Unresolved

Qualifying

Yes, I have noticed qualy results in the early races of the season like in Australia where teams with 3 big 4 CDs may start behind those with much weaker design too. From what I remember from those, the better cars were eventually a bit faster in the race, but you're not alone in noticing that, Ali.

and they do in the majority of cases, just not if the driver of a good car is doing a mistake and the driver of the bad car has a perfect lap. and that is realistic, again Leclerc in Monaco 10 cars which are 0.5-1 sec slower qualified in front of him. happened for other drivers, too, during the season e.g. Hülkenberg had it twice.
They have 2 or 3 laps in every Quali section and it happens on a regular basis.

Yea, generally the higher DP cars should perform better. So a shock qualifying by a team with lower DP is definitely something unusual. It's not impossible with variance, yes, it's just it would be helpful if managers had a better way of knowing how these variables that go into qualifying work, and even better if they are given more choices to manage them, rather than just letting the qualy sim do all the work. Yes, a few experienced managers can try their best to explain the qualy sim with how much they've played and familiarized themselves with the game, but you have many managers on this game who have no idea or explanation regarding their qualifying form and are seeking answers, and of course they won't be satisfied if they hear it is predominantly down to chance, especially with equal designs.

Though as much as I like this game, calling it realistic is a bit of a stretch. Apologies if I'm going off-topic.

If we're talking about your F1 examples (I'm not actually watching it this year but I do check the highlights; watching Indycar and some simracing more this year), Leclerc got eliminated in Q1 because Ferrari didn't send him out to do a faster qualifying lap when they sent out Vettel whose time was actually slower than Leclerc's before Vettel got his chance to set a better one; Leclerc was comfortably in Q1 before that. Track evolution, not a strong enough first qualy run, post-Todt-Brawn Ferrari exhibiting their usual strategic prowess, and stuff. And Hulkenberg is having an arguably bad year by his standards, not entirely his fault though, when you look at Renault atm. You can analyze the team's strategies, the driver's forms, and whatnot.

With qualifying in iGP, sometimes you look at the results and you just say "yeah, that's iGP". There is little way to critically analyze how to get consistently good qualifying results especially in such a tight field as the game is right now.

I thought the experience stat of the driver was a deciding factor in the frequency of a drive making a mistake? 

Regardless of that, I think that a car with 25pts more for the top 4 stats overall should still qualify ahead of the lesser team regardless of driver error. This for me is what I am referring too.

It says that regarding experience, yes. But you have 3 experience rookies who may outqualify their vastly more experienced teammates over the entire season too. However, I sometimes notice a slight lack of race pace in 3 exp rookies, but that's another story.

The car with better design in the big 4 should qualify better more often than not I take it is what you're saying, Ali. Yeah, then it hinges on how much driver error affects the qualy time on this game, whether the game decides design points have a bigger or lesser influence on qualy results than random driver error/driver super hotlap and such. The field in iGP doesn't have as big of a spread in performance between the top teams and Formula 1.5, though, but I believe it is a valid point to bring up.

@nik, i watched it. Vettel had a Really bad first Q1 lap so needed one more. Leclercs 1. was ok but not good and they just had Time to set one on new tires, so they chose Vettel, but both hadn't got good laps.
My Hülkenberg example is based on his interviews, regarding the quali. Another example would be gasly, who nearly underperformed the whole season.

I am absolutely with you that igp should release more Information how some Systems work, would solve a lot of confusion.

@ali 25 points are 0.2-0.25 sec it is like nik said more like the midfield of F1. So far every race another Team was best of the rest in F1, Maybe one team twice.

Funny that poker was mentioned a few times..I was actually a pro poker player for 1.5 yrs :-D

There is actually a term called 'variance' in poker, whereby if you make the right calls (72% : 28% decisions), in the long run, you should win overall, but it is no guarantee on each occasion.

The same applies to Qualifying here in iGP. The weaker car/driver combination can out qualify you if he/she has a super lap, and your driver(s) make a mistake. But over the course of a season, you should be ahead more times than not.

That's fine if you're playing against one other hand Peter. But you know your % dwindles the more hands that play all in Pre flop like what we have in an iGP race. So yes, although you will beat that 1 specific person 72% of the time, you will not be qualifying better than all of those bad cars combined 72% of the time.

Not sure how good your poker maths is, but poker 'Pot Equity' as you as eluding to in cases of multiple players, does not apply for multiple managers in iGP. (In poker, certain types of hands hold equity advantages in multi-way pots (ie. suited connectors) and/or increase/decrease equity versus individual hands (ie higher pocket pairs, and 'blockers'..AK is incredibly weak (5%) against AA, despite being a very strong hand)

Back to iGP. It all comes back down to that lap time variance band I mentioned earlier. In that first race, the manager who out qualified you, even with both his drivers putting in 2 superb laps, qualified P10 and P14..5th and 7th row.

The next race, you actually out qualify him by more than -0.100s on the same tyres. It is variance. Drivers can make mistakes, can put in super laps as well, just like in real life.

If you still think you should always be ahead, maybe we should all have robot drivers who can drive to the exact lap time given from the car, and never make mistakes. That way, every grid will be the same, 2 by 2 with every team allocated a row. No chance ever for any mixed up grids or smaller teams, but that is ok, the best team can win the Championship in Europe every season :)

I have the same problem too. Too slow qualification in all races.

You have totally missed the point. Anyway regarding the poker that you're going on about... let's say you have AA vs an unknown hand... your odds are what? now let's say you have AA vs 2 other unknown hands... your odds are now much less correct? now let's add in a further hand... see where I am going? your odds for your AA to win has been significantly reduced the more hands that play against you. 

