How do you define being the "Fastest"? Try #2.

[Stan Pope]

What are the most important factors or attributes of "fast?"

This is a philosophical, not a practical, question. Focus on the "attributes of fast", not the "method of determining fast".

Attributes of fast that come to mind include
"staying power" - speed doesn't fall off after a few races - How many?
"peaks high" - has one or a few very fast runs
"high minimum" - has no bad runs.

Reasons for preferring one attribute over another could include considerations such as "appropriate for a youngster's skill set" and "this is what a youngster thinks is important" and "appeals to both youngsters and adults."

Other "attributes" or "reasons"?

[brownboy]

I think I understand your point, I just took second as a guest at an AWANA race with a 3 wheel car. It was fast, but because of only three wheels staging as was lane condition was an important factor on how the car would perform in any given heat. The car had the fastest et for the night... but it wasn't the fastest consistantly or in any given heat, and now that I read that last post I realize that "fast" is a realtive term depending on the test.

[MaxV]

I favor 'Staying Power'. When we think of other car racing events, the ability to go fast consistently is most important.

- Nascar: The winner is not the car/driver with the capability of having the fastest lap, it is the car/driver that can maintain speed over many laps.

- Drag racing: The winner must consistently post fast runs over several heats.

[Stan Pope]

I favor 'Staying Power'. When we think of other car racing events, the ability to go fast consistently is most important.

Good points.

How should the following facts be integrated?
1. Often, youngsters are staging their own cars. Their staging skills, especially their consistency, is an important factor
2. OFten, tracks are in less than perfect condition. Very small staging errors can have different results depending on just where the car brushes the center rail.

[Darin McGrew]

I think that "going fast consistently" is more than just maintaining speed over several heats. It includes going fast when the track is less than ideal, when the staging is less than ideal, after 1 heat, after 10 heats, after Junior drops the car on its way back to the pit area, after Junior waves the car over his head after winning the first heat, etc., etc., etc.

[Sylvar]

Stan Said:

How should the following facts be integrated?
1. Often, youngsters are staging their own cars. Their staging skills, especially their consistency, is an important factor
2. OFten, tracks are in less than perfect condition. Very small staging errors can have different results depending on just where the car brushes the center rail.

Point one begs the question: What are you trying to measure? The car? or the Driver and his car. I think it is important to measure the Driver and his car. If a boy stages his car poorly it will have an impact on his time. Can this mean that the second fastest (or third fastest) car can win because the driver of the fastest car was careless? YES! I think that is a completely valid outcome.

Point two is stickier. Even if the race method used allows for each boy to race on each lane an equal number of times you still run into the issue of car/lane to car/lane match-ups. I haven't yet seen a really good solution to that one

Shane
[/quote]

[TDean]

Stan asked:

This is a philosophical, not a practical, question. Focus on the "attributes of fast", not the "method of determining fast".

Attributes of fast that come to mind include
"staying power" - speed doesn't fall off after a few races - How many?
"peaks high" - has one or a few very fast runs
"high minimum" - has no bad runs.

I have always preferred a "points" or other system rather than going by fastest "times" (whether cumulative or whatever).
Philosphically, I feel it is more important to win the race than to be the "speediest". Randy mentioned NASCAR -- it is often not the fastest car that wins the race -- but the smartest.
On a "perfect" track, Speedster Car could zip past the Smart Car -- but on the "Real World" track, the car that is best equipped to handle the bumps in the track, endure the finish line punishment repeatedly and maintain proper alignment, avoid "sliding" on the track, rebound from center strip bumping -- may have the other car eating its sawdust more often than not.

To me, the "fastest" is the car that crossed the finish line first more times than the other car. Isn't that what racing is all about? And IMHO, I don't think a lot of these young boys grasp or appreciate the "racing against the clock" format -- they can't understand how you could win every heat and still come in second, but it happens. So yes, Stan, I feel "what a youngster thinks is important" -- more important than what a Pinehead thinks...

[Stan Pope]

Great thoughts, guys! These are the kinds of insights that I was hoping to unearth. Thank you.

Ultimately, each of us, as race organizers, can help our organizations select a racing method according to the "aspects of fast" that they think are most important.

[TDean]

Stan --
I was going to add -- Why did you put "How do you define being the 'fastest'?" in the Scheduling Method category -- but you just answered that:

Ultimately, each of us, as race organizers, can help our organizations select a racing method according to the "aspects of fast" that they think are most important.

Also -- I wanted to add, my thoughts towards points vs. time were for the youth-oriented PWD races. WIRL races are all about time, and I have no problem with that philosophically -- as it's all about Pineheads (so I guess in your eyes, it's for the birds, but that's okay too...)

[Stan Pope]

Stan --
I was going to add -- Why did you put "How do you define being the 'fastest'?" in the Scheduling Method category -- but you just answered that:

Ultimately, each of us, as race organizers, can help our organizations select a racing method according to the "aspects of fast" that they think are most important.

My apology for not making that concern clear. And, my thanks for adding the emphasis!

Also -- I wanted to add, my thoughts towards points vs. time were for the youth-oriented PWD races. WIRL races are all about time, and I have no problem with that philosophically -- as it's all about Pineheads (so I guess in your eyes, it's for the birds, but that's okay too...)

