MSA TORA Nurburgring 8 Hours - RESULTS

Greetings all

Due to an unseen miscalculation in the Stint 4 results, pointed out by F4H Koenigsegg, I have re-calculated the results of the N8 race. There are a few affected positions, so I can only apologise profusely for not catching this sooner. I've copied Koenigsegg's original message, and my response including an explanation of the re-calculation below. If you have any questions, please ask.
At this time, the only result that I have which still appears to be provisional, and may affect those above, is that of the Hailfire PSYundai, for which the distance was not recorded due to communication (lag breaking up mic) difficulties. If this distance can be provided to me via PM please, I will finalise the results.

Regards


Chris

F4H Koenigsegg wrote:

F4H Koenigsegg wrote:I'm confused. How are the miles calculated for Stint 4? I'm asking this because I believe F4H Super Awesome Motorsport should be 3rd in the standigs. We are 4th now.

First 3 stints combined, we were 2 miles behind Team Mello Yello. It was pretty obvious that (almost) everyone will get the same amount of miles in Stint 4, because we had to finish the lap we are on. So the difference between the two teams is still 2 miles. But I (F4H Koenigsegg) finished the last stint 3 minutes and 21 seconds earlier than BG Smithy. I'm pretty sure that is more than a 2 miles difference on track.

Not criticising anyone, just asking for explanation and a look at the results.

Can anyone of the staff reply please?

Hi Koenigsegg

Apologies for not responding sooner. I took yesterday as a "no xbox day" to recover and also show my wife that I hadn't forgotted she exists so didn't see your comment until this morning.

You are quite correct that there was a flaw in the calculation. I can only apologise for not seeing it on Saturday night, but to be fair, I'd either hosted/driven or streamed/commentated for the full race, plus all the last minute prep I did in the morning to make sure things ran as smooth as possible.

The way the results WERE calculated, was distance first, then finish time. So farthest distance wins. Equal distances are ordered by finishing time, smallest (closest to 8h) first.

As you rightly noted though, and I completely missed, this would effectively lock the distances or gaps between cars after Stint 3. So if by the end of Stint 3 you were not on the same mile as the car ahead, you had no chance of passing them, no matter how fast you went in the last stint, as long as they finished.

So the problem then is how do you calculate the distance travelled in a given time?
I have re-worked the the results now and there have been a number of changes. I have checked the changes for "sanity" and to me they seem now to make a lot more sense, so before listing the changes, I will explain the rationale I used to calculate the distances for Stint 4 in this recalculation.

Firstly, any car that did not finish Stint 4 is unaffected. Any mileage covered remains the same.

For cars that finished, I re-ordered the results by time, closest to 8h first. This gave me an "across the line" order, had we all been in one big lobby.

Then I had to calculate the "extra distance" covered. To do this, I took the last car to cross the line and called this "zero". So this car has no ADDITIONAL distance.

For every car above that, I converted both their qualifying lap time, and their finish time into seconds (and thousandths for the Q time).

Using the finish time in seconds, I calculated the gap for each car, ahead of "car zero". e.g. a car finishing a minute ahead of "car zero" - the last across the line, has a gap of 60 secs.

1 lap is 12.9 miles. To work out "portions of a lap" I divided 12.9 by each car's Q time.

The last step was to multiply the "portion of a lap" by the "gap time" to give the distance covered in that "gap time".

(Sorry this is complicated!!!)

What this means then, is that cars that finished fastest, travelled a distance, relative to their qualifying time, further than those that finished minutes later.
I understand that it's a convoluted way of calculating it, but it's as "scientific" and "fair" as I can make it.

Here is a table showing my workings for those it makes any sense to:




The adjusted results re-sorted into "true" finshing order:




Affected positions:




Once again I can only apologise for not catching this sooner. Comiserations to those it bumps down. Congratulations to those it bumps up.

Team BAR Honda Racing
hmm we lost a place to team xplr
stint1 We finnsh ahead whit over 6000 feat
stint2 we finnish ahead whit 2400 feat
stint3 we lost whit 2500 feat
stint4 we lost 5800 feat to
so how can we be behind them now
I think its because the host only takes the miles and not the miles + the feat up to next car.
because between 151 to 152 miles is around 10400 feat

Dk

Thank you for answering Aero. Really appreciate the effort you put in. Again.

