Didn't finish all the courses. still in the finals.

[mjderstine]

makes sense. keep the drivers off the courses.

[pardonmyn00b]

The heavy throttle after a certain amount of time should be a mandatory winch or recovery. There were a lot of trucks and people going through so it's understandable the courses degraded over time.

[Harley]

Originally Posted by War Pig

When John asked me about how to calculate DNF's I didn't feel that I could "tweak" the written rules by telling him different. The DNF needs to be changed. When we wrote that rule, progresses were only worth 1 point (10 for the whole course). Now they are worth 2 so you get 20 progress points per course. We just need to change it to highest finishing score +40 minus progresses, that would fix everything. I believe that if someone drives really well on 2 or 3 courses but DNF's one course (that ALOT of people don't finish) you should still have a slight chance to be in the top 10. There will be a new DNF rule for 2015.

Basing a drivers score based on the performance of other drivers at the event is an insane idea to me. Crawling competitions are about YOU and the ROCKS, not you, the rocks, that guy over there, those two guys over there, etc. I see you guys want people to be able to run the courses, and that's cool but you need to realize the huge flaw in your idea and bail before it keeps causing these situations. Just band-aiding it making the value slightly higher is still a poor execution.

[ROWDY RACING]

Originally Posted by Harley

Basing a drivers score based on the performance of other drivers at the event is an insane idea to me. Crawling competitions are about YOU and the ROCKS, not you, the rocks, that guy over there, those two guys over there, etc. I see you guys want people to be able to run the courses, and that's cool but you need to realize the huge flaw in your idea and bail before it keeps causing these situations. Just band-aiding it making the value slightly higher is still a poor execution.

Yeah and everyone hates on comp rules, atleast they are understood and make sense...

[gdb85]

Originally Posted by ROWDY RACING

Yeah and everyone hates on comp rules, atleast they are understood and make sense...

Maybe...but how's that participation thing working out?

[ROWDY RACING]

Originally Posted by gdb85

Maybe...but how's that participation thing working out?

You may soon find out if rules are not fixed, besides thats a seperate issue all together.

Make the rules simple and these annoying issues will be less likley.

[sf2000xj]

(Disclaimer: the following post is based on one mans opinion and we all know opinions are like a$$hole$ everybody has one)

It seems to me that there should be some tweaking when it comes to DNF's however to me the whole scale comp (notice the word scale) should be based on both the drivers ability and the scaleness (is that even a word) of the vehicle, which it seems to be that now. I don't believe anybody should be completely eliminated from a shot at the finals from a DNF. (Read disclaimer) The way it is now mathematically you still have a shot with a DNF. Here is a scenario: Two drivers same course same scale points, driver one he's a balls out guy mashing the throttle rolling over a few times reversing all over the place takes out a few gate markers but he gets through in the allotted time his run was a train wreck but he made it, driver two he is a little more methodical picking the right lines taking his time never rolls over maybe only has to reverse one time doesn't roll over but he runs out of time and doesn't get the last two gates or over the finish, after the scoring is done driver one had so many reverses and and hitting gates and rollovers that his score is worse than than driver two who had almost a flawless run but ran out of time. Who is the better driver? In my opinion (again read the disclaimer) driver two is better and should not be automatically eliminated because he didn't finish in the allotted time. If it is changed to where a DNF makes you automatically eliminated then it's just a big race to the finish with whoever has the fastest most bulletproof truck not necessarily who is the better driver, which to me should be more important. I understand that there has to be time constraints in order to get that many people through the courses and I do believe you should be penalized for not finishing a course but I don't believe not finishing a course should automatically eliminate you completely from a shot at the finals, hinder you yes eliminate no. Again just my opinion take it for what it's worth which is really nothing since I don't make the rules.

[MudHoncho]

^^ exactly

[mrsimonsdad]

^^^ my thoughts as well

[RebelRacer]

I woud have to disagree again (seems that's happening alot here of late) you are and I'll use this term loosely, "racing" the clock as well.. Take your scenario, driver 2 should know that time is involved and in order to progress he needs to finish within the time limit. Take any video game for instance.. You can not progress until you beat something within the time limit.

