Changing The Rules of Engagement (Le Mans)

[Bentley03]

It was with great interest that I read this editorial on DSC. My thanks to 'eddsc' who has given me permission to post the article on 10 Tenths in order to make it available to a much wider audience.

Changing The Rules of Engagement

One advantage of being present at Donington Park on August 25, the day before the Le Mans Series meeting got underway, was finding an opportunity to discover what’s really going on in the paddock. Conversations which started on Friday tended to run on into Saturday (and then into the following week), and some (hopefully) interesting thoughts evolved.

And then something reminded me of something else: the fact that the ACO made it clear that cars finishing at Petit Le Mans, in positions that would qualify for a place in the Le Mans 24 Hours, would only be granted that guaranteed place if they were running in full ACO specification.

Suddenly it all became clear: the current system of awarding guaranteed places for Le Mans, of granting some entries in January, some in February and the rest in March could be improved upon – very simply. By doing so, a great deal of uncertainty could be removed from this branch of racing ‘at a stroke’, and simultaneously, ACO rules racing could be given a huge boost for 2007.

So this is more or less how an alternative system could work.

1. There were 41 entries at Donington Park. The vast majority of the teams present have supported the Le Mans Series throughout the season. Some of these teams have been pushing for two entries for the Le Mans 24 Hours in recent years, but because of the current qualification system, they haven’t had the incentive to push ahead with plans for a second car, until they were sure of a second entry: that always seems to come too late.

With a little ‘filtering’ where necessary, at least 35 cars (including nine two-car teams – some of which were single entries at Donington) could be selected for Le Mans now.

Besides removing uncertainty for the teams, this would inevitably increase the number of new prototypes available to race at Le Mans in 2007. With the ‘hybrid era’ about to end, prototype numbers, especially in LMP1, are looking a little shaky next year, as things stand.

“If we had two entries confirmed now, we would have two new cars ready to go for next year, and nine months to raise the support to do it,” seemed to be the prevailing view at Donington Park.

2. There were 11 American entries at Le Mans last year, but two of the teams are no longer racing. Sticking to 11 for now, even though others are likely to want to race at Le Mans in 2007, offer ALMS entrants 11 places at Le Mans in 2007.

Instantly, 11 US teams can be assured of a place at Le Mans next year. If more than 11 apply, some ‘natural selection’ would simply reduce it to 11. Those teams which have been consistently competitive in the ALMS, and with Le Mans experience, would logically take priority.

3. Suggest to the European teams (with the 35 cars) that have been invited to Le Mans that they might like to consider racing at Sebring next year. It would be expecting an awful lot for all of them to want to go to Florida next March, and those building new cars may not be ready (and Sebring couldn’t cope with this number), but a less than subtle hint that if 20 European entries made it to Sebring, then they would be looked upon very favourably in future years. Basically, they’ve just earned lots of brownie points.

Suddenly, the ALMS season gets off to a terrific start, with a huge grid at the opening race of the season.

Sportscar racing – the four-class system, on both sides of the Atlantic – starts 2007 awash with momentum, rather than uncertainty.

4. Lets build on that, and make the Le Mans 24 Hours part of the Le Mans Series. Why not? If a scoring system was devised that didn’t give the 24 hour race too much sway, and because the top European teams will be there anyway, why shouldn’t Le Mans be both an individual event and part of the Le Mans Series?

The Le Mans Series has now received a huge shot in the arm. Teams can now approach sponsors with a ‘double whammy’ of Le Mans and the Le Mans Series.

5. So we’ve ‘arrived’ at about 46 potential entries for Le Mans next June. Remember that the grid size will be 55 next year. The ACO now has nine places to allocate to whoever is left. We mustn’t forget Peugeot of course, any teams such as Racing for Holland, which didn’t complete the 2006 season – perhaps a Japanese entry or two? Have we missed anyone significant out? An FIA team or two? The reserve system will logically always need to be there, ‘just in case’.

Wouldn’t it be possible to put such a system, outlined above, into place almost immediately – perhaps with teams obliged to confirm their entries by, say, October 31? By December 31, teams planning on crossing the Atlantic, for Sebring, would need to confirm their presence there.