To the extent that racing like WIRL helps me to better serve the youngsters, then it is "for the boys." But, I don't see it as a Scouting related activity.

I don't think that everything I do must be for Scouting and, thus, be measured according to my "sig line" rule. I am involved in some hobbies and activities which don't purport to be Scouting... occasional outings with my bride to the pistol range (Darin, recall our discussions on blindness? ... she shoots her 357 Magnum with a 6 inch barrel or, occasionally, her 38+P Lady Smith; I usually shoot a 38 Special or, sometimes, my 9mm Browning), walking with my Dad behind his beagle dog, taking my bride to live theater, and the like.

[Da Graphite Kid]

Guys,
Although I prefer a points based system myself, as a Pack race coordinator one of my 'jobs' is to send those boys from our Pack with the best chance of winning at the District level to that race. Our District used a cumulative time system this year and so instead of our Pack race using a points based scoring system as we had planned, we used a time based system. After our Pack race, I looked at what the results would have been if we had used a points based versus time based scoring sytem and found that there would have three instances where cars would have ended up being ranked differently (a couple of 2nd and 3rd placs would have changed as well as a 5th and 6th). Although the boys that got invited to this years District level race would not have changed regardless of which system we used - it could make a difference in other years. Comments from parents were that they could more easily keep up with place finishes versus timed fininshes and so they would have been able to follow their son's progress more easily ("If we do it this way next year, I'll have to bring paper and a calculator."). The boys also would have been able to follow their progress more easily (a big consideration in my way of thinking). We had only one dispute over why someone's son placed 3rd instead of 2nd so there was some explaination involved and although I don't think they really understood, everything was fine when their son received his award.

Okay, there is a point to this post: regardless of what we consider the most fair or accurate way of distinguishing which is the 'fastest' car and regardless of how we define what is the 'fastest' car - as a race coordinator at any level where the boys will qualify for another level of racing, we must consider using the same type scoring system that the next level will use in order to send those boys who have the best chance of winning to that level. I would think that this would be an aspect of 'fast' that should be considered by every race coordinator as well.

Gee, I hope that made some sort of sense (too much coffee this morning and too liitle sleep! )

Da Graphite Kid

[MathGuy]

regardless of what we consider the most fair or accurate way of distinguishing which is the 'fastest' car and regardless of how we define what is the 'fastest' car - as a race coordinator at any level where the boys will qualify for another level of racing, we must consider using the same type scoring system that the next level will use in order to send those boys who have the best chance of winning to that level. I would think that this would be an aspect of 'fast' that should be considered by every race coordinator as well.

Our council race (in Rockford, IL) in a few weeks uses a 3 car pod single elimination method, were one is grouped in 3 cars Pods and race 3 times, the winner of those heats goes on. This seems crazy too me, but given that they have to race some 1300 boys accross 5 ranks in a two day period, I am going to trust that this is a reasonable approach. There is no way that the Packs have this sort numbers or requires such a arcane method.

[MathGuy]

A fastest car should be able to beat every other car on an equal playing field. My preferences is the following as far as what is "Fair" and most effective to determine the fastest cars.

1. Head to Head - If Car A can beat Car B, with alternating lanes, then we KNOW that Car A is faster than Car B. So Complimentary Perfect N charts accomplish this. The sorting method that I have proposed also allows the fastest cars to square off against each other, but without the lane alternatation.
2. Non Head to Head
2a. Timed Races - Here if you have a large group of boys, each boys races in each lane. Thus each boy has an equal chance of performance, with the only caveat being if there is any inconsistencies in the track timing. Thus if there is a +/- error in the timing device, Boy A and Boy B who race 4 times in each lane, if the boys times are very close, there is a chance for an error.
2b. Point System - Again, for a large group, where the boys are not going to race against all the other boys, advantageous scheduling can lead to distortions in point totals. If you have a modest to large rank/group say 32 boys, with each boy racing 4 times on a 4 lane track. Those boys will only face 12 of the 32 boys. There is no guarentee that that the competition will be dynamics of the lanes schedules and the competitors matrix could put a boy at a disadvantage.

The point system when you have an unbalanced schedule seems to be the only method that the playing field is not even.

[Stan Pope]

Our council race (in Rockford, IL) in a few weeks uses a 3 car pod single elimination method, were one is grouped in 3 cars Pods and race 3 times, the winner of those heats goes on.

Is there documentation on the complete procedure and objectives somewhere on the web? Or through other means?

Thanks

[MathGuy]

Stan,

Nothing on the web. The race documentation was done in our Council newsletter, but it primarily focused on Registration instructions and Car Rules. There was a brief description of what 3 car lane rotation SE heats that will happen.

I had just received the pack's registration kit from council and they provided the times and location of the first race for each of the boys. This is good in that you know when you have to be there for your races. Thus the "waiting" to race will hopefully be reasonable. They sent along some directions and such. The fact that there will be well over 1000 boys and over well 100 packs represented is obviously an exercise in logistics.

We had qualified last year, but we could not make it do to vacation plans. So this is going to be the first year for us.

Dates April 17 - 18th, Manchesey Mall in Rockford. I can PM you exact locations. Stan, make your way north if you want to "enjoy" a day(s) of racing. If you can't make it, I will report the complete format as I learn it.