![]() |
Change to the running order, again?
|
I like it how it is, if they reverse, they need to do it from day one!
|
I am all for a change, because I don't like that the leader of the championship keeps being punished with road-sweeping on the first day.
|
I would want to agree with Mike D but in all fairness in order to equal things a bit and ease it for some drivers (...) i'd have the championship leader cleaning the road on day one, following the championship standings then reverse order 10->1 after day 1 results, on day 2-3...
If the championship leader loses his position in the standings because of cleaning on day one then he could regain it in the next rally, sort of cycling/shaking the standings. Not a perfect system but haven't found a better one giving at the same time some (artificial) chance to the newcomers/slower/customer drivers on day one and put the front runners in a straight fight for the win. By the way, gloomyday, what's your take on it ? |
Using equipments similar to these ones, no reverse starting order is needed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsPLrQsAugQ |
Let's have a good battle until Sunday. If we change this rule, we'll know the winner on Friday! http://www.motorsportforums.com/imag...lies/frown.gif
|
Quote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qoVj-7fh0Y or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzNzVCQdF6E |
|
Yes, I also agree the random order or lottery for road positioning would be the best way to determine the running order.
|
Solberg is right. Anyway, we've shaken up the car regulations, the rules for starting orders should be given the same treatment.
|
should be reversed from day one.
"If the championship leader loses his position in the standings because of cleaning on day one then he could regain it in the next rally, sort of cycling/shaking the standings." i disagree. Perhaps the remaining rallies don't require sweeping? Then what? No driver should be punished for leading the championship or the rally. and random position? is that a joke or what? It hardly makes the conditions more equal/fair. I deffo agree with Citroen team boss. |
Quote:
|
bobcat can you please post a photo of your face at the end of the season when Citroen wins both manufacturer and drivers titles and Wilson gets nothing as usual apart from the usual humiliation ?? i am willing to pay 5000 euro for such a photo.
|
I think the random order is the best option as in some rallies, especially when it rains on gravel, and in general tarmac rallies, it is actually beneficial to start first on the road. So a reversed order would just put the frontrunners at a disadvantage again.
|
the best solution is run in reverse order from day 1 to day 3 that only ensures that the top 3-5 drivers who have chances for the title run EVERY DAY on equal conditions...all other suggestions are not worth thinking.
|
Quote:
|
wouldnt it make more sense to let the lower class's run first i.e s2000 and so on. then all the wrc guy get a good go of it. i dont think reverse order is fair to the lower drivers. loeb and co would always get a good run at it..
|
I like the idea of a lottery. Tactics wouldn't matter if they had to draw for road position on all three days. In theory you would have to drive flat out 100% to either take advantage of your current position because you may be first on the road the next day.
|
Quote:
350x.jpg |
I agree 110% with NOT. The idea of a lottery is moronic in the extreme. Why should the outcome of a rally be anymore affected by chance than it already is?
The BEST solution that has ever been proposed to the solution is reversing the order of the top 10/15 OR allowing the drivers to choose their positions though this should only be done if the halfwit Garry Connelly isn't present at the rally. If driver X is the leader of the championship then why should he be disadvantaged? Why not let the sick dogs as NOT calls them, clear the gravel for the real drivers? |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:35 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2