GPGSL S9 R13 - Austrian GP - A-1 Ring [Race online p205!]

Turbo Lover Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ferrari2007 Schreef:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Fifth and ninth is probably a good measure of
> our
> > pace here.
> >
> > Now we've got the ball rolling let's build
> > momentum up over the weekend.
> >
> > Coincidence that Greg ends up fastest in a
> session
> > that he ran?
>
>
> Don't forget the fact there wasn't any footage due
> "a technical problem with the cameras" after Greg
> set the fastest time.

Reason I said there was a technical problem is because I noticed a few screens I had taken were not with the others. The ones that didn't show were during the second runs of the second group of drivers. Don't know why Fraps would not take screenshots when I know I had pushed the right button. So I need to get onto that before running the full qualifying.

About the testers using the 2 lap format being used by the race drivers, when Stoopid ran the Japanese GP free practice, that was done in this format. It may be good for the race drivers, but for the testers it just doesn't suit them. So for the next round this should be looked at and changed back to having all cars on track and at least 4 laps each.

---

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/02/2014 09:13PM by Mullet345.

shep34 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Turbo Lover Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ferrari2007 Schreef:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Fifth and ninth is probably a good measure of
> > our
> > > pace here.
> > >
> > > Now we've got the ball rolling let's build
> > > momentum up over the weekend.
> > >
> > > Coincidence that Greg ends up fastest in a
> > session
> > > that he ran?
> >
> >
> > Don't forget the fact there wasn't any footage
> due
> > "a technical problem with the cameras" after
> Greg
> > set the fastest time.
>
>
> Nooooo! I would find it totally disgusting if by
> any chance, that our little impatient Mr O'Brien
> somehow managed to ccome first in his own RD'
> session, then mysteriously the last 10 minutes of
> the broadcast go missing, and we get no official
> GP4 results screen to show proof of what
> happened.
> Surely people are not suggesting anything
> dishonest. Greg is after all, an Australian, and
> we are all honest, law abiding citizens.....
>
> And if by some chance it was ever found that a RD
> cut short a session to advantage himself, instant
> dismissal from GPGSL should result, in my opinion.
> This is after all, supposed to be fun.

This. As such, I would like to request a formal investigation into the results and the running of the session. Not suspecting Greg, but the whole "technical difficulties" comment brings things into question.

---

If there is any doubt over the result then declare them bull and void and be done with it.

---

Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions

GPGSL Announcement

Round 3 Sepang - Malaysia is now on hold until the members of the governing body make a decision on the validity of the test session result. Any decision handed down by the GPGSL will be binding.
Mal Stoddart, GPGSL board member and team owner of Southern Cross Racing has elected to abstain from voting in this matter as a possible conflict of interest could be seen to be occurring with this investigation and forthcoming decision.
The GPGSL will announce its decision within the next few days.

---

Turbo Lover Schreef:
-------------------------------------------------------
> New test drivers mod released, see first page.


The GPGSL-S9-2013 Race Drivers CSM File is only 1,96kB and the Test Drivers CSM File is the same. Aren't they normaly not bigger, like 60 or 80MB?

It does not work with me... can't load it in CSM, am I doing something wrong... can someone explain.



GPGSL-3: VTR Driver, S4~S11 (2nd, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3th, 4th, 3th, 2nd)(Constructorstitel S7 & S9)
GPGSL-4: ONE Racing Driver, S8~S11 // TYRANT Racing Driver, S12:1st, S13:13th, S14:1st, S15:13th //
WREXHAM Motorsports Racing Driver S16: ?

Brett Sinclair schrieb:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Turbo Lover Schreef:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > New test drivers mod released, see first page.
>
>
> The GPGSL-S9-2013 Race Drivers CSM File is only
> 1,96kB and the Test Drivers CSM File is the same.
> Aren't they normaly not bigger, like 60 or 80MB?
>
> It does not work with me... can't load it in CSM,
> am I doing something wrong... can someone explain.


Just copy the GPGSL-S9-2013 Race/Test Drivers folder in the .rar archive to the GPSAVES\Carsets folder. The mod will then appear in CSM.