The bottom line is that companies working on their budgets for next year need to do so now – not in January, February or March. With a system like this in place, we would neatly avoid any of those last minute dramas over entries that pull out. Any team that did pull out at the last minute would need to understand that, with so much advance notice this time, they really would be ruling themselves out of Le Mans for many years to come.
Malcolm Cracknell

[isynge]

I read the article first time round and found it thought provoking. My only hesitation with it, is when attempts have been made to fold Le Mans into a championship the results seem to have been patchy.

Where the nail is very much hit on the head is that getting some entries sorted early, so a team knows it's got a run in June, would be very advantageous. I imagine Pescarolo's task in sorting out next year has been eased by the knowledge that he's got two entries in the bag. Similarly teams like LNT probably find the commercial challenge of sorting next year out quite a lot easier.

[AU N EGL]

The ACO and the FIA have always been a bit at odds with each other. Dr, Panoz ( ALMS ) has done wonders in smoothing things out between the two.

Isn't the LMS based of the ACO rules now ??


Then there is the other thing, IMHO, If you want to Bark with the Big Dogs, you have to play by their rules.

[Bentley03]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

Isn't the LMS based of the ACO rules now ??

Both the LMS and the ALMS are 'based' on ACO regs. LMS to full ACO regs and the ALMS with 'adjustments' to the ACO regs as IMSA see fit.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

Isn't the LMS based of the ACO rules now ??

Not just based on the rules, it's actually run by them, which gives me a little more confidence it will be around for a little longer than any FIA series!

As for Le Mans selection, you'll always have dissaponted teams.

[paul-collins]

I tend to disagree - for every team that gets nine months to raise funds for a two car guaranteed entry, there are probably 5 or 6 who no longer have any desire to raise funds, since the likelihood of getting an invitation becomes infinitessimal. Which means you're going to decimate the field, ultimately, for the season, and reduce the number of teams who could reasonably be counted upon to act as reserves.

The only thing this does is try to take the decision out of the ACO's hands - which, given the past, may be a good thing . Perhaps the single Racing for Holland entry is a good example of why this would be reasonable. Or Spinnaker Clandesteam.

But if a strict regimen were followed of choosing entrants for Le Mans based purely upon merit, where would the fundraisers have difficulty?

Perhaps the evaluation of merit could be codified - but I wouldn't go as far as locking in entries 9 months in advance - and especially not as many as contemplated here.

[yamato]

I really like the idea of tweaking the way entires are handed out. But I'm not so sure about making the 24 hours part of the LMS. Then you are basically guaranteeing any full season LMS entrant a trip to LM? Either that, or you are asking a team to enter a race series where they might not be allowed to compete in one of the races (and one that might carry more points than the others).

I am all for handing out some early entries, but not now before the season is over. Wait until the season is over, and then give out some entries based on the seasons' performance. Stick with the basic formula, you would just have to have an early entry deadline (say November sometime). The ACO would love this, because they can collect money even earlier.

Now you give out entries to these full season competitors in both the LMS and the ALMS who have proved their worth (and submitted and early entry). Now, instead of announcing additional entries just before Sebring, you can wait. Extend the standard entry deadline a bit, give teams a chance to prove their worth at Mila Milhaus and/or Sebring before you decide on the final Entries.

I think that this could really work well. Teams that have performed well can submit their entry early, get there confirmation on say December 1st. and then secure their funding. Teams that feel they still have something to prove to the ACO could submit for standard selection and could use early season races to show their worth. You could have an FIA-GT race (Brazil), and ALMS race (Sebring), and an LMS race (late March, early April race) all in the bag before final selections are announced.

what do you think?

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by paul-collins

But if a strict regimen were followed of choosing entrants for Le Mans based purely upon merit, where would the fundraisers have difficulty?

Paul that is a very all trueistic Idea. Unfortunituly that is not how racing works.

