Snetterton timetable?
 

Ok, I know not everyone agreed with the changes to the Anglesey timetable.
However, politics aside are the points races going to be on the Saturday as per Anglesey?

So points Saturday and non points Sunday ok?

Personally think it worked quite well and it could give others a chance to race for podium if top 3 clear off.

I didn't like the Anglesey format. Last year peeps who could not stretch to Saturday DD or alcomers just came for the points on Sunday.

Doing your points race on the Sat what is the point of racing for nothing on Sunday. Needs a points race on each day to keep people there.

What is the point of winning a race with 7 (class B) and 4 (class A) bikes on the grid.

Also I sent a message to Skids, he hasn't acknowledged so I'll put it here now.

I think class A should set off 10/15 secs before class B. Neil and Ron came together almost squashing me forcing a hard brake. :eek: Those A bikes are much faster from the off, so in the interest of safety I reckon they should be let go ahead of the B bikes.

All 3 races should be points and on the same day IMO. No drop 2 rounds b*llocks.
Staggard start suits me.
Pay to race, end of.

3 points races suits me also and I'd wager a few others too. But we are only the riders and very few listen to us, as others know better. :D

plenty!

I am not happy paying for the 3rd race and I agree if it is non point scoring it should be on the Saturday and not the Sunday. Folk can then use it as a test if they want to do it.

Have the rules effectively been changed to force people to pay for 3 races? Previously could you get away with only paying for 2?

I personally would not be very happy with points races on both days. I like racing but I doubt I can commit 3 days for 2 20minute races. I would rather just have the two races on the same day and then clear off.



Think thats a pretty harsh comment and there is no harm at all, if the faster guys leave, to allow others who might not get the chance otherwise to race upfront for a win.

I could be just as harsh to you and say "whats the point in winning a race if it has taken you 4 seasons to do it?"



If you stall on the grid or get away badly it would be the same with 2 class B bikes. Letting them go early will mean that on the short tracks NONE of the class B will get full race distance. We will all just have a "+ 1 lap" on our time sheet and one less lap.

Having quicker class A bikes already ends the race too soon for all but the top 3-5. As the first class B is usually about 1 min behind A then that extra 15secs could end the race early for all but the 1st place.

Which as I found at Brands means that the current jump start 10sec punishment is useless at this point. While I should have been bumped to 3rd place in race 2 due to Jimbos 10sec jump start penalty because the class A finished so much quicker I never got a time for my last lap so on the results I was apparently a whole lap behind him and his penalty meant NOTHING.

Not trying to grab a trophy of Jimbo, but I could have done with those 3 points. Your thoughts Kev/Chris?

Hugh,


you must have been more than 10seconds behind Jimbo, or you would have been awarded the higher postion. The 1 lap is the difference from the WINNER on the the road, so of no significance to your position.

Anyway, three races is fine for me. Sat sun for points.

I was in a full grid always and in 4 or 3.5 seasons I have never fell off, so don't get on your fkin high horse to me. Or better still discuss it to me personally rather than here.

Sadly not. The total "Time" for Jimbo was 18:05.463 for 18 laps and mine was 17.05.016 but for for 17 laps.

Just to be a geek I looked up the lap chart. However, as I mentioned I have one lap missing... but if you add up our times for the 17 laps I was 7.93 seconds behind.

1 66.184 67.614
2 59.895 61.299
3 60.049 60.953
4 59.769 59.939
5 60.124 59.795
6 60.077 60.647
7 60.000 59.817
8 59.651 59.826
9 59.677 59.542
10 59.064 59.577
11 59.659 59.52
12 58.497 59.678
13 59.271 59.689
14 58.123 59.621
15 58.831 59.159
16 59.316 59.286
17 58.892 59.054
TOTAL 1017.079 1025.016
Diff 7.937


Basically from Class B Jimbo, Kev and Ron did 18 laps and everyone else behind them did 17 as the race ended when the checkered came out for class A which in this case was between Jimbo and I crossing the line.

Edit: Also because of this I doubt there are many folk behind the top 3 that have seen the last lap flag this year, I think this is a bit of a shame as you arent aware of the crucial last lap battle. I wholly understand this is unavoidable with a mixed grid, just think its a shame that for the vast majority there is no last lap just an early finish.

So you PUBLICALLY belittle the winner of Sundays race by saying "What is the point of winning a race with 7 (class B) and 4 (class A) bikes on the grid". But if I give an example of a similarly rude comment that could be made about the validity of a win if it took something like 35+ races to achieve then I have to do this in private?

