BRI revisited
Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 10:28 amSo to my amazement, recent posts suggested that some of our racers actually thought that the BRI is still less than perfect! Endeavoring to make certain that only the most deserving drivers get to openly brag about the dolphin, I have once again foolishly ventured into the murky world of handicapping the different classes.
There seemed to be general agreement that N had too soft an index. This is almost certainly due to the fact that the index is driven by results in our database (which now goes back almost 5 years). Only recently have we seen the GT2 and the GT3 competing in N class, and the results of these cars are considerably faster that the historic average of cars in the class.
Someone suggested that we use only the most recent year or two, rather than the entire 5-year database. Comparing a 5-year average to a 2-year average, it is obvious that a few classes have become much more competitive (i.e. faster) in the last couple of years and probably should have their index adjusted upward.
After listening to the suggestions, and reviewing the database, I decided that it was time to consult the Ouija Board and come up with some tweaks to the BRI. So here are the proposed changes:
AS/S: increase index from 0.961 to 0.970 (sorry George, but you’re too fast)
CS/S: increase index from 0.975 to 0.980 (ditto to the Hauptmans)
MS/S: decrease index from 1.028 to 1.022
NS/S: increase index from 1.033 to 1.050 (with apologies to Neil)
Indices for stock classes would continue to be 0.025 higher than SS, prepared 0.25 higher that stock, etc.
We’ve still got 2 weeks before the next AX to argue about these proposed changes, so get out your own Ouija Board, read the tea leaves (or goat entails), Tarot cards, or whatever.
Anybody have any idea’s about a certain 911 that’s dominating GSS?
There seemed to be general agreement that N had too soft an index. This is almost certainly due to the fact that the index is driven by results in our database (which now goes back almost 5 years). Only recently have we seen the GT2 and the GT3 competing in N class, and the results of these cars are considerably faster that the historic average of cars in the class.
Someone suggested that we use only the most recent year or two, rather than the entire 5-year database. Comparing a 5-year average to a 2-year average, it is obvious that a few classes have become much more competitive (i.e. faster) in the last couple of years and probably should have their index adjusted upward.
After listening to the suggestions, and reviewing the database, I decided that it was time to consult the Ouija Board and come up with some tweaks to the BRI. So here are the proposed changes:
AS/S: increase index from 0.961 to 0.970 (sorry George, but you’re too fast)
CS/S: increase index from 0.975 to 0.980 (ditto to the Hauptmans)
MS/S: decrease index from 1.028 to 1.022
NS/S: increase index from 1.033 to 1.050 (with apologies to Neil)
Indices for stock classes would continue to be 0.025 higher than SS, prepared 0.25 higher that stock, etc.
We’ve still got 2 weeks before the next AX to argue about these proposed changes, so get out your own Ouija Board, read the tea leaves (or goat entails), Tarot cards, or whatever.
Anybody have any idea’s about a certain 911 that’s dominating GSS?
, sitting in a car that has a better weight-to-power ratio 
, you have 944's labeled "doormat" in GSS. 
, put Tom T. behind the wheel of a 944 
, or put a less skilled driver in his stock 911 
.
) in the BRI won't be the answer - alas 
. The answer, I'm afraid, will be for some of us in the 944's to become better, more experienced drivers 
about older 911's hanging with newer 911's, but then in the next auto-x if you beat me then I will be 