[WEC] BoP. Brilliant or Pants.

[Gerard C]

I think they need a new rule as to temp level. Applied immediatly. The way we go, why not?

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Has there been a justification statement or a clarification on the BOP changes?

No the way it works, or is managed, calculated, whatever, is a well kept secret. Its in the text. I dont understand how its possible that the greatest car makers of the planet ratified this. Including the no comment, no public complain thingy. A great part of this farce will be forgotten tomorrow afternoon, I hope. Well, at least part of it. Place au sport, gentlemen, please.

[Matador]

Originally Posted by TF110

I linked to an article in another thread, but apparently Peugeot weren't happy Toyota was allowed to 'update' it's car for this year. Not sure if that's the extent of the complaints. But I think its going to be a great race and hopefully it's an actual race.

So Puegot don't have jokers to use as well?

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by Matador

So Peugeot don't have jokers to use as well?

I think that everything they had/have in already in the car! And certainly a lot of miles with the tires too.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by Matador

So Puegot don't have jokers to use as well?

I think the car has been enough of a joke so far

[Matador]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I think the car has been enough of a joke so far

lol Saw that coming.

[Speed-King]

Does anyone else feel that Ferrari winning the first time out cheapens the achievement of winning Le Mans? Historically new projects have only ever won at LM in their first try under the most extraordinary circumstances, e.g. McLaren in 1995.

Neither Ford, nor Porsche, Audi or Toyota succeeded in their first attempts and Ferrari waltzing in and stealing everybody's lunch really paints a picture of F1 teams being far superior to sportscar teams.

[Gerard C]

Cheapens the achievement of winning Le Mans? Steal everybody's lunch? May be you could suggest a new BoP rule, there are quite a few already, saying something like "Thou shalt not win if you're a new comer at LM". Matter of fact, they won keeping the suspense intact till the end. They beat up Toyota, Porsche and Peugeot, teams having experience in both fields.

To answer your question, I "feel" they stole nothing from anyone and feel it's a well deserved vitory. Only my opinion.

[Matador]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

Does anyone else feel that Ferrari winning the first time out cheapens the achievement of winning Le Mans? Historically new projects have only ever won at LM in their first try under the most extraordinary circumstances, e.g. McLaren in 1995.

Neither Ford, nor Porsche, Audi or Toyota succeeded in their first attempts and Ferrari waltzing in and stealing everybody's lunch really paints a picture of F1 teams being far superior to sportscar teams.

FULLY. This is actually my biggest point of being bitter with the ACO screwing over established teams to get their "story". To me it feels like a team with spare change and personnel from their F1 budget (which is now capped) waltzed in and ****ed on sportscars (Hyper cars are relatively simple, but IMO the last generation of LMP1 hybrid cars were technologically superior to F1 cars). One that consistently bungles strategy at that.


Not to take anything away from AF Corsa and the work that the whole team, drivers included, put in through the second half of the 24hrs. Good job on making it to the end and with quick pace at that but can't help feel that the sport got shafted.

[tbtstt]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

Does anyone else feel that Ferrari winning the first time out cheapens the achievement of winning Le Mans?

The winning first time out doesn't cheapen it for me, but the significant adjustment prior to Le Mans, does.

It was a fantastic race, a memorable way to mark the anniversary and, as already said, required an incredible effort from AF Corsa: but I still can't help feel that Toyota were denied a fair shot.

Thing is, in an ideal world (where everyone is honest), I think the BoP is a fantastic way to keep the field level and maintain the appeal of a series for everyone involved... problem is, we don't live in an ideal world and if the rules can be worked to give you an advantage, then that is what is likely to happen.

[Steve McQ]

Now I wait for Adam43 post race analysis with impatience

[PhilipR]

Originally Posted by tbtstt

The winning first time out doesn't cheapen it for me, but the significant adjustment prior to Le Mans, does.

It was a fantastic race, a memorable way to mark the anniversary and, as already said, required an incredible effort from AF Corsa: but I still can't help feel that Toyota were denied a fair shot.

Thing is, in an ideal world (where everyone is honest), I think the BoP is a fantastic way to keep the field level and maintain the appeal of a series for everyone involved... problem is, we don't live in an ideal world and if the rules can be worked to give you an advantage, then that is what is likely to happen.

For whatever it is - the race was close. However I hope this does not becomes a yearly thing where teams lobby for changes in the days before le mans.
I give them benefit of the doubt - first year with LMH and LMDH and BOP stll difficult to gauge. Hopefully next year they set a BOP and leave it without last minute changes

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Steve McQ

Now I wait for Adam43 post race analysis with impatience

Actual work is getting in the way. But I am thinking of looking at

Race pace. I’m fairly confident Ferrari will be quickest, I was kind of tracking in the race. I expect some autopsies.
Top speed analysis. The comment about Porsche above piqued my interest.
Sector analysis.

