Max-V Article on Runoffs

Discussions on race planning, preparations and how to run a "fair" and fun race.
Post Reply
User avatar
Vitamin K
Master Pine Head
Master Pine Head
Posts: 980
Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2013 7:26 pm
Location: Montgomery County, MD
Contact:

Max-V Article on Runoffs

Post by Vitamin K » Fri Dec 19, 2014 11:35 am

So, in case you haven't seen it, in the most recent (as of writing this post) issue of the Max-V newsletter, there's an article on scheduling run-offs for points based PN/PPN races.

This is particularly interesting because I have the task of organizing our Pack's Pinewood Derby this coming January, and I plan to run a PN/PPN points race. If I'm reading this article correctly, it seems to suggest that whenever you have a situation that requires a Partial-Perfect-N chart, you need to be running a second round that consists of an actual Perfect-N chart.

Is this pretty standard procedure? I am certainly not adverse to more runs of the cars down the tracks (I like watching cars roll!), but I'm worried about extending the race too long. After all, not everybody is as Derby-obsessed as I am. I'd also have to explain the second rounds to our spectators, so as not to breed confusion.

Here's another question: When using the "Master" scheduling option for GPRM, how to handle second rounds? I'm assuming that these all need to occur after the original Master schedule has run?
Last edited by Vitamin K on Fri Dec 19, 2014 11:44 am, edited 1 time in total.



User avatar
gpraceman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 4606
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 12:46 am
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO
Contact:

Re: Max-V Article on Runoffs

Post by gpraceman » Fri Dec 19, 2014 11:40 am

Vitamin K wrote:Here's another question: When using the "Master" scheduling option for GPRM, how to handle second rounds? I'm assuming that these all need to occur after the original Master schedule has run?
Generally, you will complete the master schedule for Round 1 before creating a Round 2 for each of your race groups.


Randy Lisano
Romans 5:8

Awana Grand Prix and Pinewood Derby racing - Where a child, an adult and a small block of wood combine for a lot of fun and memories.

User avatar
Stan Pope
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 6888
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 7:01 pm
Location: Morton, Illinois
Contact:

Re: Max-V Article on Runoffs

Post by Stan Pope » Fri Dec 19, 2014 5:09 pm

The two stage "points" racing is (or should be) rather standard for the reasons that Randy listed in "Times". I recommend that about twice as many racers compete in the second stage (Finals) as you have trophies to dispense. That ratio seems to allow the worthy racers who got disadvantageous pairings in the first stage to have equal pairings in the finals and claim the prize that they deserve.


Stan
"If it's not for the boys, it's for the birds!"

User avatar
birddog
Master Pine Head
Master Pine Head
Posts: 307
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:40 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Max-V Article on Runoffs

Post by birddog » Tue Dec 23, 2014 2:11 pm

I read the article and found it interesting. I also read the companion article:

http://www.maximum-velocity.com/pinewoo ... v6_i11.htm

and had many issues with the comparisons. Basically, I disagree with much of it and certainly disagree with the conclusion.

Given our pack has a huge investment (many hundreds of dollars) in a timer that displays times to the audience to the ten thousands of a second, I would not consider switching to points. The biggest derby in the country (Mid America) uses times, all the pros use times and in my view times are the most fair and easiest to understand method out there.

I would not recommend anyone use points unless they do not have a reliable timer.

Birddog



User avatar
Vitamin K
Master Pine Head
Master Pine Head
Posts: 980
Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2013 7:26 pm
Location: Montgomery County, MD
Contact:

Re: Max-V Article on Runoffs

Post by Vitamin K » Tue Dec 23, 2014 4:02 pm

I agree with the efficiency of using times. But, philosophically, I like the concept of points racing better, where the cars you run against are actually significant, as opposed to just happening to run (and record times) at the same time as you.
birddog wrote:I read the article and found it interesting. I also read the companion article:

http://www.maximum-velocity.com/pinewoo ... v6_i11.htm

and had many issues with the comparisons. Basically, I disagree with much of it and certainly disagree with the conclusion.

Given our pack has a huge investment (many hundreds of dollars) in a timer that displays times to the audience to the ten thousands of a second, I would not consider switching to points. The biggest derby in the country (Mid America) uses times, all the pros use times and in my view times are the most fair and easiest to understand method out there.

I would not recommend anyone use points unless they do not have a reliable timer.

Birddog



User avatar
Darin McGrew
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 1735
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 1:23 pm
Location: Mountain View, CA
Contact:

Re: Max-V Article on Runoffs

Post by Darin McGrew » Wed Dec 24, 2014 3:30 am

birddog wrote:I would not recommend anyone use points unless they do not have a reliable timer.
For what it's worth, the reliability of the timer is only part of the equation. The timer can be accurate to ten thousands of a second, but if minor bumps at the start gate (while staging cars before each race) and at the finish line (while retrieving cars after each race) change the performance of the track by a few thousandths (or a few hundredths, or a few tenths) of a second, then the timer's reliability is irrelevant and misleading.



User avatar
MaxV
Merchant
Merchant
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 5:45 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Contact:

Re: Max-V Article on Runoffs

Post by MaxV » Wed Dec 24, 2014 8:42 am

I agree that large races need to use time as the basis - otherwise it takes too long. But for smaller races, points is great way to race.



User avatar
Stan Pope
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 6888
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 7:01 pm
Location: Morton, Illinois
Contact:

Re: Max-V Article on Runoffs

Post by Stan Pope » Wed Dec 24, 2014 9:43 am

MaxV wrote:I agree that large races need to use time as the basis - otherwise it takes too long. But for smaller races, points is great way to race.
For large races involving youngsters, another great way to race is "15th Burlington" (See also, here.) Youngsters are there to race ... the more the better. 15th Burlington also promotes (indeed, requires) active involvement from many of the packs whose boys are participating. 15th Burlington reduces the racers/track ratio, producing more heats per minute to produce finalists, then culminates in a "race the clock" finals among the fastest cars.


Stan
"If it's not for the boys, it's for the birds!"

User avatar
birddog
Master Pine Head
Master Pine Head
Posts: 307
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:40 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Max-V Article on Runoffs

Post by birddog » Wed Dec 24, 2014 10:20 am

Darin McGrew wrote:
birddog wrote:I would not recommend anyone use points unless they do not have a reliable timer.
For what it's worth, the reliability of the timer is only part of the equation. The timer can be accurate to ten thousands of a second, but if minor bumps at the start gate (while staging cars before each race) and at the finish line (while retrieving cars after each race) change the performance of the track by a few thousandths (or a few hundredths, or a few tenths) of a second, then the timer's reliability is irrelevant and misleading.
While this is true to a point (I don't think reliability of the timer is irrelevant even after the track is bumped), track run time changes due to physical changes in the track during the race also can impact points style races, especially if only one lane (or a subset of lanes) is impacted as opposed to the entire track.

birddog



User avatar
Vitamin K
Master Pine Head
Master Pine Head
Posts: 980
Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2013 7:26 pm
Location: Montgomery County, MD
Contact:

Re: Max-V Article on Runoffs

Post by Vitamin K » Tue Dec 30, 2014 10:27 pm

So...from the Max-V article, the contention seems to be that if the original schedule isn't Perfect-N, you need to have a 2nd round that /is/ Perfect-N. But I wonder: if I do second rounds for some of the schedules, does it make sense to do 2nd rounds for /all/ of the schedules, Perfect-N or otherwise? It seems like watchers might be confused by some groups having 2nd rounds while others finish after the first round of racing.



Post Reply