944 Spec BRI index

[ttweed]

Leigh Rayner raised an interesting point to me at the last AX regarding the BRI index for the 944 Spec class that I think deserves some discussion or examination. Granted, the BRI is in a fairly undeveloped state since our adoption of the new classification scheme, and more data is needed in order to refine it further, but there may be some obvious facts that we can reference in order to increase its accuracy and fairness without the need for such data. I know very little about the 944 Spec class rules, but if I put this question out there, maybe people with more knowledge can comment. The question is: "Under our current points scheme, what CC class would a fully developed 944 Spec car land in?" Leigh thought his car could run in CC04, but when I look at the Z8 Car Classification site, it appears that he has pointed out his 924S as being in CC05, with 436 total points. I have no idea if this listing is correct or if his car is fully optimized for 944 Spec (although it seems to do very well against the other 944 Spec cars, which may or may not be fully optimized as well). What I do know from looking at the event results is that the 944 Spec class has been assigned an index of 0.9380, which is the same as the CC06 class.

Unless the Rayner car is not fully developed for 944 Spec, or there are errors or omissions in the point count on the Z8 classification site which would add 15 mod points or more to the car, it seems patently unfair to me to have the BRI index for 944 Spec set at the same level as CC06, and we should correct it immediately to 0.9280, the same as CC05. As further evidence of this I would reference this past classification thread discussing the correct 944 Spec point count, which notes that Chuck Sharp's 944 Spec car is also pointed out as CC05, within one point of the Rayner car at 435 (the difference being 10 lbs. of declared weight): http://forum.pcasdr.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5014&p=37547#p37547

If anyone has more info or a different view of these facts, please feel free to comment here.

Thx,
TT

[Mmagus]

With the total lack of data, the new BRI is a "guestimate" at best any attempt to optimize for it its wasted effort . With regards to some cars cars it was broken and "patently unfair" long before the rule change. The data evidence is easy to see. I started ignoring it long ago. Why the urge to correct it when we didn't before?

As to pointing the car out...I'm confused by the question. Either accept the given SPEC points, or point it out like we all have, and run the CC class it falls in. If the car isn't optimized for SPEC, it won't point out as high. Right?

[LUCKY DAVE]

With the total lack of data, the new BRI is a "guestimate" at best any attempt to optimize for it its wasted effort . With regards to some cars cars it was broken and "patently unfair" long before the rule change. The data evidence is easy to see. I started ignoring it long ago. Why the urge to correct it when we didn't before?

Because the BRI is clearly unfair for MY class, always has been.







even when I change classes

[Mmagus]

Mine too Dave. That's why I ignore it.

[ttweed]

With the total lack of data, the new BRI is a "guestimate" at best any attempt to optimize for it its wasted effort . With regards to some cars cars it was broken and "patently unfair" long before the rule change. The data evidence is easy to see. I started ignoring it long ago. Why the urge to correct it when we didn't before?

Ummm, because some of us who will never win TTOD like to "polish our dolphin" with an unofficial award that attempts to take the car out of the equation?

Seriously, Mark, the basis for the current indexes came from the GGR region, which must have been based on some sort of data analysis, allowing us at least a decent starting point. If you feel that your car's index is inappropriate, maybe you can offer some data to support that? Or if everyone feels as harshly as you (and possibly Dave, although his remark does appear to be in humor) about the BRI, why are we even bothering to maintain it and publish the results? We should just stop going to the trouble and sh!tcan the whole thing if the majority of people feel it is as useless and irrelevant as you do. Maybe since you have been ignoring it, you missed the fact that it actually has been "corrected" before, and that we have quite a constant history in the club's driving competition (over 10 years now) of attempting to revise it to keep it current and fair, as the rules have changed. http://pcasdr.net/events/driving-info/bench-racers-index/historical-bri/

I will happily allow this thread to be turned into a driver poll to determine if the BRI is perceived by most folks to be a stupid, irrelevant, and pointless exercise with no redeeming social value, and the AX chairs, or Board, or whoever is responsible can just terminate the program if so desired and quit wasting time on it. Myself, I have had fun with it, so I'm interested in continuing the evolution into the future.

YMMV, so post away, people!
TT

[Mmagus]

Well Tom I randomly clicked a BRI result date. April of 2010. Andy Mail an AMAZING driver ran a corrected time of 1.26.01 over Jerry Bumpus' corrected 1.27.46 (in the SAME car...) The BRI winner, Hassan Zaidi had a corrected BRI of 1.22.93. Which means that to win Andy would have had to run 3.08 seconds faster. Or that Hassan, using Jerry's cars, could have done so. Impossible.
Click a random date for the old GSS class and do the math, the results are similarly impossible.