[veeten]

Take care of work, don't want you to get sacked over this...

Just leave yourself a memo to do this later.

[TF110]

I think Toyota and Ferrari should have had the same exact bop. They were about equal on speed and Ferrari a little faster on pure pace if I'm looking at fast laps and qualifying. What the difference between the two was experience and tire warmup. That was thrown out the window with the reintroduction of the warmers. Though like whats been said here, thats an ideal that often isn't realized.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Steve McQ

Now I wait for Adam43 post race analysis with impatience

OK. Here we go.

Let's start with Hypercar and Lap times. This could live in the main thread, but it is relevant, to a certain extent here, and is asked for here.

I say "to a certain extent" because BoP assessment is not by lap time. It is to match performance not lap time. I know that sounds odd, but it is key.
The ACO have data from the cars that they judge this on. Now we can infer the performance from the lap time, especially as it is all we have. Also performance will be laptime if all else goes well. However, I make this point because it is a subtle, but very important, nuance.

I've done Top 50, 100 and 150 laps. By 100 it might be a bit dodgy depending on how many actual competetive laps, in dry running each car got. The tables are ranked by Top 50.

Average Lap time

Rank	Car	Fastest	Top 50	Top 100	Top 150	Laps
1	50 Ferrari	3:26.984	3:28.411	3:29.262	3:30.104	337
2	51 Ferrari	3:27.890	3:29.014	3:29.701	3:30.460	342
3	5 Porsche	3:27.712	3:29.300	3:30.085	3:31.037	329
4	8 Toyota	3:27.549	3:29.382	3:30.154	3:30.733	342
5	3 Cadillac	3:28.298	3:29.749	3:30.434	3:31.094	340
6	6 Porsche	3:27.739	3:29.759	3:30.487	3:31.218	320
7	311 Cadillac	3:27.963	3:29.731	3:30.636	3:31.658	324
8	94 Peugeot	3:28.446	3:30.123	3:31.038	3:32.059	312
9	93 Peugeot	3:28.796	3:30.267	3:31.046	3:31.806	330
10	2 Cadillac	3:27.967	3:30.425	3:31.122	3:31.790	341
11	38 Porsche	3:28.075	3:30.290	3:31.570	3:35.940	244
12	708 Glickenhaus	3:29.577	3:31.048	3:31.841	3:32.667	335
13	709 Glickenhaus	3:29.835	3:31.571	3:32.505	3:33.504	333
14	4 Vanwall	3:32.636	3:37.028	3:51.684	4:30.730	165
15	7 Toyota	3:29.993	3:36.959	4:30.502	NA	103
16	75 Porsche	3:29.916	3:46.007	NA	NA	84

Quick Observations.

#50 quicker than #51. Yes, but one had nothing to lose and was pushing to get back on terms. However, it was a quick crew.

Toyota behind, although it's 110th best lap onwards is very similar to Ferrari. Not sure what to take from this. Slightly more peaky performance from the Ferrari, but in the conditions (and with tyre warmers) it didn't really matter for this race?
Obviously #7 didn't run laps in the best conditions.

#5 Porsche - it's ranked 3rd on this table. But after the 100th best lap it falls away and quickly.

Peugeot doesn't look very strong here at all. It had its moment in the sun, when it was damp. That will not show well on these charts.

Glick destroyed Vanwall. Although the Vanwall was on fire.

I won't comment more - please let me know what you think. I'll run some more charts.

[Adam43]

This was from the Porsche thread:

Originally Posted by tomcug

Isn't the Porsche 963 the fastest LMDh in a straight line? Clearly quicker than BMW and Caddy, not sure about Honda tho. They will never match straight line speed of LMHs due to no front axle hybrid but at least they have good downforce levels, clearly the quickest hypercar in the Porsche curves. The main concern is IMO reliability, in that aspect that's same kind of shitbox Peugeout is. Pace with current BOP was really good in the opening stages of the race, before all cars started dropping down due to various things happening.

Made me think about Top Speeds and sectors. Here we go.

Top Speed. There were dome good slip streaming in the race. Practice top speeds were between.

Ranked by Top 50.

Most common one is a fun column - it is quite discrete measurement. Toyota #7 obviously was quite often under slow zone for the limited laps it did. Don't read too much into that one - I just wondered and left it in.

