WEC Pundits who "don't talk about BoP"

JimboCycling · 12 Jul 2024, 21:55 (Ref:4218746)

I'm a big fan of both Graham Goodwin /DSC and Radio Le Mans, I think they do great things for the sport. However

GG regularly claims he doesn't cover BoP, spends a long time talking about why he doesn't cover BoP, then spends a while talking about BoP

Midweek motorsport this week pulled a variation on the same theme, going through the BoP numbers for the next WEC race and then saying "I don't care about any of this anyway, it doesn't matter"

Quit the hand wringing guys! BoP is real. We all know it's there. If there's something there to talk about, talk about it. If not don't. But stop apologising or talking at length about how you're not going to talk about it

**Aysedasi** · 12 Jul 2024, 22:11 (Ref:4218748)

I'm sure Graham will be on soon enough to give you his take on it....

**Adam43** · 13 Jul 2024, 01:45 (Ref:4218755)

Firstly, it is mentioned. Just not overly so.

What they don’t do is only talk about it.

But ultimately what is the point! They understand what is going on. It’s an old topic. I’m interested in it and massively pay attention to it. What that has taught me is that it isn’t the thing that drives this sport! I more and more appreciate what goes on in the races.

The only conversations on it mainly contain misunderstandings. Simplistic view that just shouts BoP every time misses so much about this sport.

They just concentrate on the racing. The super close racing. The nuanced sportscar racing. The endurance racing. The difference in the drivers. The strategies. Etc etc etc.

BoP does its job. What’s more to be said! Nothing worthwhile, really. Despite all my posts on the topic!

chernaudi · 13 Jul 2024, 04:19 (Ref:4218767)

Problem is that BOP is a "thing" in modern sportscar racing, and for those of you who do want it to go away, that genie isn't going back into the bottle anytime soon. Yes, BOP does often make racing political and such (especially for those who are trying to use motorsports as a break from the real world BS), but IMO it's way more up to the sanctioning bodies (IMSA, the ACO/FIA, et al) to try and make it less of a talking point.

IE, the more they tinker with it, the more it becomes a point of discussion. Just be glad that this isn't LMP1 and GT1 in the ALMS in 2006 where IMSA was making constant changes race by race, and the ACO and FIA are more transparent than IMSA was back then about their methodology.

But as far as it getting talked about nowadays, well, it's there, it's not going away in the foreseeable future, hence it's a discussion point. But IMO it's up to the sanctioning bodies on how much of a point it really is. And the commentators do have to speak about it at least on occasion to educate and inform the readers and viewers--which, after all, is their job.

**Adam43** · 13 Jul 2024, 04:50 (Ref:4218770)

They do have to “tinker” with it. That’s how it works!

And making small adjustments race by race isn’t a massive talking point.

And they do talk about it, just not all the time. It doesn’t need talking about that much. Especiallly during the race, as other stuff is going on.

chernaudi · 13 Jul 2024, 06:26 (Ref:4218776)

That's not really my point. Refer back to what IMSA was doing in the ALMS in 2006 vs what the WEC has. One, the ACO and FIA are way more transparent about their methodology and reasoning than IMSA was back in 2006. Also in 2006, especially in LMP1 and GT1, IMSA was often taking huge stabs and swings with their rule changes, while the ACO and the FIA (and IMSA in the present day) tend to make fairly minor changes.

And as I mentioned, the ACO, FIA and present day IMSA are transparent about how and why changes get made. In '06 IMSA said that they had access to data and that it governed how they went about making changes. However, not only did they seem to take huge swings in an arbitrary fashion without backing up their claims to the public at least (which seems to have lead to more questions than good answers), but they seemed to be BOP'ing things they shouldn't have (like factory vs privateer in LMP1, and Pirelli's junk tires in GT1) while they left LMP2 and GT2 alone (wise call on GT2, but you had the same factory team vs privateer issue in LMP2 that year, and IMSA left Penske alone/didn't help out Intersport).

