What format should be used at title events?

[Admin]

What format should be used at state and national titles?

• 4 heats and a final
  
• 4 heats a dash and a final
  
• 6 heats drop your worst
  
• 8 heats drop your worst
  
• time trialed practice, 4 heats, dash, final
  
• Other format
  

Let everyone know your thoughts.

[John]

I actually like the format as used for the Adelaide Classic. There may be some slight variations that could be implemented but ultimately I think it has a good balance.

4 Heats (Points), Pre-Final and Final.

A slight variation could be to Drop the Worst Heat for the initial 4 Heats points leading in to the Pre-Final. That would provide some allowance for a DNF.

Interested to read other peoples ideas on race formats.

[Mr X]

I don't care what format is used as long as it includes finals. Finals are different to any heat as you start around people who are the same speed as you. Generally there are less crashes in a final, the final is what people watch getting ride of them for a title event doesn't make sense. I am a little disappointed that there are going to be no finals in WA for the national title but the again I couldn't care less as I am not going.

I like any format which has finals, the classic format was good though. Maybe a drop your worst before the dash would of been good for me lol can't wait till the next classic.

[John]

I believe Adelaide have noted after the Classic the increased number of races especially when you have a number of oversubscribed classes. I understand that the entries per class may be capped at 20 to maintain the number of races for the event at a reasonable level.

Based on this feedback maybe a slight variation on the current 4 Heats and Final could be considered.

4 Heats Drop the Worst and Final only counts.

That would cater for a DNF during the heats, have the top drivers near the top of the field and also allow for a good driver to work through the field and win the title.

It would also maintain the number of races to that currently used for the 4 Heats and Final race format.

From what I hear the advocates for the 6 Heats Drop the Worst like it because it allows for a DNF and the advocates for the 4 Heats and Final like the Final. This would provide both those features as well as the winner takes all Final that is probably more exciting than a Final for points?

[Aidka member]

I believe the National Titles should only be open to the top 10 competitors of the State Titles in each class. You should have to earn the right to compete at a national level, not just pay your money and have 6 races under your belt.

[John]

The concept of pre qualification is a good idea and I have heard it being discussed increasingly for similar reasons to those you have raised.

Something to consider.

AIDKA now has the Northern Territory, South Australia, Queensland and Western Australia.

The concept may need to take into consideration some form of ratio to cater for the number of clubs and/or members in each of the States and Territory.

On the other hand if you did allocate qualification points to finishing positions at each of the State and Territory Titles then it could encourage greater interstate participation at the NT and Q Titles as a means of qualifying for the Nationals. In that situation somebody competing at multiple titles would have a greater potential of qualifying.

Maybe the maximum number of competitors could be 40 to limit the number of races?

[John]

I would like to restart discussion on race formats with Titles in mind as per this topic but also in general.

One limitation with the current AIDKA race formats is that they all require the initial 4 Heats to be completed to minimise the grid draw point difference between drivers.

This requirement means that race formats such as 4 Heats, Pre-Final and Final increase the number of races for an event and can place pressure on time limitations.

I have been looking at this limitation and have just developed a new 3 Heat race format that is looking good in terms of balance of grid draw points.

It could open up race format possibilities such as 3 Heats, Pre-Final and Final. This would require exactly the same number of races as 4 Heats and Final even for oversubscribed classes.

A couple of potential options and this is where I would like to hear some feedback from "drivers".

I won't go into details on tied points but the calculations would be similar to those currently being used.

Option 1
3 Heats, Pre- Final, Final
3 Heats auto grid draw, points accumulated
Pre-Final grid position based on points from 3 Heats best to front
Final grid position based on points from 3 Heats and Pre-Final best to front
Meeting position - Overall Points
Note: for oversubscribed classes (assume up to 40 for example) the drivers would be allocated a position in one of two Pre-Finals.

Option 2
3 Heats, Pre- Final, Final
3 Heats auto grid draw, points accumulated
Pre-Final grid position based on points from 3 Heats best to front
Final grid position based on points from 3 Heats and Pre-Final best to front
Meeting position - Finishing position of Final
Note: for oversubscribed classes (assume up to 40 for example) the drivers would be allocated a position in one of two Pre-Finals.

Option 3
3 Heats, Pre- Final, Final
3 Heats auto grid draw, points accumulated
"A" Pre-Final grid position based on points from 3 Heats best to front (top 10)
The finishing order of the "A" Pre-Final will be grid positions 1 to 10 of the Final
If over 30 karts then a "B" Pre-Final of up to 20 karts will race with starting grid positions based on the points from the 3 Heats.
Finishing positions 1 to 10 will be assigned Final grid positions 11 to 20.
Meeting position will be finishing position of the Final

The concept is similar to that used for the Adelaide Classic but with variations.

I have heard lots of comments supporting the Meeting position being based on the finishing position of the Final but I was surprised that nothing was forwarded at the AIDKA rule change meeting.