Professional teams take BIG money to run. Multi millions of dollars / euros / Stering per year. These sponsors what results NOW, not planning in the future.
Some manufactures dont want to sponsor GT racing do the competion from other teams. Chrysler/ MB and the Viper or BMW and the New 6 serires car which was FIA hologized two years ago. These manufactures dont want to compete as they my loose. Loosing a race means loosing sales. If the manufacture does not compete they dont loose.

Event promotions ( races ) are the same way, it takes lots of money to promot the event.

Yes winning teams from diffent classes should get invitations, and for the most part they do.

Event sponosors may also get team invetations, even if their team sucks. It pays to smooze with the big shots of differnt events.

and the event promotor, ACO, has there own choices so French teams ( sorry guys) get in no matter how bad they may be.

Do you think Peugot will get an invitation to the 24 hour?? even if they dont do one race prior to June?? Of course they will. Nature of poltics .

Racing is not only between the Green and Checkard flags, it is 24/7/365.

The ACO has the biggest race, 24 h LeMans, so THEY get to set the rules.

We may not like it, but that IMHO is the way it is.


Tom

[duke_toaster]

Add LM24 to the championship, and maybe merge ALMS with LMES, getting each team to do the ones in it's continent plus two in the other.

And in an ideal world, I would like to see a merger between FIA GT and LMS. That would mean 4 class racing @ Spa. That would be legendary.

This invite junk should go totally. Just run it as part of a championship.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

Paul that is a very all touristic Idea. Unfortunately that is not how racing works.
Tom

Tom:
The reply that part of this quote was interesting, but out of curiosity, how do you feel, at this point in time, does racing work.

Racing as a whole fell apart in the nineties, with the odd exception of drag racing and LEMANS, as LeMans went from a regional "gentleman's" race to a quasi-international elitist event.

If one bases how racing works on the power plays of the nineties, things will be, at best, tenuous. (the 2000s have been, catch as catch can, power doing as the old cliché says)

There is no whammy poster trashing awaiting your reply, just curiosity.
Bob

[AU N EGL]

Bob

Personally I dont like it. But unfortunitly that is the way it is for now. Dr. Panoz is working very hard with the ACO to change the rules. Without Dr. Panoz and ALMS the ACO might be history.

The Manufactures want to dispaly their high tech goods, but the indpendent teams fill the fields. Which is a Good thing.

Some ppl compalin that IMSA ( ALMS) rules are differnt the ACO. Yes to a small point. Every rule change or ( cough) competition adjustment IMSA made the ACO followed. Scott A. ( ALMS President) spends a lot of his time working with the ACO. Yes the ACO ( French ) wants to do things their own way. ( Heck that is what I do to ) but Race promotors need and must work with manufacutres and big sponsors or race partners to get the funding for the teams and races. Spectators and TV rights cant pay all the bills.

If some race orginzation says ' MANUFACTURE ABC" you WILL give us X amount of mony and provide 10 cars. That manufacutre will say go jump in the lake. Take their money and leave. Only King Burnie can do that with F1.

Does that mean P1 is for Audi?? NO, even though AUDI is screeming up and down that Peugot is coming out with a dissel. Heck my Dissel Chevy pick up has more HP & torque then the R10. But that is part of working with the manufactures.

It is not an easy thing to do. So if a race promotor has to allow some sponsors choices or natioanl choices to fill the fields, so be it. They also provide the MONEY to fund the event.

Racing is NOT socializium. Racing is pure capitalisium at its best. Money pays the bills. PPL like Dr. Panoz ( which he put in severl hundred million dollars of his own money ) and Scott A. do all the hard work to keep the races going.

Manufacures dont have the money. Today Ford anounced severl thouand ppl will be layed off here in the States. Ford will sell AM and Jag. Look at GMs problems. MB is loosing money big time on Chrysler. BMW is too far involde with F1 to pull out. Ferrari is F1. Toyota is hevealy invovled with F1 and now NASCAR. Big Manufactures dont have the money too support racing in too many differnt venues. They must pick and choose based on who they sell cars too and what races potential customers watch.

Indpednet teams fill the field but dont have the big budgets. Limit budgets and the manufactures leave. Fully indpendent teams and racing is minor leage profession and amature.

