The "Thrill" of the Race

[Cory]

Perhaps the close tolerances you had are attributed to a couple of factors...

Yes, I realize I'm comparing apples and oranges, or at least tangerines and clementines.

With your analysis, I'm now comfortable with 30 ms...especially when you factor in 4 different independant groups.

The groups were not independent. You intermingled the groups, so that track/starter variations (if any) were applied somewhat consistently to all four groups. Thus I might expect the variances to be about the same. Your data hints at this, the aggregated by heat average times go up and down somewhat in sync between the groups.

Had you raced the groups separately and gotten the same variances, then I'd be more convinced.

How many more times do you want them to go at each other?

These two cars deserve a CPN chart, along with 156. My choice would be a 2-round chart (twice in each lane) so they'd race 4 to 8 times depending on how many cars you let into the finals.

Question: Would a perfect N chart fail to pick winner in this instance?

It might. CPN will produce ties if the track is more uneven than the cars.

Breaking two-way ties is not hard, though, if you have two decent lanes. I have never gotten into the dreaded race-forever situation.

And within the Pack, I do not break ties for first, and I do not break ties for third. I just give out extra ribbons, medals, trophies, whatever.

The only ties I break are ties for second, because that decides who advances from the Den to the Rank final, or from the Rank finals to the District.

Did 156 get to go to the District derby also? It certainly seems possible to me that he was the fastest.

Very interesting study. I'm becoming a believer that time is much better at selecting finalists than points. And while I still like the CPN finals approach, but I understand the appeal of your approach also.

Thanks! I'm ready for this year's data!

[glaforge]

I'm ready too, but our race is not until March 20th. So, sometime after that.

It has been interesting, I too have been enlightened on several things and have learned much. I think it will be interesting to get another complete race to compare to.

Thanks again

[davekelly]

We just finished our Pack race this past weekend using the total time method. This will have been the third pack race I have seen using this as well as the district race we ran last year. While there are pros and cons about whether one method or another picks the "fastest" car, I believe our system gives more "thrills." The running order in the first round is random - each car running against two others. The next round and those following are conducted as follows. The three cars with the slowest times race first, followed by the next three etc etc. When that round is done, the computer reshuffles the running order based on total times of the first two rounds (the computer also may do some minor shuflling to ensure each car races in a different lane each round). In each round the heats are closer and closer. By the last round each heat was close and the crowd was really getting into it. No one was blown out again and again and even the cubs who had slower cars were able to race neck and neck and talk smack with their friends about it.

Does it find the truly "fastest" car? I guess that depends on what you consider "fast." We've never had a complaint about our method, maybe because we explain the rules several times during the event (and yes, a car may win the overall championship yet not win a heat) and the theoretical discussion of "fastest" is forgotten because of heat after heat of close racing.

Just my .02 cents worth.

[GoneFission]

Proponents of timed versus pointed racing can find (or sometimes manufacture or at least conjecture) reasons to support their preferred method. If your boys and parents are happy, you are at least halfway there. I have yet to see a genuine race situation that couldn't be bent to support at least two different viewpoints.

I think the best thing you can get from these boards is to sift out the holy wars on the race details and get awesome ideas for either improving what you already do or experiment with something new without having to start from scratch. No matter what you do, keep it as fair as you can and keep the boys having fun.

I'm a dedicated timer (for now), but I'm working on figuring out how to have the boys stage cars instead of adults, and I'd like to sample a different race scoring method. I'd have never known about them without coming here. To do this, we may have to move the pack race from a Friday night (where a 90 minute derby is appreciated) to a weekend day. That may or may not be accepted by our parents.

[Cory]

To do this, we may have to move the pack race from a Friday night (where a 90 minute derby is appreciated) to a weekend day.

How big is your Pack?

[GoneFission]

We have between 50 and 60 boys. We race by rank, with ranks ranging from 4 or 5 boys to about 20.

We start racing about 7 and finish between 8:30 and 9. Next year we are planning on randomizing the whole pack and sorting winners by rank instead of racing just the ranks. The idea is to keep everyone involved to the end.

The pack committee will also be discussing boys staging cars. Once brought up for discussion if there are more than two opinions expressed, I'll be surprised. The issues I see for us having the boys staging will be 1) having 6 boys trying to place their cars nearly at once without having a car get jostled and dropped, and 2) the extra time for the boys to each place their car. I like the idea of making the boys more of a "driver", the deal will be in changing a decade or more of how we've always done it.

We will also have a new release gate by then. After reading about quick release gates here, we will have no more starter errors.

[Cory]

We start racing about 7 and finish between 8:30 and 9.

That's pretty fast for 50-60 kids.

If the boys end up staging their own cars, I suggest that you explicitly prohibit the wearing of coats and sweaters by the boys while they are competing. Extra apparel causes lots of car jostling which can be easily avoided. Shirts with short sleeves or rolled-up sleeves are encouraged.

A good staging platform makes a big difference, too. Lots of hand jostling occurs when the boys' shoulders are not well above the starting gate level.

[Stan Pope]

The pack committee will also be discussing boys staging cars. Once brought up for discussion if there are more than two opinions expressed, I'll be surprised. The issues I see for us having the boys staging will be 1) having 6 boys trying to place their cars nearly at once without having a car get jostled and dropped, and 2) the extra time for the boys to each place their car. I like the idea of making the boys more of a "driver", the deal will be in changing a decade or more of how we've always done it.

Cory expressed very important issues. The best "staging platform" plan that I've seen is on my website at http://members.aol.com/standcmr/pltfm.htm.

I'd recommend that the cars be staged one at a time, beginning with the lane nearest to the starter. The starter should watch for interference to cars that are already staged, giving guidance to the boys and calling a prior boy back if his car was affected. It will help if a second track staff member gets the boys lined up in the right order ahead so that you don't have to have the entire crowd on the platform at the same time.

[nosam116]

Thank you for this post it has been quite informative.
First time posting, but long time reading.