GPGSL S8 Round 14 -Monaco Grand Prix - The RD's Short Straw >> SHOCKING NEWS AT PAGE 204!!! <<
Posted by GPGSL
Oh god, so we were racing with an advantage?! Could of fooled me lol! I would go for option 3 though. Simply level the field and go from there. If AMR were at a disadvantage and they are still second in the championship imagine what they would do if we went with another option.
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Incident 2k9 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> shep34 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Slave labour is what Demon Racing is all about :
> 2
> > cents a day...... he he he.....
>
> Seb gets all of 2 cents? I think I'm being mugged
> off here...
You are doing fine Jake - you are on double the salary : 4 cents a day....he he he......
That salary will rise as you get results for the team! lol.....
GPGSL Team Owner Debut - Melbourne, Season 8 - present
GPGSL Test Debut - Hungary, Season 4. GPGSL Race Debut - Adelaide, Season 5.
-------------------------------------------------------
> shep34 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Slave labour is what Demon Racing is all about :
> 2
> > cents a day...... he he he.....
>
> Seb gets all of 2 cents? I think I'm being mugged
> off here...
You are doing fine Jake - you are on double the salary : 4 cents a day....he he he......
That salary will rise as you get results for the team! lol.....
GPGSL Team Owner Debut - Melbourne, Season 8 - present
GPGSL Test Debut - Hungary, Season 4. GPGSL Race Debut - Adelaide, Season 5.
I've often asked myself the same question about the teams.
Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions
Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions
xSilvermanx Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ehm ... sorry Boss, do I have a problem now? :-p
Nah, at Demon Racing, all men are created equal, and all paid excessively well. Luxury accomodation, first class air travel. Anything the team members want, the team members get... We are a very happy team at Demon, aren't we!!??
GPGSL Team Owner Debut - Melbourne, Season 8 - present
GPGSL Test Debut - Hungary, Season 4. GPGSL Race Debut - Adelaide, Season 5.
-------------------------------------------------------
> ehm ... sorry Boss, do I have a problem now? :-p
Nah, at Demon Racing, all men are created equal, and all paid excessively well. Luxury accomodation, first class air travel. Anything the team members want, the team members get... We are a very happy team at Demon, aren't we!!??
GPGSL Team Owner Debut - Melbourne, Season 8 - present
GPGSL Test Debut - Hungary, Season 4. GPGSL Race Debut - Adelaide, Season 5.
I am feeling rather disappointed with some of the comments on here.
5 x WCC - S5, S6, S7, S8, S10 | 4 x WDC - S5 Nick van der Voort ; S6, S7, S8 Ed Greenhalgh | 2 x WTC - S6 Stuart Ingers; S8 Andrei Sevastian
5 x WCC - S5, S6, S7, S8, S10 | 4 x WDC - S5 Nick van der Voort ; S6, S7, S8 Ed Greenhalgh | 2 x WTC - S6 Stuart Ingers; S8 Andrei Sevastian
Stoopid Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am feeling rather disappointed with some of the
> comments on here.
Why?
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am feeling rather disappointed with some of the
> comments on here.
Why?
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Ferrari2007 schrieb:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've often asked myself the same question about
> the teams.
Elaborate that please.
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've often asked myself the same question about
> the teams.
Elaborate that please.
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
Stoopid Schreef:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am feeling rather disappointed with some of the
> comments on here.
Look guys, i dont think its fair to say AMR should be neglected a consolidation because "They dominated the years before". Its not theire fault that we as the other teams didnt get to that level of performance. Also i dont think its healthy for everyone to discuss about it (not attacking ppl here). The GPGSL board should get together on this matter and make an decision. Its not up to the us as "fellow participants".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If in doubt, Flat out."
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am feeling rather disappointed with some of the
> comments on here.
Look guys, i dont think its fair to say AMR should be neglected a consolidation because "They dominated the years before". Its not theire fault that we as the other teams didnt get to that level of performance. Also i dont think its healthy for everyone to discuss about it (not attacking ppl here). The GPGSL board should get together on this matter and make an decision. Its not up to the us as "fellow participants".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If in doubt, Flat out."
JohnMaverick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ferrari2007 schrieb:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I've often asked myself the same question about
> > the teams.
>
>
> Elaborate that please.
I've felt for a few seasons now that the team bosses should be more involved with the running of the series. I made that pretty clear this time last year when the idea of a second tier series was introduced, without anyone asking any of the team bosses their opinions.
I think they should have a say in the introduction of new rules and such, not just the GPGSL Governing Body.