Too have any type of racing there needs to have comprmise between the big and small manufactures, small indpendent teams, and the ever shrinking advertsing money of race sponsors.

Racing is not cheap, no matter how you look at it.

[JAG]

Personally, I spend far less time worrying about Le Mans than the LMS and ALMS.

Le Mans is so huge it will take care of itself, even when the sport hits rock bottom, i.e. 1992/1993/1994.

The ACO seem to have at last figured you need a strong European Le Mans reg series, hence the intoruction of the LMS, a US series with regs flexibilty, and finally a Japanease series.

If the ACO manage these series, they'll have a pool of 70-90 quality cars from which to choose from.

A Le Mans entry should be a bonus, not a necesssity to keep a team going.

The ALMS has served Dyson well, hopefully the LMS will become prestigous enough itself to enable European teams to put together a sportscar program, independent of a Le Mans entry.

[Fogelhund]

This is my response to the article on DSC.

I don't disagree that the system currently in place has it's flaws. But, it really is not possible to create a system that doesn't have flaws.

I would like to begin, by putting forth some of the tenets that I believe should be true. First, it should be apparent that the ACO will foremost do what it believes is best for its race. Second, I agree with Mr. Cracknell that the ACO should be doing what it can to strengthen it's franchises. These two tenets at times create conflict.


Let me examine the proposals put forth.

1. Essentially moving forward calendar wise, and increasing the number of guaranteed places on the grid.

This quote summed it all.

“If we had two entries confirmed now, we would have two new cars ready to go for next year, and nine months to raise the support to do it,” seemed to be the prevailing view at Donington Park.

Frankly, I simply cannot buy this argument put forth. While I appreciate that a guaranteed entry might help Team X to raise the support to enter the big race, I'm not certain what recent achievements this team can put forth, to reasonable support an argument that they are a solid two car team.

What proof does the ACO have, that this second entry will enhance the show, when there is simply no provenance behind it? There is a probability that a team could raise the funding, and have professional drivers, but then they could go out and find a couple of relatively inexperienced rent a ride buyers. Then there is a reasonable probability that the team doesn't raise the funding, and due to a scarcity of "at large entries", some teams simply don't bother submitting an application, resulting in a reduction in the quality of the grid.

Why exactly should the ACO be putting their race at risk for unfunded cars, no matter what the time frame is?

I'll tell you what ACO. Give Bobby Rahal, a guaranteed entry now. Certainly with that guaranteed entry, Rahal would have a better chance to raise funds, and adding that Rahal to the ALMS, sure would raise it's profile.

This is mid-September. It is a completely normal timeline, to expect a number of very capable potential entrants to not even announce their programs for several months. It is my belief that if we preselected 46 cars today, the remaining nine positions would be oversubscribed, by teams much more qualified, than many on the list of 35 LMS and 11 ALMS cars.

Hmmm, what about those Peugeots? Ok, well we only have seven at large positions now.

What if there is a European Audi team next year? Ok, well we only have five at large positions... Maybe it won't be Audi, but it certainly will be some entrant, in one of the classes that will be a lock.

In my opinion, way too many guaranteed entries, and way too much risk for the ACO.

3. Suggest to the European teams (with the 35 cars) that have been invited to Le Mans that they might like to consider racing at Sebring next year. It would be expecting an awful lot for all of them to want to go to Florida next March, and those building new cars may not be ready (and Sebring couldn’t cope with this number), but a less than subtle hint that if 20 European entries made it to Sebring, then they would be looked upon very favourably in future years. Basically, they’ve just earned lots of brownie points.

There is no question that the ALMS has had unsatisfactory entry levels the past few years, but I believe that this isn't the answer for Sebring or the ALMS. I believe that the ALMS really should be looking internally at building up car counts to around 40. That certainly doesn't preclude entries from Europe, but it does reduce their importance.

Secondly, if a team is given this proposed guaranteed entry in September, what justification is there for not being ready six months later? Do we really expect much out of a team, if they cannot field a team some two and one half months prior to Le Mans pretest? Sure, we can come up with some examples, such as Rollcenter last year, but at this point things are looking pretty dodgy for the ACO, having given up a guarantee, and now a no show.