Regarding iGP, it was not my team that I am referring too. I am talking about another team and it has been in a few different leagues this is happening. Other people are noticing this happening Peter... if you haven't noticed it and you're happy with what's going on then so be it. Good luck!

I gave the explanation in the earlier post, regarding certain hands play better against others, effecting equity. It is completely different in iGP as one car's performance has separate variables, that do not get effected by other car's performances (as it does in poker)

Bringing it back on topic, I have bad qualifyings, but I generally have more good than bad, as over the course of a season, the car stats evens it out. Yes, as others can point out, you can go on a bad run of Qualifyings, it is just part of the game. You can not make a absolute prediction based on 1 race in which this team got out qualified.

Shall we not take into account all the following races where this team then subsequently got out qualified as well? Or will just Melbourne count?

I was focusing on what had been happening recently in the Australian iGP because we can calculate quite accurately the other teams car points based on their CD. I know some teams use more than one CD, but when you're used to your league you know who has more than 1 CD and also what that CD is.  Yes it does happen often when all stats are maxed out but in the first races of the season, the best car should always qualify ahead of any car that has a poor score for one of the top 4 stats.  That is all I am trying to say and that has not been happening. It has been a bit too random.


I am sure you have seen whereby a car which is worse on the top 4 stats qualify on softs ahead of the better car who was on supersofts? I have... we tried to address it to the developers and it was ignored. In that particular situation it was my car on supersofts vs gerard's car on softs. He qualified 0.8sec ahead of me. My top 4 stats were better and our driver's were maxed out. That cannot be down to simply a driver error...

But you qualified P2 and P3 in your league that you run. Was that 'a bit too random' as well?

https://igpmanager.com/app/d=result&id=24024456&tab=qualifying



I have seen that, but not by 0.8s ahead, as you say.

There are numerous factors involved in Qualifying, which can partly explain this:

• Did you both use new Engines? An old Engine (1 race old) can contribute around +0.650s/lap.


• What temperature was this Qualifying run at? (Taken place 10 mins before the race start time) Qualifying runs are run at Push Level 3, all the way around the lap, so if it was a particularly hot temperature, Softs can be faster than SuperSofts.


• What track was this run at? Each track has a different influence over the relative deltas (performances) of each tyre compound.

Those factors accounted for, if it still hasn't explained it, by all means show the Qualfy ID.

I presented it to the Devs whilst being a tester for them. Both cars were fresh and the softs qualified above my car but none of the other supersoft cars. If you want info regarding this ask Gerard as I no longer have these details or search through the forum as I think it may have been posted here as well.


 Regarding today's qualifier, I actually have the best car by 6pts on the top 4 stats. There was a glaring eye opener though regarding position 5th and 6th in the qualifier. They are from the same team. Have a look at both driver stats and you will see what I mean. How can they qualify with the same time given the huge disparity in points between them both?

I am sure there are factors, which can accrue to explain this deficit, sadly I don't have the time to search through the Forums for that, or want to really bother Gerard regarding this.

As for the P5 and P6 Qualifying, I don't see anything out the ordinary. Both drivers are all 20 in the 'Driving Ability' stats, so produced similar qualify times. The difference is evident in the race time, the 2nd driver finished 18 seconds behind his teammate.

https://igpmanager.com/app/d=result&id=20138071&tab=qualifying

That is the link to the race in question. Australian iGP. My car was better on the top 4 stats than Gerard and was better than everyone else's due to me having the best CD at the time in question and nobody using 2 CDs.

Look at all of those teams on Soft qualifying above both of my driver's who were on Supersoft. How is that explained? It's nothing to do with the car as I had the best car, it's not to do with the temperature as the top qualifiers were all on Supersofts. It could only come down to driver error and that would be a huge driver error on both of my drivers. Simply put, Softs should never be qualifying ahead of Supersofts in this given scenario. Also take note on both of my drivers having the identical qualifying time...

Regarding your response just now. Both drivers are not full of 20 stats. Look again. Qualifying positions 5th and 6th. Smith and Anderson. Huge disparity with their Mental driving stats. This alone should make for them to not qualify on almost identical times.

Hmm, that is a strange one. It appears half the field qualified on one temperature, and the other half a completely different.

Race was dated 12th December 2018 though, during the Australia summer. Just checked the temperature there, and there was a larger temperature variation over the course of the day than usual (33.6C high / 16.0C low) from an average of 22C high pretty much all the week. Perhaps this sudden spike in temperature could be a factor regarding the weather station.

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/201812/html/IDCJDW3050.201812.shtml

Only thing I can think of is there was sudden, drastic temperature correction, during Qualifying (sometimes you see momentarily half the field qualified at .51 or .52 past) and the other half complete the grid 1 minute later.

There have been a few of these poking it's ugly head spread out across the different leagues that I am involved in. Not always to do with my team but others. I just am looking for clarification from the devs as to how qualification is calculated as you can see from the example I showed you that it makes no sense. Even if it was a temperature discrepancy that would still not do that. I just raced in Bahrain today whereby the temp was 36c and all those (inc myself) that used SS qualified ahead of Softs.

Regarding that Aus race I linked, we raced at 13:30 GMT so that was about 10:30pm Aus time. Definitely not anywhere in the over 25c bracket

That one can be explained.

The tyres straight out of the box, start towards the 'cooler' temperature range on the tyre guage (like when you refit tyres during a pitstop) Even with Push Level 3 for Supersofts in 36C Bahrain, the tyre will only really start overheating in Sector 3, which only has 2 real corners, rest straights.

Normal advantage is -0.900s/lap to -1.000s/lap from Supersoft to Soft, and the average gap was around -0.700s, so +0.200s to +0.300s was lost to overheating in those 2 corners.