I'm not mad, nor is this posted harshly, (that's your interpretation, not my state if mind) but why waste energy doing this ? So I ignore the BRI and just try to best my closest competitors.

Mark.

[ttweed]

As to pointing the car out...I'm confused by the question. Either accept the given SPEC points, or point it out like we all have, and run the CC class it falls in. If the car isn't optimized for SPEC, it won't point out as high. Right?

That is correct--if the car is not optimized for 944 Spec, it won't point out as high, and the owner may choose to run in an appropriate CC class for whatever level of development they choose. I do believe that cars like John Kincaid's may not be fully developed for 944 spec, and may be able to run in CC04, in some configuration, possibly CC03 with street tires. However, regardless of development, there is great competition in the 944 Spec class, and if the owner does choose to run there instead of the CC classes, they should all be assigned an index that is appropriate for a fully developed Spec car, since the intention of the BRI is to assign an index appropriate for the highest possible speed potential of any car eligible for each class, without any consideration of who may be driving it.

My contention is that a fully-developed 944 Spec car would point out in the CC05 class at a maximum, not in CC06, so their index should be equal to the CC05 index not the CC06 index. If someone can show me that when a 944 (or 924) makes all the possible legal mods under the 944 Spec class racing rules, and is taken down to the minimum legal weight, that it will have a point total greater than 450 under our CC class rules, than I would say that the current index is fine.

TT

[Gary Burch]

the BRI is perceived by most folks to be a stupid, irrelevant, and pointless exercise with no redeeming social value
TT

that is exactly the reason I like it

Well Tom I randomly clicked a BRI result date. April of 2010. Andy Mail an AMAZING driver ran a corrected time of 1.26.01 over Jerry Bumpus' corrected 1.27.46 (in the SAME car...) The BRI winner, Hassan Zaidi had a corrected BRI of 1.22.93. Which means that to win Andy would have had to run 3.08 seconds faster. Or that Hassan, using Jerry's cars, could have done so. Impossible.
Click a random date for the old GSS class and do the math, the results are similarly impossible.

I'm not mad, nor is this posted harshly, (that's your interpretation, not my state if mind) but why waste energy doing this ? So I ignore the BRI and just try to best my closest competitors.

Mark.

another random sampling with the new class system, and again Jerry as the test subject..

Feb 5,2012

if Jerry had run 1 second faster he would have won the BRI, and for those who have seen Jerry drive, you know there was probably another second out there.
The variables in the BRI are the same as the variables in any autocross(track, tires, car, etc...) some days you drive fast, others you don't

[Mmagus]

Tom,

I aplaude your sentiment and enthusiasm and hope that it will be applied to the rest of the classes. Until such a time I will ignore BRI for the reasons given in my example, and try to best Jerry (we are driving the same cars as last year though now we are in different classes.) Who knows...I may even try sneaking past the times of folks in classes higher than mine.

Mark

[Mmagus]

[/quote]

another random sampling with the new class system, and again Jerry as the test subject..

Feb 5,2012

if Jerry had run 1 second faster he would have won the BRI, and for those who have seen Jerry drive, you know there was probably another second out there.
The variables in the BRI are the same as the variables in any autocross(track, tires, car, etc...) some days you drive fast, others you don't[/quote]

I disagree Gary, though he has his off days, like we all do, Jerry runs his VERY best times in timed runs, a tendency that has spanked my butt repeatedly, he tends to leave NOTHING on the track and more power to him. But even in your example he placed 14th in BRI, thats a good placing, but a long way from the top.

Again folks, please don't think I am going "sour apples" on this, I enjoy my victories and accept my defeats, with all the grace I can, as my competitors will attest. The BRI is just the reality it is and I don't waste effort worrying about it.

[ttweed]

Well Tom I randomly clicked a BRI result date. April of 2010. Andy Mail an AMAZING driver ran a corrected time of 1.26.01 over Jerry Bumpus' corrected 1.27.46 (in the SAME car...) The BRI winner, Hassan Zaidi had a corrected BRI of 1.22.93. Which means that to win Andy would have had to run 3.08 seconds faster. Or that Hassan, using Jerry's cars, could have done so. Impossible.
Click a random date for the old GSS class and do the math, the results are similarly impossible.