---

Some F1 CSM mods
1996 | 2000 | 2002 | 2007 | 2011 | 2013 | 2015 | 2018

Brett Sinclair Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rod_vs Schreef:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Rico Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > What's you're problem i got 3rd?!:p
> >
> >
> > Yes, I know, but I want both cars in top-5!!!
> =/
>
>
> I know... Sorry boss... I was just skating on thin
> ice... my car just feld like a yacht... I hate
> rain in Malaysia... to bad for the boost I used...
> damn, damn, damn not good at all.
>
> Congra to teammate Rico for 3rd place, well
> done... pls learn me to drive in the wet !!


No problem!! I saw the guilty was the rain!! Rico was brillhant!!!


One Racing driver and team manager
GPGSL-3: champion in 2007/2013/2014!
GPGSL-4: testdrivers champion in Season 11!

kedy89 Schreef:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Just copy the GPGSL-S9-2013 Race/Test Drivers
> folder in the .rar archive to the GPSAVES\Carsets
> folder. The mod will then appear in CSM.


Thx Tobias, now it's working... so easy, why does I always look for the difficult way, thanks again mate.



GPGSL-3: VTR Driver, S4~S11 (2nd, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3th, 4th, 3th, 2nd)(Constructorstitel S7 & S9)
GPGSL-4: ONE Racing Driver, S8~S11 // TYRANT Racing Driver, S12:1st, S13:13th, S14:1st, S15:13th //
WREXHAM Motorsports Racing Driver S16: ?

I think the discussion on the validity of the fp results is a bit pointless. This series relies on trusting the race directors. We could question every single race result by simply stating the perf file has been tampered with (that being said: why would anyone fake a result by stopping the session halfway down when there's an easier and more elegant method to manipulate a result?). Imho the explanation that has been provided so far is plausible (i had the same problem with fraps some time ago - different game, though) so I'd leave it at that.

---

used to be GPGSL's Nick Heidfeld

Writing this personally and not as part of the governing body (although it should be obvious that this will give clues on my vote ). What Chris writes there is completely how I see it, too. I've also experienced this phenomenon with FRAPS and I honestly can't think of any less elegant and more suspicious way to manipulate the result for one's own favor. Of course one could argue that the most suspicious way is the best way because everybody thinks the way I do. But I mean...really?! This series has to rely on the honesty of their RDs. I was also nervous when I won a race that I RDed myself. But there are only two ways around that. Either trusting into those people who take the effort and time to bring us some entertainment, or disallow RDs being any series members. And we know that the second option won't work. And see it like this: You can only win a self-RDed race every so often before it really becomes suspicious. Unless you're Ed Greenhalgh in an AMR, of course

@Greg: It would still be good to sort out this issue with FRAPS, however. Maybe try alternatives like MSI Afterburner, if the problem persists.


GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)

n00binio schrieb:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think the discussion on the validity of the fp
> results is a bit pointless. This series relies on
> trusting the race directors. We could question
> every single race result by simply stating the
> perf file has been tampered with (that being said:
> why would anyone fake a result by stopping the
> session halfway down when there's an easier and
> more elegant method to manipulate a result?). Imho
> the explanation that has been provided so far is
> plausible (i had the same problem with fraps some
> time ago - different game, though) so I'd leave it
> at that.

+1

didn't intend to start such a debate obviously, don't have any problem with a RD winning, especially not a rain-trunked session, where he was lucky to be out first, because the track just got wetter with every driver.
The only thing I'm unlucky about is the way, the FPs are being held, doing it like a "normal" practice-session would be more fair. As a qualifying-system though the system is great in my opinion.
So sorry Greg for the trouble, and for the GPGSL-board one thing to remember:

The championship in season one was decided by a faulty track (Adelaide), after some 13 laps everything was bugged and thus the decision was made to take the standing after those 13 laps. The championship-leader, a certain Monil Santilal, was 9 points in front of Philip Oakley, but crashed in the absolutely chaotic last race, ultimately failing to win the championship by a mere 2 points, as Oakely finished 2nd. RD was Mal Stoddart.