Do you see the difference in what I'm trying to explain? Not to mention that transparency does help reduce it as a talking point, as at least now the ACO, FIA and IMSA can justify their decisions without it looking like they have a rule book written in pencil or invisible ink.

flatlandsman · 13 Jul 2024, 08:51 (Ref:4218790)

I would imagine aswell they are paid up ACO fanboys so have to stick on message as every tv comms who broadcasts for the hosts does, and will be told to talk about somethings a lot, hence the endless direction to the access show it is rather pushy but not over the top. And also they are always trying to get people to attend events, again this is possibly enthusiasm but also maybe pushed by the ACO.

I think talk of BoP is very newsworthy and should be done, they seem to do it when they have to, but no more, and this will be clearly a directive from ACO I would think.

Notice they never mentioned at LM the clear straightline speed the Ferrari had, in Access you see Lotterer and Estre say straightaway first lap, we have no chance.
Yet all you get from the box is that Ferrari are faster right now. Which I guess is fine, but a more expansive answer would be great.

I do think in the past Haven expecially calls it out,

J Jay · 13 Jul 2024, 09:15 (Ref:4218791)

It's a case of shouting into the wind - there isn't any media outlet I can think of that over-analyses BoP or spends "too much" time on it, so the near-constant proclaiming (it has to be said, from Goodwin more than most) seems unnecessary. It is rightly covered as an integral part of WEC in most places, but it never dominates the news cycle.

I wonder if they (DSC/TWISC, RLM, etc.) are still receiving or reading a lot of fan discussion around BoP and that's why they feel the need to address it. Not being on social media, all I have to go off is S365's comment section, but BoP articles do quickly descend into circular arguments.

Alan52 · 13 Jul 2024, 11:08 (Ref:4218793)

In any sport where the commentators are employees of the race organisers you are not going to get their “frank and honest” opinions.Thats not how the employee relationship works.
Myriad examples.In motor racing Moto GP has the same issue with the Dorna feed.Supercars in Australia even worse.The ICC/BCCI cricket commentators worse again.
I accept it,don’t like it and just tend to tune out and not hang on every word.To me it seems to insult the intelligence of the audience by assuming they can’t see through it.

JimboCycling · 13 Jul 2024, 11:50 (Ref:4218797)

Quote:

Originally Posted by J Jay

It's a case of shouting into the wind - there isn't any media outlet I can think of that over-analyses BoP or spends "too much" time on it, so the near-constant proclaiming (it has to be said, from Goodwin more than most) seems unnecessary. It is rightly covered as an integral part of WEC in most places, but it never dominates the news cycle.

Thanks for this - this is really what I meant, but you've put it rather better than me!

**Adam43** · 13 Jul 2024, 13:48 (Ref:4218806)

Quote:

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Do you see the difference in what I'm trying to explain?

I think we are saying similar things?

Quote:

Originally Posted by J Jay

I wonder if they (DSC/TWISC, RLM, etc.) are still receiving or reading a lot of fan discussion around BoP and that's why they feel the need to address it. Not being on social media, all I have to go off is S365's comment section, but BoP articles do quickly descend into circular arguments.

This is the best argument to not keep bringing it up!

I reckon there are two ways to approach BoP as a fan. Actually three. Either just enjoy the racing.

Practically ignore it, you don’t need to know the intricacies to enjoy the races, or even to get into the wonderful aspects of endurance racing; the battles on track, the battles behind the pit wall, and the whole endurance of it.

Or, go all in. Pour over the Racecar Engineering articles on how it is done. The new car deep dives. Track the changes, try to correlate to on track performance, poor over the, as chernaudi said, the transparent data. Believe me you soon understand what you can and can’t see. This later bit is so important to understanding it. When doing analysis this is as important as what you can. This isn’t for most people. They don’t have the inclination (fair enough), or the time (fair enough, they have better things to do in their lives!).

The problem comes when you are in the middle of this. The minimal research, or consideration, and baseless conclusions. See S365 comments.

The third option is to just not watch! Based on some of the conclusions being made I don’t get why once some of these conclusions are made you would entertain watching this!

As for it not being mentioned. I’m comfortable with the level of it. Are we just chasing that they repeat our theories and thoughts on it. And if they don’t they must be wrong? I’m not after that, and if they did I’d rather, if it is considered, that it was different to mine so it could make me consider more.