The ACO simply would build themselves too little flexibility under such a scenario, and I can't support this type of idea.

4. Lets build on that, and make the Le Mans 24 Hours part of the Le Mans Series. Why not? If a scoring system was devised that didn’t give the 24 hour race too much sway, and because the top European teams will be there anyway, why shouldn’t Le Mans be both an individual event and part of the Le Mans Series?

The Le Mans Series has now received a huge shot in the arm. Teams can now approach sponsors with a ‘double whammy’ of Le Mans and the Le Mans Series.

Given we have concluded that there are likely to be 5 at large entries left over with this system, and we split 3 for LMS, and 2 for ALMS for argument sake.

These are the teams this year in the LMS, that were not around last year. These teams would have been fighting for those three LMS "at larges".

CHAMBERLAIN - SYNERGY MOTORSPORT LMP1
SWISS SPIRIT LMP1
LUC ALPHAND AVENTURES GT1
RACING FOR HOLLAND - do you give a guaranteed entry to a team with 3 points in LMP1 over countless other teams with better results?
IMSA PERFORMANCE MATMUT - GT2

Maybe there is more I've missed, yet two of these teams would unlikely have been at LM this year, due to this discussed changes in guaranteed entries.

Further to this, the point of this being part of the LMS series. So your current 2nd and 4th place LMP1 teams in the standings, your current GT1 leader, and your current 3rd in GT2 in the standings all might miss a round of the series, and lose out points to their competitors. Chances are the three LMP1's get chosen. It is highly likely that those teams who were forced to miss a round of the series, would have fairly unhappy having lost out in their championship bid. Perhaps Mssr. Alphand would be disappointed with this outcome, having enough points to win the championship, except he wasn't allowed to run at one of the races.

I appreciate that finding sponsorship money is difficult, and there is a strong need to plan well in advance.

With a system like this in place, we would neatly avoid any of those last minute dramas over entries that pull out.

Well, no we don't, and in fact we may increase this probability. Said sponsorship money is not guaranteed, perhaps the place where you wish to purchase your car falls behind in their production, such as Radical did this year. There will still be last minute dramas, and perhaps even more.

The Le Mans Series has now received a huge shot in the arm. Teams can now approach sponsors with a ‘double whammy’ of Le Mans and the Le Mans Series.

.... and yet other new teams get quite the opposite result. Very little chance to go to Le Mans, the promise of missing a round of the championship... how does this appeal to sponsors. What about Mssr. Alphand, currently leading the championship, but unlikely to have done so if LM was part of LMS, and he wasn't invited? While we may have a positive on one side, we have an equal negative on the other.

I suppose 35 guaranteed entries for the LMS looks great, yet the combined JLMS and ALMS get 11, with few at larges available. The ALMS has won 75% of the classes/overall the past three years, and yet is guaranteed only 20% of the entry? Somehow this doesn't seem very equitable, nor does it do for the ALMS, what it does for the LMS in terms of theoretically building grid size. ... and which series needs the most help building grids again???


There are however several changes to the existing qualifications that I would make.

1. To be deemed eligible to enter LM, you must be full-time entrants in an ACO sanctioned series, and have competed in at least two races prior to LM in that current year in ACO sanctioned races. This doesn't mean one car in series = two at LM... both have to run to qualify.

This ensures that teams are qualified, and ready to race at LM, and eliminates cherry-pickers who do nothing to increase the quality of the ACO franchise series.

2. Eliminate the sale of autobids. Your team earned it, you use it, or forfeit.

3. Require that all drivers will have competed in a minimum of two ACO sanctioned races in the prior twelve months. Sorry Mr. Rent a ride. Beyond $, what have you done to deserve to be here, be a rolling pylon, and decrease the quality of the show?

4. Guaranteed entries, subject to the above requirements as follows;

Top 3 finishers in points, in ALMS and LMS, per class. If JLMS actually survives, revist this.

Teams cannot receive more than two guaranteed entries, and auto-bids do not roll to the next nearest point getter.