Average Maximum Speed

Rank	Car	Top Speed	Top 50	Top 100	Top 150	Most Common
1	50 Ferrari	347.8	341.1	339.5	338.1	337.0
2	51 Ferrari	345.6	340	338.7	337.7	338.1
3	3 Cadillac	343.4	339.5	338.4	337.5	336.0
4	708 Glickenhaus	344.5	339.3	338.3	337.4	336.0
5	709 Glickenhaus	342.3	338.8	337.6	336.8	334.9
6	38 Porsche	344.5	338.3	336.6	335.4	333.9
7	5 Porsche	345.6	338	336.5	335.5	333.9
8	8 Toyota	343.4	337.2	335.9	334.7	333.9
9	311 Cadillac	339.1	336.6	335.5	334.5	332.9
10	2 Cadillac	341.3	336.3	334.9	333.9	332.9
11	93 Peugeot	340.2	335.8	333.9	332.4	333.9
12	6 Porsche	338.1	335.3	334.1	332.9	332.9
13	7 Toyota	346.7	334.9	266.9	261.4	80.3
14	94 Peugeot	340.2	334.7	332.5	330.9	329.8
15	4 Vanwall	337	331.7	328.2	283.2	327.8
16	75 Porsche	341.3	326.5	244.6	244.6	334.9

Quick thoughts.

Play longer in the game and you get more slip streaming.

While watching I thought that Ferrari, despite having the natural Top speed, was quite aggressive with slipstreaming.

Surprised at the Toyota.

Not much in it! Whatever, but one of the Caddy's was fastest GTP.

[Adam43]

Sector 3 - the one with the Porsche Curves.

Ranked Top 100.

Average sector time

Rank	Car	Fastest	Top 50	Top 100	Top 150	Laps
1	50 Ferrari	1:34.708	1:35.571	1:35.988	1:36.347	337
2	51 Ferrari	1:34.917	1:35.822	1:36.145	1:36.482	342
3	5 Porsche	1:34.960	1:35.755	1:36.195	1:36.622	329
4	6 Porsche	1:34.854	1:35.922	1:36.328	1:36.671	320
5	8 Toyota	1:35.276	1:36.092	1:36.411	1:36.676	342
6	3 Cadillac	1:35.304	1:36.082	1:36.476	1:36.806	340
7	311 Cadillac	1:35.146	1:36.101	1:36.569	1:37.020	324
8	2 Cadillac	1:35.003	1:36.273	1:36.644	1:36.961	341
9	94 Peugeot	1:35.433	1:36.283	1:36.711	1:37.123	312
10	93 Peugeot	1:35.669	1:36.557	1:36.896	1:37.193	330
11	38 Porsche	1:35.324	1:36.303	1:36.898	1:37.838	244
12	708 Glickenhaus	1:36.030	1:36.869	1:37.299	1:37.681	335
13	709 Glickenhaus	1:36.031	1:37.140	1:37.586	1:38.039	333
14	4 Vanwall	1:37.402	1:39.292	1:42.168	1:55.642	165
15	7 Toyota	1:35.722	1:37.596	1:54.433	NA	103
16	75 Porsche	1:35.923	1:38.684	NA	NA	84

Porsche was indeed pretty good in S3. Not quite at Ferrari, but above Toyota and Caddy.

Sector 2

Average sector time

Rank	Car	Fastest	Top 50	Top 100	Top 150	Laps
1	50 Ferrari	1:19.147	1:19.497	1:19.728	1:19.950	337
2	51 Ferrari	1:19.449	1:19.782	1:19.965	1:20.119	342
3	8 Toyota	1:19.151	1:19.970	1:20.225	1:20.390	342
4	3 Cadillac	1:19.628	1:20.109	1:20.286	1:20.452	340
5	5 Porsche	1:19.786	1:20.199	1:20.414	1:20.591	329
6	311 Cadillac	1:19.717	1:20.193	1:20.429	1:20.632	324
7	6 Porsche	1:19.948	1:20.340	1:20.530	1:20.710	320
8	93 Peugeot	1:19.977	1:20.334	1:20.537	1:20.709	330
9	708 Glickenhaus	1:20.011	1:20.369	1:20.602	1:20.800	335
10	38 Porsche	1:19.523	1:20.330	1:20.605	1:20.951	244
11	2 Cadillac	1:19.847	1:20.441	1:20.662	1:20.822	341
12	94 Peugeot	1:19.937	1:20.464	1:20.665	1:20.838	312
13	709 Glickenhaus	1:20.033	1:20.546	1:20.784	1:21.016	333
14	4 Vanwall	1:21.163	1:22.172	1:23.272	1:39.719	165
15	7 Toyota	1:20.408	1:21.737	1:47.500	NA	103
16	75 Porsche	1:20.278	1:22.996	NA	NA	84

