Something new for 2017

[steveaca]

Hi Luke,
while I think the idea of some sort of slight performance penalty being given to the winning cars is credible, I think that starting the winning car from pit lane would be too drastic. My feeling is, if we cannot come up with some method of implementing a SLIGHT penalty, we should leave well enough alone.
Steve

[Luke]

Thanks for your reply Steve but to me leaving well enough alone is the situation that needs adjusting and I'm not trying to be part of a problem with not drastic but rather an innovative solution ... for the very few and very advanced slot car tuning guys.

Seeing it's just us for now - Gordon, you and me on this topic - wondering what's Gordon take with this idea ..?

[gordon]

Luke, this handicap probably won't solve the real issue. Say Ramesh wins a race and Steve places second after a close battle against him. We then apply this handicap so Ramesh is one lap down from the start and I win after a close battle with Steve. Next race I'm handicapped and Steve wins again after a tight battle with Ramesh. You get my drift.

How does this encourage new drivers or even other current drivers who are not winning? Winning is about working at improving your car till it can run competitively and therefore have a shot at first place. Handicapping winners in this way does not improve slower cars.

[Luke]

In essence it sounds like trilling race already Gordon and here's how those racing points (maybe 9 6 4 3 2 1 pts. system) you described with Ramesh, Steve and yourself ... Plus how I also included pole point for Ramesh and 3 other drivers for a full FRC (example) score sheet report.

• Steve ........... 0 - 6 - 6 - 9 = 21 pts.
  Ramesh ........ 1 - 9 - 4 - 6 = 20 pts.
  Gordon ......... 0 - 4 - 9 - 4 = 17 pts.
  Arden ........... 0 - 3 - 1 - 3 = 7 pts.
  O'Brie ........... 0 - 2 - 3 - 1 = 6 pts.
  Luke ............. 0 - 1 - 2 - 2 = 5 pts..

Of course ~ All things being equal (in theory) it is only natural, one could agree with your reply above ... but for my 8+ years of SSD racing and with other sporting activities ... Simply put - I think I'm just being sidelined with this (not too favored) idea.

Now I will "leave well enough alone" but who's to know how well someone would race for a win under such handicap condition?

Have a good night.

Luke

Btw from your description with drivers positions and my example race report - Steve didn't "win again" in the second race, it was only the last race ...

[Luke]

Also Gordon,

Could you imagine what would have happened if Scalextric Ace Racer - Luke B was in that race report equation "real scenario" and under such handicap (1 lap down) conditions ..?

Luke

[Luke]

I am proposing a replacement of the American Muscle class from 2017 with a different approach and new class for this historic Trans-Am era. This class will be called "American Pony Car" (APC) and I'll reveal more details soon.

Gordon your plans to change AM to APC class - looking like it will be a very promising slotcar racing feature ... in 2017!

However - when reading that there's more info to fellow concerning this new class. I would like to put forward a new idea I thought about (some days now) for you to consider with FRC racing cycle of (A, B, C, D & E) 5 groups.

Now when you observing the suggestion (below) you will see that the new class in blue - is an opening event and the 4 IROC classes are well distributed across the board

• APC
  RGT
  MGT IROC
  
  HS
  VS6075
  
  SC
  RC
  MC IROC
  
  MP
  F1
  SGTC IROC
  
  GT
  LMP
  NSS IROC

Sure you will also notice that HS and VS (group B) is the only one with 2 classes ... Which isn't such a bad thing because with the other groups the IROC classes could be dropped (depending on drivers turnout of course) and in this way, almost every 2 weeks for an IROC event - there will be no long wait if alternated as before ...

Hope it's all easy to understand and you and others may consider for next year at FRC.

Must remind you again - its an idea I came up with just because of the new racing class and thought mix and matching classes was possible.

Needless to say - it still is if considered

Luke

[gordon]

Luke,

After some thought, here's what I prefer for the 2017 class groupings:

A:
MGT IROC
RGT

B (Keeping our historic classes together):
HS
APC
VS6075

C:
MC IROC
RC
SC

D:
SGTC IROC
MP
F1

E:
NSS IROC
GT
LMP

[Luke]

Gordon,

It's Looking Extremely Good!

As promising as the new APC class is sounding - so to with the 5 FRC groupings maybe in 2017 ...

It's also very perfect slotcar racing straight through the year and giving full attention to all 14 FRC classes!

It will be GR8 to hear what the other guys think with this plan and if this idea could be put into effect for next year

Luke

[gordon]

OK guys, the 2016 racing season is over and its time to look towards 2017. I've already posted the 2017 Class regulations, so we now need to confirm our class groupings. Please lets hear your comments on my suggestions in my previous post above.

[Luke]

Yuh hit the ground running Gordon

It's Looking Extremely Good!

I'm in favour of the same amount of (5 letter named: A, B, C, D & E) groupings for 2017 ...

• AOK ~ how the 14 classes (2, 3, 3, 3 & 3 per group) follow each other.
  
  GR8 ~ how there's an IROC event in 4 of the 5 groupings.

Plus when (RD225) racing resumes in 2017 - will it start with the group C event, since it was stopped at the group B (RD223) event in 2016 ..?

Just some early morning thoughts

Luke