Whatever pal. I have no issues with you and think your a quicker better rider than me. Just thought your comment was obnoxious and rude about the Sunday guys results.

As for not crashing... I am so sorry for being human and making a couple of mistakes on a track that I had to learn in 10 laps. :frog:

Snetterton and Pembrey only have two races, one on Saturday after first having untimed and timed practiceand one on Sunday following a morning warm-up session

The only remaining meeting with 3 races is Cadwell in August, here it is being considered to have all three races as Championship races with the riders two best scores from the three races to count towards the championship.

Yes Phil I did get your email, I haven't discussed it with anybody, namely Trudi as she and Kev have been dealing with other matters.

But as Hugh points out above there are other concerns such as stalled bikes, and the fact that a 10/15 second headstart for Class A bikes would be almost quarter of a lap for someone like Neil putting him and others in among the Class B back markers a lot earlier especially at circuits like Mallory and Pembrey where chicanes and hairpins tend to string the field out.

There is also the possibility of a couple of Class B bikes coming together off their start or on the run to the first corner leaving less time available before the Class A front runners come around again which could change what could be a yellow flag incident into a red flag race stoppage,

For the majority of the previous 6 years of DD where we have had combined grids the start line record isn't to bad apart from Snetterton last year although I and a few others almost ran into Sam West when his chain broke off the start line at Castle Combe
Then it would also be a matter of trying to get Hottrax to accomodate such a start procedure.

You say nobody listens to the riders but when it came to a proposed Qualifier race followed by two championship races at Anglesey the only communication received by the race comittee was against the idea so the idea was scrapped.

Hugh now that you have pointed out the Brands result I agree you should have had 3rd, I see the 10 second penalty dropped Jimbers average race speed to a slightly lower average speed than you and seeing as you were only 7 seconds behind him at the end of Lap 16 then the penalty should have put him behind you and had him getting lapped also. Trouble is under ACU rules you only have a certain time frame to lodge a protest and have the result ammended and according to the race results issued third in Class B went to Jimbers. in my opinion by mistake. Maybe they need to introduce ride through penalties for Jump starts.

Have to see what next years RC do with the rules, who ever they may be

I brought this up as a general comment on how split grids affect the racing dynamic and by starting A off earlier then this would only worsen. Class A winner would get to their chequered flag even quicker. In the instance of Brands it might have meant that not one class B bike would get the full race distance.


I think the only way this can be resolved is by getting more class A bikes on the grid so as to have two grids rather than both classes racing together.


Chris:burn:

[size="3"]Snetterton and Pembrey only have two races, one on Saturday after first having untimed and timed practiceand one on Sunday following a morning warm-up session[/SIZE

Thanks Kev that's all I asked for, and as regards to you other ladies. Keep yer machismo for the race track girlfriends. No handbags at dawn or fisticuffs please. ;)

thats exactly how I saw the comment Hugh, thanks.

So what about class A then - they often have less than 10 on the grid, brands was 6 or 7?! Does that make it less a win? Or if there are 3 peolpe likley to win a race in B, why dont the rest of us sit out?! I was surprised by the comment TBH, I would have expected it from Ron ;) but not Phil.

seems winning a few trophies changes the outlook on racing life, eh

guess I better win a 'proper' one then, not like thiose Sat races last year when peolpe won their 'first' race and the front guys werent out there...roll on Snettereton!!

Hey Paul don't you go and become one of those "Diva's" cos you have a trophy now. ;)

I agree, a race is a race. It takes only 2 competitors to qualify as a race in my book. At the moment I choose to not do the non points races simply beacause I want to keep the risk of crashing to a minimum and also when possible I like to watch a DD race for a change.
The skill level of who ever enters a race is completely irrelevent, basicaly you have to be in it to win it, and if you do then well done.

Paul on re-reading it does look trite of me, but that is not the context it was meant in. Last year when asked at work "how did you get on at the weekend"? I say got a 4th/5th, first thing they say how many are in the race.

Like Neil says its only takes 2 for a race. But its the odds game, on a full grid a person has approx 27:1 chance of a win, whereas Anglesey was a 7:1 chance. So the odds are considerably shorter.

I publically appologise for not wording my argument clearly and if any reference to belittlement was infered it certainly was not meant.