Ferrari quickest again

Sector 1

Average Lap time

Rank	Car	Fastest	Top 50	Top 100	Top 150	Laps
1	8 Toyota	0:32.586	0:32.898	0:33.032	0:33.137	342
2	50 Ferrari	0:32.628	0:32.969	0:33.094	0:33.204	337
3	5 Porsche	0:32.626	0:32.969	0:33.094	0:33.219	329
4	311 Cadillac	0:32.591	0:32.962	0:33.104	0:33.244	324
5	6 Porsche	0:32.697	0:33.018	0:33.128	0:33.226	320
6	51 Ferrari	0:32.747	0:32.998	0:33.129	0:33.244	342
7	93 Peugeot	0:32.688	0:33.026	0:33.148	0:33.267	330
8	3 Cadillac	0:32.854	0:33.067	0:33.182	0:33.283	340
9	94 Peugeot	0:32.683	0:33.072	0:33.207	0:33.344	312
10	2 Cadillac	0:32.724	0:33.120	0:33.254	0:33.370	341
11	38 Porsche	0:32.849	0:33.199	0:33.385	0:33.629	244
12	709 Glickenhaus	0:32.887	0:33.364	0:33.526	0:33.692	333
13	708 Glickenhaus	0:33.122	0:33.443	0:33.560	0:33.657	335
14	4 Vanwall	0:33.652	0:34.163	0:35.043	0:43.920	165
15	7 Toyota	0:32.844	0:33.847	0:45.945	NA	103
16	75 Porsche	0:32.665	0:34.593	NA	NA	84

More of a mix here. Toyota nab it.

I1 and I2 on the map indicate the end of Sector 1 and Sector 2.

[Adam43]

Quick overall conclusion.

Overall job well done by ACO - see disclaimer above and in previous posts about lap time analysis only.

Relative to Ferrari Toyota was probably could have ad more favorable BoP. See disclaimer.

But it was super super close. Anyone got a nomination for a year that was closer than this? Where five big manufactures where within 2s of each other? And two smaller ones (privateers? - I know they aren't they are factory) within 3 or 4s?

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Based on RL17 feedback. Instead of expressing the relative pace as a %, it is expressed as difference in lap time at Le Mans. Assuming a 210s nominal lap time.


Still lots of assumptions and ultimately it is a simple model, but it doesn't look completely stupid. Remember this is based on Top 50 lap time performance. My guess on this is that Toyota will do better in Q - if only because they will manage their tyres better. Also I would expect Vanwall to be closer to Glickenhaus - the start point of this is Spa and they didn't have that many laps to get the best Top 50 they could have. So should do better if they get, say 100 laps at Le Mans.

So, how did this comedy prediction work out?

Manufacturer	kg change	New relative pace (s)	Race Top 100
Ferrari	24	0	0
Toyota	37	0.9	0.9
Cadillac	11	1.2	1.2
Porsche	3	2.2	0.9
Peugeot	0	2.8	1.8
Glickenhaus	0	3.5	2.6
Vanwall	0	7.6	5.7

Fastest car of manufacturer v. faster time
Vanwall - based on fastest lap due to lack of running.

Three observations:

Ferrari was fastest, and the relative pace of Toyota and Cadillac to Ferrari was spot on

Porsche and Peugeot came good at Le Mans. Relatively. Both led for a bit. I would say that I felt more good vibes about Peugeot - eventually it went all wrong. Porsche - they had the numbers, but the race just did not go their way.

Glick was closer - strong performance.

Vanwall, not good, but their pace looks worse that it is here because it didn't get all the laps in. Which is a problem in itself.

[Simmi]

https://www.motorsport.com/lemans/ne...eans/10482738/

Bit of a thinkpiece on the BoP from Gary Watkins. Would agree that the adjustment was decent for the show, but sets a precedent that pushes us back to the height of GT sandbagging.

[kevin993]

While Toyota lap times were close, did the Toyota drivers have to push their cars harder to get lap times? In other words, did they need to be harder on their equipment to keep pace?

[Steve McQ]

Originally Posted by Adam43

OK. Here we go.

Let's start with Hypercar and Lap times. This could live in the main thread, but it is relevant, to a certain extent here, and is asked for here.

I say "to a certain extent" because BoP assessment is not by lap time. It is to match performance not lap time. I know that sounds odd, but it is key.
The ACO have data from the cars that they judge this on. Now we can infer the performance from the lap time, especially as it is all we have. Also performance will be laptime if all else goes well. However, I make this point because it is a subtle, but very important, nuance.

