GPGSL S7 [SEASON COMPLETED!!!] Rule Changes Announced For S8.
Posted by GPGSL
Just looking at the waiting list for teams to get into the series and I have to ask are these three prospective owners active on this forum at all?
Facebook F1 (alexf1man)
Biscione Motor Racing (littleone90)
Marr Grand Prix (DanFilm007)
I certainly don't remember them posting this season. Should they not be taken off the list?
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2012 05:33PM by CaptinFranko.
Facebook F1 (alexf1man)
Biscione Motor Racing (littleone90)
Marr Grand Prix (DanFilm007)
I certainly don't remember them posting this season. Should they not be taken off the list?
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2012 05:33PM by CaptinFranko.
Out of interest - was there ever a rule change about how new teams could come in?
I remember people used to be able to 'sell' their teams to anyone they wanted, so that the team's performance remained and the team itself remained but simply under a new name and with new ownership.
OR
Once you withdraw as a team owner is that it and your team is completely disbanded?
I remember people used to be able to 'sell' their teams to anyone they wanted, so that the team's performance remained and the team itself remained but simply under a new name and with new ownership.
OR
Once you withdraw as a team owner is that it and your team is completely disbanded?
brunoboi schrieb:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Out of interest - was there ever a rule change
> about how new teams could come in?
>
> I remember people used to be able to 'sell' their
> teams to anyone they wanted, so that the team's
> performance remained and the team itself remained
> but simply under a new name and with new
> ownership.
>
> OR
>
> Once you withdraw as a team owner is that it and
> your team is completely disbanded?
Yes, silently - behind the back doors - there was a rule change and Stu also announced it some time ago. Team owners are not allowed to sell their teams anymore. They can only quit and the teams start with the base perf. That's a good thing, if you ask me, although it's also a bit unfair to new teams now, as Aston - for example - had a big advantage due to the old rule. No blame, Stu, just a simple fact. But there has to be a point when new rules are implemented, and like in F1 there's always somebody who has an advantage from it and somebody else who has a disadvantage.
As for the three managers on the waiting list, I have to admit that it's a bit of a strange situation. So far there was no rule concerning activity of waiting managers. But I agree that it would be good for them to be aware of things going on here - which means that at least some basic activity should be shown. Maybe we could consider activity checks for them either, like every 3rd check they have to have shown their activity in a way. Up to Dean though to decide this, as it's his extra work.
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
-------------------------------------------------------
> Out of interest - was there ever a rule change
> about how new teams could come in?
>
> I remember people used to be able to 'sell' their
> teams to anyone they wanted, so that the team's
> performance remained and the team itself remained
> but simply under a new name and with new
> ownership.
>
> OR
>
> Once you withdraw as a team owner is that it and
> your team is completely disbanded?
Yes, silently - behind the back doors - there was a rule change and Stu also announced it some time ago. Team owners are not allowed to sell their teams anymore. They can only quit and the teams start with the base perf. That's a good thing, if you ask me, although it's also a bit unfair to new teams now, as Aston - for example - had a big advantage due to the old rule. No blame, Stu, just a simple fact. But there has to be a point when new rules are implemented, and like in F1 there's always somebody who has an advantage from it and somebody else who has a disadvantage.
As for the three managers on the waiting list, I have to admit that it's a bit of a strange situation. So far there was no rule concerning activity of waiting managers. But I agree that it would be good for them to be aware of things going on here - which means that at least some basic activity should be shown. Maybe we could consider activity checks for them either, like every 3rd check they have to have shown their activity in a way. Up to Dean though to decide this, as it's his extra work.
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
JohnMaverick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> brunoboi schrieb:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Out of interest - was there ever a rule change
> > about how new teams could come in?
> >
> > I remember people used to be able to 'sell'
> their
> > teams to anyone they wanted, so that the team's
> > performance remained and the team itself
> remained
> > but simply under a new name and with new
> > ownership.
> >
> > OR
> >
> > Once you withdraw as a team owner is that it
> and
> > your team is completely disbanded?
>
>
> Yes, silently - behind the back doors - there was
> a rule change and Stu also announced it some time
> ago. Team owners are not allowed to sell their
> teams anymore. They can only quit and the teams
> start with the base perf. That's a good thing, if
> you ask me, although it's also a bit unfair to new
> teams now, as Aston - for example - had a big
> advantage due to the old rule. No blame, Stu, just
> a simple fact. But there has to be a point when
> new rules are implemented, and like in F1 there's
> always somebody who has an advantage from it and
> somebody else who has a disadvantage.