About the staggered start, the timing of the stagger could be adjusted to suit the track length/laptime. Why do some races have staggered starts? I recall class A's last year at Mallory, going out with super retards with a staggered start, why would that have occurred.

Kev I understand your delay now. I wasn't aware that you would be consulting Kev & Trudi, they have more serious things on their mind at present.:(

No machismo here from my side and cerainly no handbags at dawn, I like racing but not enough to ruin my Gucci man bag!

My intention was not to ruin a friendships over forum chatter and I wasnt expecting Ghost swearing "high horse" reaction. But I thought it right to stick up for the likes of the Sunday guys and even yourself who have won at Brands against the same numbers.

It's just getting all too serious for my liking:rolleyes:

I'm with Neil Appleby and think that all races should be points scoring and ALL count in the championship.
Now I know that is not great for anyone that has a crash or engine, sickness, work or other issues and would be VERY unfortunate for Kev (Senna) but that's the way the cookie crumbles (sorry Kev/Trudi I do feel kinda bad saying that) :(

At the start of the year we're going racing and commit to that, so at the end of the day if you turn up to them all, are consistent, don't crash and manage to keep your bike running/repaired to finish them all, your points have been well earnt and you should keep them. .

Last year I had bike problems at Snetterton and Pembrey which could have cost me 4 finishes but I managed to scrabble round and grab some points and I know that isn't always possible, but that's racing and the luck of the draw.

Most bike series are won by consistency and as said before 'you have to be in it to win it' but in DD that doesn't necessarily give you an advantage.

Can you imagine Shakey saying 'I'm not going to Thruxton cuz its too far to travel and I'll have that as my dropped round', or Lorenzo saying 'I've got a cold so gonna give Valencia a miss and anyway rain's forecast' :lol:

Or even Neal (C) and Awesome saying I'm a bit achy, so gonna give Anglesey a miss... Well done you 2 :)

The drop 2 rule does play a big part in the results (I would have been joint 1st in the Novice Championship last year without it and at present sat in 2nd only 3 points behind Phil instead of 4th and 25 behind

Anyway C'est la Vie......... It's all about Fun!!

Exactly what I got when I won a Sat race at Pembrey last year... and exactly why I didn't say a word, because I remember how much it annoyed me. According to the ACU, you need 6 finishers for it to count as a Race... so 7 is plenty!

Part of the difference is that we do more laps now, so more laps to make up the difference. I only finished 2s ahead of Neil at Brands and 40s ahead at Anglesey. I think it would be hard to pick a stagger that would work at the shorter (1min ish) lap circuits

Alan... I thought you were just there for fun? ;)

I argued the side of all races scoring points (if there was no overseas round) before the season started, but the general opinion was that we should drop 2 for all of the previously mentioned reasons (I may even go back and see who agreed before the start of the season).

You have argued against my attitude for winning in the past with the comment that this is not WSB or MotoGP, but turn the same argument on its head by telling us Lorenzo and Shakey would not choose to drop rounds.... besides which, the truth is that no-one has chosen not to turn up because they have a bit of a cold (I was even at Anglesey 2 weeks after breaking my finger). As Skids has pointed out to me, these are the rules we entered the season with, so we cannot change them halfway through the season just to suit some people that have been luckier than others.

Regardless of all this, if you look back at all the past championships, the winner would have won, dropped rounds or not..... and it will be interesting to see if that happens again this year. I will still try to win everything, and if I crash a few times, so be it. Skids offered me the loan of his bike at Mallory (thanks Kev), and I could have sat in second at the last race. That probably would have put me close to the championship lead without dropped points. However, I'm not interested in safe points, I want to beat people.... isn't that what racing is all about? If I won the next 4 races I could lead the championship again, but that is unlikely to happen if I settle for decent points for the next 4 races. I have benefited more than most the past 2 seasons from dropping results, but I still don't think we should drop any.... so why do we?....

[quote=Jolley]Exactly what I got when I won a Sat race at Pembrey last year... and exactly why I didn't say a word, because I remember how much it annoyed me.


Part of the difference is that we do more laps now, so more laps to make up the difference. I only finished 2s ahead of Neil at Brands and 40s ahead at Anglesey. I think it would be hard to pick a stagger that would work at the shorter (1min ish) lap circuits


Alan... I thought you were just there for fun? ;)
I AM Ron and not silly enough to accept that there are at least 2 or 3 riders that will always beat me because they are faster, but all races give the opportunity to EARN points and when EARNT it seems a bit of an injustice to have to hand them back

I argued the side of all races scoring points (if there was no overseas round) before the season started, but the general opinion was that we should drop 2 for all of the previously mentioned reasons (I may even go back and see who agreed before the start of the season).