But in the race, what’s to be said on it. Ferrari had a good top speed, Porsche quicker elsewhere. That was covered well. It was mentioned about the two stage BoP. It was all there. There aren’t shouting proclamations that this was right or wrong because this isn’t possible. That they didn’t shout that the race was fixed, or that BoP was completely wrong, is not because they are employed by the race organisers! It was another reason.

flatlandsman · 13 Jul 2024, 15:25 (Ref:4218816)

Another issue is fans.

The series is growing, and that is attracting a lot of new fans who might be getting bored of F1 or other things or or just caught in the hype

They might want to know about BoP, it is an interesting feature and nothing like anything else, so it could be talked about more, the joy of long races is the room to do this, but it never happens.

Why? Because the tv producers are afraid of it, as it is too complicated and hard to talk about they think people have low attention spans and will zone out, and that may be true in some cases, but they always pander to this dumb viewer demographic, they do it in all motorsport really even established stuff like MotoGP, a British show always focuses totally on British riders even if they are about 1% of the riders out there and often not achieving anything, all WEC tv want is flowery action footage, slow mos and endless pit non reaction footage, it is the only real remit here.

I am sure the comms would talk about it, but really all they are going to do is push you endlessly towards the website, access shows etc, they are basically like modern radio presenters, hocking endlessly rather than going into detail. The price you pay sadly

**Adam43** · 13 Jul 2024, 15:27 (Ref:4218817)

Oh, the irony.

v8supes · 13 Jul 2024, 21:40 (Ref:4218880)

Eventually it will end up like GT3 though where BOP now is hardly ever spoken about. Even the drivers dont moan about it anymore because "it is what it is"

tomcug · 14 Jul 2024, 07:34 (Ref:4218945)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam43

But in the race, what’s to be said on it. Ferrari had a good top speed, Porsche quicker elsewhere. That was covered well. It was mentioned about the two stage BoP. It was all there. There aren’t shouting proclamations that this was right or wrong because this isn’t possible. That they didn’t shout that the race was fixed, or that BoP was completely wrong, is not because they are employed by the race organisers! It was another reason.

Yes and no. The only manufacturers capable of winning that race (Caddy, Ferrari, Porsche and Toyota) were quite close in race trim but both Caddy and Porsche simply needed that positive power gain that Toyota had to have a realistic shot at victory without having to rely on luck. But it's a more complicated topic -> more power = too much advantage in qualy trim so would need weight adjustment as well that could probably hurt the tyre life. All in all not an easy choice for those who decide the BOP. Life, accept or don't watch

**Aysedasi** · 14 Jul 2024, 08:17 (Ref:4218947)

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomcug

Life, accept or don't watch

Yeah but if you do that, you'll have nothing to nit-pick and complain about!

tomcug · 14 Jul 2024, 08:30 (Ref:4218949)

Very good point

flatlandsman · 14 Jul 2024, 08:31 (Ref:4218950)

The issue there is that if you have a car with high top speed it can win at LM and not be so great everywhere else on the track, so hard is it to actually PASS anywhere else all things being equal.

If Ferrari did this cleverly all plaudits to them, I still go back to the Access show and seeing Lotterer and Estre basically give up the race on the first lap so ridiculous was the straightline speed advantage.

For a tv production BoP is not interesting, you have to realise the director thinks he us making a reality tv show, you can tell this by how it is shown, so any kind of technical stuff that might explain racing is for the night time only!

That is either resignation that they did not the job well enough or a sort of laugh at the BoP situation.

**Aysedasi** · 14 Jul 2024, 08:35 (Ref:4218951)

Quote:

Originally Posted by flatlandsman

For a tv production BoP is not interesting...

Exactly so. And exactly right IMO. I want to watch a race, not to have lengthy conversations about BoP. I hugely enjoyed Le Mans from trackside. Did I think about BoP even once while I was watching....? No.

J Jay · 14 Jul 2024, 09:20 (Ref:4218954)

Quote:

Originally Posted by v8supes

Eventually it will end up like GT3 though where BOP now is hardly ever spoken about. Even the drivers dont moan about it anymore because "it is what it is"

Drivers definitely still complain about BoP in GT3, but there is an acceptance in the paddock that it is the price to pay for so much (and so long-lasting) manufacturer involvement, and that it is well worth paying.

If hypercar continues it will get to that stage eventually, but it will take longer given the higher-profile of Le Mans and the WEC compared to blue-riband GT3 events and series, N24 aside.