5. Only half tongue in cheek, go back to a proper pre-qualifying for the rest of the entrants. I appreciate the costs involved to those who don't make it, yet this is an excitement lost, and it ensured that some of the questionable teams didn't make the grids. Average time of the three drivers, get on with it.

Points 1.) and 3.) may require certain Euro teams/drivers to make Sebring, to fulfill their requirements to enter LM, satisfying the desire to have more Euro teams enter said race..

Just my opinions.

[dj4monie]

I agree with Hound.

The ONE thing I never understood about Le Mans its an INVITE only dance and not an open invite to qualify for the event.

Okay so that might mean teams like WR don't get in, but would that really hurt the quality of Le Mans? Such storylines make great tv I guess, but below the surface, its just another struggling team with no money and no real chance to win.

The Indy 500 isn't INVITE only, its anybody who has a car and a driver trying to get into the show. The winner usually comes from the first 5-10 rows and not any further back. Those that got in on the last day of qualifying really don't stand a chance to win, but since finishing LAST pays so well, why not take a crack at it?

The Daytona 500 has as many as 50-60 cars qualify for 2 guaranteed spots. Only the front row is locked in, the rest have to "race" their way in, with the 2 qualifying races on the Thur before the race.

Why not make teams EARN the right to be at Le Mans? That's the level of professionalizm that is missing.

Sportcar Racing has largely been amaturish throughout the years. Its only when the factories have made it their personal battle field that its even been interesting to anybody outside of France and the UK.

That culture has to change sometime...

Desolve Grand Am and you would have solved your entry/field problems with the ALMS.

Desolve IRL and Im sure you would see a few teams come over to the ALMS.

As in the Matrix, the problem is choice... For the common good of the sport there shouldn't be so much choice.

I'd say having 2 series in a area dominated by road racing prolly isn't a good idea either.

There's a way to do this, no other race can give you WORLD exposure the way Le Mans can.

The answer lies somewhere between these post...

[dj choc ice]

i would rather say for entrants to do it this way

10 cars from FIA GT atleast
20 cars from LMS
20 from ALMS
5 cars from JLMC

after all i thought honda mugen were running a courage LC70 mugen out in the JLMC in pseudo F1 honda colours so maybe a little more variety next year?, there didnt seem to be any teams from japan except for the JLOC lamborghini and the taisan porsche and some quality entries were skipped like larbre competition and dyson and 2005 was a joke they missed zytek out when they were at their absolute best which inexcuseable.

and worst of all EBImotors porsche was not at lemans which again is sacrilege that car is going very well in the FIA GT when they dont have problems and also were was the GLPK corvette C6R and the oreca saleen S7R this year? and the zakspeed saleen S7R?! hopefully next year they will allow a few more waulity privateer teams even thogh the entries are limited for lemans to 55 cars

i also like the idea of using sebring as a kind of "honeypot" to give certain teams a better chance of taking part in the 24 hours of lemans but what about some teams that may not be there or have the money for sebring?

hopefully some of the top FIA GT teams are invited next year to lemans as are dyson, GLPK, EBImotors, oreca and PSI experience

[Bentley03]

I'm still pondering the implications of the proposals in Malcolm's article, but in the meantime I thought I'd give you my 2p on the subject:

The problem (if that's the right word) with Le Mans is it's timing. It just doesn't fit in with the motor racing calendar. It's a stand alone event and yet it's bigger in almost every sense of the word than the various series (ALMS/LMS/JLMC) it has spawned. In almost any other sport you might care to mention the 'Big One' is the season finale. In 'our' sport this is not the case.

So, we have a situation whereby the 'Season Finale/Big One/Cup Final/call it what you will' in ACO rules four class sportscar racing actually takes place mid-season. It is an absurd peculiarity which poses problems for potential participants and sponsors which are unprecedented in other sports.

My solution would be to simply adjust the ACO racing calendar to run from July to June. The LMS/ALMS/JLMC would obviously need to take a winter break, but I see no reason why this couldn't work.

