B.O.P. Why is it necessary?

[pach233]

I think that one of the biggest issues turning purist sports car racing fans off to GT racing worldwide is the balancing of performance. Whatever happened to building the besst possible car to a certain set of rules. Artificial balancing just seems like a form of racing communism to me. Why penalize the best and reward the slowest? I understand it incentivices manufacturers to join a particular class and helps make the racing close. But is artificially close racing and all the whining and complaining that comes with B.O.P. really worth it?

[alexkiller8]

because GT cars are not prototypes and share more (gt3) or less (gt1-gte) parts with street version, so these cars are not built following a pre-existent technical regualmentation like dtm, super gt, f1 etc.... and in their costruction/specs are very different each other; so to garantuee a fair competition is required the bop, to balance the performances wishing to give the same chances of victory to really different cars models. This in theory.... in the reality each bop always helps some car (this year lambo in gt1, last year dbr9) and penalizes others (nissan in the first part of the season last year).... some other times balances is usefull to penalizes cars that are running under regs derogations (small rear wing in mc12 gt1)

[johntt]

The BoP is necessary because if it wasn't there manufacturers would end up trying to outspend each other to try and win.

That would first reduce the number of manufacturers until only one is left thats willing to keep spending.

After that you have de facto spec series which will limp on until the championship dies from lack of interest (because all the cars are now the same) and/or the sole remaining manufacturer withdraws its investment and the series dies.

The whole point of BoP is to keep the series stable, ensure close racing and maintain variety of cars.

[Speed-King]

And that said, BoP has been here for a long time, if not under that name... watch some IMSA or Trans-Am races from the 80s and all you'll hear about in the interviews with owners and drivers is weight this, turbo boost that.

[FordCosworthPanoz]

Yes, BOP is necessary but is often done better in certain series than others, and in some cases it reaches joke status. But when done correctly, BoP is actually good for the series and the manufacturers that race in them.

[FordCosworthPanoz]

Also, I have the same opinions on the BOP adjustments at the Nurburgring 24 Hours this year as Lucas Luhr.

[alexkiller8]

actualy the most important GT3 champs (brasilian itaipava GT, FFSA GT, ADAC GT master, european fia GT3) run under SRO's managment, so i suppose these championships share the same bop.

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by alexkiller8

actualy the most important GT3 champs (brasilian itaipava GT, FFSA GT, ADAC GT master, european fia GT3) run under SRO's managment, so i suppose these championships share the same bop.

VLN and the Nurburgring 24h are not GT3 championships.

[alexkiller8]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

VLN and the Nurburgring 24h are not GT3 championships.

infact i didn't write them .-.

[Chiana]

I can live with it as long as it's only used as an accessory and real written regulations are in place, not when it's the whole freaking basis and main decider of the whole series *cough gt3 cough*

It's true that you couldn't have a GT series without some kind of system, you can't transform different production cars into racing machines stricly by the rulebook without problems. But you could argue that the variety does not really matter when everyone's been brought to same exact level (in theory) and it's not all down to machinery you're running. Spec racing may not offer the same thrills and wonders but it's kinda same result. Well expect then you don't really have any complaining to do, with BoP there's always a question mark whether your car won because of it's own superiority, drivers, strategy or the special weight/restrictors/waivers/laserguns/whatever it's been given during the lunch break.

Also, what tends to disgust me that winning is not a good thing in these circles (sometimes being very slow can be however). Difference can be down to drivers or different tyre compounds, but in some series it's always car's "fault" a la definite no-no and you need to be artificially slowed down. Constant changes aren't good either, yes you may have some in-season adjustments there and there but not after every single round (or session!)

That's been said, I think ACO/IMSA has done a reeelatively good job with GT1/GT2 balancing in the last couple of years.

[canam]

Originally Posted by Chiana

That's been said, I think ACO/IMSA has done a reeelatively good job with GT1/GT2 balancing in the last couple of years.

Is that why there is no GT1 in ACO racing??

The ACO has been a comprehensive genius when it comes to performance balancing: Diesels win, privateers get shafted. Le Mans 2011 was one of the best LM races in years. Petrol class??? Privateers??? Who cares!

NASCAR knows how to do performance balancing right as well--allowing various teams/drivers to have a shot at justifying the investment of their sponsors.

Not a problem for ACO series...as they have no real sponsors anyway.

[MitchZ06]

GT1 died in ACO for a number of reasons.

1) SRO got the bright idea for a sprint GT1 World Championship effectively making the cars running less reliable over the long haul as they only needed to last an hour of flat out racing instead of 24 hours.

2) Corvette was only racing themselves in GT1, grid numbers died in other series (FFSA for example) and even the ILMC wasn't heavy in GT1 cars.

Thats all I got off the top of my head but just from that the ACO binned GT1 at Le Mans to concentrate on LMP1/2 and GTE-Pro/Am.

[FordCosworthPanoz]

Originally Posted by canam

Is that why there is no GT1 in ACO racing??

The ACO has been a comprehensive genius when it comes to performance balancing: Diesels win, privateers get shafted. Le Mans 2011 was one of the best LM races in years. Petrol class??? Privateers??? Who cares!

NASCAR knows how to do performance balancing right as well--allowing various teams/drivers to have a shot at justifying the investment of their sponsors.

Not a problem for ACO series...as they have no real sponsors anyway.

So essentially right performance balancing is near identical cars having close to the same engines with stickers on them, that should really help sports car racing... Perhaps we should bring out the Wrangler 3 car on July 4th weekend and let AMR actually win a race, we could even let it lead the third lap.

NASCAR Manufacturer Champions 2003 to Present:

2003: Chevrolet
2004: Chevrolet
2005: Chevrolet
2006: Chevrolet
2007: Chevrolet
2008: Chevrolet
2009: Chevrolet
2010: Chevrolet

[Pandamasque]

GT1 died long before SRO GT1 WC came about.

[FordCosworthPanoz]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

GT1 died long before SRO GT1 WC came about.

You are correct, and a lot of people seem to forget that.