Current Car Classifications vs Performance- Fact or Fiction

[ttweed]

Bill, you have done an amazing amount of work on this.
but.
you cannot insert the driver into the classification system.

+1. This is the main problem with the scheme. It is basically a driver handicapping system that would promote mediocrity rather than improvement. This proposal "throws the baby out with the bathwater." It may make some more people feel good about themselves, but it will not result in better/faster drivers and cars, which I see as the main point of our friendly competition.

If all we want is "feel-good" camaraderie and fellowship, then sure, let's only make classes where you don't have to compete with people who are out of your comfort range. There's something to be said for that. Reminds me of the Miracle League. If you don't know what that is, take a look at http://miracleleagueofsandiego.org/about/. It is organized baseball for profoundly disabled kids. Everybody hits, everybody scores, and games always end in a tie. If you ever see one of their games, it is one of the most heart-warming and joyous events you will ever witness. But it ain't competition, and it isn't designed or intended to make the kids better ballplayers.

TT

[Greg Phillips]

I am always ready to learn, although I do not always like being taught."
-- Winston Churchill,
former British prime minister


Greg

[Dave Diamond]

Obviously this generates so much intensity because the amount of prize money is so large!

Seriously, this is a great discussion, but we might want to tone down the trash talk and recognize that there may be multiple – and fully legitimate—points of view about different classification systems, as well as about the goals they are designed to promote. There are also multiple reasons why and ways in which people participate in TTs and/or AXs – and again, all of these have some legitimacy. One of the things about this club that has impressed me since the beginning of my own participation has been its remarkable combination of a welcoming, inclusive spirit, the mutual helpfulness among competitors, the volunteerism, the dedication of many key members, the extremely efficient and well-organized events, all while fostering intense-but-friendly competitiveness. I think the proposal Bill outlined is well within the spirit of the last point.

Another bit of preamble: You are free, of course, to ignore most of what I say because I’m neither very fast overall nor at the top of any class I’ve been in. Oh wait, my black boxster and I won our class in TT for 2012! Of course, I was also last-in-class that year too, since I was the only one in it. This, actually, is one of the issues Bill’s system was designed to address. I also don’t think we should write off Bill’s ideas or impugn his reasons for offering them. I followed along closely as he developed his proposal, as did Don Middleton and Jim Binford. Early on we discussed many of the points that have come up in this thread. It takes a while to follow the data and the math involved, but they become more persuasive as you dig into them, think them through, and discuss them, so I recommend not trying to shoot it down mathematically. Trust me. Most of you can out-drive Bill (and me, but not Don or Jim), but he’s locked up the math TTOD.
Observations about the overall discussion:

1. There may be, figuratively speaking, “pro” and “amateur” (and maybe semi-pro, etc. ) divisions within the club, and this might be part of the intensely negative tone of some of the reactions to this. I don’t mean anything negative by “amateur” and consider myself in that group. (I don’t think this is the same as the SS vs. CC class distinction.) Some people are interested in and able to put much more time, energy, and $ into this, and make it a more central pursuit. Others don’t have those luxuries, or have other important commitments, but still greatly value and enjoy participating as much as possible. Many of us like the competition and are committed to improving our skills – but have limitations on how many events we can come to, and/or how much time and $ we can put into developing our cars, given our life circumstances. I think these are legitimate differences, and that both groups are important to the club. The more the merrier, and the better off the club will be in terms of paying for track time.

2. Keep in mind that a small group of the “pros” are the mostly the ones on this forum, so we’re not necessarily hearing the full range of opinion. It’s a great thing that people are putting so much passion into this thread, and those who show up for the discussion certainly deserve to carry more weight in this thing, but we should remember that not being on the forum may not represent a lack of interest or commitment to the club and the events.

3. The proposed system only includes TT data at this point. It looks like it would work similarly at AX, but those data have not been analyzed in the same way yet. Something like this could ultimately be more important for AX, however, because a wider range of skill levels is probably present at AXs. Keep in mind that it originated with the focus on TTs though.

