Anonychuk

#66

To quote the first post. "WE are asking all former, current, and FUTURE Time Attack competitors"

I guess stating future members was a poor wording then, I'll be sure to let him know his vote does not count as the future member who want to travel from out of province to the track. But we already knew the way favor of rulings goes to the want of the director's choice when it's convenient.

I have a proxy vote for keep the same as is, for Zared Schukei, until his forum access is granted to cast it himself, he is planning on attending the school in the spring.

It's 22/22 for PAX/Anything but PAX, yet with 2 options not for PAX it's splits that vote to weaken it...

There is nothing simpler than RAW Times, which is the core idea of Time Attack and what it was created around in its origin. It's not called Math Attack.

Time Attack is a time based competition. The concept is simple, drive your car around a track and whoever does a lap in the shortest time wins. That’s it.

That chart tells me, a GT1 car has to run a 1:03.517 to even match the GT4 record at 1:06.013. That's 1.209 seconds the PB for GT1 needs to find, or be in equivalent of current RAW times of the SGT class, but with a GT Car with PAX... Even my PB in GT1 is 2.379 seconds slower than what's required to match the GT4 record with PAX. But hey, if we need participation awards via math more than driver skill to make everyone happy, maybe Road Racing is calling next year.

The previous PAX based system takes alot of the joy out of racing for myself. The simplified way we have done it for 23' and 24' seasons of all RAW times means you earned where you placed fair and square. Losing because of some math formula makes someone "faster" takes all the pride, fun and driver skill out of it and makes it feel like we give participation awards when they suddenly are faster because of math and modifiers.