Vintage Road Racing Association

More math. Just for the hell of it I took the lap record times at calabogie and ran the numbers. p4f1 = 52.52 laps, p3H = 51.43. Wow, the diff is almost identical. However I like using the top 5 fast times to give a more realistic value. Using my previous numbers to calculate total distance p4f1 should go 1050.88 km by the end of the season, p3H goes 1016.45, or 96.72369% of p4f1 distance. At these numbers the p3H should have a 3.3% distance added on. For ease lets call it 4 or 5% post race??? 1016.45 x 1.04 = 1057.11 km. Down time due to red flag will have no bearing. Add agreed to % to all p3H distances. This could be done for all classes.

yes- something like that. it simplifies the process and doesn't award in laps- but miles as a percentage.
So- we now just have to do every class and every track configuration.

OK i worked up a spreadsheet.
Here is what i did and why.
I used lap records for every single class in sprint for each of the tracks.
Took that lap time and figured out what the maximum potential number of laps was based on these times and not including a pit stop.

This gives us what the maximum potential of each class is at each track.

While i understand that no one will be doing record pace for the entire race it does level the field. We do not have a reasonable way of doing this as lap data for each track and rider combination becomes very unwieldy.

So this shows us the difference in number of laps. We add a bit to pad up the handicapped bikes - (to encourage participation).

Feedback please- and if anyone wants to see the spreadsheet let me know- i can email it to you. PM me here with your email address

Brilliant Kirby! Still allows you to tilt the field by rounding up to encourage participation by handicapped bikes.

Not sure i will actually do much with this if there isn't much interest. the reality is- we have very few handicapped bikes running.

Mostly in lightweight, one in middleweight and the odd appearance in HW.

not a ton of interest in this- Will proceed with just pro rating based on race time for this season- keep this new formulation on the backburner....

I think the lack of interest is because you have this all under control and no one has qualms with what you've proposed.

I kind of wish I had an endurance bike to enter!

Justind97 wrote:I kind of wish I had an endurance bike to enter!

Things that make you go hmmm. lol. Back to the garage....make your dream come true!

Thinking about reviving this. I know we have a few anomalies that need to be looked at.

Calabogie seems to be the one track throwing a bit too much handicap at most classes.

Generally i think Mosport and Shannonville handicaps work. But there is a huge difference in lap times between the venues and so a single handicap measured in laps doesn't actually work well applied across the board.

Lets not forget the potential P5 classes...

Without any data, it's hard to determine handicaps.

2 options:

1. Slide into current heavy/mid/light and handicap accordingly

2. During trial run P5 as a separate class. We could use for data collection to determone handicaps.

Thoughts?

Sounds fair.

Andre Kipin
On The Verge #818

Kirby.

Where would P4 Early fit in. Would it just slot into the respective P4-F2 and P4-F1 groups?

Yes they would...
Man - I have some more handicaps to figure out....

Did another spreadsheet this year looking at the handicaps per venue.
I used the same idea - lap records in each class.

At this time i am not sure how to deal with P4 early. I don't have any good way to collect data for that,
So for now they will likely have to remain in the P4 handicaps.

P5 - this is a tough one. we have zero data- and as the top of teh food chain- all other handicaps are calculated from these. I may have to just eyeball it. I was thinking 2 laps Shanny/Mosport and 1 lap Calabogie?

any feedback appreciated.