Hopefully we learn from it for next year.

Very odd that a change in rules is done after the event.

I was the one who initially made this comment about the last stint way back in the sebring 12hrs and britcar yet nothing was done.

Feel that my team has been penalised for me driving cautiously in the last stint because I knew everyone would finish on the same lap meaning everyone would do the same amount of distance in the last 2hrs.

Very hard to understand a rule change after the event has finished which affects peoples standings.

poor show by TORA

Agreed it's not ideal Smithy, and I've not 100% finalised this yet, not least because Hailfire's result is not in, so I am open to comment.

It does seem though, that the size of the lap here has highlighted a particular need for more accurate distance measuring, and we're going to look into that for next season. (The most plausible suggestion I've seen so far would take the lobby leader's distance, then offsets everyone behind that based on the distance between cars in feet).

In the meantime though with the N8 results, it seems unjustly harsh to lock everyone's distances in after 6 hours racing. Whatever happens, someone will be unhappy.

I understand where you are coming from Smithy. I'm truly sorry this affected you. If we would have stopped on track at the 2hr mark, my team would have been infront of yours. So I had the feeling that my team was being penalised.

As Aero stated, it's a miscalculation. Not a rule change.

I could be wrong, but I never saw a post from any of the organisers that the results were final.

Gregbie wrote:

Racing Dk wrote:Team BAR Honda Racing
hmm we lost a place to team xplr
stint1 We finnsh ahead whit over 6000 feat
stint2 we finnish ahead whit 2400 feat
stint3 we lost whit 2500 feat
stint4 we lost 5800 feat to
so how can we be behind them now
I think its because the host only takes the miles and not the miles + the feat up to next car.
because between 151 to 152 miles is around 10400 feat

Dk

As long you belive the result is true then it must be !!!!!!
No it's not fair for anyone there has been a part of this event !!!!!
So pleace Gregbie turn down your happyness

Am just having a laugh Dk, fear not,,

In stint 3 lobby A, XBR IMMORTAL didn't stop at the 15 min mark and gained just over 6000 feet on me. In this time after the 15 min mark he may have gained an extra mile.

Surely the other Endurance races need to be altered to reflect this now too?

This has been pointed out by Smithy prior to this event, why has the change only been applied now?

Racing Dk wrote:Team BAR Honda Racing
hmm we lost a place to team xplr
stint1 We finnsh ahead whit over 6000 feat
stint2 we finnish ahead whit 2400 feat
stint3 we lost whit 2500 feat
stint4 we lost 5800 feat to
so how can we be behind them now
I think its because the host only takes the miles and not the miles + the feat up to next car.
because between 151 to 152 miles is around 10400 feat

Dk

Uh a mile is 5280 feet, overall distance in the end would be about 100 feet ahead, but since y'all lost to them in the end, depending the time, that 100 feet may be lost...

Results are good to me, and looks like a new system will be in place for next year

BG Beanz wrote:Surely the other Endurance races need to be altered to reflect this now too?

This has been pointed out by Smithy prior to this event, why has the change only been applied now?

The results for past races will not be changed. This one is still in the "provisional" point after a race. The lap distance has never been great enough to highlight this as being a major problem before. Whatever I do here, I'm going to be burned at the stake. I'm damned if I do, and damned if I don't. What would you do? If I don't give a calculated end distance, what we would have is effectively results a 6 hour race for distance, and a 2 hour race for a finish time.

Incidentally, HR PSYundai's stint 3 distance is now in.

CQR Aero wrote:What would you do?

Give my team 3rd place!

Very disappointed in this change, I was faster than MGR In both my stints and the rules were clear before the start. At the end of each stint I was no more than 20 ft from an extra mile so the idea about counting back from the leader (that I suggested at the last 3 events) is a good one, but this is a kicker chaps, like I said, disappointed, very disappointed.

If TORA wants to be professional as much as possible, you don't go changing rules at the end of an event, you do it in line for the next one...