Hmm, it's not something I personally agree with. As far as I'm concerned it solidifies the top teams' positions with the new rules as surely the teams most likely NOT to leave are those performing well at the front and so everytime a midfield to lower team leaves the gap between the top teams and the lower teams will get greater. You could argue that had the rules been in place when AMR came in that TSS would now be dominating the series as we would have had one less competitive team to battle against...
I also think it would be fairer for new teams nhot to have to start dead last if they could use their savvy to get involved with current team owners and arrange a takeover. This would also act as an incentive for prospective new team owners to maintain interest in the series as they may be able to work with an existing team before they officially take over.
I mention this only because I had previously thought about stepping down as team manager so as to give some other guys a go. Although I no longer have these plans, I know that if I ever were to step down I would not want all of my hard work building TSS into a top team to be lost.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2012 07:01PM by brunoboi.
-------------------------------------------------------
> brunoboi schrieb:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Out of interest - was there ever a rule change
> > about how new teams could come in?
> >
> > I remember people used to be able to 'sell'
> their
> > teams to anyone they wanted, so that the team's
> > performance remained and the team itself
> remained
> > but simply under a new name and with new
> > ownership.
> >
> > OR
> >
> > Once you withdraw as a team owner is that it
> and
> > your team is completely disbanded?
>
>
> Yes, silently - behind the back doors - there was
> a rule change and Stu also announced it some time
> ago. Team owners are not allowed to sell their
> teams anymore. They can only quit and the teams
> start with the base perf. That's a good thing, if
> you ask me, although it's also a bit unfair to new
> teams now, as Aston - for example - had a big
> advantage due to the old rule. No blame, Stu, just
> a simple fact. But there has to be a point when
> new rules are implemented, and like in F1 there's
> always somebody who has an advantage from it and
> somebody else who has a disadvantage.
Hmm, it's not something I personally agree with. As far as I'm concerned it solidifies the top teams' positions with the new rules as surely the teams most likely NOT to leave are those performing well at the front and so everytime a midfield to lower team leaves the gap between the top teams and the lower teams will get greater. You could argue that had the rules been in place when AMR came in that TSS would now be dominating the series as we would have had one less competitive team to battle against...
I also think it would be fairer for new teams nhot to have to start dead last if they could use their savvy to get involved with current team owners and arrange a takeover. This would also act as an incentive for prospective new team owners to maintain interest in the series as they may be able to work with an existing team before they officially take over.
I mention this only because I had previously thought about stepping down as team manager so as to give some other guys a go. Although I no longer have these plans, I know that if I ever were to step down I would not want all of my hard work building TSS into a top team to be lost.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2012 07:01PM by brunoboi.
If i might react on this aswell i'd like to state that teqams should be sold by team owners to whoever they want.
When i look on the reserve list half of the owners show no interest in the series at all. And 3 of the 4/5? on top of the list are racing drivers that i dont see quitting on a short term.
I know there's at least one team (not Minardi) who's thinking about leaving the series. And he is already talking to guys on the list, ending up almost on the bottom.
So basically i have to ask, is this rule any good and to what extent is the current reserve list up to date?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If in doubt, Flat out."
When i look on the reserve list half of the owners show no interest in the series at all. And 3 of the 4/5? on top of the list are racing drivers that i dont see quitting on a short term.
I know there's at least one team (not Minardi) who's thinking about leaving the series. And he is already talking to guys on the list, ending up almost on the bottom.
So basically i have to ask, is this rule any good and to what extent is the current reserve list up to date?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If in doubt, Flat out."
Quote
Diax F1
Personally, I agree that team owners (prospective team owners) should be involved in the GPGSL beforehand - just putting your name on the list then scooting off to do something between bugger and all is daft. If I recall, they've been on the list since the start of last season. No activity for the over a year. What. A. Joke.
+1
I know they're on the list and all, but the powers-that-be should probably take a look at it. I know the teams that Chris mentioned currently have the right to be on the list, but they should really have been getting involved. We all knew about Alexf1man's team only because his 'please can someone use my livery. PLEASE...' annoyed the hell out of us, but I wasn't even aware of the other two teams. They put their names in the hat and just, well, Dean explained it so much better
Quote
Rico
When i look on the reserve list half of the owners show no interest in the series at all. And 3 of the 4/5? on top of the list are racing drivers that i dont see quitting on a short term.
I know there's at least one team (not Minardi) who's thinking about leaving the series. And he is already talking to guys on the list, ending up almost on the bottom.
The list should be also be revised for this reason. I'm aware of the situation but can't shed anymore light on that I'm afraid (but it doesn't involve me, which narrows it down) and agree that it should be looked at a bit. It's not quite as bad as Rico mentioned as I understand it, though.
