Please let me know your thoughts on this.
I am fine leaving as is, but there is some validity to the argument that laps means different things at different tracks, not just the actual length of the track, but how fast you cover it.
Mosport is our fastest track, Shannonville our slowest with Calabogie in between.
The long track will be used this year.
Below is the track length and maximum theoretical distance based on the winning team from 2017 lap times but eliminating pit stops just to keep it simple. so 2 hours of track time at the fastest average lap time of the 2017 races.
Shannonville is 4.03km Theoretical max Km =234
Calabogie is 5.05km Theoretical max Km =263
Mosport is 3.957km Theoretical max Km =297
A five lap handicap - just as an example equals 20.15km at Shannonville, 19.785 at Mosport and 25.25 at Calabogie.
These are not vastly different this year as we are using long track. But that 5km gain at Calabogie could really make a difference to your season (or you entire classes season).
P1-200 potentially gets 30 laps this year. That's more than half the race at 2 of the 3 tracks. Someone should really take advantage of this! Hard to imagine overcoming that kind of handicap even on the fastest bikes in the class.
A one lap penalty just equals a single lap. But a penalty costs the most at the medium speed track. And cost the least at the highest speed track. So there could be a slight imbalance. This goes for handicaps as well.
the question then is - we only record full laps for the race, so is it just easier to continue with laps for penalties and handicaps or should it have a relationship to each tracks length and speed?
please feel free to jump in and tell me i am crazy or onto something.
It's lonely in here.