4. This does NOT seem like a way just to make sure everyone gets a trophy (and the accompanying prize money). If you look at it carefully, it’s clear that it greatly reduces the number of possible class winners. This is not about whining or endorsing mediocrity or having hurt feelings. One of the problems this attempts to address is the fact that we have way too many classes, some with very few people. Showing up gets you a podium finish or a trophy (e.g., me). That’s not any more fun than losing all the time, nor is it a direct incentive to get better. But again, some people (maybe the interested, loyal amateurs) don’t have the inclination (for a variety of sometimes quite legitimate reasons) to maximally optimize their car for a class, or to take it down to a lower class.

5. Some people really enjoy tinkering with cars and classes, and consider that another skill, part of the overall strategy and competition. That’s a reasonable point, worthy of respect. But in Bill’s system, if you look at it closely, that doesn’t automatically go away.

6. Some car classes and some subgroups of very good drivers are much more evenly competitive. Some car classes work very well, or happen to have very similar cars right now. (e.g., CC04 used to be basically stock boxsters; some higher classes happen to have pretty similar cars too). Others contain odd mixes, and if the times are similar in such a class it’s hard to tell what’s driver skill and what’s car performance. If the times are very similar despite differences in cars, they would be grouped in the same new class anyway. If somebody consistently dominates a class by a meaningful margin, they would eventually be bumped up to a class that better matches their ability and gives them more incentive to keep building their skills. If they gain time by altering their car, they would also get bumped up into a faster group, where they’d have to start increasing their skills once again to rise within that group (unless they just keep buying faster cars, which will be obvious to everyone). Incentives might in some ways be better in the proposed system.

7. Subjectively and informally, this system is already in wide use. Drivers in the upper ranges, i.e., the “pros” (remember, this is at TTs only for now – AX may be quite different), often disregard classes and compare themselves with other close-to-TTOD drivers anyway. I’m sure the X cars must do this. For some of you at that level, I can’t imagine it’s all that satisfying to only win your class, especially if you are by far the fastest driver in it. You probably care more about TTOD or have informally put yourself in a subgroup of the people usually very close to you.

8. Same in the nether regions: I, for one example, am pleased if I incrementally narrow the fairly large gap with the Sharps – and of course, in a spec class, our cars are VERY similar (robbing me of all excuses, and giving me incentive to improve even if I never catch them). Chuck may always beat his wife, and he may always beat me. (Oops, that didn’t sound right, did it? Sorry Chuck and Debby.) I can accept that while still working to improve. But I have also always made an informal comparison with others who tend to be more similar to me in time (regardless of class). No doubt they sometimes improve more, or more quickly, than I do. If they also have a better car, their superior skills will put them WAY ahead of me, informally bumping them out of my class. If we’re both improving, and the cars are not too different, we may stay in the same class and go back and forth for a long time, enhancing incentives and competitiveness in what seems to me like a good way. I’m sure there are others who think of it this way (I think Jad said he makes this suggestion to his students…) to add to the fun quotient while they still try to get better.

9. Some of the point adjustments in the current system make sense in a broad way but not always in the details. Some of them are just wacky. Still, people have put a great deal of good faith effort into it over a long period of time and I think that deserves great respect. It’s also inherently hard to get one’s mind around the way driver skill and car performance are not always really separable in any system as complex as ours. In lots of other motorsports, classes are fewer and easier to define, drivers and cars are more comparable.

10. I’d like to suggest we add system like this (perhaps for TT first, because that’s what it’s “optimized” for) as a side-by-side experiment, like an additional BRI, just grouping the classes similar to the way Bill proposes (with whatever tweaks people like) but not using the handicaps to adjust times – I think the fast people deserve to stay at the top. That might give people a chance to see whether it has any merit in real life (where we generate testosterone by burning hydrocarbons rather than electrons), who likes it and who doesn’t, whether the classes are relatively stable or not, etc.

Cheers. Thanks to anyone who bothered to read this. See you at Chuckwalla.