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
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2012 09:17PM by Incident 2k9.
Incident 2k9 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Personally, I agree that team owners
> (prospective team owners) should be involved in
> the GPGSL beforehand - just putting your name on
> the list then scooting off to do something between
> bugger and all is daft. If I recall, they've been
> on the list since the start of last season. No
> activity for the over a year. What. A. Joke.
>
>
> +1
>
> I know they're on the list and all, but the
> powers-that-be should probably take a look at it.
> I know the teams that Chris mentioned currently
> have the right to be on the list, but they should
> really have been getting involved. We all knew
> about Alexf1man's team only because his 'please
> can someone use my livery. PLEASE...' annoyed the
> hell out of us, but I wasn't even aware of the
> other two teams. They put their names in the hat
> and just, well, Dean explained it so much better
>
>
>
> When i look on the reserve list half of the owners
> show no interest in the series at all. And 3 of
> the 4/5? on top of the list are racing drivers
> that i dont see quitting on a short term.
> I know there's at least one team (not Minardi)
> who's thinking about leaving the series. And he is
> already talking to guys on the list, ending up
> almost on the bottom.
>
>
> The list should be also be revised for this
> reason. I'm aware of the situation but can't shed
> anymore light on that I'm afraid (but it doesn't
> involve me, which narrows it down) and agree that
> it should be looked at a bit. It's not quite as
> bad as Rico mentioned as I understand it, though.
+1. I think Mr "use my livery" got the hump when nobody wanted to and so cleared off. Personally I don't know who the other two guys are.
On the topic of new teams coming in I'm afraid that Im still on the side of agreeing with the new rules. Its plain not fair that a new team should be able to inherit the perf of an old one. I know the argument will be made that it happens in F1 when teams buy out old teams, and that's true but the ruling factor in this series is the perfs, which ultimately nobody can control. Therefore, the only way to keep it fresh and keep the series competitive in the long run is to make new teams come in with the base perf.
In my view, if we are going to let new teams simply re-brand the old ones then we might as well do the same with drivers. In which case, imagine the bidding war for Ed Greenhalgh's perf should he ever decide to step down.
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2012 09:33PM by CaptinFranko.
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Personally, I agree that team owners
> (prospective team owners) should be involved in
> the GPGSL beforehand - just putting your name on
> the list then scooting off to do something between
> bugger and all is daft. If I recall, they've been
> on the list since the start of last season. No
> activity for the over a year. What. A. Joke.
>
>
> +1
>
> I know they're on the list and all, but the
> powers-that-be should probably take a look at it.
> I know the teams that Chris mentioned currently
> have the right to be on the list, but they should
> really have been getting involved. We all knew
> about Alexf1man's team only because his 'please
> can someone use my livery. PLEASE...' annoyed the
> hell out of us, but I wasn't even aware of the
> other two teams. They put their names in the hat
> and just, well, Dean explained it so much better
>
>
>
> When i look on the reserve list half of the owners
> show no interest in the series at all. And 3 of
> the 4/5? on top of the list are racing drivers
> that i dont see quitting on a short term.
> I know there's at least one team (not Minardi)
> who's thinking about leaving the series. And he is
> already talking to guys on the list, ending up
> almost on the bottom.
>
>
> The list should be also be revised for this
> reason. I'm aware of the situation but can't shed
> anymore light on that I'm afraid (but it doesn't
> involve me, which narrows it down) and agree that
> it should be looked at a bit. It's not quite as
> bad as Rico mentioned as I understand it, though.
+1. I think Mr "use my livery" got the hump when nobody wanted to and so cleared off. Personally I don't know who the other two guys are.
On the topic of new teams coming in I'm afraid that Im still on the side of agreeing with the new rules. Its plain not fair that a new team should be able to inherit the perf of an old one. I know the argument will be made that it happens in F1 when teams buy out old teams, and that's true but the ruling factor in this series is the perfs, which ultimately nobody can control. Therefore, the only way to keep it fresh and keep the series competitive in the long run is to make new teams come in with the base perf.
In my view, if we are going to let new teams simply re-brand the old ones then we might as well do the same with drivers. In which case, imagine the bidding war for Ed Greenhalgh's perf should he ever decide to step down.
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2012 09:33PM by CaptinFranko.
Looking at the reserves list at the moment, a number of them are drivers, in good positions as well, I wonder how many of them would want to take up the opportunity as a team boss?
