| Forfatter |
Emne: Tyre puncture |
28 svar
|
|
|
|
#1 Skrevet Jan 22 2007, 21:49:59
|
Citat
|
I have a question regarding "Tyre puncture".
Under what conditions does one receive a tyre puncture ?
Is it random ?
In the last race I received a puncture, 2 laps after I had changed tyres !!?! Is this really normal ?
I am eagerly awaitng constructive and informative answers.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 Skrevet Jan 22 2007, 21:53:41
|
Citat
|
|
yes Christer...is totaly random...it ca happen form lap 1 to th last lap of a GP...also can happen in real world...the only difference, is that in real world, pherhaps only 30-40 % of the times you quit by a puncture...and here...is certain!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 Skrevet Jan 22 2007, 21:57:16
|
Citat
|
|
I'm not sure, but its possible that a tyre puncture is not only random.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 Skrevet Jan 22 2007, 22:07:47
|
Citat
|
|
Quote ( Rui Fonseca @ January 22nd 2007,21:57:16 )
is not only random
its random. THE ONLY thing it could be is parts wear and maybe your risk
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 Skrevet Jan 22 2007, 22:37:11
|
Citat
|
I think that it's totally random. I've experienced it twice now and both times I had good tyres and small risks.
I've also seen it happen to a rookie in his first race, with a brand new car, so I don't think parts wear is a factor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 Skrevet Jan 23 2007, 01:11:40
|
Citat
|
how do you think about technical insite?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 Skrevet Jan 23 2007, 01:15:26
|
Citat
|
well if you explain what you mean, there most probably
be answers to that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 Skrevet Jun 3 2015, 05:51:22
|
Citat
|
|
Well, I just wanna ask.... Is the track risk affects the tyre? My risk was very small at the previous race, then my tyre got puncture 4 laps after pit...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 Skrevet Jun 3 2015, 08:03:36
|
Citat
|
Quote ( Fahriza Naufall @ June 3rd 2015,05:51:22 ) Well, I just wanna ask.... Is the track risk affects the tyre? My risk was very small at the previous race, then my tyre got puncture 4 laps after pit...
Ehmmm... Formula One forum? ;-)
But the answer is no. Tyre puncture is purely random.
|
|
|
|
|
This is happened to me. I've raced in Sepang twice and i've got a puncture twice there. Anyone knows why?
|
|
|
|
|
Look at the answer above.....
|
|
|
|
It's very painful.
Two rounds to the end of the race, when my position is 2nd, i fail finish because tyre puncture.
|
|
|
|
|
Its a part of the game. I dont see the problem.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Kasper Meng @ October 13th 2018,08:14:21 ) Its a part of the game. I dont see the problem.
Totally unnecessary and unhelpful comment. 😡
This is the newbie forum and the person asking has only had 6 races in his GPRO time.
Ronni, unfortunately this is a random event that anyone can experience. There are other similar events such as the driver being sick in his helmet and the steering wheel malfunctioning.
Hopefully this is the last time you will experience this for a while.
|
|
|
|
Graham is right.
A newbie to this game will not be familiar with the experience of events that happen which absolutely cannot be planned to avoid. As Graham said, tyre puncture is exactly in this category - and it is frustrating that sometimes you can limp back to the pits and finish the race (albeit with strategy in ruins) while other times your race just ends. Sadly that's just one of a few random events that just cannot be planned around.
Generally speaking a tyre puncture happens on average about once every 2 to 3 seasons. I've had 11 in my time playing and that's since S24. You can go a long while without getting one (as I had until last season with a run of over 80 races since my last one) or you can (in V. V. rare cases) experience them in consecutive seasons or single seasons.
Other random events include the driver being sick in his helmet, the steering column making trouble for the driver and also some random part fails (these can occur even with 0% wear). Now, it must be reiterated that thes random events do not crop up with regular occurrence enough to thwart your plans at all, at worst you may get one per season, though some people may tell you it's higher than this figure, though quite often the reality is that people who claim as such, some of those randoms were related to some manager choices (start risks, high worn part).