[mrondeau]

One of the things about this club that has impressed me since the beginning of my own participation has been its remarkable combination of a welcoming, inclusive spirit, the mutual helpfulness among competitors, the volunteerism, the dedication of many key members, the extremely efficient and well-organized events, all while fostering intense-but-friendly competitiveness. I think the proposal Bill outlined is well within the spirit of the last point.

Dave, While I think that Bill's proposal is interesting in an esoteric way, I don't believe that it qualifies for consideration as a system for a competitive event.

1. There may be, figuratively speaking, “pro” and “amateur” (and maybe semi-pro, etc. ) divisions within the club, and this might be part of the intensely negative tone of some of the reactions to this. I don’t mean anything negative by “amateur” and consider myself in that group. (I don’t think this is the same as the SS vs. CC class distinction.) Some people are interested in and able to put much more time, energy, and $ into this, and make it a more central pursuit. Others don’t have those luxuries, or have other important commitments, but still greatly value and enjoy participating as much as possible. Many of us like the competition and are committed to improving our skills but have limitations on how many events we can come to, and/or how much time and $ we can put into developing our cars, given our life circumstances. I think these are legitimate differences, and that both groups are important to the club. The more the merrier, and the better off the club will be in terms of paying for track time.

I believe that if you are committed to improving your skills, you are much better off comparing to a driver in your class with a similarly set up car or point value than a randomly selected index where the car and the driver are both variables. If I am faster than a GT3, it's probably because of the driver. If I'm faster than a Cayman, is it the driver or the car? If we don't have points for modifications, how do I know?

3. The proposed system only includes TT data at this point. It looks like it would work similarly at AX, but those data have not been analyzed in the same way yet. Something like this could ultimately be more important for AX, however, because a wider range of skill levels is probably present at AXs. Keep in mind that it originated with the focus on TTs though.

I think it would be even more skewed for AX than it is for TT due to the wide range of variables in cars, track layouts, driver skills and TTOD. Two AX's ago, the ideal car would have been a 991S with new sticky tires driven with all of the electronic controls on by someone just pushed as hard as possible and let the "nannies" keep them on track. At the last AX, it greatly favored a skilled driver in a modified car. I believe that the results would be all over the place based on Bill's formula.

4. This does NOT seem like a way just to make sure everyone gets a trophy (and the accompanying prize money). If you look at it carefully, it’s clear that it greatly reduces the number of possible class winners. This is not about whining or endorsing mediocrity or having hurt feelings. One of the problems this attempts to address is the fact that we have way too many classes, some with very few people. Showing up gets you a podium finish or a trophy (e.g., me). That’s not any more fun than losing all the time, nor is it a direct incentive to get better. But again, some people (maybe the interested, loyal amateurs) don’t have the inclination (for a variety of sometimes quite legitimate reasons) to maximally optimize their car for a class, or to take it down to a lower class.

If you look at the 2013 results, you will see that only two classes, Boxster spec and CC01, had single entrants. Your class, 944 spec, had a total of 14 drivers . The rest of the CC classes all had multiple drivers, some as many as 15 drivers and 9 of the 16 classes had 10 or more drivers throughout the year. That seems like that's much more competitive. Can you still win a trophy by showing up at every event? Yes, but that's how competitive driving series work. You have to show up and you have to finish.

5. Some people really enjoy tinkering with cars and classes, and consider that another skill, part of the overall strategy and competition. That’s a reasonable point, worthy of respect. But in Bill’s system, if you look at it closely, that doesn’t automatically go away.

I disagree. If I drive too hard and my index goes up, I'm handicapped by driving with much faster cars and the drivers who know how to drive them. If I maintain a steady pace and try to stay "in class" I might have a chance. It's like the Peter Principle for driving. If you drive well, you will get promoted to your level of incompetency, at least temporarily. My promotion or demotion in classes is also dependant on other drivers and how well or poorly they are doing on an event to event basis.