You have argued against my attitude for winning in the past with the comment that this is not WSB or MotoGP, but turn the same argument on its head by telling us Lorenzo and Shakey would not choose to drop rounds.... besides which, the truth is that no-one has chosen not to turn up because they have a bit of a cold (I was even at Anglesey 2 weeks after breaking my finger). As Skids has pointed out to me, these are the rules we entered the season with, so we cannot change them halfway through the season just to suit some people that have been luckier than others.

Not argued Ron.. debated :D... and that paragraph was not aimed at any particular person. My point is surely you should keep what you earn.
Put it another way:
Tom Dick and Harry all work with Tom making sure he turns up everyday even if feeling a bit rough. He keeps his bike as reliable as possible and works to the best of his ability, but gets 14 days pay for 16 days work?
Dick takes a couple of sickies or forgets to set the alarm for 2 days and gets the same pay as Tom!
Harry didn't remember to put petrol in his bike one day and then on another day he fell off on the way to work but also got the same pay as Tom... Is that right?

Regardless of all this, if you look back at all the past championships, the winner would have won, dropped rounds or not..... and it will be interesting to see if that happens again this year. Yes it will and may still be the case but the compulsory dropping of points still makes you feel robbed and could well affect other positions
I will still try to win everything, and if I crash a few times, so be it. I'm not interested in safe points, I want to beat people.... isn't that what racing is all about?
]I applaud you for that Ron but I don't think us other mere mortals are going for 'safe points', we are also trying to win everything (well at least go as fast as we can).

+1

It does seem this year that its started to get far too serious at times, ok i know its racing, but if you realy want to pit yourself against fast racers (not saying there ar not any fast racers in DD for sure there is and they know who they are) there are other series you can enter, just to remind some people DD is supposed to be entry level racing, a step up from having fun with your m8s on a track day, i go out there to have fun and do my best maybe thats what helps keep the numbers up on the grid, especialy in class B anyway. i only have to look at lap times to know there is no way i will get in the top 3 but its fun to be out there, its fun to chat and laugh in the paddock and on the forum, a few of us have our own little races against each other....... Its fun, if i started to look at it as some people seem to then i would not bother entering.

Sunday race at Angelsey was no different for me than racing on Saturday, a race is a race and there was some bleeding good racing happening on Sunday if anything the fact that those of us who stayed for Sunday race knowing there was a good chance at a pot because so many had left Saturday night, more than likely pushed themselfs just that little bit harder there should be no cudos taken away from those guys they rode well and deserved their pots, had it been a points race i wonder how many would have stayed for the Sunday as well ?

I like the idea of a split grid start. if there was a way to implement it then why not, when i look at the race results i only look at the B as that is who i am racing against. A split grid would give some of the class B guys a chance to actulay start at the front of a grid and not have to try to push there way through class A bikes.

But what do i know, i just make up the numbers and enjoy myself.

I think the difference has a lot to do with how vocal we are. I am sure Mr Lister, Mr West, Mr Larret, Mr Sheppard and plenty of others have taken it very seriously.... they just liked to keep it all to themselves.

Don't put your lap times down. I am sure I raced you at some point last year... none of the field this year are slow, and I am sure we have all improved. I know I enjoyed racing for 7th as much as I do fighting for a top 3.

In my opinion, a split grid just makes it worse for me in the first 5 laps. I will be fighting to get past some Class A bikes that I would normally qualify in front of. As it is, in theory we all set off in a position relevant to our laptimes.

:D Exactly Paul

Also everyone that knows Phil (Ghostie), will also know that his comment came across wrong in translation... The riders award for being such a great guy (2010) and the unlimited help that he gives to everybody (helped you a lot this weekend too I understand), underlines that he is a special fella...
Oooh I LOVE YOU PHIL xx :D :D

Trouble is emails, texts and forum typing often comes across different to how you meant it and that's when peeps need to think 'did he really mean it like that', before crucifixion Lol

Bradders was going REALLY well on Saturday and regardless of the amount of riders on Sunday EARNT his win, he would have also been in with a good chance if it had been a full grid!!
After all, even I got a 2nd on Saturday... having Fun!... Now if only I could learn to Race Pmsl

I'm not sure the analogy has any relevance. If we flip it and say they all have 2 days holiday, but Tom choses not to take them, what does that say about them? The only important thing is that we race in a series with a set of rules. We can only race to those rules. I don't think we should drop them, but can see how (in an amateur series) there is place for such a rule. Myself, Phil, Kev and Jimbo have all used the rule for various reasons.... and I am not quite as callous to suggest that in some cases that is the way the cookie crumbles... If we agree or not, I think the rule has a place. The way people should look at it if they have not been forced to miss races is a way of having "spare" races to improve some of their not so good results.