There are pros and cons to the points based system and the finishing position system.

So my main question to the drivers is...

What are your thoughts on Meeting position being the finishing position of the Final versus being based on the overall points?

Looking forward to hearing your views.

[tom]

Firstly thanks for putting the time into investigating methods of point-scoring for everyone! I imagine it is a fair bit of number crunching and work for you.

I like the idea of a pre-final, and final system, the best races to me are the ones where all the fastest drivers are grouped together.

It doesn't bother me personally if the final only counts for the win, or the points for the whole day. I really like the idea of more races with the quickest karts grouped at the front of the field though.

[John]

Thanks for your comments Tom.

Here are my thoughts on the pros and cons of the "points" versus "finishing position" systems.

Point System
Pro
A driver that has been consistent and finished well through the Heats and Pre-Final assume starts in grid position 1 for the Final. They could lose a few positions but on the day still be either 1st overall or on the podium.
The Meeting Position isn't based mainly on one race.
Con
In most cases other than half the field failing to finish less than 10 of the drivers have a realistic chance of a podium finish.

Finishing Position
Pro
A driver can have a fairly "ordinary" run through the Heats and Pre-Final and start down the grid order for the Final. If they can drive well in the Final then they can still be 1st overall.
All 20 drivers in the Final have the ability to be 1st overall.
A driver that has had a good run through the Heats and Pre-Final gains the benefit of a good Final grid position.
Con
A substantial points buffer from the Heats and Final is lost when moving into the Final. Example a driver may be leading by 15 points and so only has to finish in the top 6 to win overall and this advantage is lost with the finishing position system.

I didn't want to preempt the drivers feedback but maybe this will assist...

After considering the pros and cons of points versus finishing position I believe something like option 2 would be a good balance. This is based on the fact that the 3 Heats just like the current 4 Heats have a "Grid Draw Points" bias due to the points system (a topic on itself). What this means is that some divers "potentially" get a slight points advantage due to their grid positions.

The Pre-Final is achieved based on the results of the 3 Heats so the associated "Grid Draw Points" are now "merit" based and not "luck" based. I like the idea of maintaining points for the Pre-Final as it permits the ability to refine their positions without a major impact. It also maintains the major build up and excitement for the Final.

The Final grid positions would therefore be awarded to the top 20 available drivers and the Meeting Position be awarded based on the finishing position of the Final. This means that the drivers that have had a good run through the Heats and Pre-Final have the advantage of starting at the front but the driver at the back still has the potential to win. This will make for some exciting racing.

I believe the top 6 (?) dash (Pre-Final) type concept as used at the Adelaide Classic is perfect for that type of event but feel for a Title Event the points based Pre-Final is a more balanced format.

As mentioned that is my thought on the format that I believe to be the most suitable and the reason.

I am hoping to get some more feedback on thoughts from drivers.

[John]

Thanks to the people that responded.

I have now developed the new system using a 3 Heat grid formula, Heat 4 "best to front" and Final. Meeting position can be either accumulated points or finishing position of the Final.

The other item of interest is the point system.

A suitable point system for the 3 heat format is a 23 points system. This still allows for some additional points to be earned by finishing 1st, 2nd or 3rd that was a requirement at the time of the last review.

The worst case Grid Draw Bias on the current 20 point system for the 4 heat format is 8 points. This would be 9 points for the 3 heats format should the 20 point system be used.

Using the 23 point system for the new 3 heat format there is a worst case Grid Draw Bias of 4 points. Note: only currently evaluated for classes of up to 40.

Position Points
1 - 23
2 - 21
3 - 19
4 - 17
5 - 16
6 - 15
7 - 14
8 - 13
9 - 12
10 -11
11 -10
12 - 9
13 - 8
14 - 7
15 - 6
16 - 5
17 - 4
18 - 3
19 - 2
20 - 1

After considering a number of options I think that the following may have potential for Title Events?

Heats 1 to 3 based on random grid draw
6 laps
Allows the better drivers to start obtaining points and a lower Heat 4 grid position.

Heat 4
6 or 8 laps
The drivers have now earned their Heat 4 grid positions and a couple of additional laps would allow drivers the ability to obtain additional points towards a better grid for the Final.

Final
10 laps
Finishing Position of the Final is the Meeting Position. All 20 finalists have the ability to win the event. 10 laps would allow a good driver enough time to work their way to the front.

The new system doesn't comply with the 2011 or 2012 AIDKA Rules of Racing so anticipate club level testing in 2012 AIDKA permitting.

[tom]

That looks good to me, i hope it gets put to AIDKA and is used at big events, this is the best format i've seen so far. Nice job John!

[John]

I wanted to get an idea of how many competitors in the Final had the potential of a podium finish so did a review of the 2011 SA Title results.

I initially did a check on how many competitors had the potential to finish 1st and then secondly how many could finish 3rd.

