(FEEDBACK) The "DRIFT BOX" for Judging

[cfrost]

I like the idea behind the drift box...but I think it should count for very minimal points in an overall score.

Part of what I like about drifting is the variables that come into play with car, style, and approach to a course.

From what I saw at D1, the box seemed to reward mistakes (like over-rotating) and detract from good runs that came up on the wall.

I think it's a great reference tool for judges though

[OldSkool510]

The designers of the DriftBox need to watch Sport Science for a while. If they can incorporate that technology with drifting, then they would definitely have something. The DriftBox's technology is just too limited right now.

[MonkeySlide]

So there doesn't seem to be any objections to using it for single runs.

Perhaps the Drift Box has been misused this entire time? The only organizations to really try it have been NOPI and D1. No offense to either parties but perhaps those instances aren't really fair assesments?

I'm going to step out and say that I think the Drift Box COULD be great for drifting but so far no one (that I've seen) has utilized it correctly.

I always thought it kinda sucked that the Drift Box has taken so much flack when really the problem is the organizations that had it don't know how to use it.

I'd like to see it used for single runs...in fact I almost think it SHOULD be used for single run judging.

Now I don't think this should replace the human aspect. I think some people might jump to that conclusion when they think about the drift box being used. Especially when D1 lets it account for 60% of the result.

I just think the drift box should be implimented into the process

Also 2 of the 3 criteria (speed and g-force) the "driftbox" measures gives the inherent advantage to the faster car, doesn't it? I think so. Drifting is more than just speed and g-force.

Lets look at the judging critera for drifting: Line, Speed, Angle, and the mysterious "overall impact".

Two (speed and angle) out of the four aspects of judged criteria are numerically measurable.

As Alex mentioned earlier different cars drift differently. One car may get more angle vs another. However judges should be pretty educated on that already. So during a single run when they see an angle read out from a AE86 they can instantly know just how hard the driver was pushing it.

Lets say the AE86 gets 36 degrees of angle one run...after enough use of the drift box the judges may know that the car is capiable of 45 degrees and they can use that information to make their decision along with the other visual information.

Also this should be thought of from a fan perspective.

One of the coolest parts about watching Indy Car Racing or Formula 1 is that sometimes they put up the live telemetry on screen so you can see where the driver is braking, where they apply full throttle, steering input etc.

Imagine being able to see drift box telemetry on the big screen overlayed on Chris Forsberg's run through Irwindale??

As long as its only used in single runs...and the data doesn't dominate the results I see no bad to using the Drift Box as part of judging.

[Cavi Mike]

If a judge needs a computer, or anything for that matter, to tell him what a good run was, he shouldn't be a judge. Maybe that's the real problem.

[Drift Brick]

I think it's a great reference tool for judges though

This.

A reference tool, hard evidence. Not a judge on its own.

[hhn2002]

i think we should let the people decide too, as well as develop a better drift box. that way the overall score will be made of components from judges, drift box, and the audience. when it boils down to it, its the audience/fans thats most important. they could pass out keypad like transmitters to random attendees at the gates, and a good number amount too, 1 out of every 4 people, that way they can get a good representation of the opinion of the crowd. i think this would be most ideal, that way people cant complain that judges scores are too subjective and shows favoritism or that the drift box is flawed because they will have their own input. it should also be relatively cheap to implement and maintain as they could have rechargeable batteries, theft deterrent sensors and little to no r&d funding is required since the technology is already there.