[WEC] BoP. Brilliant or Pants.

[S griffin]

The ACO have really shot themselves in the foot here. They would have been better off saying nothing, but they seem to have made this decision more controversial than it should have been. First they said they wouldn't do anything, then they do something, then they don't give the best explanation for it. They need to hope these changes have the desired effect to save them further embarrassment.

[Sodemo]

At least one good thing is that these measures are transparent and are actually disclosed to the public (unlike the BTCC).

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

At least one good thing is that these measures are transparent and are actually disclosed to the public (unlike the BTCC).

there is a time and a place to discuss that.

[Matador]

Originally Posted by Adam43

A strong word, I grant you, but in the ball park of what is being suggested (not specifically by you). My main point is that not too long ago the rationale was that
Toyota was being favored. Now it is the opposite. So I think we can park that it is to favor whoever.

It is just to tweak the competition. The narrative that it is to favor a manufacturer doesn’t seem to fly.

It would be great to see the driver of the change in the data, but that probably wouldn’t help the general perception. And could ruin the process.

Yes. It’s odd. They said and explained otherwise.

I was always surprised Le Mans wasn’t going to have a change, but that’s what they said. Two reason I thought there potentially should be. Firstly, it is a different style track. Secondly, it’s about at the time when they’ve just collected a decent chunk of data from previous races and the new cars.

Ultimately the teams and drivers still have to be good in the areas promoted by these new rules. Consistency, ease of use, adapting to different conditions and reliability. All very endurance racing.

And these changes look like they are just narrowing the field rather than changing the current pecking order.

This change is not odd in a way and fits with what should happen, but it is odd because they were firm that we wouldn’t get a change. The only thing they said could happen is Hypercar v. LMDh adjustment and even that was ruled out around Spa time. Now we have much more than that.

I dunno about not favoring anyone. Seems to me like it heavily favors Porsche/Ferrari, and may that's what it's been meant to have been all along (bait and switch?).


I guess we'll finally see next weekend how much the teams have been sandbagging, cause realistically I don't think any of them have actually been blind sided by this decision.


All that aside, how do you really BOP Strategy? Operational efficiency? Driveability and Driver ability? I feel like BOP was meant to balance between the different types of technologies, not to function as success penalties for the teams that put in the work. All well and good to have a show, cause at the end of it, we do want a good race but... As someone whose been following this for a while it just doesn't... taste? Right.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Matador

I dunno about not favoring anyone. Seems to me like it heavily favors Porsche/Ferrari, and may that's what it's been meant to have been all along (bait and switch?).

The change benefits some more than others. Clearly. What I am pointing out is that there isn’t anything in this to suggest that the intention itself was to favor a specific team. I’m arguing against the narratives that it is because the ACO want x manufacturer to win.

I’m guessing based in some very high level analysis guess work that this won’t radically change the order, just the gaps between them. https://tentenths.com/forum/showthre...01#post4159201

I guess we'll finally see next weekend how much the teams have been sandbagging, cause realistically I don't think any of them have actually been blind sided by this decision.

Why has there been sandbagging? There wasn’t meant to be a change! And also I’m not sure sandbagging really helps anymore. The data the ACO has reduces this a lot. Although may not eradicate, but if you do man you have to be subtle about it.

All that aside, how do you really BOP Strategy? Operational efficiency? Driveability and Driver ability? I feel like BOP was meant to balance between the different types of technologies, not to function as success penalties for the teams that put in the work. All well and good to have a show, cause at the end of it, we do want a good race but... As someone who’s been following this for a while it just doesn't... taste? Right.

What is to suggest these changes aren’t for the reasons you say they should be as an opposed to the reason you say they shouldn’t be. At worst you can’t tell.

The ACO have been collecting data, this is the first change they’ve made since most of the teams have been in it. I would be a surprise it there weren’t decent changes when they first did it.

Other than they said it would be after Le Mans before I don’t see anything to see anything wrong with the actual change.

Although I am concerned that they will have to reverse these changes as the newer teams and drivers get up to speed with their cars, the rules, and running conditions. At least part of Toyota’s success is that all of the pieces are well established.