For the first check I recorded the points after 4 heats for the top point scorer and then recorded the Final grid position of the driver who was just under 20 points behind.

I did a similar exercise for the competitor that was 3rd on the grid for the Final.

The average grid position that could potentially take 1st place was just over 7 and the average for taking 3rd position was just over 11. Sounds reasonable until you consider that for the 7th driver to take 1st position the other 6 competitors would need to have a DNF. Similar situation for the driver to finish 3rd. The other 10 would need to DNF.

So realistically the average number of drivers that had the potential to achieve 1st place overall was the top 4 or 5. Those that could achieve 3rd position would be the top 7 or 8.

The results are available on the AIDKA web site so please review them for yourselves.

[John]

I attended a WA Clubs Meeting on Wednesday and the club representatives indicated that they were keen to test the new race format.

Provided they can obtain a Supplementary Ruling from AIDKA to allow testing it will be scheduled for early in the 2012 season.

[John]

Reportedly AIDKA included a survey relating to "Final Only Counts" as part of the 2012 licence process.

Does anybody have details on the % of surveys returned and what % were for and against the "Final Only Counts"?

I assume that the outcome of the survey would have been reported at an AIDKA Council meeting and the minutes sent to each club.

Everybody I talk to appears to like the idea but as previously mentioned it wasn't proposed by any clubs at the rule change meeting so I appear to be talking only to the minority that happen to like the "Final Only Counts".

So if you have the information obtained from the survey I would like to see the results.

[John]

I haven't seen an official report but have been informed by an member that the survey results were overwhelmingly in support of Meeting Positions being based on accumulated points.

The positive comments relating to the race format of the Adelaide Classic that incorporates the "final only counts" must be on the basis of it being a unique annual event.

If accumulated points is the preferred method for driving Meeting Positions at race meetings especially title events I would like to raise the following to prompt some discussion.

Having analysed the results of a number of title events and found that less than the top 10 qualifiers are capable of achieving a podium position due to them being over 20 points behind the driver on grid 3 for the final. Other than in most cases giving the drivers in final grid positions 11 to 20 an additional drive, what is achieved?

The finals could be limited to only the drivers that are 20 points or less behind the driver that qualified on grid 3 for the final. In some cases my review has shown this could be down to actually less than 5 karts. This would be a bit of a non event from a spectator perspective so a good balance may be 10 kart finals except where more qualify (not common). This would allow the genuine contenders to race without being impeded by those that are not. It also has the potential for easier race starts due to the smaller fields.

Interested to hear other peoples thoughts and opinions.

[John]

An exception to this would be if any of the top qualifiers for the final were disqualified and had all their points deducted for the event or they had a DNF and also had penalty points applied.

This would erase the 20 point advantage they had going into the final.

In these cases somebody that is greater than 20 points behind the driver on grid 3 for the final could in fact achieve a podium position.

So based on that I have answered my original question of "what is achieved"...and it is that there is still potentially a chance that if the top qualifiers lose more than 20 points through disqualification or penalties then the other drivers could move into a podium position.

[John]

The 2012 NT Title race format will not be finalised until all the nominations are received this year. The preference is to run the 8 heats and drop the worst round format that Alice Springs adopted several years ago as a means of providing more races to entice visitors across the borders. This has proven to be effective over the years with drivers travelling from WA and SA to compete for the NT plates.

With Alice Springs hosting the 2013 Australian Title it is anticipated that a few more drivers may venture to Alice Springs to start working on their setup for 2013.

This is why the prospectus has specified that in the event of a threshold of 170 nomiations are received the race format will change from the usual NT Title format to 4 heats and final.

This will become apparent as the nominations are received.

Alice Springs will no doubt be presenting a first class event as they continue their build up to the 2013 Australian Title.

[2013 titles]

Any one know if Loxton has confirmed they are running 2013 States, nothing on their website about it?

[John]

Interested to learn how the "time trialled practice, 4 heats, dash, final" would work. Can somebody please provide a basic explanation.

My initial thoughts are that the time trialled practice would be used as part of the grid format for the 4 heats. How would the time be used in relation to the 4 heats? What would the grid format be for the 4 heats? Would there be a point system used or finishing positions throughout the heats and then final only counts for example.

Look forward to hearing how the format will work.

[Mix it up]

Interesting discussion and great to see so much thought going into it.

One thing I'd like to see considered is a time trialled practice/qualifying session that determines the starting positions for heat 1. From there, the usual reverse grid/mix ups are used through the heats. Instead of a 2 lap carby tune, make it a 4 or 5 lap qualifying session.

This has the advantage of hopefully keeping guys/girls of a similar speed grouped together. It also doesn't put too much reliance on the time trial because grids will be reversed etc as per normal. The only downside is if you mess up the time trial and are generally one of the faster guys you will be out of sync with the other quick guys so to speak.