So that much to technical difficulties causing havoc in GPGSL. While reading the thread of GPGSL S1, I thought "what the hell did they just decide" and felt absolutely sorry for Monil, I couldn't believe they'd allow such a deciding bug in the last race. However this time we aren't talking about a championship, but one testers' session which ran completely smooth and with a weather forecast that everyone playing GP4 knows can happen kinda often. The only technical error this time is Fraps failing to save some of the photos taken, which has happened to other RDs before as well (actually kinda similar also in FP). The only difference is that the RD has won the session now. It's nothing I'd call foul on.
So I think take the results as they are, award the points and perf-points regularly and forget the whole debate. Even if Greg can't prove he didn't run 5 sessions to have himself finish 1st, no RD can prove that. The technical error that occurred has already happened to quite a few RDs and is well known to exist.
So even if Greg can't prove anything, everyone else can't either. So it would be "in dubio pro reo", the benefit of the doubt I think it's called in English.

As far as I see it, there is nothing that can prove that every session from S1 till now hasn't been manipulated. Yet nobody is gaining a cent by winning something in GPGSL.
So the only thing that someone would get by manipulating an Ai based race/qualify/test session is proving himself as a not too grown up man.

this isn't the first time something like this happens (as a guest RD I ran Laguna Seca S6 and that was the first time I finished 1st in a test session, with no boost and no rain) and it should be declared valid like before has happened.

---

My GPGSL Career

Eh, it's just one test session. @#$%& happens. Let's just not needlessly delay things, sort the practice format for later sessions, and carry on.

---

GPGSL: S6 - TafuroGP Tester (14th) /// S7 - ART Tester (6th) /// S8 - Demon Driver (13th) /// S9 - Demon/Snake Driver (13th) /// S10 - Snake Driver (???) ///]
"My ambition is handicapped by laziness" - Charles Bukowski

I'm happy with 8th considering the weather.

Another medicore result. Dan's 4th is'nt bad. I wonder if my car has the same parts...

As Team Shadow Mercedes' Team Principal and former race director of other series, I would like to declare that I see no problems in accepting the results of the practise.

Directors put in SO much effort for no reward, they enable the series to continue by giving up their precious time. I applaud all their hard work and do not see why their efforts should be put into question as a result of our buggy game.

Many thanks.

As I made the comment, I'll say now I was looking for clarity - which, ironically, Greg provided in a manner of speaking just before I had posted.

Had Greg mentioned this detail rather than the blanket "technical issues" comment, I wouldn't have been quite so quick to voice concern. This stuff happens, so let's just get on with it

---

... they sent me last on the track and continued to be last through the heavy rain ... though I had boost!

Wouldn't it be better, that all test races were driven in sunny or cloudy weather, instead of rain and heavy rain, because we can not defend or win some places during a race... We only do a test race (qualification) and that should normally be the same for everyone in this case, then everyone has a chance!

Then there are NO discussions anymore if it was manipulated or not, that's my opinion... it must stay funny and we love it, so... GENTLEMEN START YOUR ENGINES and have FUN !!

I was very unlucky that they send me as last on the track... I should better have stayed in the pits, sparing the car, engine and tyres for next race.

What a bummer !!!



GPGSL-3: VTR Driver, S4~S11 (2nd, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3th, 4th, 3th, 2nd)(Constructorstitel S7 & S9)
GPGSL-4: ONE Racing Driver, S8~S11 // TYRANT Racing Driver, S12:1st, S13:13th, S14:1st, S15:13th //
WREXHAM Motorsports Racing Driver S16: ?

Considering the atrocious driving conditions, I am happy with my result. Congratulations Greg

brunoboi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Directors put in SO much effort for no reward,
> they enable the series to continue by giving up
> their precious time. I applaud all their hard work
> and do not see why their efforts should be put
> into question as a result of our buggy game.


So we're racing buggies now?



Stats: 139 Starts / 7 Wins / 9 Poles / 5 Fastest laps