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by Matador

I dunno about not favoring anyone. Seems to me like it heavily favors Porsche/Ferrari, and may that's what it's been meant to have been all along (bait and switch?).I guess we'll finally see next weekend how much the teams have been sandbagging, cause realistically I don't think any of them have actually been blind sided by this decision

Even in a perfect world (nobody tying to cheat or hiding his gambling…) isn't all the BoP system a reaction and not action meaning it will always be one stroke behind?And if the phrase "que le meilleur gagne" preveals why a BoP…

[Gerard C]

Update or justification: https://fr.motorsport.com/lemans/new...-bop/10476583/

[Gerard C]

I guess you've been reading this, Adam43: Kamui Kobayashi, team principal de Toyota Gazoo Racing et engagé sur la GR010 Hybrid n°7, a simplement commenté "L'ajout de 36 kg représente une perte de 1,2 seconde par tour. C'est un changement très, très douloureux. Mais nous n'avons pas d'autre choix que de gagner, c'est la preuve que nous avons fait une bonne voiture. À tous les ingénieurs, je suis désolé pour notre manque de puissance. Mais même dans cette situation difficile, faisons une bonne voiture et gagnons !" Politiquement correct then its a comment not a criticism…Just wonder how you can add 36 kilos within hours in such a complicated machine tho.

[Adam43]

Yes - it was, although it was Kobayashi's tweet where I originally got it from. So I didn't have to translate it from French, but from Japanese!

Originally Posted by Google translate from Gerard C's link[/URL

- Thank you for posting]"The first races of the 2023 FIA WEC season showed that the differences between the LMH cars competing in the Hypercar category were greater than initially expected", specify the two authorities. "In view of these factors, and following a thorough analysis of the available data, the WEC Committee has decided that the objective of ensuring a level playing field within the Hypercar category would best be achieved by implementing a correction between the LMH and LMDh platforms, but also within these platforms.

The new BoP is now in effect "until further notice" and it is unknown if it can still be subject to changes between Test Day and the race. Its modification would have been imposed by the authorities, without seeking the unanimous agreement of the manufacturers.

Basically, it is kind of how we thought, except that they previously said not till after Le Mans. They say they've been surprised with the data. I'm coming to the view that maybe they shouldn't have been surprised as it is likely that this is the period of time where it is likely to deviate most (the early days of new cars). It was a mistake to say there would be no changes. One advantage of saying that they wouldn't change is that no body would try to game the system. Although I hope with all the data they are gathering (it aint just lap times!) it is hard to do.

Originally Posted by Gerard C

…Just wonder how you can add 36 kilos within hours in such a complicated machine tho.

Well Toyota have done a good job understanding where to put their resources into this rule set (consistency, etc...), I wouldn't be surprised if they have also considered how to implement BoP changes with minimal disruption. They also have experience of running close to (but not quite) this weight last year (they ran 1071kg at Monza). Ferrari however, I wouldn't be surprised if this is more of a headache with them. Just like cold tyres were!

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by Adam43

They say they've been surprised with the data. I'm coming to the view that maybe they shouldn't have been surprised as it is likely that this is the period of time where it is likely to deviate most (the early days of new cars). It was a mistake to say there would be no changes. One advantage of saying that they wouldn't change is that no body would try to game the system. Although I hope with all the data they are gathering (it aint just lap times!) it is hard to do.

I guess that when they talk about the first datas collection one word is missing "comparison" i-e Toy' vs Pug'. Agreed, when you have datas and lap times from several cars it becomes less easy to cheat the system. But will all eletronic stuff and some imagination…


As said above, this category is more a show now and I dont know about many sports where you can restrict athletes like that. Imagine saying Usain Bolt "you're too fast, instead of 100 metres it will be 120 m for you and please put on snow boots"?

[Adam43]

Well that’s a more general philosophy of BoP. To be clear I haven’t gone there in all I’ve said recently. The reason is that it’s a “what’s the point” type approach as we are where we are, and it is also an old trope now. There is nothing to do about that. And nothing more to be said on it I feel. If it is something that turns someone off the sport, I get it, but it ain't changing any time soon. I’d chosen to embrace it, because pragmatically I feel it might be the best solution we actually have.

Yes, it would be great for it to be all go for it with no limits. That can produce some great racing with several competitive manufacturers at once. When have we really had that? The mid 50s, the late 80s, the late 90s? Other times have been two, if we are lucky, main players.

If you want a competitive and sustainable sport then you have a couple of options. Restrict the rules ridiculously and get all cars being very similar (engine, aero, size, etc…) - almost one make without being one make. Or you do this.

And this is giving us good variety and it isn’t restricting engineers. Not the good ones anyway. The areas they work in now (consistency, drivability, reliability, a car that is good in different conditions, good with tyres, etc…) are very endurance racing and also, arguably, more relevant to real life than just I can develop part x and go y faster.

And finally what you describe with the snow boots isn’t actually what we have here. It is a subtlety and I think lost because superficially it seems the same, but it isn’t. Le Mans is a sport that isn’t just about being Bolt, it is much more than that. We are just being encouraged to play in those other areas. The areas that actually make the sport.

I hope this makes sense.