Quote:

Originally Posted by flatlandsman

I still go back to the Access show and seeing Lotterer and Estre basically give up the race on the first lap so ridiculous was the straightline speed advantage.

The ACO (again, following SRO's lead) have done their best to dictate the internal BoP narrative from the outset. Remember, the full Access clip would have been approved, so they are okay with the open acknowledgement for a number of reasons. How fans take it depends on how cynical they want to be, but as GT3 has proved, as long as the racing keeps delivering, any griping won't last for too long.

Articus · 14 Jul 2024, 12:44 (Ref:4218962)

No specific manufacturer has had a consistent advantage in the first 5 rounds. That means the system is working. While one can argue all day about fine tuning the race-specific adjustments, it is like seeing the forest from the trees.

Performance is also not the only factor which decides the races otherwise Ferrari might have won in Imola and Spa and Toyota might have won at Le Mans. This is a tenet of endurance racing. 2024 WEC is working quite well if you look at the big picture. Porsche led at the start, then it trended towards Ferrari, and now it trends towards Toyota. Over 8 races, the opportunities turn out to have been evenly distributed all along.

broadrun96 · 14 Jul 2024, 12:45 (Ref:4218963)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Exactly so. And exactly right IMO. I want to watch a race, not to have lengthy conversations about BoP. I hugely enjoyed Le Mans from trackside. Did I think about BoP even once while I was watching....? No.

Exactly, that's a discussion for FP1 to mention what's changed. But in race, it's been set and done.

helgi · 14 Jul 2024, 21:35 (Ref:4219419)

Club racing from grandstands is 500% more interesting than any championship TV footage - it's a known fact. It's all about atmosphere. But when I watch racing via TV I want to understand more. How can you explain why car A is faster than car B at the straights but slower from the corners if not talking about tech side. In terms of WEC and GT3 - about BoP. And I feel happy that I managed to catch those days when commentators (Barff, Collins) tried to explain in most simple words as possible the whole art of engineering in racing. By the way, let's not lie to ourselves. In racing it's all about cars. It's not running or swimming where all about human. It's auto-sport not man-o-sport. Yes, there're good attempts in Racecar Engineering to prove that BoP is a fair thing to spice the show. But as an automotive engineer I will for ever doubt that anything can "balance" two different chassis with two different engines. It's physics in the end of the day. And there's Danny Nowlan in RE on the state of junior formulae. For me, that state shows clearly where sportscars are going if you put all the stress onto the "show".
If you are not talking about all the reasons why car T is faster than car F on a track I then how can you explain the results? Just enjoy the show? OK, you are working within the championship and they have a rule that forbid talking about rules. And that's not what I would call journalism, excuse me. Without talking about BoP you do not show the whole situation, and listeners are missinformated in fact, still enjoying the show. I don't say they shouldn't enjoy. But telling them about BoP is not a crime. Or do somebody think that if listeners would have known more about BoP they'd say the show is not that good? The more I think about it, the more questions I have.

flatlandsman · 15 Jul 2024, 12:35 (Ref:4219469)

I think there are multiple issues, for a tv audience it is what you call a dry subject, unless you can find someone who can make it interesting and WEC is not big enough and doe snot have enough airtime to really do this.

Plus I feel there is a clear directive to make the races a show, you can tell from the coverage, the way replays are added in every hour, the obsession with pit lane reaction.

If the series really does hit high audiences on tv and in person I do feel there is scopefor a show detailing this, it is done in IMSA a little but by a third party.

**Adam43** · 15 Jul 2024, 12:58 (Ref:4219473)

The showing the pits was quite minimal this race.

Didn’t you write to the ACO about this? Perhaps it worked.

There was an occasion I remember a 2s flick to pits when the Caddy was battling, which grated. But it’s not my biggest take away from this 6 hour race.

It is true that some people are more interested in the none racing part. Some, for instance, are more interested in talking about celebs on the grid in another series while it is on rather than watching endurance racing.

The highlights on the hour are pretty short and I find quite useful. I’d cut down on the pre race pageantry recap after hour 1, but I’m too into the race to let it get in the way of following it and enjoying it.

As you say, there are indeed multiple issues.