|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
20 Jan 2014, 13:25 (Ref:3356229) | #1 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,042
|
IMSA / ACO Driver Ratings
Hi,
I didn't want the other threads to be clogged up with these discussions, but seeing as we have the new rankings for both series, I thought we should have a place to discuss. ACO: http://www.lemans.org/wpphpFichiers/...tification.pdf IMSA: http://www.imsa.com/sites/default/fi...20%2314-28.pdf Now these are always going to be controversial. They're either subjective, and everyone's opinion differs, or based on history, which can be misleading depending on what is given prominence. Now, for a start, I don't understand why there are four categories in each. The only time I think there's any difference between bronze and silver or gold and platinum is in the WEC P1 category, and I'm sure they'd make a 'readjustment' should a bronze driver actually want a P1 drive. Surely a Pro or Am system would work fine? Or would we need a 'Young Pro' and 'Veteran Pro' category? At the moment, several of these junior drivers seem to be classed the same as an amateur, which opens up the classes to exploitation. In the IMSA ones, there was much consternation about how the latest changes affect the careers of certain drivers, ones who have been moved from silver to gold. Personally, I agree with DHH's twitter assertion that if a 'career' is affected, then the silver status isn't apt anyway. Personally, I agree with the majority of changes that IMSA have made - Asenbach and Cosmo are professional drivers, for instance - although there are still some to be looked at. As for the Gold/Platinum distinction, this is where I cannot fathom some decisions (N24 and Porsche Supercup winners 'gold', Indycar rent-a-rides 'Platinum), but this doesn't really affect anything, so it's of little bother. I notice, in particular, that two of last year's P2 lineups from Le Mans would now be ineligible (#26, #42), by the ACO rules, but all GT-Am lineups could carry over. So, if you'd like to discuss individual rankings or the system in general, let's hear your viewpoint. (Oh, and I hate that a category is limited to rankings anyway, but that's probably a whole other debate...) Last edited by Rodger Davies; 20 Jan 2014 at 13:33. |
||
__________________
Eat Sportscars Sleep Sportscars Drink Gulf |
20 Jan 2014, 20:14 (Ref:3356375) | #2 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,208
|
There shouldn't be any distintion between Ams and Pros. the only restriction would be certain drivers to not be allowed to run on a LMP1.
If an Am wants to drive, he can do it, but not having a seat reserved for them. |
||
|
21 Jan 2014, 07:49 (Ref:3356536) | #3 | |
Rookie
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 35
|
I don't think this is about keeping Am drivers out of prototypes, it's more about stopping all Pro pairings from cleaning up in Pro/Am classes.
|
|
|
21 Jan 2014, 13:45 (Ref:3356698) | #4 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,042
|
I agree with you SF, but unfortunately that's not the world we live in at the moment it seems.
|
||
__________________
Eat Sportscars Sleep Sportscars Drink Gulf |
21 Jan 2014, 14:04 (Ref:3356700) | #5 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 664
|
Pro-Am classes is all about having enough cars on track to organise a race/series. The Am drivers bring the money to the track and the series. Without a class for them, they have no chance at winning anything. I'm pretty sure everyone who races want to win or at least be competitive. If Am drivers have no chance at winning something, they won't race. So to have more cars on track, they need special Pro-Am classes.
|
||
|
21 Jan 2014, 14:25 (Ref:3356707) | #6 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 16,760
|
does anyone have a list of guidelines for categorisation?
and did the aco ones apply to the elms last year or do they have their own system? |
|
__________________
devils advocate in-chief and professional arguer of both sides |
21 Jan 2014, 15:40 (Ref:3356716) | #7 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,958
|
|||
|
21 Jan 2014, 17:19 (Ref:3356756) | #8 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 16,760
|
i'm sure i read the elms sporting regs (had insomnia, did the job cause i fell asleep about 4 pages in) and they had some broad guidelines on driver rankings there. it was interesting to look at their entry list and see how they'd been rather generous in some cases and deliberately sandbagged in others.
|
|
__________________
devils advocate in-chief and professional arguer of both sides |
21 Jan 2014, 17:25 (Ref:3356760) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,270
|
ELMS uses the ACO driver rankings. And there are rough guidelines about driver classification written into the ACO sporting regulations, regarding age, past performances, series the driver has competed in etc., but the end result is at the classification people's discretion.
|
||
__________________
When in doubt? C4. |
21 Jan 2014, 17:29 (Ref:3356762) | #10 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,042
|
There definitely are guidelines of sorts depending on what people have raced, how they did and when they did it. In fact, I believe that when IMSA were looking at doing their own system, they specifically referred to doing away with the guidelines and doing it based upon their own judgement.