That Tom should earn 2 more days pay than the others ;)

If that is in his contract.... If not, Tom is an idiot!

Yes it is, he entered and was contracted for a 16 Day Project, like all the others.
They were allowed to take 2 days holiday without pay if needed/wanted... Tom preferred to take the pay! ;) ;)

The difference is that our DSC contract doesnt have the option you introduced to suit your argument. Also, Does that mean Dick and Harry have to forego their holidays just because it suited Tom?

Ok, Le mans start then....:D

I just figured you'd had a few beers before posting phil ;)

All races should be point scoring; no dropping. Simple. Too late this year but has to be something for next year....

Simple fact is that every past champion would have been, regardless of dropping points. Phil is leading this years championship regardless of if we drop results... I can't see it makes a difference either way.

It works to keep more people in the races, but I don't like it for the championship... IF I won 2 of the races but not the third, I would possibly only make up 5 points instead of 10. A big IF I know.... But it allows more points to be scored and could reduce any gains to be made. I am more a fan of all 3 being championship races, or keeping it at 2.

I suppose it would let me crash in one of the races though! ;)

However, I think this is as much a rule change as anything else we have said we can't change mid-season. Sure, you only score in 2 races, but it fundamentally changes how the points get distributed.

Magners poisoning I think. Sorry if I upset anyone, totally unintenional. I also agree all races count.

At this current juncture Alan would drop 22 points. I have 2 DNF's so I drop zero points, ok I never scored any, but could have raced and still scored zero.

No one person has one all of the races, so a front runner could effectively have to drop 45 points. Does seem harsh, good brainstorm for next season on this and other aspects.

But lets stay with the tyres, they are ace. :D

No our contract doesn't have options but any contract should reward the worker for all work done, so the DSC contract is flawed imho.

Dick and Harry can take their unpaid holiday if they want to but why should Tom not get paid for what he has earnt?

Anyway, it is what it is so :frog:

PMSL now that would be interesting :D

"All races should be point scoring; no dropping. Simple. Too late this year but has to be something for next year"....

Totally agree Paul

"Simple fact is that every past champion would have been, regardless of dropping points. Phil is leading this years championship regardless of if we drop results... I can't see it makes a difference either way"
That's because you have dropped 3 Ron, whereas in other cases(read mine) I would only be 3 points behind Phil and not 25!!



"At this current juncture Alan would drop 22 points. I have 2 DNF's so I drop zero points, ok I never scored any, but could have raced and still scored zero"
That about sums up the point I was making Phil

"But lets stay with the tyres, they are ace".
Agreed :lol:

I can go back and find discussions about this for at least the past 2 seasons. The reason always given in the past is it allowed people to drop Assen. The point I made at the start of this season was that if we were not going abroad we should drop the rule... A lot agreed, but it never went any further. I still think we will find it will make very little difference by the end of the year.... It certainly won't make any difference to me, you, Kev or Jimbo.

Oh, and I vote to go back to Pirelli... I liked that they slowed everyone down!!! ;)

I know. But by the end of the season it will make less and less difference if people consistently finish in the same places. You may have 2 terrible results in the second half of the season and it will have equally little effect on your results.... All you can do is keep beating people and they will stay behind you in the championship regardless.

I personally don't mind either way. I do however see how I helps with anyone that has a problem/wedding/money issues that they have no control over. Sure, at the minute, you are losing out on some points, but that is the way the cookie crumbles ;) I still think you should look upon that as points in the bank, allowing you to take a risk in another round to improve on some of those results. PMA... It is an opportunity, not a handicap.

Let's even the field then.. You and Phil on Pirelli's and the rest on Dunlops.. You 2 buggers would still be on the Podium most meetings methinks :eek:

Sam West set some respectable times on the Diablos, looking forward to Snett, level playing field for us all as its new. :eek: