high vpi increase and almost all of them left. Problem solved in some peoples eyes as they have a better chance of winning now that the E36 teams were pushed to WRL. Though as a business the number one priority should be to retain customers and revenue, so I do not see how that strategy can be any good long term. . If you do nothing then the people who want a vpi increase to teams the beat them will be pissed and complain and you need to deal with the vocal mass, which are usually the loudest and can get their way by sheer volume of yelling. There is not good answer.

 

The great thing I see right now is that we have great racing and a great ruleset. Sure, not perfect, nothing is, but it is pretty dang good. No platform is walking away with anything and there are great battles in the field. I do not want to see anyone pushed out and away and want to continue to have that battle to the end. If someone beats me and we battle to the end then I am happy. If we push teams out and I win by a lap without a battle because we pushed someone away, shame on me and I have a hollow boring unsatisfying victory. If that happens you can have my trophy as the memory of the battle an earning it is not there and the win was for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, chbright said:

 

That sounds So much like wack a mole without knowing it was a team that prepped and drove well because a lack of data. If this is the way, deviation from the known standard car sets a team up to get wacked for their performance. Even if they are well within the rules, have great drivers, and great prep.

The problem with this line of thinking is that there are at least 5 teams at any race that have the same positives.

 

Great prep, great drivers, great strategy.  

 

If great teams are consistently getting beat, then it's time to look at the car.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bandit said:

I've been thinking about the same thing, along with the apparent thought some teams need to be "brought back to the field".

 

I think the better solution would be to lower the VPI's of somewhat competitive cars versus only raising VPI's to slow certain platforms because a few teams are fast.

 

If you don't want certain teams winning all the races, make other cars more competitive versus penalizing 1/2 the field with boosted VPIs. Would certainly keep the grumbles to a minimum compared to the alternative. I mean no one wants to take parts off their car. Especially when they are not winning.

 

eta-If CC was to boost VPI's on the cars the fastest teams run, they will still be faster than everyone else with those same cars, so what is really gained?

T hats how you make racing more expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, wvumtnbkr said:

The problem with this line of thinking is that there are at least 5 teams at any race that have the same positives.

 

Great prep, great drivers, great strategy.  

 

If great teams are consistently getting beat, then it's time to look at the car.

Sounds like only the current great teams allowed

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, chbright said:

Sounds like only the current great teams allowed

Not at all.

 

I said look at.  I didn't say jack up their value.

 

It would be a bit shocking if a team came into champcar and was immediately winning races against established teams.  There is a lot to learn and study to be competitive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Technical Advisory Committee

Just in case everyone at home has missed Troy's thinly veiled posts...

 

This is about the NC Miata...

The other "team" in the posts is my team.

 

 

This is what happened so far behind the curtain.

 

I requested a review of the NC Miata VPI. 

 

After watching Nemesis at VIR N and CMP, plus reviewing data from NCM and performing my own analysis on lap times, stint times, and knowing the issues that team experienced, plus looking at data from other NC teams (Basil Weenie specifically as another well-done NC), I believed that the car was under-valued.

 

I suggested it needs a vpi bump.  I threw out 480-500 (of which, of course, 500 is what was communicated outside the meeting..).  This was based on the TAC's "beta" VPI calculator formula, which is a spreadsheet they developed to guide/assist in VPI assignments.

 

The BOD in that meeting requested that the TAC review the issue and report back to the BOD.

 

I did not know that Troy was building a NC Miata swap car.

I did not expect to be accused of "attempting personal gain via penalizing others".

 

Within 24 hours, the BOD had a lengthy email from Troy, describing how Grant/Chuck are gods gift to race car driving, how Cooper RS3-R are basically 200 TW hoosiers, and a few other things, basically TLDR the NC Miata value is too high and it should be lowered to 100 points.

 

The TAC reviewed the NC Miata, including inviting Mazda Motorsports representative to attend the meeting.  This individual spent over an hour answering questions regarding the platform, its strengths, weaknesses, mods, sneaky gains, etc.  As the TAC chair I was the meeting organizer but specifically verbalized at multiple times in the meeting that I was not getting involved in the discussion since I had already been accused of bias on the matter.  

 

The TAC recommended a VPI increase on the platform to 460 points.  This has been presented to the BOD but not yet voted on.


At this point, I regret bringing up the issue all together.  This wasn't personal.  I have, and will continue to perform, data analysis on my teams performance in addition to competitors performances after each race.  I do this to learn what I did wrong. I do this to learn what THEY did wrong, so I can exploit their weaknesses.  Its racecraft.  Data doesn't lie and when you look at (correct) data with the correct perspective it provides excellent information.  I thought I was doing the right thing as a BOD member, for the club, to speak up when I see an issue.  I knew better than to bring up anything related to an E30 or SC300 as I have personal stake in those.  What I didn't anticipate is that if I bring up any value that has been successful, Its going to be biased since I'm a competitor.

 

I don't care what the NC value is personally.  I already said this to the person who accused me, but I'll say it again here.  I'd rather the value go down to 300 and maintain our working relationship (dare I say friendship) than let this issue come between us.  I don't want to alienate Nemesis, Troy, or any other NC team.  Perhaps my initial suggestion was high, but that's what TAC and the BOD as a unit is for - Everyone needs to be mitigated at some level.  

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since Chris waded in, I will note that the flip side is that the NC was faster than the field in exactly ONE race, by 2 seconds over Chris at CMP.  In no other race in the last 18 months has the car been faster than the field.  The win in question was by Grant's team with great drivers, pro-built car and hot tires.  In all the other races the car finished middle of the pack to near the top lap times and results in a few cases.  So the question is do we increase the VPI based on one hot team at one race?  I believe its possible it needs an increase but we don't have the data/results to really show that right now.  So do we raise it now, potentially disenfranchising all the NC teams running today and those building NCs?  I'm very interested, like Rodger, in finding out what members think.  The TAC generally just looks at numbers on paper, not the effect on membership on potential decisions. The Board is tasked with looking at the bigger picture which we are in the process of doing.  I will make the votes public.  

Edited by Jer
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Jer said:

Since Chris waded in, I will note that the flip side is that the NC was faster than the field in exactly ONE race, by 2 seconds over Chris at CMP.  In no other race in the last 18 months has the car been faster than the field.  The win in question was by Grant's team with great drivers, pro-built car and hot tires.  In all the other races the car finished middle of the pack to near the top lap times and results in a few cases.  So the question is do we increase the VPI based on one hot team at one race?  I believe its possible it needs an increase but we don't have the data/results to really show that right now.  So do we raise it now, potentially disenfranchising all the NC teams running today and those building NCs?  I'm very interested, like Rodger, in finding out what members think.  The TAC generally just looks at numbers on paper, not the effect on membership on potential decisions. The Board is tasked with looking at the bigger picture which we are in the process of doing.  I will make the votes public.  

 

Are hot tires worth 2 seconds?  Isn't that the easy button instead of VPI?  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Originalsterm said:

 

Are hot tires worth 2 seconds?  Isn't that the easy button instead of VPI?  


They are a button and they are worth some time. How much they are worth over the course of a race is what you will get no agreement on. At least from me anyway, and I have driven on them all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rodger Coan-Burningham said:


They are a button and they are worth some time. How much they are worth over the course of a race is what you will get no agreement on. At least from me anyway, and I have driven on them all. 

I have not driven the Coopers but i think it's safe to say (based on watching AND on actually using these tires) that the RE71s were 2 seconds faster per lap than RS4s at multiple tracks.  Why would anyone run the faster, grippier tires that wear out way faster than RS4s?  2 seconds per lap.  That's why.  Ask any team using RE71s or Coopers why they do it.  This is pretty obvious.  

 

Edited by Jer
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rodger Coan-Burningham said:


They are a button and they are worth some time. How much they are worth over the course of a race is what you will get no agreement on. At least from me anyway, and I have driven on them all. 

 

So the push (not necessarily by you) is to adjust the VPI of a car who bested someone 1 time and penalize teams who aren't that fast yet?  What was the supporting data to push the VPI up on this particular model?  I don't envy anyone who is tasked with setting values since there are so many variables, but tires and drivers NEED to be factored in somehow. 

 

We run enough races all over the place.  Can we get a volunteer (or someone who is voluntold) to run a race and demonstrate the lap times of different tires to either put this to rest or to place a ranked order on these tires and see if it should be addressed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jer said:

Since Chris waded in, I will note that the flip side is that the NC was faster than the field in exactly ONE race, by 2 seconds over Chris at CMP.  In no other race in the last 18 months has the car been faster than the field.  The win in question was by Grant's team with great drivers, pro-built car and hot tires.  In all the other races the car finished middle of the pack to near the top lap times and results in a few cases.  So the question is do we increase the VPI based on one hot team at one race?  I believe its possible it needs an increase but we don't have the data/results to really show that right now.  So do we raise it now, potentially disenfranchising all the NC teams running today and those building NCs?  I'm very interested, like Rodger, in finding out what members think.  The TAC generally just looks at numbers on paper, not the effect on membership on potential decisions. The Board is tasked with looking at the bigger picture which we are in the process of doing.  I will make the votes public.  

Fastest at NCM on Saturday and sunday as well.

 

Won s aturday.  2nd place s unday.

 

Won CMP on Saturday as well.

 

Just getting the facts out there.  It was not just 1 time.