6. Some car classes and some subgroups of very good drivers are much more evenly competitive. Some car classes work very well, or happen to have very similar cars right now. (e.g., CC04 used to be basically stock boxsters; some higher classes happen to have pretty similar cars too). Others contain odd mixes, and if the times are similar in such a class it’s hard to tell what’s driver skill and what’s car performance. If the times are very similar despite differences in cars, they would be grouped in the same new class anyway. If somebody consistently dominates a class by a meaningful margin, they would eventually be bumped up to a class that better matches their ability and gives them more incentive to keep building their skills. If they gain time by altering their car, they would also get bumped up into a faster group, where they’d have to start increasing their skills once again to rise within that group (unless they just keep buying faster cars, which will be obvious to everyone). Incentives might in some ways be better in the proposed system.

. In the current system, if a car is consistently beating the others, my money would be on the skilled driver. I've found that putting a skilled driver in a car that is "non competitive" usually shows that either the car is not set up or it can be driven much faster than the driver thinks. Ask Dan Chambers about how fast his car can go with a different driver.

7. Subjectively and informally, this system is already in wide use. Drivers in the upper ranges, i.e., the “pros” (remember, this is at TTs only for now – AX may be quite different), often disregard classes and compare themselves with other close-to-TTOD drivers anyway. I’m sure the X cars must do this. For some of you at that level, I can’t imagine it’s all that satisfying to only win your class, especially if you are by far the fastest driver in it. You probably care more about TTOD or have informally put yourself in a subgroup of the people usually very close to you.

. While we do compare our times, we don't disregard our class and we do pay attention to the BRI. The BRI, while flawed, is still a fairly good indicator of driver skill across the classes.

8. Same in the nether regions: I, for one example, am pleased if I incrementally narrow the fairly large gap with the Sharps – and of course, in a spec class, our cars are VERY similar (robbing me of all excuses, and giving me incentive to improve even if I never catch them). Chuck may always beat his wife, and he may always beat me. (Oops, that didn’t sound right, did it? Sorry Chuck and Debby.) I can accept that while still working to improve. But I have also always made an informal comparison with others who tend to be more similar to me in time (regardless of class). No doubt they sometimes improve more, or more quickly, than I do. If they also have a better car, their superior skills will put them WAY ahead of me, informally bumping them out of my class. If we’re both improving, and the cars are not too different, we may stay in the same class and go back and forth for a long time, enhancing incentives and competitiveness in what seems to me like a good way. I’m sure there are others who think of it this way (I think Jad said he makes this suggestion to his students…) to add to the fun quotient while they still try to get better.

I don't believe there's a better way to make my point than the highlighted sentence above. You drive similar cars, you have no excuses and you're motivated to improve your driving because you know it's not the car that needs to improve.

9. Some of the point adjustments in the current system make sense in a broad way but not always in the details. Some of them are just wacky. Still, people have put a great deal of good faith effort into it over a long period of time and I think that deserves great respect. It’s also inherently hard to get one’s mind around the way driver skill and car performance are not always really separable in any system as complex as ours. In lots of other motorsports, classes are fewer and easier to define, drivers and cars are more comparable.

Driver skill and car performance ARE separable. Put a top driver in almost any car and they'll do well even while driving at less than 10/10ths. If you feel that point adjustments are "wacky", submit a proposal to change it. It happens quite often at every racing level.

10. I’d like to suggest we add system like this (perhaps for TT first, because that’s what it’s “optimized” for) as a side-by-side experiment, like an additional BRI, just grouping the classes similar to the way Bill proposes (with whatever tweaks people like) but not using the handicaps to adjust times – I think the fast people deserve to stay at the top. That might give people a chance to see whether it has any merit in real life (where we generate testosterone by burning hydrocarbons rather than electrons), who likes it and who doesn’t, whether the classes are relatively stable or not, etc.

If Bill and others want to do the math and see how this works out compared to BRI (which would be useless, redundant, and impossible to quantify with the new proposed system), that's fine by me.

I fail to see how this would be better. How do you award trophies (and the accompanying prize money) in a system that could conceivably have drivers changing classes quite often? How do you define track records? How is this system fairer to a skilled driver? How does this system improve a driver's skill set?