Having adjusted the calendar to run from July to June, we now have a situation whereby Le Mans becomes the 'Season Finale'. The ACO could then adopt results based entry criteria for Le Mans and in doing so give the ALMS/LMS/JLMC an enormous boost.

The number of places to be awarded to each class from each series (based probably on car counts in each class in each series) are announced at Le Mans prior to the opening round of the (new) season, reserves would be called up on the basis of 'next best place in that class in that series' and amazingly everyone knows exactly where they stand and what needs to be done in order to go to the party.

Le Mans maintains it's place at the pinnacle of Sportscar and GT Racing, the associated series become stronger, more significant, more competitive, better funded, more exciting and better supported, and the ACO can sleep sound in their beds at night....................

[Graham Goodwin]

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

i would rather say for entrants to do it this way

10 cars from FIA GT atleast
20 cars from LMS
20 from ALMS
5 cars from JLMC

after all i thought honda mugen were running a courage LC70 mugen out in the JLMC in pseudo F1 honda colours so maybe a little more variety next year?, there didnt seem to be any teams from japan except for the JLOC lamborghini and the taisan porsche and some quality entries were skipped like larbre competition and dyson and 2005 was a joke they missed zytek out when they were at their absolute best which inexcuseable.

and worst of all EBImotors porsche was not at lemans which again is sacrilege that car is going very well in the FIA GT when they dont have problems and also were was the GLPK corvette C6R and the oreca saleen S7R this year? and the zakspeed saleen S7R?! hopefully next year they will allow a few more waulity privateer teams even thogh the entries are limited for lemans to 55 cars

hopefully some of the top FIA GT teams are invited next year to lemans as are dyson, GLPK, EBImotors, oreca and PSI experience

Oreca withdrew their 2006 entry, Zakspeed didn't enter, neither did Dyson. I have no idea whether GLPK or EbiMotors even entered either.

I'd also very much doubt that your formula would work either - There simply aren't 20 cars from ALMS that wish to enter and 5 is certainly too many from JLMC as yet (though that may change). As for 10 from FIA GT I can't see that ever being accepted by the ACO when their own championship is in competition for entries.

[AU N EGL]

LM 24 may not fit into the worlds race calander, but rember it is on the longest day or weekend closest too the longerst day of the year. This way there is the most day light racing.

PPl have mentiond and I agree, not all the top teams or place in a particular series get enterys.

Does this mean if Peugot runs NO races prior to the 24 they should not get an invitation?? Of course not. Peugot is French and big company so they get an entery no matter what.This part of the poltics of racing and nationalisium.

[Graham Goodwin]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

Does this mean if Peugot runs NO races prior to the 24 they should not get an invitation?? Of course not. Peugot is French and big company so they get an entery no matter what.This part of the poltics of racing and nationalisium.

But that point is already covered - referring to the original article -

5. So we’ve ‘arrived’ at about 46 potential entries for Le Mans next June. Remember that the grid size will be 55 next year. The ACO now has nine places to allocate to whoever is left. We mustn’t forget Peugeot of course, any teams such as Racing for Holland, which didn’t complete the 2006 season – perhaps a Japanese entry or two? Have we missed anyone significant out? An FIA team or two? The reserve system will logically always need to be there, ‘just in case’.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Graham Goodwin

There simply aren't 20 cars from ALMS that wish to enter

There weren't 20 cars from the ALMS that wished to enter in 2006.

I don't think anyone presently knows how many wish to enter next year, though I suspect it will be more than the number submitting applications in 2006.

[Graham Goodwin]

Fair point but I still think that 20 in 2007 will be pushing it a bit!

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Graham Goodwin

Fair point but I still think that 20 in 2007 will be pushing it a bit!

Maybe, maybe not. There are so many unknowns that we really can't say right now.

Based on this seasons ALMS teams, with their suggested car entries next year, you'd come up with 11. Intersport x 2, Audi x 2, Corvette x 2, AMR x 2 (not really an ALMS team next year), Panoz x1 (or 2?), FLM, PWL.

Then we have the unknowns, rumours and otherwise.

