Success Ballast

[The Stig]

Don't think this topic has appeared here before. If I'm wrong please correct me. What is the general consensus ? A good or a bad thing ? Are recent seasons as good as they have been because of it, or would the teams be as close by dint of their own hard work and development . If success ballast was taken off the rule book, would one team gallop away in a kind of Ferrari fashion ?

[King Cleland]

it appeared in the old forum, of which I don't remember you!

I am all for scrapping it!

it was good for producing good races during the years of domination, but it looks like this year we will have more equal cars, which could piss a few people off as they are weighed down by success ballast!

[thommo_fan]

the success ballast rule works really well, its far better changing it every race rather then every meeting.

if it ain't broke, don't fix it;)

[King Cleland]

it is annoying when a person who should be winning is dropping back due to no fault of their own!

[The Stig]

Been a fan for yonks, but this my first year of taking part, so forgive me going over old ground. Maybe some newer contributors have an opinion. Tend to agree with you, Tourers seem reasonably evenly matched, and I reckon we've got no one driver head and shoulders above the rest. This seasons champion will have had to work ****** hard to earn it. Given good reliability loads of drivers will be contending, because the cars are that close.

[King Cleland]

No problem, there are a lot of new members here, would be nice to hear their views! :)

[thommo_fan]

in a way it is their fault because they know that if they win a race then they will have a heavy car for the next race.
morrison deliberately dropped down the field in the sprint race at donington so he would have no weight on his car for the feature race to give himself the best chance of victory, and what happened he won by 13 seconds.
menu did the same thing in round 22 at oulton park in2000.

to my knowledge non of the drivers complain about it and most of them think its a good system.

[King Cleland]

Exactly, it can be confusing for non-fans too, wondering why one driver can so good in one race and shite in another!

lose them I say

[The Stig]

Hypothetical scenario, what about abandoning the concept half way through the season and then let the top boys scrap it out to seaons end. If it can be abused by drivers tactically, so to speak, is it flawed ?

[King Cleland]

Yer, it is bad that it can be abused tactically to try and gain maximum points... Drop them! :D

[thommo_fan]

look at brands hatch, hughes finished 2nd in the sprint and then won the feature with 30kgs of ballast.
thommo qualifyed his car on pole at mondello with maxium ballast.
ballast livens up the racing and gives the smaller teams a chance to do well.

without success ballast the best car would always be the best car, the same as F1, which is boring.

[The Stig]

Meant to mention on previous post, with the "handicap" system theoretically levelling the field, how will we know how close the cars really are?

[King Cleland]

Originally posted by thommo_fan
look at brands hatch, hughes finished 2nd in the sprint and then won the feature with 30kgs of ballast.
thommo qualifyed his car on pole at mondello with maxium ballast.
ballast livens up the racing and gives the smaller teams a chance to do well.

without success ballast the best car would always be the best car, the same as F1, which is boring.

That is the challenge to the manufacturers though.... to build the best car!

[King Cleland]

Originally posted by The Stig
Meant to mention on previous post, with the "handicap" system theoretically levelling the field, how will we know how close the cars really are?

Another good minus point :D

[The Stig]

and perhaps a plus point for losing it in say July or August ?

[King Cleland]

maybe, but if you are going to use them from the start, then carry on using them.... otherwise, a team could complain that it was handicapped in the start of the season when the rules were in place and now they are not as other cars have moved on.... ie Audi in 1997, complained because the FWD cars had moved on and they still had their 30kg extra of weight!

[thommo_fan]

Originally posted by King Cleland
That is the challenge to the manufacturers though.... to build the best car!

vauxhall had the best car last year and without success ballast would have probably won every race, wouldn't that have been boring.

[King Cleland]

So if you start with them, finish with them and drop them at the start of 2004 :D

[King Cleland]

Originally posted by thommo_fan
vauxhall had the best car last year and without success ballast would have probably won every race, wouldn't that have been boring.

No they wouldn't have done......

MG had the best car at Brands, Honda at Donny & Knockhill,

MG won at Silverstone when the Vauxhall's had no heavy ballast!

Plus, Vauxhall dominated 2001, but that wasn't boring was it? :D

[The Stig]

Probably too late now - but I'd risk it and lose it for 2003. You might be quite surprised how close the racing was. If one team dominated, which I'd doubt, the others would do their damnest to make up ground. Pardon the F1 analogy, but do you reckon Ron Dennis and Sir Frank Williams are going to let Ferrari piss it again this year

[thommo_fan]

honda didn't have the best car at knochill, honda had the fastest car in the feature because priaulx had no weight, thommo had 30kgs, muller had 18kgs, muller and thommo didn't finish far behind priaulx in that race.

same at donny, morrison had minus 24kgs and thommo had maxium ballast, hence morrison won and thommo finished 3rd.

hughes won at silverstone because muller started from the pitlane and thommo started 8th, both vauxhall drivers were on slick tyres on a wet track.
oh yeah thommo got fastest lap at silverstone.

in the words of alain menu, ''i think i proved a point'' wink!:D :D

[AussieV8]

The organisers here were going to introduce the lead as a handicap as HRT ran away with the title last year. The teams, fans and manufactures said a BIG NO !!!

My opinion is that if one team is doing well its because they have done there homework let the others catch up..

[thommo_fan]

its different in aussie v8's though because even though holden had the best car last year, theres still something like 10 holden drivers all capable of winning.
in the btcc vauxhall had the best car last year but there were only 3 vauxhall drivers capable of winning.
thats why the success ballast system works in the btcc.

the v8's got better after skaife won the title at bathurst because he kept breaking down after that race.

[touring fan]

I don't mind the success ballast. Yes it makes things a bit "artificial" but it keeps things close so I don't mind that. It can be a bit confusing now though where it changes between races so having those stickers back on the windows saying how much each car has would be good for this year.

[The Stig]

For me, on balance would prefer to get rid of. The series is good enough now, not to need it. All the top boys have machinery capable of winning. Where we are now is, without it you'd still have an excellent series, with all the teams keeping each other honest. Notwithstanding, let drivers make mistakes or chuck it off or breakdown rather than rely on an "outside" influence to even things up.

[John]

The aspects I didnt like last year were first of all that it wasn't always obvious who was carrying what success ballast - by this I mean the rules werent exactly simple - x kg for finishing 1st, 2nd etc.. but if you finished less than 5th you had negative success ballast. I think the 2000 rules were less complex (40kg, 30kg 20kg then nothing with a 40kg maximum) and also had the added bonus of displaying the weight on the windscreens so people at the track and on tv could clearly see who was carrying ballast.

Also now that it is done race by race rather than meeting by meeting there is a severe disadvantage over winning the feature race because you have to qualify (and test?) with ballast for both sessions, whereas someone who wins a sprint just has to complete the feature race with it.

But on the plus side it certainly makes it a bit more interesting and should guaruntee the championship goes to the end of the season - nothing worse than it being over midseason (like BTCC 1997 or F1 2002).

[thommo_fan]

i deffinetly think they should bring back the stickers on the window to show whos carrying what ballast.

thommo proved at mondello last year that you can qualify on pole with maxium ballast tho.:D

[AussieV8]

So if he didn't have the ballast on board it would have been a cake walk.

I still think that why should a team be handicapped for doing the right thing and winning. Yes Yes I know that it would make for closer racing but don't forget you here to win and not come second carrying fat.

Look at some other sports they don't handicapp the yatchs in the America's Cup or tell OUR cricketeers to run slowly so the OTHER teams can get you out.

[John]

Originally posted by AussieV8
or tell OUR cricketeers to run slowly so the OTHER teams can get you out.

Maybe they should! Put lead ballast in their shoes - or tie one arm behind their back!

Maybe someone should suggest that to whoever is in charge of cricket!

Back to a serious point (briefly!) the other aspect of success ballast that I dont agree with is when drivers deliberately lose positions to avoid getting any (Menu in 2000 at Oulten didnt want ballast at the final round at Silverstone so was prepared to drop out of a podium spot) - thats not really the way motor-racing should work is it?! I thought it was go as fast as you can!

[AussieV8]

John you are exactly right the whole idea of the sport of motoracing is to go as hard as you can and look after the car. The word "sandbagging" comes to mind when you mentioned that a certain driver through the race to avoid ballast. Shame on him.

If the drivers have to except change then they need to get on with it and try harder and if they get ballast cop it on the chin and wear it.

[King Cleland]

You don't see West Brom asking Man U to play one player down so it's 'fair' do you?

[Sim_Da_BTCC_Man]

Originally posted by King Cleland
You don't see West Brom asking Man U to play one player down so it's 'fair' do you?

you proberbly do but it never works :D

[King Cleland]

Come on now, repeat after me...

MUST TALK BTCC

[cav1995]

This is a topic which won't go away. I do think an important issue raise is the driver tactics of holding back to avoid weight. Of course fans will be miffed and rightly so but success ballast is not the only thing to provoke such tactics. I'm sure I remember reading some where that Cleland deliberately stalled and Astra Mk2 on the grid so to start from the back and avoid unecissary risks at the start of the race.

Penalising anyone for being successful at a competive sport is an absurd idea.

Maybe at the end of a successful season, rival teams could inspect the winning goods? Or is that a bad idea? Dunno...

[John]

Is that 1989? According to his interview he couldnt select a gear on the formation lap - but when he did select it he decided to let the rest of the field pass and start from the back, he said it was due to safety issues - ie not passing people on the formation lap.

Dunno if thats the incident u are referring to? That was final round 1989 if it is.

[cav1995]

Yeah sounds close but what I 'think' I read was that he started from the back because he caught wind other drivers were going to take him out the race. Probably one of those storys that gets more and more exaggerated every time like Shilton hanging from the stairs once to make his arms longer.

[John]

Ive got the 1989 review video and he does say it was probably a good thing to avoid the class B BMWs (since his main championship rival was Weaver in that class - the way the scoring sytem worked back then). But hearing the interview I dont think he went out with the idea of dropping to the back - otherwise wouldnt he just have slowed down in qualifying so he wasn't in amongst the class B cars in the first place.

Thats just my perception - be interested to know anyone elses view if you've got the review video.

[King Cleland]

The oldest video I have is 1991, my Dad has others, but they are under lock and key!

[Amanda]

I've got all the review videos from 1988 to 2002.

[thommo_fan]

you're well lucky.
i am trying to get hold of either the 1988 or 89 review because they will have footage of the birmingham street race on them and i've never seen any footage of the birmingham street race.

[Amanda]

Try Ebay, that is where I got the ones I needed to complete my collection. You may have to wait a while and sometimes they get very expensive!

[thommo_fan]

i have tried there serveral times but no luck yet.

[John]

Yeah Ebays the place to try I think - but as Amanda says they can get very expensive!!

Got 1988 off there and it arrived this morning (so you can guess what I've been up to since the postie came!)

I still need 1990 but then Ive got the set aswell! :)

[John]

Originally posted by thommo_fan
i have tried there serveral times but no luck yet.

So youre not the person who keeps out bidding me at the last minute?!! :mad:

[AussieV8]

I have a shop down here called Wheels and funny enough it is run by a Pom so gettin any BTCC stuff is NO trouble.

Lets see if F1 would use ballast.

[John]

They did consider it but dismissed the idea of ballast. The idea was related to how many points the drivers had (1kg for every point in the championship?)

[McKay]

Put succest ballast on all cars except Minardis and give them a win :D

[Mocko]

If success ballast goes I'll be happy. The fakeness is rubbish. Look at Proton. All their good results were in the sprint races and ballast ruined any chance they had of repeating it and they got hardly any team points. Ballast has had it's day.

ps: Is Pom a derogatory or just Australian slang?

[The Stig]

"Pommie", originally started life as, "Prisoner Of Mother England"
wish we'd never sent 'em then we could be good at cricket!!!!