|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
6 Mar 2006, 17:04 (Ref:1537368) | #501 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,793
|
Quote:
We already discussed the second idea when I brought it up a few pages back, but it is logistically unfeasible if attractive. |
|||
|
6 Mar 2006, 17:34 (Ref:1537384) | #502 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Two suggestions:-
1. The ACO select entries for each individual race, regardless of season long entries, which in effect would only be for Donington. 2. A knock out qualifying system, which in itself may put off the smaller teams who can't compete with the best, therefore leaving space for other entries. When it comes down to it you cannot possibly turn away top quality entries from the prototype classes, in favour of countless rich journymen out for a bit of fun in GT2. You need a balanced grid, and 13 GT2 cars to 8 LMP1s is not. |
|
|
6 Mar 2006, 18:35 (Ref:1537422) | #503 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,153
|
Quote:
I really don't like the way you talk about those "rich boys racing for fun", a bit more respect would be in place imho. |
|||
|
6 Mar 2006, 18:49 (Ref:1537431) | #504 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 767
|
As I said before, let those teams who missed (did not commit) the season entry list buy out the entries from those teams who have entered for the full season. It is a market solution and should suit the manufacturers such a Audi and Zytek.
This qualifying suggestion process is pure C***. If you were a team owner of a '3 year old Porsche' with a full budget (ie. can pay your costs)...and have already paid the entry fee for the full season...how would you feel? This is a competitive business. If you can't get the budget together in time or take a flyer then the consequences are your own fault. I love P-Cars and and totally am unimpressed by 'yet another' Porsche Cup' contest but I believe commitment comes first. I have sympathy for RfH and ProTrans but spare me from crying over Audi and Zytek. They have the cash; why did't they step up to the plate????? ...because they are probably arrogant enough to believe that the organisers would 'make space' for their illustrious presence. I honestly hope that they don't get what they want. |
|
|
6 Mar 2006, 19:23 (Ref:1537463) | #505 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
Well , what happened to the saying "first come , first serve" . Thats the way it works for most things , so why change it ? That is the fairest in my opinion .
|
||
|
6 Mar 2006, 20:25 (Ref:1537514) | #506 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,217
|
My observation is that the GT2 teams are what keep are series going year after year, but it is the top class that people pay to see.
Some of you will look at this simple statement and come up with completely opposite conclusions; one being I guess a distortion and not the true conclusion. Lower classes are the foundation of the series, and the bricks and mortar too. The top class is the lick of paint and new roof, that gets your attention -"Blimey! Look at that!" But the middle aged men and women that put forward their own money and take time off work to support racing is what keeps a series together. Manufacturers are there to pay the money to the series and get some return for their investment within two years whereupon a review board will determine whether the performance warrants continued involvement. Examine most series and this is the scenario, and there is good and bad to this situation. The loyalty to a race series by manufacturers is investment based, and extremely fickle and sometimes poorly managed. When it comes to dealing with them, give them an inch and they'll take a mile. BPR and Porsche's GT1 show how quickly it gets out of hand - so quickly that the Porsche GT1 had become outdated between the time it was anounced in 1996, to the time it and the Mercedes CLK GTR hit the track several months later in 1997. In effect Porsche burnt themselves because the same favours extended to them were handed to Mercedes but later when the Porsche performance was known. Porsche competed in 1997, and 1998, and then withdrew from all top level motorsport. That loyal GT2 Porsche or Ferrari (or other) entrant that you knock out to make way for a prototype, could just well have been a future Privateer Prototype entry! A new example being Hitotsuyama Racing with the Zytec prototype for 2006. Only a few years ago, they raced in JGTC with a McLaren F1 GTR in GT500 and a BMW M3 GTR in GT300, then last year a Ferrari 550 GTS and the McLaren in Super GT, they have now entered the top flight this year. Oh and lastly, as a paying race fan, how many of you have found it easy to talk to the factory teams, and sit in their cars? Or is it the lower level privateers that you go up and ask about camber settings, wing angle, and if a miracle somehow occured, found yourself looking out of the centrally located drivers seat of a certain BMW powered British car, at the quickly fading Japanese sunset, stunningly framed by bright yellow louvered front wings in the foreground to the left and right, and the open garage a few metres in front of you.. I know where my memories are, and priorities. I think everyone here has some memory like this too, and once you've got it, nobody can ever take it away from you. |
||
|
7 Mar 2006, 00:06 (Ref:1537654) | #507 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Quote:
Doesn't work for Le Mans. The ACO need to select a balanced, quality grid for each race, based on the quality of the team, car, drivers, and their commitment to the series. We are only talking 3 extra entries in P1, in a thin grid to start with, at ONE race. As has been said previously buying entries is probably the way to go. BTW, this isn't about shafting the small (rich) guy. The majority of teams on the grid have rich backers, it's about what is right for the series, and putting on the best show for the fans. |
||
|
7 Mar 2006, 16:05 (Ref:1539647) | #508 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 13,763
|
I appreciate that it will not work at Le Mans , but there has to be a fairer system than telling commited teams that they cant race . How are they supposed to plan a season on that ?
|
||
|
7 Mar 2006, 16:13 (Ref:1539654) | #509 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
$$$$$$$$$$$$ to step down for one race?
Particualrly if you are not champiohship challengers. |
|
|
7 Mar 2006, 16:23 (Ref:1539659) | #510 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,217
|
JAG I can see the point you make.
I think it works on some levels in the short term for some aspects, but it does damage in others too. Also, in the long term it weakens the sport in my view, (basically for the reasons I mentioned in my previous post.) Also, I think some race fans will agree with what you propose and the point you make above, but some other fans will disagree. You are assuming that what you say is what the majority of race fans want. If you could find that out, then it would certainly support you view. |
||
|
7 Mar 2006, 16:27 (Ref:1539662) | #511 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Look at it another way, giving payments to a couple of smaller teams/drivers could help them find seats in a more competitive car, no need to miss out.
Funded drivers are in demand. |
|
|
7 Mar 2006, 16:29 (Ref:1539663) | #512 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Quote:
|
||
|
7 Mar 2006, 16:45 (Ref:1539667) | #513 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,217
|
It could be put forward like a voluntary redundancy package, and there maybe a couple of takers.. If that worked then it would be good for all I guess. With that part dealt with, I come to another sticking point that flashed my mind right now; the notions of preference and precedence.
If Audi are perceived to have gained an advantage than it will be considered preferential treatment by the other competitors. In coming years the ACO will suffer a barrage of requests for leniency, all citing the Audi precedence. Let's all sing together: "What about me? It isn't fair.." So where at the point of me agreeing with you in principle, it becomes a nightmare in practice - for the ACO anyway, not me. So will Audi need to be penalised in order to ensure that the Status Quo CD remains out of sight and well away from a stereo?! Once they have received the LM place surely they should be penalised. |
||
|
7 Mar 2006, 16:47 (Ref:1539669) | #514 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 840
|
If a european team have a GT car, they can race in LMS , FIA-GT, British GT, Britcar, Belcar, FFSA Etc, but if they have an LMP1 they can only race in 1 series. Therefore, i would like to see them given entries. Bit of a waste of money if you can't guarantee an entry in the only series that caters for you. Its hjardly likely to encourage people to step up who may not be able to commit to full seasons. All IMHO of course. Anyway, why not just go back to Silverstone where all entries can be accomodated.
|
||
|
7 Mar 2006, 17:09 (Ref:1539680) | #515 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,133
|
7/3/06 - Dear Mr 911 owner, sorry we have no room for you on the grid at this race because the big boys want to come out to play, sorry to mess you about.
Mr 911 owner replies, what about my sponsors who I sold a full race package too televised media etc, what about my co drivers who have paid me? what about the commitment I have given you when you wanted money up front. 7/3/08 - Dear Mr 911 owner, well the big boys have all gone again and we have alot of space on the grid for you. Mr 911 owner replies softly - 'sod off' If Zytek want to race in a series, then they need to enter the series. To dip in and out at the expense of teams fully commited then they will take they cars elsewhere, the teams that don't commit, will still not commit and dip in and out whenever they please and the LMES will suffer. |
||
__________________
Some people will tell you that slow is good - and it may be, on some days - but I am here to tell you that fast is better. H S Thompson 1937 - 2005 |
7 Mar 2006, 17:40 (Ref:1539703) | #516 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,217
|
Well said Nordic and with humour too - much appreciated. What you said has been my concern from the start. The series is being sabotaged before it has even begun. At least they waited until the middle of the third year with the BPR series, before tearing it down.
LC2, it is very expensive to prepare a car for a series, and to change to a different series costs too much money for most people as the car has to be rebuilt, entry fees paid again, insurance changed again, sponsors comforted that their money is not being wasted. While we are spoilt in this decade with full time young drivers like Kimi Raikkonen who have hobbies like get drunk and fall off boats and bang their head in their spare time, this is not the norm. Racing drivers are normally the ones who put their own money into the car, and buy a lot of there own gear, and frequently have some sort of job outside of racing. All the legends of racing are like this, including those of today. If they are going to be forced to suffer a finacial and credibility loss due to a loss of their entry, as is being discussed at the moment, than they must be somehow compensated. |
||
|
7 Mar 2006, 17:42 (Ref:1539705) | #517 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 813
|
Quote:
If an Audi R10 was to win this years Le Mans, who in their right mind would object to a GT2 car being sidelined so that we could see the Le Mans winning car here in the UK at Donington? The simple argument is that an LMP car has nowhere else to go in Europe except for the LMS, on the other hand GT2 cars have plenty of other options. If you want to talk about compensation for the GT2 team then fair enough, but the actual decision itself is a no-brainer. |
|||
|
7 Mar 2006, 18:23 (Ref:1539718) | #518 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
Let's put this into perspective, we're talking about one event, Donington, the other circuits have capacity.
Secondly, most LMP1 teams are not big budget factory operations, they are usually funded, at least in part, by owners/pay drivers. The cost of building and running one of these cars is far more than your average GT2. Without an LMS slot, there's no future for the car/team. I would image we'll see a number of extra entries in a number of classes at Donington, particualrly GT2. The only way around it is to allocate a max number of spots for each class, and either select or have knock out qualifying. Whichever way you look at it, LMP1 and GT1 merit a couple more slots at least. If they're not taken up theres more room for LMP2 and GT2. Well, thats IMO at least |
|
|
7 Mar 2006, 22:41 (Ref:1539858) | #519 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,793
|
I'm almost knocked over with shock that you just said something to imply GT1 needs room to grow, JAG!
In all seriousness though, if you're going on the argument that prototype teams deserve to be able to race in the LMS because there's nowhere else for them to race, surely then LMP2 deserves billing over GT1? I'm not saying this is what I believe, I'm saying that it seems to follow with the logic that you've laid out, so I'm curious why you give LMP2 short-shrift. As for me, I still believe that the LMS is fundamentally a 4-class series, not fundamentally an LMP1 series. That's its strength too, so I'm very glad it is that way. An LMP-focused series is extremely boring, as the FIA-SCC proved. |
||
|
7 Mar 2006, 23:52 (Ref:1539918) | #520 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
LMP1 has 8 entries, LMP2 12, GT1 9, GT2 19.
I'd say each class should have 11 guaranteed entries, 44 cars in total. LMP1 and GT1 are the two classes that could grow. 44 cars would leave 2 slots open for Donington, with a strong possibility that GT1 will not gain anymore entries, therefore allowing 12 entries in LMP2 and 14 cars in GT2. 5 GT2 cars would have to make way. 11 LMP1 12 LMP2 9 GT1 14 GT2 Seems fair to me. |
|
|
8 Mar 2006, 00:38 (Ref:1539936) | #521 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,793
|
Fair enough, that's not an unreasonable breakdown by any means. It won't happen though. That being said, I still think that's the type of solution were we actually oversubscribed with full-season entries. I maintain that full-season entries should (and seemingly will) get priority at Donington.
|
||
|
8 Mar 2006, 09:40 (Ref:1540110) | #522 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 187
|
Just think if the LMS had chose a track suitable for the quantity of its field then we wouldn't all be arguing about whats the right way of putting cars on the grid...
Whats wrong with Silvertone why has it been taken away from ? |
||
|
8 Mar 2006, 10:21 (Ref:1540158) | #523 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,103
|
Quote:
But why Donington was chosen for the UK round over a more suitable venue is a very valid question which should not be overlooked. Given the energy with which which this thread has moved forward (and at the same time, stood still) suggests to me that the ACO have made a big mistake in awarding the race to Donington. They must surely have seen this coming. It is the presence of teams like Joest and Zytek which gives the series it's headline, and the vehicle with which to attract increased sponsorship, media coverage and public attendance. If the ACO stick to their original plan, I'd consider them to have scored something of an own goal. I, for one, will think twice before making the long journey to Donington if the R10, Zytek etc. do not get an entry. And I doubt I'll be the only one............. |
||
|
8 Mar 2006, 11:36 (Ref:1540223) | #524 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,983
|
Quote:
On balance I really think that by the time late August rolls round the situation will be a lot clearer. I'd be surprised if all the full season entries currently on the table actually do a full season - a combination of finance, accident damage, and a realisation that the championship is slipping away as a prospect will all take hold. Over the last couple of years there's been quite a few absentees (the Pescarolo at Silverstone 04 and the Oreca Audi at Monza last year spring readily to mind) so I don't think it's overly optimistic to think that this, as a problem, will work itself out. Either way, looking forward to the August bank holiday this year. |
|||
|
8 Mar 2006, 14:08 (Ref:1540317) | #525 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,500
|
I'd be overjoyed if Silverstone never ever hosts a sportscar race again.
All they are interested in is the cash cow of the F1 GP and snatching big races once other circuits have put in the hard work to promote them, i.e. British Superbikes, FIA GT etc. 46 slots is large enough. History shows once competition increases it's difficult to attract more than 45 entries, and as mentioned above half a dozen entries usually drop off the entry for various reasons. DSC said:- A “special selection” will take place among the GT2 entrants for this event. To me that doesn't indicate one way or the other that the selection will be from the season entries or the grid as a whole |
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Audi in F1?? | Racer_kyle | Formula One | 17 | 20 Jul 2005 12:14 |
Audi R8s | Dan Rear | Sportscar & GT Racing | 8 | 14 Jul 2004 15:09 |
Audi R8 | rdjones | Sportscar & GT Racing | 1 | 6 Jul 2004 15:54 |
Trois Riveres - Audi - Audi - Panoz - Corvette? | vandijk | Sportscar & GT Racing | 13 | 5 Aug 2003 23:06 |
DSP VS Audi R8 | H16 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 59 | 4 Jan 2003 01:50 |