In summary, it's very much a case of 1) take randoms with the smallest pinch of salt possible 2) Don't believe everything people might tell you about 'random' events in the game 3) Above all, I always found it best to expect the unexpected from a race, so having a mindset where you don't absolutely expect a given result, that's the best way to kind of approach the game. Nothing is ever certain. Which has its upsides as well as downsides but it is a small element of the game that we have to both try to get over and embrace all at once! :/
Best of luck playing Ronni and my advice above all is not to let this small part of the game cause you to give up, just try and park it to the back of your mind and not to ever expect the unexpected. :)
|
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Stuart Foster @ October 13th 2018,10:09:37 ) Now, it must be reiterated that thes random events do not crop up with regular occurrence enough to thwart your plans at all, at worst you may get one per season, though some people may tell you it's higher than this figure, though quite often the reality is that people who claim as such, some of those randoms were related to some manager choices (start risks, high worn part).
This isn't correct, Stuart. Pure randoms are statistically independent events, so whereas in long term they happen at a low-ish rate, nothing prevents clusters of them. My example from S59 to S61 was a rate of 5 pure randoms (tyre punctures, helmet or low wear technical failures) in the span of ~36 races, whereas in the last 3 seasons I haven't had any random at all.
Also as a consequence, whereas the statement these clusters won't happen with enough frequency to thwart plans is partially right, it's also quite relative. I think it's safe to say 3 pure randoms in one single season in Elite to Pro are potentially dooming. According to the data Vlad posted some time ago, there are ~1 pure random per 20 races. For those I think he only used the helmet or tyre puncture ones, so let's say it's 1 per 15 when we include the realistically unavoidable wear dependent ones, because you don't want to replace your parts too early in order to avoid those (neither you can fully prevent those even with new parts).
Using these numbers, in average 1 each 10 managers is having 3 or more pure randoms any given season. Infrequently is maybe technically right, but then again, that's +150 managers in Elite to Pro who are having this kind of streak each season, completely beyond their control. We could use the realism card here and state the rate of randoms in GPRO is lower than in real life (maybe?), but we also must question why we need to mimic the frustrating parts of the real life thing, especially because in real life we will never see Renault being demoted to GP2 because Sainz was vomiting too much.
|
|
|
|
|
Well i am also a newbie, but you could just read the comments before his then you would know what its all about :)
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Edwin Silva @ October 13th 2018,11:32:45 ) My example from S59 to S61 was a rate of 5 pure randoms (tyre punctures, helmet or low wear technical failures) in the span of ~36 races, whereas in the last 3 seasons I haven't had any random at all.
Indeed, and that is incredibly unlucky, though I did allude to the consecutive nature of such events here :
Quote ( Stuart Foster @ October 13th 2018,10:09:37 ) You can go a long while without getting one (as I had until last season with a run of over 80 races since my last one) or you can (in V. V. rare cases) experience them in consecutive seasons or single seasons.
So, sure, it is wise to include both random events and punctures as two of the same than separate, so if the reading from my original post is that random events can't happen in such a manner as punctures then that is incorrect. But the nature of my post should have been clear, if it is not, then people should understand it to be as above.
