IRacing, Safety Rating and fear factor

While reading one of the many Iracing forum rants about the unfairness of it
all (that incident points get handed out to the innocent as well as the
guilty) one poster remarked that IRacing had managed to introduce a sense of
fear into virtual racing.

The more I thought about it the more this idea rings true. We tend to think
of incident points as something that are doled out by stewards and we expect
a determination of guilt or responsibility in that awarding. In IRacings
case the Incident points act more like an abstraction of the real life
consequences of an action. Physics doesn't judge; if you run into another
car (or another car into you) both the innocent and the guilty suffer
damage and so it goes with IPs. In real life racing you see far less
incident than you see in a typical online race since an accident, regardless
of fault, has expensive consequences. IRacings IPs appear to be an attempt
to introduce some of that cautious fear into the online world.

Obviously the IP system isn't exactly analogous to real life. For one thing
it is introduced gradually whereas physics is always the same. As far as I
can tell the gradual intro is a training scheme to break online racers from
the years of bad habits we have formed from consequence free
contests.Rookies are affected least
since decent Safety Rating (which is derived from IPs) is relatively easy to
maintain at the rookie level. At D level, where I am at present, the
penalties are stronger. As a rookie I could get away with a 6 IP race
without losing SR. At D a 4 IP race can negatively affect my SR. From forum
posts by the C level players they are under even stricter rules. I'd have to
assume that the A & B levels (when IRacing gets there) will have it even
worse.

SR is also a form of abstract fear. Do badly enough at a high level and you
may not be able to play with the toys you've bought. Want to drive a Radical
in races' Better maintain that B level or high SR C level. Fall back enough
and you lose access to your toys. If you can't drive safe enough to compete
with the big boys then you can suffer a monetary loss too since you have
laid out real cash to buy that Radical and now you can't use it.

Interesting concept. As they say in IRacing it is not for everyone. It will
be interesting to see what sort of virtual racer winds up in the higher
levels. A lot of the fast but only marginally in control boys will find
themselves stuck at lower levels, no doubt frustrated and blaming the system
for their troubles. Frankly the thought of getting away from the stuff-it-in
crowd is all the incentive I need to progress

Dave

"DavErb" > wrote in message
...
> While reading one of the many Iracing forum rants about the unfairness of
> it
> all (that incident points get handed out to the innocent as well as the
> guilty) one poster remarked that IRacing had managed to introduce a sense
> of
> fear into virtual racing.
>
> The more I thought about it the more this idea rings true. We tend to
> think
> of incident points as something that are doled out by stewards and we
> expect
> a determination of guilt or responsibility in that awarding. In IRacings
> case the Incident points act more like an abstraction of the real life
> consequences of an action. Physics doesn't judge; if you run into another
> car (or another car into you) both the innocent and the guilty suffer
> damage and so it goes with IPs. In real life racing you see far less
> incident than you see in a typical online race since an accident,
> regardless
> of fault, has expensive consequences. IRacings IPs appear to be an attempt
> to introduce some of that cautious fear into the online world.
>
> Obviously the IP system isn't exactly analogous to real life. For one
> thing
> it is introduced gradually whereas physics is always the same. As far as I
> can tell the gradual intro is a training scheme to break online racers
> from the years of bad habits we have formed from consequence free
> contests.Rookies are affected least
> since decent Safety Rating (which is derived from IPs) is relatively easy
> to
> maintain at the rookie level. At D level, where I am at present, the
> penalties are stronger. As a rookie I could get away with a 6 IP race
> without losing SR. At D a 4 IP race can negatively affect my SR. From
> forum
> posts by the C level players they are under even stricter rules. I'd have
> to
> assume that the A & B levels (when IRacing gets there) will have it even
> worse.
>
> SR is also a form of abstract fear. Do badly enough at a high level and
> you
> may not be able to play with the toys you've bought. Want to drive a
> Radical
> in races' Better maintain that B level or high SR C level. Fall back
> enough and you lose access to your toys. If you can't drive safe enough to
> compete with the big boys then you can suffer a monetary loss too since
> you have laid out real cash to buy that Radical and now you can't use it.
>
> Interesting concept. As they say in IRacing it is not for everyone. It
> will be interesting to see what sort of virtual racer winds up in the
> higher levels. A lot of the fast but only marginally in control boys will
> find themselves stuck at lower levels, no doubt frustrated and blaming the
> system for their troubles. Frankly the thought of getting away from the
> stuff-it-in crowd is all the incentive I need to progress
>
> Dave
>

I agree. I think the system is something that needs to be there and I pretty
much like it the way it is, despite most of the incidents I get involved in
being created by other cars. This is because I know that I can repair my
rating easily, whilst the win or crash merchants will find themselves going
backwards.