No ill will was meant towards Stu or his team Aston Martin and if that was the way my comment was taken I do apologise.
But I don't think my opinion is unfair, in fact I wouldn't be surprised if most of the team bosses would like some form of representation in regards to rule changes
Going back to the actually topic of the thread, Aston have been screwed in this case and should be fully reimbursed for their loss.
It's a bit of a ballsup but it is only fair that each team is treated the same, regardless if Aston are the top team in the league.
Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ferrari2007 schrieb:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I've often asked myself the same question about
> > the teams.
>
>
> Elaborate that please.
I've felt for a few seasons now that the team bosses should be more involved with the running of the series. I made that pretty clear this time last year when the idea of a second tier series was introduced, without anyone asking any of the team bosses their opinions.
I think they should have a say in the introduction of new rules and such, not just the GPGSL Governing Body.
No ill will was meant towards Stu or his team Aston Martin and if that was the way my comment was taken I do apologise.
But I don't think my opinion is unfair, in fact I wouldn't be surprised if most of the team bosses would like some form of representation in regards to rule changes
Going back to the actually topic of the thread, Aston have been screwed in this case and should be fully reimbursed for their loss.
It's a bit of a ballsup but it is only fair that each team is treated the same, regardless if Aston are the top team in the league.
Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions
I personally didn't relate your post to AMR or Stu specifically, but I was curious what exactly you meant by this, and in the end you have basically underlined my ideas.
I respect your opinion in that, but at the same time I find it pretty ridiculous. Yes, there was this one situation where the second series should be introduced. It wasn't thought to the end and it was a mistake. But actually this was the worst example you could have chosen for. Cause...remember what happened! Team bosses and drivers complained about it and it wasn't introduced! So, now say again that you don't have a say in what is going on!
Then there was this big discussion in the pre-seasion, before a bunch of new rules were introduced. All these rules weren't the idea of the GPGSL governing body. It were the ideas of people discussing about them and then the board introduced the ones which made sense. And now compare that...nearly all suggestions were introduced this year. So again, where did you not have a say in what is going on?
In the end, I must say I'm also starting to get really pissed. Many people took a great effort to make this series more enjoyable for everybody. A bunch of new rules where introduced, the whole series is shaken up and basically we have the result many people were crying for before this season. And yet it's still not right.
Now, I ask explicitly: What are other examples where you think team bosses or drives...basically everybody, was not asked for opinion before something was eventually introduced?
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
I respect your opinion in that, but at the same time I find it pretty ridiculous. Yes, there was this one situation where the second series should be introduced. It wasn't thought to the end and it was a mistake. But actually this was the worst example you could have chosen for. Cause...remember what happened! Team bosses and drivers complained about it and it wasn't introduced! So, now say again that you don't have a say in what is going on!
Then there was this big discussion in the pre-seasion, before a bunch of new rules were introduced. All these rules weren't the idea of the GPGSL governing body. It were the ideas of people discussing about them and then the board introduced the ones which made sense. And now compare that...nearly all suggestions were introduced this year. So again, where did you not have a say in what is going on?
In the end, I must say I'm also starting to get really pissed. Many people took a great effort to make this series more enjoyable for everybody. A bunch of new rules where introduced, the whole series is shaken up and basically we have the result many people were crying for before this season. And yet it's still not right.
Now, I ask explicitly: What are other examples where you think team bosses or drives...basically everybody, was not asked for opinion before something was eventually introduced?
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
I think it's fair to say that the majority would like to see the perfs reset to where they should be. That is to remove the boosts caused by the mistake in the excel calculator and continue as normal. Existing boosts nominated by drivers and team owners for the next round will stand. Obviously the fairest, the easiest and the most equitable solution under the circumstances for everyone.
There is no way we are going to re-run events, or start splitting boosts, adding here and subtracting there, or handing out complimentary boosts to even things out for some.
This is a one off event, unlikely to happen again, and for everyone to be arguing over it is unwise. It is not my place to just overrule everyone, however after reading through the discussion it is apparent that a removal of the excess boosts, the solution that I suggested in the first place, is the preferred option.
I find myself in the situation where my team is currently at the top of the leader-board, and I have an excess of 11BHP. Was this caused by the mistake in the calculator, or is it just luck of the game? Hard to say, however I have to remain impartial, even though some may think that I am not.
The excess boosts will be removed, and any requested boosts by drivers and teams for round 4 will be added and we can then get on with running the event.
Stu has done the right thing, by advising everyone of the situation. Far better to have done that than to have kept it quiet and discussed it under a cone of silence with the GPGSL. Had we done that, it is likely we would have been caught out with the publication of the next round of perfs.
Also, the talk of particular teams domination of the series in the past is irrelevant and had little to do with the subject at hand, and for some a bit of a disappointment. Let's move on and get on with the job at hand gentlemen.
[www.mediafire.com] Some say you should click it, you know you want to.
[www.gp4central.com] <----GP4 Central
There is no way we are going to re-run events, or start splitting boosts, adding here and subtracting there, or handing out complimentary boosts to even things out for some.
This is a one off event, unlikely to happen again, and for everyone to be arguing over it is unwise. It is not my place to just overrule everyone, however after reading through the discussion it is apparent that a removal of the excess boosts, the solution that I suggested in the first place, is the preferred option.
I find myself in the situation where my team is currently at the top of the leader-board, and I have an excess of 11BHP. Was this caused by the mistake in the calculator, or is it just luck of the game? Hard to say, however I have to remain impartial, even though some may think that I am not.
The excess boosts will be removed, and any requested boosts by drivers and teams for round 4 will be added and we can then get on with running the event.
Stu has done the right thing, by advising everyone of the situation. Far better to have done that than to have kept it quiet and discussed it under a cone of silence with the GPGSL. Had we done that, it is likely we would have been caught out with the publication of the next round of perfs.
Also, the talk of particular teams domination of the series in the past is irrelevant and had little to do with the subject at hand, and for some a bit of a disappointment. Let's move on and get on with the job at hand gentlemen.
[www.mediafire.com] Some say you should click it, you know you want to.
[www.gp4central.com] <----GP4 CentralI'm not trying to suggest that team bosses have no say whatsoever.
Funnily enough the cases you have used are both good examples for what I was actually trying to say.
In the case of the second series, yes, it wasn't introduced, which I think was for everyone the general consensus. In that situation it was basically the entire league who was against the idea, so it wasn't a relevant issue regarding the team bosses.
Then with the new rules introduced over the off season again the general consensus was that yes these are good ideas and they have been implemented.
All I have tried to suggest is that team's can officially vote on rule changes, just like every member of the league does with the calender.
This series has in fact always been run to the highest possible standard, and I don't think anything has ever been done to favour a certain team over the other or anything like that. John you seem to feel that I am attacking the way the league is run when that isn't what I'm doing at all.
I just want to make sure that the league continues to run as well as it has done in the past and I think the best way we could do that is to formally introduce a panel of all the team bosses who can also vote on decisions that the GPGSL board would like to introduce or any decisions that need to be made.
If a panel as I've mentioned above did exist we could have quickly all voted on what would be best to do regarding Aston Martin's unfortunate situation that has happened with the perf file and saved ourselves page upon page of needless discussions that simply take away from why we are all here in the first place, and that is to have a bit of fun.
I have never myself complained about the new rules. In all fairness going on my own teams personal interest I should have been much more in favour of the old rules set.
Edit - Having seen Mal's post can I just say I totally agree with the points he has made.
Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/15/2012 12:32AM by Ferrari2007.
Funnily enough the cases you have used are both good examples for what I was actually trying to say.
In the case of the second series, yes, it wasn't introduced, which I think was for everyone the general consensus. In that situation it was basically the entire league who was against the idea, so it wasn't a relevant issue regarding the team bosses.
Then with the new rules introduced over the off season again the general consensus was that yes these are good ideas and they have been implemented.
All I have tried to suggest is that team's can officially vote on rule changes, just like every member of the league does with the calender.
This series has in fact always been run to the highest possible standard, and I don't think anything has ever been done to favour a certain team over the other or anything like that. John you seem to feel that I am attacking the way the league is run when that isn't what I'm doing at all.
I just want to make sure that the league continues to run as well as it has done in the past and I think the best way we could do that is to formally introduce a panel of all the team bosses who can also vote on decisions that the GPGSL board would like to introduce or any decisions that need to be made.
If a panel as I've mentioned above did exist we could have quickly all voted on what would be best to do regarding Aston Martin's unfortunate situation that has happened with the perf file and saved ourselves page upon page of needless discussions that simply take away from why we are all here in the first place, and that is to have a bit of fun.
I have never myself complained about the new rules. In all fairness going on my own teams personal interest I should have been much more in favour of the old rules set.
Edit - Having seen Mal's post can I just say I totally agree with the points he has made.
Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/15/2012 12:32AM by Ferrari2007.
Well this all got a bit...
edit: my two penneth: Mistakes happen. Personally I can forgive it because I don't understand really how the perfs work, even now, and so what you guys do is, to me anyway, some sort of witchcraft (plus its bloody hard work so your forgiven the odd mistake lol). I also think that the suggestion thread worked really well in bringing in the new rules for this season. Even though I am not a personal fan of single lap qualifying I don't mind it having been implemented because it was discussed openly and thoroughly in the forums, then the governing body took the decision that they feel was best. You all know that my bug bear is activity rules and so during the next off-season I shall be making suggestions in the suggestions thread as to what we might consider doing. Although don't ask me what I think now...becuase I really don't know.
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/15/2012 12:45AM by CaptinFranko.
edit: my two penneth: Mistakes happen. Personally I can forgive it because I don't understand really how the perfs work, even now, and so what you guys do is, to me anyway, some sort of witchcraft (plus its bloody hard work so your forgiven the odd mistake lol). I also think that the suggestion thread worked really well in bringing in the new rules for this season. Even though I am not a personal fan of single lap qualifying I don't mind it having been implemented because it was discussed openly and thoroughly in the forums, then the governing body took the decision that they feel was best. You all know that my bug bear is activity rules and so during the next off-season I shall be making suggestions in the suggestions thread as to what we might consider doing. Although don't ask me what I think now...becuase I really don't know.
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/15/2012 12:45AM by CaptinFranko.
And why should only the team bosses have a right to vote? Why not also the drivers? Don't they have the equivalent right to vote in this case? And suddenly you have about 30 people who need to vote about something. That takes time, slows down the process and isn't in the end at all fairer, as still some people won't be happy with what the majority voted for.
In this league, everybody has a say. At least that's what I thought about it for a pretty long time. Compared to how things went back in season 5, a lot has changed for the better, if you allow my honest opinion. But in the end you need a restricted number of people making decisions about what has been proposed. Cause everything else doesn't work out!
Like Mal wrote, maybe we all should calm down again and proceed with the stuff this league is there for. I honestly don't care if AMR will be paid back their lost points or not. Actually I think that Stu's suggestion would have even less paid back the loss than the now preferred option, at least as far as AMR is concerned. But some people's arguments for not giving compensation to AMR was far below the belt. In this regard it shouldn't be forgotten what Stu is doing for this series and what this series would be without him!
And with that I'm out of this discussion.
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
In this league, everybody has a say. At least that's what I thought about it for a pretty long time. Compared to how things went back in season 5, a lot has changed for the better, if you allow my honest opinion. But in the end you need a restricted number of people making decisions about what has been proposed. Cause everything else doesn't work out!
Like Mal wrote, maybe we all should calm down again and proceed with the stuff this league is there for. I honestly don't care if AMR will be paid back their lost points or not. Actually I think that Stu's suggestion would have even less paid back the loss than the now preferred option, at least as far as AMR is concerned. But some people's arguments for not giving compensation to AMR was far below the belt. In this regard it shouldn't be forgotten what Stu is doing for this series and what this series would be without him!
And with that I'm out of this discussion.
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
I don't really care what happens :P
Too busy trying to improve my own shockingly poor pace
Too busy trying to improve my own shockingly poor pace
Fair comment John, I respect your decision but personally think that it would be a positive move for the league.
As you know I never tried to suggest screwing over Aston Martin.
As you say discussion over.
Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions
As you know I never tried to suggest screwing over Aston Martin.
As you say discussion over.
Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions
To quickly summarise my 2 cents :
- remove excess bhp from the 10 teams (including my own) immediately to how it should be after 3 rounds.
- boost send in will stand for rnd 4 (malaysia) and will be used as normal.
- give AMR +4 bhp extra to spend on boost this season as compensation.
If you are racing, keep on racing and get some points!
GPG Super League S11 | Driver #41 | Team-manager | Snake Motorsports Racing Group | Next Race: Emmeloord - Flevoland GP | Constructors: 10th | Best Race Finish: 1st
GPG Super League Season 9 Testers Champion*
- remove excess bhp from the 10 teams (including my own) immediately to how it should be after 3 rounds.
- boost send in will stand for rnd 4 (malaysia) and will be used as normal.
- give AMR +4 bhp extra to spend on boost this season as compensation.
GPG Super League S11 | Driver #41 | Team-manager | Snake Motorsports Racing Group | Next Race: Emmeloord - Flevoland GP | Constructors: 10th | Best Race Finish: 1st
GPG Super League Season 9 Testers Champion*
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.