Dyson x2 (not likely but...)
Courage Cosworths x2 (???)
Porsche LMP2 x2 (apparently no sales until post LM. Why? Why not post Mid Ohio? Is there plans?)
Acura LMP2 x3 (were they planning on an assault?)
VDS Radical x1?
I don't think Risi is interested but....
How many new Porsche 997's? Can we discount than none of them will want to go?
Is Kinetic really buying Spykers? Would they want to go?
Krohn expressed interest, in what who knows....

On the other hand, 35 from LMS is also stretching things a wee bit right now.
LMP1 is the problem area, unless it gets shrunk at the expense of an expanded LMP2. Creation and Lister "seem" to have nothing to run in 07' for LM. Zytek?

I don't think we'll know until January (or later) next year, what is going on for next season.

[Bentley03]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

LM 24 may not fit into the worlds race calander, but rember it is on the longest day or weekend closest too the longerst day of the year. This way there is the most day light racing.

I assume you were actually referring to my last post so of course, and I'm not suggesting the traditional June dates for the race should be altered.

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

PPl have mentiond and I agree, not all the top teams or place in a particular series get enterys.

Does this mean if Peugot runs NO races prior to the 24 they should not get an invitation?? Of course not. Peugot is French and big company so they get an entery no matter what.This part of the poltics of racing and nationalisium.

The aim of this adjustment to the season dates (July to June) and the adoption of a results based entry system is to bring strength in depth to the associated series. So yes, if Peugeot were unable to accumulate enough points during the course of the season in order to finish high enough up in their championship to gain Le Mans qualification, they would not go to the party. It is, of course, almost inconceivable (with their budget) that this would happen, but it would certainly add to the drama of the LMS should Peugeot find themselves in such in a precarious position.

But let me put this to you, 12 entries per class based on championship positions and 7 'wildcard' entries to be decided by the ACO. They then have a get out clause should some of their friends (WR, Debora, Peugeot) not qualify...........

The exact detail of how entries would be allocated is not important. This is totally hypothetical and not fully thought through (or ever likely to be). But what it would do is use the Le Mans 24 Hour race itself far more effectivly as a vehicle with which to improve it's associated series. If those series become more competitive and gain greater strength in depth, it can only bode well for the 24 hour race itself.

[Bentley03]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

Creation and Lister "seem" to have nothing to run in 07' for LM. Zytek?

And that, surely, is the reason why 'headline' teams such as Creation and Zytek should be told NOW by the ACO if they will be granted entries for Le Mans next year, and if so, whether they will be granted one or two. With a 'sensible' amount of time to accrue the necessary funds and build the cars, both teams would have two cars built and ready for competition in time for the start of next season. It's the uncertainty and incredibly short lead time of the current system which causes such problems for these teams. It is not just Le Mans which would benefit from their presence, it's the LMS aswell. The ACO really does need to nurture and work with teams like Creation and Zytek, not against them.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Bentley03

And that, surely, is the reason why 'headline' teams such as Creation and Zytek should be told NOW by the ACO if they will be granted entries for Le Mans next year, and if so, whether they will be granted one or two. With a 'sensible' amount of time to accrue the necessary funds and build the cars, both teams would have two cars built and ready for competition in time for the start of next season. It's the uncertainty and incredibly short lead time of the current system which causes such problems for these teams. It is not just Le Mans which would benefit from their presence, it's the LMS aswell. The ACO really does need to nurture and work with teams like Creation and Zytek, not against them.

Why grant entries nine months in advance, to teams without cars currently, with no funding currently to build? Too much risk on the ACO. You assume that such funding would indeed be found, and the cars built in time. You assume that the cars will be worthwhile, sorted and reliable. Neither team has ever factored at LM, so why even take that stretch for these teams?


If we gave out entries to every team that needed nurturing and work, there wouldn't be any spots left for newcomers that have yet to announce. How does this help and nurture their programs? Have the brand new Creation and Zytek cars for next year proven to be fast, and reliable?

We have no idea what the P1 grids will be next year across the globe, and locking into current teams has the potential to lock out some very good teams.

Isn't Creation's car supposed to be for late 07' or 08' anyway?

This is an interesting exercise, but you'll never find a perfect solution.