 

 

Edited by wvumtnbkr
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jer said:

Since Chris waded in, I will note that the flip side is that the NC was faster than the field in exactly ONE race, by 2 seconds over Chris at CMP.  In no other race in the last 18 months has the car been faster than the field.  The win in question was by Grant's team with great drivers, pro-built car and hot tires.  In all the other races the car finished middle of the pack to near the top lap times and results in a few cases.  So the question is do we increase the VPI based on one hot team at one race?  I believe its possible it needs an increase but we don't have the data/results to really show that right now.  So do we raise it now, potentially disenfranchising all the NC teams running today and those building NCs?  I'm very interested, like Rodger, in finding out what members think.  The TAC generally just looks at numbers on paper, not the effect on membership on potential decisions. The Board is tasked with looking at the bigger picture which we are in the process of doing.  I will make the votes public.  

FTD both days at VIR North in December- so what's that FOUR races?

But who's counting...

Edited by chip
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Jer said:

Lol.  How much faster at NCM?   An NA Miata was right there with them.  So e30s win every other race.  Why no outcry?

I was merely pointing out that it wasn't 1 time as you said.  

 

It also wasn't a mid pack finish.

 

I'm just keeping the facts straight.

 

P.s. there were a bunch of cars that are considered fast in this series that got smoked by those 2 miatas by multiple seconds.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, chip said:

FTD both days at VIR North in December- so what's that FOUR races?

But who's counting...

If a team was winning 50-60% of the races they enter and are always on the podium that would stand out.  A team that does it 4 times isn't there yet IMO.  

 

If the NC Miata gets re-evaluated based on this, what about all other race winners?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jer said:

Since Chris waded in, I will note that the flip side is that the NC was faster than the field in exactly ONE race, by 2 seconds over Chris at CMP.  In no other race in the last 18 months has the car been faster than the field.  

We are just responding to this part.

 

This is not true at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Originalsterm said:

If a team was winning 50-60% of the races they enter and are always on the podium that would stand out.  A team that does it 4 times isn't there yet IMO.  

 

If the NC Miata gets re-evaluated based on this, what about all other race winners?

Won ncm on Saturday (finished second on Sunday)  Won cmp on Saturday.  Won virN on Sunday.  

 

Set fast lap in all of those events.

 

3 out of 6 races with a 2nd as well.

 

As far as I can tell, that is all the races that have been entered with this car since December. 

 

 

I would like to point out, that I am NOT calling for a change to the VPI.  I am just correcting the facts.

Edited by wvumtnbkr
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wvumtnbkr said:

Won ncm on Saturday (finished second on Sunday)  Won cmp on Saturday.  Won virN on Sunday.  

 

Set fast lap in all of those events.

 

3 out of 6 races with a 2nd as well.

Who won NCM on Sunday? Who won CMP on Sunday? Who won VIRN on Saturday?  Are they also be looked at?

 

I would really like to see the formula or calculator used to determine that car's value compared to any other car in the series. I'm curious how these values are achieved, honestly, I'm a data guy and my mind can be changed with the numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Originalsterm said:

Who won NCM on Sunday? Who won CMP on Sunday? Who won VIRN on Saturday?  Are they also be looked at?

 

I would really like to see the formula or calculator used to determine that car's value compared to any other car in the series. I'm curious how these values are achieved, honestly, I'm a data guy and my mind can be changed with the numbers.

No idea if all of the other teams are being looked at.

 

NCM sunday winner was another miata (different generation) that wouldn't have won if it was for MOV. 

 

CMP s unday was Huggins orange car.  The miata in question broke their exhaust and retired from the race.

 

VIR n, I'm not sure.  I wasn't there and don't want to go back and look.  They finished like 9th or something on saturday.

 

 

I gave you that data above because it basically satisfied your earlier statement.

 

Edited by wvumtnbkr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ChampCar Staff
7 minutes ago, wvumtnbkr said:

Won ncm on Saturday (finished second on Sunday)  Won cmp on Saturday.  Won virN on Sunday.  

 

Set fast lap in all of those events.

 

3 out of 6 races with a 2nd as well.

 

As far as I can tell, that is all the races that have been entered with this car since December. 

 

 

I would like to point out, that I am NOT calling for a change to the VPI.  I am just correcting the facts.

So if one team of 19 of the platform wins often should that entire platform VPI be moved up because of the results of one team? If that is the case we need to review and look at other vehicles also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MR2 Biohazard said:

So if one team of 19 of the platform wins often should that entire platform VPI be moved up because of the results of one team? If that is the case we need to review and look at other vehicles also.

If only one team gets the platform to its potential, does that team get a free ride because of the other 18? 

 

VPI should be about a platform's potential, not an average of what shows up. 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...