[mrondeau]

Oops! Posted twice. As if it wasn't long enough.

[Gary Burch]

mark,well said...

[Jess]

The result is a car that can win its class by 3+ seconds routinely

Don't pat yourself on the back to hard

Standings for Event: 2014-01-04
CC03 115 Gill, Adam 1998 Boxster 1:02.36
CC03 40 Osterberg, Jess 1976 914 1:02.77 .41
Standings for Event: 2014-02-09
CC03 115 Gill, Adam 1998 Boxster 1:00.19
CC03 40 Osterberg, Jess 1976 914 1:01.23 1.04
Standings for Event: 2014-04-19
CC03 115 Gill, Adam 1998 Boxster 1:02.27
CC03 40 Osterberg, Jess 1976 914 1:04.20 1.93


Not bad for a mid CC02 car

Seriously I have been doing this since the 70's and I have found that the rules have never made it equal for everyone. I do think the classifications we have now are one of the best because it give you a lot of options. Just look at CC03 you have 911SCs, Carrera, 914, and Boxster in the same class. I was lucky and learned early to work on my driving and not worry about the competition. In the early days most of the cars were the same so classification was not a big issue. Just like in the past you will have people purchase speed so if you are equal in talent you will never win. That’s where the spec class is a good place to compete no excuses. I found when I focused on my driving and not worry about the rules I improve. Also talking to others on how they attack a corner is very beneficial. Some drivers will ask to work a corner that they are having issues with to get some ideas to improve. Bottom line if you focus on your driving you will become faster. I am not stating anything new that hasn’t been stated in this thread just sharing through my club experiences.

The other option is to build a cheater car with frosting. Just kidding

[Dan Chambers]

I found when I focused on my driving and not worry about the rules I improve. Also talking to others on how they attack a corner is very beneficial. Some drivers will ask to work a corner that they are having issues with to get some ideas to improve. Bottom line if you focus on your driving you will become faster.

+1. 'nough said.

[AGill]

The result is a car that can win its class by 3+ seconds routinely

Don't pat yourself on the back to hard

Standings for Event: 2014-01-04
CC03 115 Gill, Adam 1998 Boxster 1:02.36
CC03 40 Osterberg, Jess 1976 914 1:02.77 .41
Standings for Event: 2014-02-09
CC03 115 Gill, Adam 1998 Boxster 1:00.19
CC03 40 Osterberg, Jess 1976 914 1:01.23 1.04
Standings for Event: 2014-04-19
CC03 115 Gill, Adam 1998 Boxster 1:02.27
CC03 40 Osterberg, Jess 1976 914 1:04.20 1.93


Not bad for a mid CC02 car

Seriously I have been doing this since the 70's and I have found that the rules have never made it equal for everyone. I do think the classifications we have now are one of the best because it give you a lot of options. Just look at CC03 you have 911SCs, Carrera, 914, and Boxster in the same class. I was lucky and learned early to work on my driving and not worry about the competition. In the early days most of the cars were the same so classification was not a big issue. Just like in the past you will have people purchase speed so if you are equal in talent you will never win. That’s where the spec class is a good place to compete no excuses. I found when I focused on my driving and not worry about the rules I improve. Also talking to others on how they attack a corner is very beneficial. Some drivers will ask to work a corner that they are having issues with to get some ideas to improve. Bottom line if you focus on your driving you will become faster. I am not stating anything new that hasn’t been stated in this thread just sharing through my club experiences.

The other option is to build a cheater car with frosting. Just kidding

Oh crap, brain-fart! I'm the worst competitor ever...how did I forget my biggest and closest competition??? Sorry, Jess, totally my bad and it wasn't intentional. You drive the wheels off your car and you know it.