I've done Top 50, 100 and 150 laps. By 100 it might be a bit dodgy depending on how many actual competetive laps, in dry running each car got. The tables are ranked by Top 50.

Average Lap time

Quick Observations.

#50 quicker than #51. Yes, but one had nothing to lose and was pushing to get back on terms. However, it was a quick crew.

Toyota behind, although it's 110th best lap onwards is very similar to Ferrari. Not sure what to take from this. Slightly more peaky performance from the Ferrari, but in the conditions (and with tyre warmers) it didn't really matter for this race?
Obviously #7 didn't run laps in the best conditions.

#5 Porsche - it's ranked 3rd on this table. But after the 100th best lap it falls away and quickly.

Peugeot doesn't look very strong here at all. It had its moment in the sun, when it was damp. That will not show well on these charts.

Glick destroyed Vanwall. Although the Vanwall was on fire.

I won't comment more - please let me know what you think. I'll run some more charts.

Could you do the same exercise mergeing all cars of one kind into one line in the graph (all Porsche together, all Ferrari together etc...)? So that it can erase the performance linked to the driver, track condition etc ?
A graph with one line per manufacturer would be interesting to see where we stand BOPwise at the moment.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Steve McQ

Could you do the same exercise mergeing all cars of one kind into one line in the graph (all Porsche together, all Ferrari together etc...)? So that it can erase the performance linked to the driver, track condition etc ?
A graph with one line per manufacturer would be interesting to see where we stand BOPwise at the moment.

I'd wondered about this before during practice. I didn't go down that route as I was concerned about getting the best of the car, but also unrealistic due to set-up. However, I'm not sure how to judge if that is OK or not. Probably is reasonable and, certainly, is lower than the difference between some drivers.

So here you are. This is still ranked by Top 100.

As you can see some cars still didn't do that many laps to judge well (Vanwall, Corvette, G56). Others had a lot of goes to improve the Top 100. The extreme here is LMP2.
This is one reason why using lap times for BoP does not really work.

Average Lap time

Rank	Car	Fastest	Top 50	Top 100	Top 150	Top 200	Top 250	Laps
1	Ferrari (HYPERCAR)	3:26.984	3:28.149	3:28.706	3:29.114	3:29.476	3:29.868	679
2	Porsche (HYPERCAR)	3:27.712	3:28.852	3:29.350	3:29.682	3:29.978	3:30.241	977
3	Cadillac (HYPERCAR)	3:27.963	3:29.155	3:29.575	3:29.911	3:30.211	3:30.477	1005
4	Toyota (HYPERCAR)	3:27.549	3:29.368	3:30.080	3:30.594	3:31.134	3:32.295	445
5	Peugeot (HYPERCAR)	3:28.446	3:29.671	3:30.192	3:30.633	3:31.037	3:31.452	642
6	Glickenhaus (HYPERCAR)	3:29.577	3:30.706	3:31.269	3:31.704	3:32.141	3:32.581	668
7	Oreca (LMP2)	3:36.043	3:36.916	3:37.243	3:37.460	3:37.635	3:37.781	6145
8	Vanwall (HYPERCAR)	3:32.636	3:37.028	3:51.684	4:30.730	NA	NA	165
9	Porsche (LMGTE Am)	3:50.771	3:51.907	3:52.348	3:52.708	3:53.021	3:53.337	1523
10	Chevrolet (INNOVATIVE CAR)	3:50.512	3:51.859	3:52.559	3:53.662	4:00.084	4:15.608	285
11	Chevrolet (LMGTE Am)	3:50.439	3:52.353	3:53.109	3:54.121	3:56.241	4:06.064	313
12	Aston Martin (LMGTE Am)	3:51.530	3:53.387	3:54.012	3:54.469	3:54.856	3:55.219	864
13	Ferrari (LMGTE Am)	3:52.124	3:53.499	3:54.118	3:54.527	3:54.867	3:55.189	1319

To repeat, more laps will help you improve on this list. Alternatively, if you didn't get many in because you are a sample of one car, hurt you.

Toyota suffer on this because they only had a single car in the good conditions. Obviously Vanwall are really hurt here, although they were the slowest easily.

The surprise for me is in GTEAm - Ferrari bottom and Porsche top. Any theories any one!?

[Steve McQ]

Yeah sure, it's relevant only for models which completed at least the total distance of the race, but not more than two or three times of it.

Regarding Porsche vs Ferrari in GTE : Porsche have the best Pro drivers, Ferrari line-ups the best Ams. That is my theory !