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
The second series is definitely no option at the moment. And I want to stress at the moment. Despite all the doubts of it, we had this possible scenario on the table, last season. It was a gut shot and raised too many questions to be really implemented. As there was totally no progress in these things, plus the fact that even this one series is basically run by Stu alone, with the help of very few guest RDs plus people who care about things like perfs and tables, there's no chance for a second series. People step up and show your dedication to this series, when that runs smoothly over quite a while, we can start to think about a second one.
As for the current situation, I am, of course, well aware of the situation. Being first on the list put me right into it, actually. Yes, I was offered a team of the current grid and it became clear that I wouldn't take over the perf of this team. It was not because of this, however, that I eventually declined. As for the main topic, I see both sides. Yes, it's true that the gap between the top teams and the lower teams will increase this way because top teams are less likely to step down. But yes, it's also true that when a top team steps down, other midfield teams increase their chance as the current top team slot isn't simply replaced by only a re-branded team. Personally I think that the second thing is most flaw of the series, and the consequence is worse than having a bigger gap between new teams and top teams. Racing IS working from the bottom end to the top. In my opinion it can't be, that this natural order is simply skipped.
I agree though that things have to be done concerning the team perfs, in any direction, and the GPGSLRS will have to discuss this in the next weeks.
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
As for the current situation, I am, of course, well aware of the situation. Being first on the list put me right into it, actually. Yes, I was offered a team of the current grid and it became clear that I wouldn't take over the perf of this team. It was not because of this, however, that I eventually declined. As for the main topic, I see both sides. Yes, it's true that the gap between the top teams and the lower teams will increase this way because top teams are less likely to step down. But yes, it's also true that when a top team steps down, other midfield teams increase their chance as the current top team slot isn't simply replaced by only a re-branded team. Personally I think that the second thing is most flaw of the series, and the consequence is worse than having a bigger gap between new teams and top teams. Racing IS working from the bottom end to the top. In my opinion it can't be, that this natural order is simply skipped.
I agree though that things have to be done concerning the team perfs, in any direction, and the GPGSLRS will have to discuss this in the next weeks.
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
JohnMaverick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The second series is definitely no option at the
> moment. And I want to stress at the moment.
> Despite all the doubts of it, we had this possible
> scenario on the table, last season. It was a gut
> shot and raised too many questions to be really
> implemented. As there was totally no progress in
> these things, plus the fact that even this one
> series is basically run by Stu alone, with the
> help of very few guest RDs plus people who care
> about things like perfs and tables, there's no
> chance for a second series. People step up and
> show your dedication to this series, when that
> runs smoothly over quite a while, we can start to
> think about a second one.
>
>
> As for the current situation, I am, of course,
> well aware of the situation. Being first on the
> list put me right into it, actually. Yes, I was
> offered a team of the current grid and it became
> clear that I wouldn't take over the perf of this
> team. It was not because of this, however, that I
> eventually declined. As for the main topic, I see
> both sides. Yes, it's true that the gap between
> the top teams and the lower teams will increase
> this way because top teams are less likely to step
> down. But yes, it's also true that when a top team
> steps down, other midfield teams increase their
> chance as the current top team slot isn't simply
> replaced by only a re-branded team. Personally I
> think that the second thing is most flaw of the
> series, and the consequence is worse than having a
> bigger gap between new teams and top teams. Racing
> IS working from the bottom end to the top. In my
> opinion it can't be, that this natural order is
> simply skipped.
>
> I agree though that things have to be done
> concerning the team perfs, in any direction, and
> the GPGSLRS will have to discuss this in the next
> weeks.
Has this not already been decided? I thought the ruling had been passed that new teams had to start with a base perf.
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
-------------------------------------------------------
> The second series is definitely no option at the
> moment. And I want to stress at the moment.
> Despite all the doubts of it, we had this possible
> scenario on the table, last season. It was a gut
> shot and raised too many questions to be really
> implemented. As there was totally no progress in
> these things, plus the fact that even this one
> series is basically run by Stu alone, with the
> help of very few guest RDs plus people who care
> about things like perfs and tables, there's no
> chance for a second series. People step up and
> show your dedication to this series, when that
> runs smoothly over quite a while, we can start to
> think about a second one.
>
>
> As for the current situation, I am, of course,
> well aware of the situation. Being first on the
> list put me right into it, actually. Yes, I was
> offered a team of the current grid and it became
> clear that I wouldn't take over the perf of this
> team. It was not because of this, however, that I
> eventually declined. As for the main topic, I see
> both sides. Yes, it's true that the gap between
> the top teams and the lower teams will increase
> this way because top teams are less likely to step
> down. But yes, it's also true that when a top team
> steps down, other midfield teams increase their
> chance as the current top team slot isn't simply
> replaced by only a re-branded team. Personally I
> think that the second thing is most flaw of the
> series, and the consequence is worse than having a
> bigger gap between new teams and top teams. Racing
> IS working from the bottom end to the top. In my
> opinion it can't be, that this natural order is
> simply skipped.