[pecivil]

1. There may be, figuratively speaking, “pro” and “amateur” (and maybe semi-pro, etc. ) divisions within the club, and this might be part of the intensely negative tone of some of the reactions to this. I don’t mean anything negative by “amateur” and consider myself in that group. (I don’t think this is the same as the SS vs. CC class distinction.) Some people are interested in and able to put much more time, energy, and $ into this, and make it a more central pursuit. Others don’t have those luxuries, or have other important commitments, but still greatly value and enjoy participating as much as possible. Many of us like the competition and are committed to improving our skills – but have limitations on how many events we can come to, and/or how much time and $ we can put into developing our cars, given our life circumstances. I think these are legitimate differences, and that both groups are important to the club. The more the merrier, and the better off the club will be in terms of paying for track time.

I think this makes the best point on this thread. Some people due to their personal circumstances, can be the "pros" and some can't. In my time spent doing this which hasn't been much, I definitely noticed this very quickly. Some people are more serious, have more money to spend, are more competitive, and as a result do the things that make you fast, whatever the rules may be, however they might be based. What makes a "pro"? Probably the most impt thing is time. Taking time to learn how to drive fast. Of course the car matters, but as we see on this thread, all our pros say not nearly as much as taking the time to learn.

Others are not in the "pro" class because they don't have the time others make to do this for whatever reason. Their level of seriousness is less. They come to have fun, and understand their times are slower and probably the main reason is they are not as good drivers. Not that they don't want to be faster, just that for what they can "put into it" they are not at the top. To me this seems somewhat independent of car class.

I understand the motivation behind both concepts of rules. And I firmly would think the same people at the top now, would still be. In X class in AX I would frequently win in the Elise. Then at TT at the track, I would get blown away by 2 other gents in Loti, yes theirs were faster and had more HP, but they still would always beat me if all 3 of us drove my car. We were in the "same class" but not really if you get my drift.

[Jess]

Adam

wasn't intentional

sure it wasn't

No worries just some competitive fun.

The sad news April's race will be my last for a while so you won't have me chasing you for the rest of the season. Yes chasing
As soon as I heal I will be back better, stronger, and faster, OR Maybe just back having fun racing.

[Dave Diamond]

Hey Monte - Good points For one or two events you and I were in close to the same "time class" (as per the proposal being discussed here), and then you took a leap ahead to what would probably be the the next "time class." Made sense to me, despite the differences in cars. When will you be back with us other amateurs at the track?

[pecivil]

hey Dave!
That is a good question, I wish I knew the answer! I definitely miss it very much, but as you noted well, life circumstances sometimes take us on a path that makes AX and TT difficult to do, as mine has. I had to sell the lotus at the end of 2012, and my 996 daily driver is just that, my daily driver, and currently I dont have the spare $$ to keep up with the higher costs for tires and maintenance AX adds, not to mention if it breaks, I cant get to work. And I have had some medical problems that made attendance difficult as well. I do miss it so much. Performance driving definitely got under my skin and in my blood!

I see you also lost your boxster! sad to hear that!

At any rate, when my circumstances change for the better, I want to get a nice 951 track car! and maybe get Dave M & Chuck S to show me how to drive it!

[AGill]

hey Dave!
That is a good question, I wish I knew the answer! I definitely miss it very much, but as you noted well, life circumstances sometimes take us on a path that makes AX and TT difficult to do, as mine has. I had to sell the lotus at the end of 2012, and my 996 daily driver is just that, my daily driver, and currently I dont have the spare $$ to keep up with the higher costs for tires and maintenance AX adds, not to mention if it breaks, I cant get to work. And I have had some medical problems that made attendance difficult as well. I do miss it so much. Performance driving definitely got under my skin and in my blood!

I see you also lost your boxster! sad to hear that!

At any rate, when my circumstances change for the better, I want to get a nice 951 track car! and maybe get Dave M & Chuck S to show me how to drive it!

Monte - glad to see you post but sorry to hear that life has gotten in the way of you getting out to join us. You are missed!

[ChuckS]

Monte - Ditto what Adam said.

We have all missed you.
Hope you are getting better!

Will absolutely help you with a Turbo.
In fact, drive mine to see why we like them!


Chuck