RobP

(DavErb) wrote:

> Frankly the thought of getting away from the stuff-it-in
> crowd is all the incentive I need to progress

The fear/SR argument is indeed a good one. Part of my problem though is
that I don't want to be afraid when I relax after work. :-)

Andrew McP

"Andrew MacPherson" > wrote in message
ddress_disguised...
> (DavErb) wrote:
>
>> Frankly the thought of getting away from the stuff-it-in
>> crowd is all the incentive I need to progress
>
> The fear/SR argument is indeed a good one. Part of my problem though is
> that I don't want to be afraid when I relax after work. :-)
>
> Andrew McP

At least iR puts some adrenaline into the racing. An adrenaline rush being
one of, if no the biggest attractions of real life racing.

If you want to relax, try flower arranging.

"Andrew MacPherson" > wrote in message
ddress_disguised...
> (DavErb) wrote:
>
>> Frankly the thought of getting away from the stuff-it-in
>> crowd is all the incentive I need to progress
>
> The fear/SR argument is indeed a good one. Part of my problem though is
> that I don't want to be afraid when I relax after work. :-)
>
> Andrew McP

I'm pretty relaxed during a race, that is unless I'm overtaking. I guess
this is because I limit myself as to how much I push the car during the
race - I leave the edge testing for private practice.

Despite being slow (I am a little faster now, so I guess I'm improving
slowly), I'm getting pretty regular top 5 positions. iRacing has taught me
one thing, and that is whilst speed is nice to have, consistency is far more
valuable.

Yet again, in another race yesterday there was a super fast racer that came
up large in my mirrors, so I let him by. Two corners later he came off at
the Barrel at Laguna. Again he started to loom larger in my mirror and
again, he came off.

The chap above was a lot faster than me, but just couldn't put it together
consistently and as a result came in behind me.

RobP

> Yet again, in another race yesterday there was a super fast racer that came up large in my mirrors, so I let him by.
> Two corners later he came off at the Barrel at Laguna. Again he started to loom larger in my mirror and again, he came
> off.
>
> The chap above was a lot faster than me, but just couldn't put it together consistently and as a result came in behind
> me.

But that chap may end up learning track and car combinations quicker. One
of the advantages of a racing game, is that learning the limits for a track
and car combination is faster than real life, beacue you can exceed the limits,
off track, even crash, but then reset and continue. Although this is something
that should be done in practice instead of a race.

It outght to be fairly easy to build a system where the most rudimentary
info was considered, like, position on road, speed relative to average
speed at the point, if brakes are used heavily the moments before a
crash, relative velocity vector comparison, etc etc...

I have a few easily implemented ideas on how to weigh these factors into
a SR points system where aggressive reckless drivers would do much worse
than the cautious and respectful driver...

In a way, iRacing think that the careful driving is a common
responsibility amongst racers, and this needs to be accepted and adapted
by each and every racer. This model has many things for it, but I still
think that a slightly more finely-grained points system would be fairer...

-A-

On 24.08.2008 20:10, * DavErb wrote:
> While reading one of the many Iracing forum rants about the unfairness
> of it
> all (that incident points get handed out to the innocent as well as the
> guilty) one poster remarked that IRacing had managed to introduce a
> sense of
> fear into virtual racing.
>
> The more I thought about it the more this idea rings true. We tend to think
> of incident points as something that are doled out by stewards and we
> expect
> a determination of guilt or responsibility in that awarding. In IRacings
> case the Incident points act more like an abstraction of the real life
> consequences of an action. Physics doesn't judge; if you run into another
> car (or another car into you) both the innocent and the guilty suffer
> damage and so it goes with IPs. In real life racing you see far less
> incident than you see in a typical online race since an accident,
> regardless
> of fault, has expensive consequences. IRacings IPs appear to be an attempt
> to introduce some of that cautious fear into the online world.
>
> Obviously the IP system isn't exactly analogous to real life. For one thing
> it is introduced gradually whereas physics is always the same. As far as I
> can tell the gradual intro is a training scheme to break online racers
> from the years of bad habits we have formed from consequence free
> contests.Rookies are affected least
> since decent Safety Rating (which is derived from IPs) is relatively
> easy to
> maintain at the rookie level. At D level, where I am at present, the
> penalties are stronger. As a rookie I could get away with a 6 IP race
> without losing SR. At D a 4 IP race can negatively affect my SR. From forum
> posts by the C level players they are under even stricter rules. I'd
> have to
> assume that the A & B levels (when IRacing gets there) will have it even
> worse.
>
> SR is also a form of abstract fear. Do badly enough at a high level and you
> may not be able to play with the toys you've bought. Want to drive a
> Radical
> in races' Better maintain that B level or high SR C level. Fall back
> enough and you lose access to your toys. If you can't drive safe enough
> to compete with the big boys then you can suffer a monetary loss too
> since you have laid out real cash to buy that Radical and now you can't
> use it.
>
> Interesting concept. As they say in IRacing it is not for everyone. It
> will be interesting to see what sort of virtual racer winds up in the
> higher levels. A lot of the fast but only marginally in control boys
> will find themselves stuck at lower levels, no doubt frustrated and
> blaming the system for their troubles. Frankly the thought of getting
> away from the stuff-it-in crowd is all the incentive I need to progress
>
> Dave
>
>