I think the ultimate thing here is that the rules are jacked one way or Another and nothing we say or type is gonna change the outcome which aggravates me to hell and back especially since I was one of the very few that actually finished all 3 courses.. Not to mention the complete loss of my scale points which just blows my mind.. And on that note because BadBKO's scale points were also "lost" it cost him 2nd place over all.. But yet he won best interior for class 3.
How do you look at a sheet and see ZERO on the scale points area and not have red flag go off?

[THEmicroRR]

The time is only kept for one reason, a tie breaker. It's not a scale race. Racing goes on tracks, not trails. I'm with Harley and Mudhoncho

[RebelRacer]

So technically what most of you are saying is that you could actually DNF all three courses but still take a top spot... That doesn't seem wrong to you..?

[sf2000xj]

Originally Posted by RebelRacer

I woud have to disagree again (seems that's happening alot here of late) you are and I'll use this term loosely, "racing" the clock as well.. Take your scenario, driver 2 should know that time is involved and in order to progress he needs to finish within the time limit. Take any video game for instance.. You can not progress until you beat something within the time limit.

I think the ultimate thing here is that the rules are jacked one way or Another and nothing we say or type is gonna change the outcome which aggravates me to hell and back especially since I was one of the very few that actually finished all 3 courses.. Not to mention the complete loss of my scale points which just blows my mind.. And on that note because BadBKO's scale points were also "lost" it cost him 2nd place over all.. But yet he won best interior for class 3.
How do you look at a sheet and see ZERO on the scale points area and not have red flag go off?

I can understand what your saying about the time and we'll just agree to disagree that's why they are opinions. My point is it should be about the drivers ability and how scale the truck is hence scale comp, not just how fast one can make it through a course, again I respect your view, I just don't feel a DNF should be cause for complete elimination, hindering your chances ABSOLUTELY. As for your issues with the scale points blows my mind to you can't possibly have a truck that fits the class rules with no points and why would you want too. An out of the box rtr has at least some scale points. It really should have thrown a red flag and I would be just as mad as you probably are about that had it happened to me. I really think they should have posted a preliminary score sheet for everyone to see so those kind of things could have been caught and corrected before the finals were ran but again that's just another thing to add time for.

[War Pig]

Unfortunately, DNF's are directly influenced by the course builders. You build a 9 minute course with an 8 minute time limit and there are going to be a lot of unhappy drivers no matter what DNF equation you have in place.

[sgtbham]

Just my opinion here, I don't think a DNF should automatically preclude you from finishing in a certain spot. If you make it to the point of a DNF automatically take you out of the running you will see courses get harder and harder because why run a heavy scaler when you can just run light less scale rig and finish? That way you are garaunteed a shot right? (I'm not putting my bad driving into the equation here). Again, just my opinion.

[sf2000xj]

Originally Posted by sgtbham

Just my opinion here, I don't think a DNF should automatically preclude you from finishing in a certain spot. If you make it to the point of a DNF automatically take you out of the running you will see courses get harder and harder because why run a heavy scaler when you can just run light less scale rig and finish? That way you are garaunteed a shot right? (I'm not putting my bad driving into the equation here). Again, just my opinion.

Exactly it needs to be a combination of scale and driver ability not just time alone otherwise just go grab a SC truck and go racing

[sgtbham]

Originally Posted by sf2000xj

Exactly it needs to be a combination of scale and driver ability not just time alone otherwise just go grab a SC truck and go racing

I agree, I think the less scale matters the closer you get to the segment the new trail class covers.

[imthatguy]

I think this would be an entirely more interesting discussion if SORCCA were to look at instituting a minimum scale points, rather than a maximum.

[sgtbham]

Originally Posted by imthatguy

I think this would be an entirely more interesting discussion if SORCCA were to look at instituting a minimum scale points, rather than a maximum.

What an idea!!!

[sally1800]

II could still be it possible. If you run great in the other two courses. But as far as score for that course I couldn't see it being any different that "+40 of the worst driver on the course. PLus no scale points awarded for that course."