1 in 10 though with 3+ pure randoms per season? You think? I am sure it is not quite that high, but then I don't really track these occurrences, I just know I don't like them as much as you or anyone. And yes, I' support an alternative to these events, there's been some suggestions, one fairly good one recently though I can't remember what, where, when or who made it :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 Skrevet Okt 13 2018, 20:34:03 (senest redigeret Okt 13 2018, 20:46:26 af Edwin Silva)
|
Citat
|
Quote ( Stuart Foster @ October 13th 2018,15:11:15 ) 1 in 10 though with 3+ pure randoms per season? You think? I am sure it is not quite that high, but then I don't really track these occurrences
This isn't anecdotal. Vlad posted data some years ago about the occurrence of pure randoms and as far as I remember it was 4% to 4.5% odds per race. I used 6.6% because I think he didn't include wear related randoms, but I guess we can agree a part failing at 0-80% wear is a random enough event. I'm not too eager, neither my search-fu is good enough to dig the actual post by Vlad, but if somebody is willing to search for it, it should be in the public forums. Now, in hindsight maybe 6.6% was too high. If we reduce it to 5%, it becomes approximately 1/13, not 1/10.
The 1/10 is the probability of having 3 or more events at statistically independent 6.6% odds per event in 17 samples. Now, if this value matches GPRO, I don't know. As I said, I used the data produced by Vlad, which must be more accurate than my limited data. If the numbers won't be coherent, it's either because Vlad's data wasn't correct (which is pretty unlikely), or because the events aren't statistically independent (as in the odds of having a random are reduced if you already had one in the same season/window, which I'd like, but I don't think that's the case either).
Quote ( Kasper Meng @ October 13th 2018,13:07:26 ) Well i am also a newbie, but you could just read the comments before his then you would know what its all about :)
I did. Stuart said streak of randoms are rare events so they infrequently thwart your plans. I quoted that in my message and I addressed that commentary. I know I'm off topic plenty of times, but this one wasn't any of those.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Edwin Silva @ October 13th 2018,20:34:03 ) neither my search-fu is good enough to dig the actual post by Vlad, but if somebody is willing to search
/gb/forum/ViewTopic.asp?TopicId=12049&PostId=3977906#post3977906
Quote ( Vladimir Alexandrov @ August 5th 2016,15:42:40 ) Since the topic is getting ever so popular, let's post some stats on randoms from the last race to see if randoms are such a big problem:
Total racing managers: 9428
Managers who got hit by a real random technical problem (including puncture): 364 (3.9%)
Managers who got a technical problem due to worn parts: 1816 (19.2%)
Managers who got a technical problem due to too high driver risks: 1265 (13.4%)
Discuss please :)
|
|
|
|
|
So, that's one in every 26 people (25.9) getting a real random then. Interesting. Cheers Kevin for finding it :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
What Vlad said is data for one particular race, it is not enough to extrapolate the number of randoms over the course of a season without understanding specific mechanisms by which randoms work.
For example is the chance of a random constant per race? per lap? per unit of distance?Because that would make a huge difference if we're comparing Monaco to Spa to Indy Oval here. And this is assuming it's even a constant, for all I know it could depend on either manager-controlled variables (talking about "real randoms" here so not risks) and/or weather.
For all I know Edwin you may be fairly close in your estimate, and as you yourself point out there are other things that could affect the accuracy of the analysis as well. All I'm trying to say is that there is too many assumptions in the analysis of it for the data to have any grounds to be used over personal experience.
|
|
|
|
Thanks, Kevin. So it was 3.9%. It also states 19.2% due to worn parts, but it's impossible to separate how many of those are real very worn parts (as in skipped replacements) and how many are those caused by the still possible technical failure even at low-ish wear.
I'm going to throw a wild estimation here, stating 1.5% of those 19.2% were in practical terms unavoidable failures (still too low wear to replace the part without being too wasteful). That produces a total of 5.4% odds of unavoidable random per manager per race.
Globally, that's approximately 93 managers per season in Elite + Master + Pro who are having 3 or more randoms (~17 of them at 4 or more, ~3 of them at 5 or more).
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ October 13th 2018,22:10:48 )
^^^^^
Yawn!
My apologies. I shouldn't be saying pure randoms are a bad thing. I should instead support your position:
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ September 12th 2018,08:52:34 ) Personally it should be non existent. However on average these randoms happen once per season. They may be named differently but they happen. The sooner they remove them the better.