>
> I agree though that things have to be done
> concerning the team perfs, in any direction, and
> the GPGSLRS will have to discuss this in the next
> weeks.
Has this not already been decided? I thought the ruling had been passed that new teams had to start with a base perf.
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Yes, that has been decided. But I had the feeling that there are still other opinions and in my opinion it's good to hear all of them, no matter whether or not a decision has already been made. If I'm wrong with that, I don't wanna have said something
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
JohnMaverick Schreef:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, that has been decided. But I had the feeling
> that there are still other opinions and in my
> opinion it's good to hear all of them, no matter
> whether or not a decision has already been made.
> If I'm wrong with that, I don't wanna have said
> something
You're good there because you've only typed it. You have nothing to worrie about buddy...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If in doubt, Flat out."
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, that has been decided. But I had the feeling
> that there are still other opinions and in my
> opinion it's good to hear all of them, no matter
> whether or not a decision has already been made.
> If I'm wrong with that, I don't wanna have said
> something
You're good there because you've only typed it. You have nothing to worrie about buddy...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If in doubt, Flat out."
The whole "new team entry" scenario has lots of questions. I have my team sitting 3rd on the list right now, and I am currently a race driver at TNR, where I have had 2 full seasons (by the end of this season). Ideally, I would love to keep a race seat, but if i take up a team ownership, "poof" : no more race seat.
However, I can put myself in the test seat of my own team, and keep building my perf rating, then if i chose to do so, quit my team in a few seasons and return to racing.
The AMR dominance does get tiring, but the AMR team have worked to get their perf ratings as strong as they are. No blame or anger over that. A new team i might bring in will be bottom of the heap, and that's fine. It will take quite a few seasons to get my squad moving up the grid. If drivers are prepared to drop their standards and expectations, perhaps some top drivers might take a gamble and do a Damon Hill ala 1996 and go to a crappy team!!
If so, this Australian team boss would be more than happy to talk to any top drivers wanting to show the GPGSL that it is there talent, and not the car they currently pedal, that is the star of the show!!
GPGSL Team Owner Debut - Melbourne, Season 8 - present
GPGSL Test Debut - Hungary, Season 4. GPGSL Race Debut - Adelaide, Season 5.
However, I can put myself in the test seat of my own team, and keep building my perf rating, then if i chose to do so, quit my team in a few seasons and return to racing.
The AMR dominance does get tiring, but the AMR team have worked to get their perf ratings as strong as they are. No blame or anger over that. A new team i might bring in will be bottom of the heap, and that's fine. It will take quite a few seasons to get my squad moving up the grid. If drivers are prepared to drop their standards and expectations, perhaps some top drivers might take a gamble and do a Damon Hill ala 1996 and go to a crappy team!!
If so, this Australian team boss would be more than happy to talk to any top drivers wanting to show the GPGSL that it is there talent, and not the car they currently pedal, that is the star of the show!!
GPGSL Team Owner Debut - Melbourne, Season 8 - present
GPGSL Test Debut - Hungary, Season 4. GPGSL Race Debut - Adelaide, Season 5.
Time contraints mean that the race will not be posted tonight. I'm still sifting through screenies and writing the report.
The prospect of a second tier was discussed last season and it was rejected, so no chance of that. Also I personally no longer have a desire to run it neither, not unless I got much more help. I'm finding it hard to find the motivation to run races for the current series to be honest.
I would like to propose a reduction in race length. It's not running the race that takes time, it's sorting the screenshots and writing the race report, so reducing the races to a 40 minute one stop race would help reduce the amount of screenies.
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
The prospect of a second tier was discussed last season and it was rejected, so no chance of that. Also I personally no longer have a desire to run it neither, not unless I got much more help. I'm finding it hard to find the motivation to run races for the current series to be honest.
I would like to propose a reduction in race length. It's not running the race that takes time, it's sorting the screenshots and writing the race report, so reducing the races to a 40 minute one stop race would help reduce the amount of screenies.
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
I'd be all for a shorter GP with one stop!
Back in the W300 races were only normally around 20mins in length and still as exciting
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/13/2012 01:17AM by brunoboi.
Back in the W300 races were only normally around 20mins in length and still as exciting
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/13/2012 01:17AM by brunoboi.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.