Mark,
FYI, I ran GS/S for several years and won the BRI more than a few times:
http://results.pcasdr.org/event_bri_standings.php?event_date=2004-10-09&database=&time_format=0#1:29.44-908
http://results.pcasdr.org/event_bri_standings.php?event_date=2004-03-13&database=&time_format=0#1:30.33-908
http://results.pcasdr.org/event_bri_standings.php?event_date=2003-03-29&database=&time_format=0#1:39.03-908

The example you chose to demonstrate your point was a result of the problems with the G class that began when they threw out all the 911s and made G a 944-only class, but that is a whole 'nother story that you weren't around to witness, apparently. The exclusion of the 911s reduced the speed potential for the class, but the index did not follow suit. The correct thing to do would have been to move the 944s into a new "D" class, with a correspondingly lower index, instead of moving the 911s to H, making them uncompetitive, and I argued that point at the time without effect.

TT

[ttweed]

Because the BRI is clearly unfair for MY class, always has been.

Clearly unfair, Dave!
http://results.pcasdr.org/event_bri_standings.php?event_date=2009-08-23&database=&time_format=0#1:26.75-908
http://results.pcasdr.org/event_bri_standings.php?event_date=2009-10-04&database=&time_format=0#1:27.20-208
http://results.pcasdr.org/event_bri_standings.php?event_date=2009-04-11&database=&time_format=0#1:10.25-208


TT

[Mmagus]

Yes Tom, I noticed that, and I guess I should have put the a 944 disclaimer in my comment. lol You won...in 2004. thats a long time ago. Doesn't that say something is off? Can we 944/924 people all be that bad at this driving thing? I appreciate your efforts at fairness, truly I do.

Mark

[ttweed]

Doesn't that say something is off?

What it says to me is that the 944s were victims of some dubious rule changes that ignored the "hierarchy of speed" that was implicit in our old "A-Z" classification scheme, with the A class being the slowest, just as the CC01 class is now the slowest in the 1-16 hierarchy. To eliminate what was perceived as unfair competition from the older 911s, all the 911s in G class were moved up instead of taking the 944s and moving them down. This meant that the 911s were no longer competitive in their new class, and the 944s could not have an index lower than F, since F is a slower class according to the hierarchy. Since no one on the rules committee paid any attention to my arguments, I set about to build an F class car that would beat all the G class cars to prove my point. Both segments of the old G class, both the 911s and the 944s, suffered for that decision back in 2005 or 2006, whenever it was, but as you say, that's old news. With the new CC classes, all models have been thrown together again with the compression in the class structure.

Can we 944/924 people all be that bad at this driving thing?

IMHO, the 944 can be a very capable car when modified appropriately, but in stock form, not so much, compared to the stock capabilities of other Porsche models. Maybe that means that the base points for the 924/944 should be lower than they are, I don't know, but I believe the success of some 944 drivers in scoring top-10 and even top-5 BRI positions like Jerry, Mark Rondeau, John Kinkaid, Leigh and Grant Rayner, and even yourself, scoring an 8th place on the BRI this year and another one last year, both under the new classification scheme, shows the BRI is not as whacked-out as you are portraying it to be.

TT

[mrondeau]

Tom,

A fully optimized 1988 944 Spec car that weighs 2400 pounds can point out at 463 points which would put it in CC06. A fully optimized 1988 924S Spec car that weighs 2400 pounds can point out at 452 points, which is still in CC06. Not all Spec cars are going to point out at that level, but it's the potential that matters. Keep in mind while pointing out your car that it's the weight of the car without driver and full of fluids and don't forget the points for no Catalytic converter (5 points) AND non stock muffler or no muffler (5 points).

Mark,

While you may choose to ignore the BRI for the reasons you've listed, it does have it's place and has can allow all drivers to compare their driving ability against all other drivers, regardless of vehicle. This should be taken with a grain of salt and tongue in cheek.

As it was explained to me a few years ago, the BRI assumes a FULLY optimized car for its class, driven to ITS limit. If a car is not fully optimized and/or not driven to the cars limit, it might not be at the top of the BRI. That means that the car needs to be fully optimized with fresh rubber, and a dialed in set up.

I was able to achieve multiple top ten BRI finishes under the previous system in GP, including a 1st in BRI in a 944. In the new system, I have two 2nd place BRI finishes at Chuckwalla. In my opinion, this is a 944 friendly track. Auto Club Speedway is the opposite of that and I have still been able to get 10th in BRI in the new system. Each AX track is different and will reward certain car types and set ups differently. Each big track is different and will reward certain car types and set ups differently. It took a while for me to optimize my car and to learn to push it to its absolute limits. I used the BRI stats to compare my times to the top drivers in the club. I feel that it helped me become a better driver.

Keep in mind that driving well and driving at the absolute limit are two very different things. As I've been told before, "there's always another 1/2 second out there".

That's just my opinion and YMMV.