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ September 12th 2018,08:53:25 ) Which is why true randoms should be removed.
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ September 12th 2018,10:55:54 ) Are you insinuating you can manage true randoms?
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ August 15th 2018,23:48:03 ) As I've always said is I want fairness in the game. There is still far too much random acts in this game. I want this game to be decided on skill alone. Not luck.
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ October 8th 2018,15:55:52 ) ou can't be giving people multiple true randoms per season surely? We all mess up enough ourselves. We dont need randoms to hinder things further.
|
|
|
|
I dont care what you support. You talk shit. I'm sick of it.
Thousands of letters and words linked together to try and make a point.
You spout nonsense over and over. You did it again with the part failures ffs. I actually ignore everything you post. I used to humour them for a line or two. I see your name now. I know an essay about bs will appear. So I switch off.
The problem I've got is you're misleading rookies and managers trying to make it in this game.
How to play the game is subjective. I dont know how to play it perfectly, nobody does. Some are near perfect of course.
There is literally about 20 managers i'd listen to if they tried to post something as fact. Any other manager I would do everything in my player to disprove it and I bet in 99.9% of the cases I'd disprove it.
So I suggest anyone reading the crap you post is to ignore it or think initially the complete opposite.
I guarantee you are wrong on most of your theories. It would also be terrifying if you ran a company with how you pull your data together. You have an agenda and that's ultimately frightening in a game based on data
All you've proved above is I want fairness for all. But that's how I am in every day life.
|
|
|
|
|
Your written English deteriorates somewhat when you're riled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#27 Skrevet Okt 14 2018, 00:31:22 (senest redigeret Okt 14 2018, 00:42:07 af Edwin Silva)
|
Citat
|
I think you haven't read my posts, then. Not that I blame you. They are usually very long. But anyways, misleading rookies and managers trying to make it in this game?
I guess you haven't read my numerous statements about untrainables and about the unfair gap between Rookie and Amateur, for instance. Also do you remember when the Super Rookie rule was created? Those weeks I was publicly saying it was unfair there were managers willing to go deep into red numbers in Rookie whereas legitimate promo candidates had to keep an eye on their wallets. I even supported a very unpopular change about giving newcomers to Amateur additional cash.
Now, you're completely right about the subjective game. I don't think I play the way it should be played. If anything, my gameplay style is horrible and I don't advice anybody to try to emulate my very poor technique. Which shouldn't require an advice anyways; anybody can see my game history and realize is hasn't led to any success.
Whether I'm wrong in most of my theories, you say that as if that was a horrible thing. Being wrong is right. If anything, being wrong is better than being right, as long as you learn something new after the dialectical process. Being right won't teach you anything. But agenda? Really? That's new. I know you don't want to address my posts, but please do an exception just in this aspect. What would that be? Become an Elite champion? Destroy the game? Troll the forums? If the former, come on, I don't have the skill or the patience required to become a champion. Scratch that out. The other two I can't prove, tho. Maybe it's that. I want to burn GPRO and kill the Rookies.
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ October 14th 2018,00:17:49 ) It would also be terrifying if you ran a company with how you pull your data together.
This is going to be very low and scum on my part. But what the hell: data scientist here, 2 Master degrees, PhD majoring on machine learning, publications accepted in top quartile journals on the subject, reviewer for several of them. That doesn't prove anything, but be civil, Michael. I don't think I've ever offended you in any way.
|
|
|
|
as a 3 season now in my 4rh manager, I have experienced 1 random in all those races.
my advice to the OP, read the first few replys they explain it.
I like reading the forums to gain knowledge but the above lectures/essays bore me.
please no offence intended.
But when I see these essays I switch off and look at another topic :)
|
|
|
|
|
Be civil, and if no substance to add to the actual discussion, no need to post. Although I would suggest the actual discussion, while valid, is probably better in a thread not in the Newbie Forum.
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Shqip
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Bahasa Melayu
Pirate