And finally come that Saturday at 3pm, it’s all irrelevant. Fortunately there is this thread for people to chat about that during the event if they’re not that bothered about the racing.

[skycafe]

I wouldn't be surprised if they have also considered how to implement BoP changes with minimal disruption. They also have experience of running close to (but not quite) this weight last year (they ran 1071kg at Monza). Ferrari however, I wouldn't be surprised if this is more of a headache with them. Just like cold tyres were![/QUOTE]

Exactly! Given their resources they have run various scenarios-from weather to cautions, that will change the race. Undoubtedly they also have the resources to run various scenarios of BoP changes, and how to maximize performance on each step. They will know how and where to position weight (or, potentially remove it if BoP fell that way...) to best get them 'on program.'

...as have Ferrari, Porsche, Peugeot.

[TF110]

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/a...playing-field/ interesting read and seems like politics are at play.

[Gerard C]

Got it Adam, thanks. Just for the record, it'll be 4 pm…



TF110 what a link, mille mercis! If now Gary Watkins hears strange noises in his telephone and does not receive his parking sticker for LM, he wont be surprised! Yes this most important rule is fully agreed by all participants. Yes the "how it works" is secret. Yes any entrant is not allowed to say a word about it. Yes the rule can be changed any time by the instances this not changing the etrants agreement. Surprised that the words lobbying and politicking can be used, all the rest being far from democratic imo.

[Mike E]

'In light of what happened this week, no one is going to show their hand on Sunday when the Le Mans field takes to the hallowed asphalt of the Circuit de la Sarthe. Like it or not, it looks like sand-bagging is back.'

No one shows their hand on test day anyway. The track is filthy, teams are working on set up after rebuilding the cars, rookies are doing their minimum 10 laps etc etc.

But this has surely opened a big can of worms.

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by Mike E

No one shows their hand on test day anyway.

Fully agreed. If in doubt, have a look to the lap time differences between test day and the race.

On a lighter mode, I've always been amazed by the strange LM special rules, like the suitcase, spare wheel, tool kit thingy to name a few, all this leading to write The Legend making this race an open air laboratory.

All in all, we gonna have a fantastic centenary edition to spectate.

[Sodemo]

If 1030kg is the min weight, What is the max weight permitted under the BOP measures?

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Gerard C

Got it Adam, thanks. Just for the record, it'll be 4 pm…

OT:We’re back to t the old 4pm is there an election, football match, or something?

Gary Watkins hears strange noises in his telephone and does not receive his parking sticker for LM, he wont be surprised!

No one is surprised if they don’t get their parking ticket from the ACO.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

If 1030kg is the min weight, What is the max weight permitted under the BOP measures?

I don’t believe one is stated. There is no practical reason why one is needed.

OT: when was the last time a major event had a maximum weight in the rules? Pre-war? Apart from my kids pinewood races.

[Mike E]

There will be a practical limit to how many lumps of lead can be bolted to the floor, and it will become a safety issue at some point. The cars are designed and crash tested with a weight in mind.

Having said that, they increased the minimum weight of the Rebellion by about 100kg when turning it into an Alpine, if I remember correctly.

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by Adam43

when was the last time a major event had a maximum weight in the rules?

Its not exactly the answer you're lookin for I fear, Adam, but in many series there's a maximum for the added weight. In this case, adding the ballast weight to the homologated weight gives you the maximum. I'm old but not enough to know about prewar stuff. But I do remember that for instance a three liter Lola was 475 ch for circa 660 kilos.

[Adam43]

I can see in a success ballast series you have a max otherwise the automatic increases would get silly.

Which reminds me in GTE this (similar) element goes away for Le Mans.

Attached are the BoP including the success ballast for GTE. Corvette #33 had an extra 45kg by Portimao. But this element is not used for Le Mans. The pre-success ballast weighted ranged from 1245kg to 1269kg for the cars.

All the other BoP (air restrictors and boost pressure) is very old school.

[Sodemo]

There should be a maximum penalty weight. Something like 40-50kg. If your competitors cannot overcome a 50kg weight advantage then they shouldn’t be competing imo.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

There should be a maximum penalty weight. Something like 40-50kg. If your competitors cannot overcome a 50kg weight advantage then they shouldn’t be competing imo.

Why 50kg? Why not 60kg or 40kg?

The premise of the rules aren't really like that, the start point isn't to all try and build the same mouse trap. It's to get the cars all within the same performance despite very different starting points. You then battle it our on reliability, drivability, consistency, strategy, and endurance.

[GT6]

Originally Posted by Adam43

I don’t believe one is stated. There is no practical reason why one is needed.

OT: when was the last time a major event had a maximum weight in the rules? Pre-war? Apart from my kids pinewood races.

Boxing!