In fact, it is a bit subjective but here is the FIA GT formula: A (or Platinum) A professional driver generally recognised as a well-known driver on the international scene, under the age of 55, and satisfying at least one of the following criteria:
B (or Gold) A semi-professional driver in international series or who has distinguished himself in national Championships and satisfying at least one of the following criteria:
C (or Silver) An amateur driver satisfying at least one of the following criteria:
D (or Bronze) An amateur driver. Any driver who was over 30 years old when his first licence was issued, and who has little or no single-seater experience. |
||
__________________
Eat Sportscars Sleep Sportscars Drink Gulf |
21 Jan 2014, 17:39 (Ref:3356767) | #11 | |
Racer
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 430
|
Get rid of all classifications, Ams should just be happy they get to compete with the Pros. What is the difference between an Am and a Pro anyway; pure talent, time spent practicing to get better? And why would you want to hamstring other teams because of a lack of ability or motivation on an Ams part to improve their game? Plus there is too much opportunity for sandbagging, it just introduces more controversy, and there is already enough of that with performance balanced cars. Racing is a competition, not a preschool drawing class where everyone receives a blue ribbon, get better or go home. And before you say it, if the money men want to take the ball and go home because they cannot compete at the highest level so be it.
|
|
|
21 Jan 2014, 17:42 (Ref:3356770) | #12 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,270
|
As far as I'm aware, the FIA GT classification criteria that Rodger posted above are 99% identical to the ones used by the ACO.
|
||
__________________
When in doubt? C4. |
21 Jan 2014, 19:42 (Ref:3356816) | #13 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,673
|
I'd love United SportsCar to have around 40 all-pro entries only. But in 2014 there's less than 25. So they have to allow pro-am entries to compete the field.
Now, amateurs wouldn't compete if they must run in the same class as all-pro entries. So they have to include two pro-am classes. |
||
__________________
Nitropteron - Fly fast or get crushed! by NaBUrean Prodooktionz naburu38.itch.io |
21 Jan 2014, 19:46 (Ref:3356819) | #14 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 932
|
The IMSA rules for driver classification are in Attachment 11 of the Sporting Rules. Just a quick paste to compare Platinum:
Quote:
|
||
|
21 Jan 2014, 21:14 (Ref:3356856) | #15 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 704
|
Quote:
The thing that most of us "Ams" get ****ed off over is the sanctioning body not properly enforcing the requirements. If you're going to make it Pro-Am, make sure there's Am's in there... not Pro's masquerading as "Ams" so they can find a way into the race. IMO, if they can't enforce the regulations then they should do away with them. -mike |
|||
|
21 Jan 2014, 21:42 (Ref:3356864) | #16 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,042
|
Hmm, I'm guessing they let 'E' slip a bit, I can think of some (JC France, Chris McMurray, Tony Burgess, Eric Lux, Piergiuseppe Perazzini and others) that would be made Platinum by that logic but just aren't, so that's where common sense prevails.
Just silver is a bit of a grey (!) area, especially for young drivers who haven't done much in single seaters but don't have another career. Are they 'pro' or 'am', because at the moment there are a group who are joining as silver drivers because they are too young/inexperienced to have met the other criteria. |
||
__________________
Eat Sportscars Sleep Sportscars Drink Gulf |
22 Jan 2014, 11:02 (Ref:3357020) | #17 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 16,760
|
i agree with you that silver is a grey (nice pun, btw) area for the young drivers who clearly have nothing better to do than be a racing driver. i think there should be a requirement for a season in one of the big powerful single seaters such as gp2/fr3.5 before a driver can be considered a "pro".
on the other hand, having these quick but relatively inexperienced drivers be classed as silver stops them being used as ringers for bonafide "am" bronze drivers, which seems to be what mike is talking about? i agree with mike about enforcement and sticking to the rules though. they actually seem to cover most of the concerns anyone has expressed so far in the guidelines... |
|
__________________
devils advocate in-chief and professional arguer of both sides |
22 Jan 2014, 16:53 (Ref:3357120) | #18 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 704
|
Quote:
That's all fine, I'm not trying to take away employment for anyone... but for them to be racing dentists and lawyers is just ridiculous. Of course, most fans don't care or understand the nuances of the rules so it doesn't really effect the show.. which is why most people won't talk about it. Especially if there's enough uber-wealthy gentleman drivers (or countries giving their "Ams" money for motorsport...) that don't mind abusing the system and footing the bill to win these "Pro-Am" classes and put cars on the grid. -mike |
|||
|
23 Jan 2014, 13:56 (Ref:3357430) | #19 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 16,760
|
apologies, thanks for the correction, i think i'm a season behind.
is there a simple solution to rankings so that a greater percentage of people can follow the logic, or is it something that's best dealt with behind the scenes? |
|
__________________
devils advocate in-chief and professional arguer of both sides |
23 Jan 2014, 17:43 (Ref:3357517) | #20 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,673
|
The answer could be to enforce a lap time limit to amateurs. If they do faster laps than 105% of the polesitter or so, they get a drive through.
|
||
__________________
Nitropteron - Fly fast or get crushed! by NaBUrean Prodooktionz naburu38.itch.io |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Variable Geometry Turbochargers no ACO/IMSA legal for all cars. | chernaudi | ACO Regulated Series | 3 | 9 Jan 2007 10:47 |
AusGP driver ratings | rocketracer | Formula One | 3 | 3 Apr 2006 15:53 |
should IMSA take a step away from ACO regs? | cybersdorf | North American Racing | 20 | 4 Oct 2005 15:10 |
Driver Ratings | BrazilianFan | ChampCar World Series | 6 | 27 Mar 2004 10:43 |