On Aug 25, 8:57*am, Asgeir Nesoen > wrote:
> It outght to be fairly easy to build a system where the most rudimentary
> info was considered, like, position on road, speed relative to average
> speed at the point, if brakes are used heavily the moments before a
> crash, relative velocity vector comparison, etc etc...

It actually wouldn't be easy at all, because people would learn the
system and use it to their advantage. Only a human can decide fault.

There's some fine tuning to do, but I think the SR works very well.

>> It outght to be fairly easy to build a system where the most rudimentary
>> info was considered, like, position on road, speed relative to average
>> speed at the point, if brakes are used heavily the moments before a
>> crash, relative velocity vector comparison, etc etc...

>It actually wouldn't be easy at all, because people would learn the
>system and use it to their advantage. Only a human can decide fault.

The current system is already doing that, it decides that both drivers are
at fault every time. There is no reason that the SR system couldn't assign
fault a portion of the time, even it it's not always fair, since any reasonable
attempt to assign blame by a computer would be more fair than the current one.

This post is not entirely without merit

-Larry

"DavErb" > wrote in message
...
> While reading one of the many Iracing forum rants about the unfairness of
> it
> all (that incident points get handed out to the innocent as well as the
> guilty) one poster remarked that IRacing had managed to introduce a sense
> of
> fear into virtual racing.
>
> The more I thought about it the more this idea rings true. We tend to
> think
> of incident points as something that are doled out by stewards and we
> expect
> a determination of guilt or responsibility in that awarding. In IRacings
> case the Incident points act more like an abstraction of the real life
> consequences of an action. Physics doesn't judge; if you run into another
> car (or another car into you) both the innocent and the guilty suffer
> damage and so it goes with IPs. In real life racing you see far less
> incident than you see in a typical online race since an accident,
> regardless
> of fault, has expensive consequences. IRacings IPs appear to be an attempt
> to introduce some of that cautious fear into the online world.
>
> Obviously the IP system isn't exactly analogous to real life. For one
> thing
> it is introduced gradually whereas physics is always the same. As far as I
> can tell the gradual intro is a training scheme to break online racers
> from the years of bad habits we have formed from consequence free
> contests.Rookies are affected least
> since decent Safety Rating (which is derived from IPs) is relatively easy
> to
> maintain at the rookie level. At D level, where I am at present, the
> penalties are stronger. As a rookie I could get away with a 6 IP race
> without losing SR. At D a 4 IP race can negatively affect my SR. From
> forum
> posts by the C level players they are under even stricter rules. I'd have
> to
> assume that the A & B levels (when IRacing gets there) will have it even
> worse.
>
> SR is also a form of abstract fear. Do badly enough at a high level and
> you
> may not be able to play with the toys you've bought. Want to drive a
> Radical
> in races' Better maintain that B level or high SR C level. Fall back
> enough and you lose access to your toys. If you can't drive safe enough to
> compete with the big boys then you can suffer a monetary loss too since
> you have laid out real cash to buy that Radical and now you can't use it.
>
> Interesting concept. As they say in IRacing it is not for everyone. It
> will be interesting to see what sort of virtual racer winds up in the
> higher levels. A lot of the fast but only marginally in control boys will
> find themselves stuck at lower levels, no doubt frustrated and blaming the
> system for their troubles. Frankly the thought of getting away from the
> stuff-it-in crowd is all the incentive I need to progress
>
> Dave
>
>