jeffpiazza
Feature request - rolling heats
This request is for scheduling the heats by car number as described below.
For simplicity assume 10 total cars across all dens. Our heats would look like this (in lane order):
Heat 1 = cars 1/2/3/4
Heat 2 = cars 2/3/4/5
Heat 3 = cars 3/4/5/6
Heat 4 = cars 4/5/6/7
Heat 5 = cars 5/6/7/8
Heat 6 = cars 6/7/8/9
Heat 7 = cars 7/8/9/10
Heat 8 = cars 8/9/10/1 (coming back to car 1 here)
Heat 9 = cars 9/10/1/2
Heat 10 = cars 10/1/2/3
Could you add an option to schedule the heats in the rolling car number fashion?
We have a four lane track and run all cars on each lane. Fastest times are taken for each car. Trophies/awards given to fastest 3 in the entire pack (regardless of den) and then fastest 3 in each den. So I don't think the scoring is impacted in this request, it's just the ability to schedule heats in car number order.
Background: In our pack we do car check ins before race day to reduce race day stresses on volunteers or cubs/parents. The way we register is starting with the first person who registers a car is car# 1 and so forth. So we can end up with a natural randomization, where adjacent car numbers could be cubs in different dens. The above race strategy reduces the race day stress of organizing the cubs to get their cars to the track for each heat. Or from having the random cars to be selected off a table. Instead we have one large board where we line the cars in car number order and the track volunteers make their way through the numbers one by one.
I wouldn't mind trying to code something. But where in the code are the schedules created?
This idea (sometimes called "Lane Rotation") comes up every so often. I have to admit I'm not a big fan. It makes things easier on the race crew (or the racers, if they're effectively acting as the race crew), as the slate for each heat is mostly taken from the heat just finished.
The downside is that a given racer is exposed to fewer different cars head to head. (On a four-lane track, e.g., each racer will meet six other cars in a rotation schedule, but 12 in a schedule produced by the current scheduler.)
The racer who happens to end up adjacent to the fastest car in the field will, for all but one of their heats, have little chance of taking a first place finish, even if they're in fact the second-fastest car in the field. (If two siblings end up in adjacent slots, well, the same head-to-head outcome is likely to repeat several times in a row.)
Let me have a think on how this might be appropriately presented to the user. The implementation of the scheduling part wouldn't be hard.