I'm still open to comment from staff here if they want to agree/disagree this version of the results as "final". At the moment this is just me, being left to fend for myself, with either BG, or F4H getting pissed off. I can't win either way, so a little support would be nice!

I agree with Wumba, even though it helped one of our teams out. It's not fair to change the rules after the race has been run and the results tallied. I'm glad my team wasn't affected, because no matter what way they would have moved, I wouldn't have been okay with that.

CQR Aero wrote:I'm still open to comment from staff here if they want to agree/disagree this version of the results as "final". At the moment this is just me, being left to fend for myself, with either BG, or F4H getting pissed off. I can't win either way, so a little support would be nice!

Results should have been final after posted, the rules were stated, and even if mistakes were made on the Staff's side, the community helpers side, or even just the drivers own fault, isn't fair on everyone else that did take part and were prepared, ready and sorted.

Not trying to start an argument, nor trying to put anyone down or change results or anything, just saw this thread, read Aero's post and I agree with him.

He's gonna piss someone off whether he keeps it as it was, or changes it, people need to SUPPORT the stewards decision, either way it goes, that way it is easier and less stressful to hear peoples points, and to see which direction the decision should go.

Anyways just thought i'd give my 2cents worth, all the best guys, please don't make Aero's job harder!

Like Twisted, I meant to include this sentiment in my post above.

You have to support the decisions made, because no matter the decision, someone was going to be pissed about it.

I will be honest. I didn't look at the scoring rules, just the racing ones. When I saw the results, I went, that doesn't make sense. I don't know what the answer is. Ideally, Forza wouldn't suck. Not happenning. I had a blast either way. See you next race.

BG Blackbird wrote:Very disappointed in this change, I was faster than MGR In both my stints and the rules were clear before the start. At the end of each stint I was no more than 20 ft from an extra mile so the idea about counting back from the leader (that I suggested at the last 3 events) is a good one, but this is a kicker chaps, like I said, disappointed, very disappointed.

Yes yes, you definitely were faster than us. But, you had a teammate who was significantly slower (think he had damage) as well in the 4th stint. Should that count for nothing? I don't know...

Aero made a mistake in calculating the final distances and he's getting slag for it? Doesn't seem like a change in rules to me... Either way, being 5th or 6th in class isn't going to change how we feel about this event, we were verry happy to be able to take part in it and we plan on coming back in 2013, albeit next time with a little bit more preparation.

Nice words their Taeatua, completely agree with you

Hold on a second here. The rules for the final stint were that it was a 'race to the line'. In that scenario, everyone should have completed the lap they were on, so everyone's distances for the final stint should have been exactly divisible by 12.90 (or 13 as I believe the game displayed it).

I'm assuming everyone completed the lap they were on, as per the rules. The times would then have been recorded to establish the final order for those who were on the same mile previously.

From what I can see from the 'amended' results, some teams are being docked (penalised) distance due to the time they completed the final stint in.

That's not how a 'race to the line' works.

Everyone who crossed the line in time should have completed the lap they were on, and thus their total distance and results should reflect that. If the intention was to have it whereby distance travelled again denoted the results of the stint, the rules should have stated that and a longer stint in the same format as the previous ones should have been ran.

Surely it would have been clear what a 'race to the line' final stint meant in terms of the results before it was decided that it would be used to finish the race?

The rules were clear. By now amending the distances, it is effectively saying that some people actually didn't cross the line in the final stint. That is utter nonsense.

Docking distance in this way is a total joke. I'm glad I'm not in one of the affected teams, and I can completely understand why those affected would be annoyed by this.

The results should be reverted back to how they were originally. And in future, if the final stint is to be a distance travelled stint, state it in the rules.

Distance was not "docked" but added. I'm not completely happy with either option and at the moment I'm kinda caught between 2 or 3 teams who want it to fall "their way". I still have the original results, so putting them back is possible, but I'm still waiting on some comment from my colleagues as to which method of calculation should stand.

I think we've heard all the arguments now, so I'm going to lock this thread for comments until such time as the other staff members can aide me with the final decision.