944 Spec BRI index

[martinreinhardt]

I have gotten top BRI a few times in the past and usually score fairly high. But, I don't believe in it's accuracy overall and rarely look at it. To me it's just a fun addition to the results. I believe that some classes do have an advantage to score higher in the BRI.

[ttweed]

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.

Thanks for that info, Mark. If it's accurate, and I have no reason to think that you haven't studied the issue carefully, being a 944 owner, then the CC05 index might be closer than the CC06 index for 944 Spec class, since 452 and 463 are at the lower end of the point scale for CC06. Perhaps it should be set at a percentage of the difference between the CC05 and CC06 indexes, then? If you average 452 and 463, you get 457.5 points. That is only 15% into the CC06 point range of 450-499. The CC05 index is currently at 0.928 and the CC06 index is at 0.938. That is a difference of .010, 15% of which is .0015. Adding that to the .928 CC05 index would yield .9295 (possibly rounded to 0.930?) as a more accurate calculation of the proper 944 Spec index, in my mind, based on those facts.

Anybody have more input on these numbers? Or speak up if you think the whole BRI idea is a crock. People have always thought that to some extent, which is why it is unofficial, and why Curt A. coined the "polished dolphin" phrase (or was it "waxing your dolphin" originally?)--I forget, now, it was too long ago. The SCCA has used the "indexed time" (PAX) idea successfully for many years to compare classes containing cars that are far more disparate than our Porsche models. It shouldn't be that difficult to get a semi-useful system dialed in, but it would definitely be easier to just blow the whole thing off. We should do one or the other, according to how people actually feel about it, not just muddle along without thinking about it, or not addressing obvious issues when revealed.

That's my $0.02,
TT

[ChuckS]

The BRI is interesting and fun, but flawed. Always has been and always will be. Nature of the beast.

Concerning the original question, the reason that the differenct 944 Spec cars point out differently (even if optimized for the class) is that SPEC rules dictate a minimum weight of 2600 lbs AS THE CAR COMES OFF OF THE TRACK AT THE END OF A RACE with driver and all equipment that is in the car as it passes the checkered flag. This is vastly different than what the current rules for our AX classes take into consideration. The weight of the car itself is very dependant on the weight of the driver in Spec rules. A driver weighing 300 lbs could have a car weighing 200 lbs less than a driver weighing 100 lbs. The amount of gas you decide you want in the car also determines the ideal weight of the car. Also, usually in racing, you remove the passenger seat to reduce weight, which many cannot do in AX. Even in racing, no one wants to be DQ'ed for being underweight, so everyone runs from 20-50 lbs over the legal minimum to be sure and to deal with variations in the accuracy of various scales. In our current Z8 class rules, the "weight" is factored using tools, fluids, spare, etc - things that are NOT in the car during actual AX Timed runs.

So, in my opinion, 95+% of the 944 SPEC cars that run in an AX would point out at the top of CC05. One year (1988) could theoretically, if it has a very heavy driver point out in CC06. Is this fair to the other 95%? Because the LEGAL cars weight can vary by over 200 lbs, depending on the drivers weight, in my opinion, it is impossible to create a situation that is fair. I hate the politics of this, but if I were to "assign" a BRI index, it would be the sames as CC05 because that is what is an equivalent class for the vast majority of the cars out there, not the <5%.

[lrayner]

Gee sorry I've been missing the fun, as I kind of precipitated this. I agree with Chuck that the 944 Spec cars typically fall into CC 5 ( I was in error when I was thinking CC 4). I have always enjoyed the BRI, warts and all and would certainly advocate continuing to use it and tweek it. And its not just for the low horsepower guys to occasionally claim some glory but also to marvel at the brilliant driving of someone like Eric Kinninger who shows up and claims TTOD and BRI.

[ttweed]

The BRI is interesting and fun, but flawed. Always has been and always will be. Nature of the beast.

Thanks for your input, Chuck. Of course it is flawed, just like our current classification system is (and any racing ruleset, for that matter), but not fatally, IMHO. It is up to us to do our best to constantly evolve and refine it, just like we do with the Z8 rules, if we want to keep it interesting and fun and fair. Reading your input, I could definitely support using the CC05 index for 944 Spec--it's not that far off from my last suggestion, and it is still up to the driver to get everything from the car to win. Looking at the historical results for the class, I don't think such a move would allow them to dominate the BRI--at the last event, it would have moved Grant Raynor from 9th up to 6th, for example. If such a thing did occur, we could always adjust it again.

Of course when Erik K. shows up, or Mike Avitt or Martin Reinhardt uncork a perfect lap that wins both TTOD and the BRI, all us little guys are SOL, as Leigh pointed out. I wouldn't expect that to change, either.

TT

[Cajundaddy]

As another data point, the Boxster brothers run CC06 and with similar practice tires we run very close to 944spec and have enjoyed running nose to tail with Chuck, Deb, Sean, Jackie and Leigh over the last 3 years. Once we mount the "no excuse" tires we are usually a touch faster. CC05 is probably right for 944 Spec.

In other news, there is a proposed rule change for tire points on RA-1s and other 100tw tires. If it passes all 944 Spec cars will point out as CC05 and the BRI will correct itself. I believe this is the right answer to better align the classes as well as BRI.

[Kim Crosser]

On Saturday, in the mid-day practice sessions, I had what felt like a "near perfect lap" and a 1:05.93 in the Boxster. If I could have done that again in timed runs (woulda, coulda, shoulda), I would have edged Martin in the BRI by a couple of hundredths. The BRI isn't perfect, especially with the wide point ranges in some classes, but if you nail the track right, you can get up there in the standings.
In timed runs, I took the pressures down - thinking they were too high and this would get me another tenth or so. Unfortunately, my resulting times were much worse than my practice runs.
Moral of the story - if your times are good, don't mess with your setup just before timed runs.

[Jad]

I think the BRI is a very fun system and a good benchmark. If you are not generally near the top quarter, it is driver or car, not the classification. The system may not be accurate to a tenth of a second, but if you are several seconds off, look to see how optimized the car is, tire condition and as a very last resort, check the mirror and you will find the problem. As far as I can tell, the system does a pretty good job of telling you about which range you place as far as driver skill within the club, I do not think it tells you whether you were better than the guy you beat by a tenth in the BRI, but the car classification are not that accurate either.

The only completely accurate system is best time wins, and while it is accurate, it is a long way from fair for lots of reasons.

When you really think you have optimized the car and track, let Eric K or Mark R drive your car for a few laps and see if maybe you didn't leave a couple of seconds out there...

[AGill]

I think the BRI is a very fun system and a good benchmark. If you are not generally near the top quarter, it is driver or car, not the classification. The system may not be accurate to a tenth of a second, but if you are several seconds off, look to see how optimized the car is, tire condition and as a very last resort, check the mirror and you will find the problem. As far as I can tell, the system does a pretty good job of telling you about which range you place as far as driver skill within the club, I do not think it tells you whether you were better than the guy you beat by a tenth in the BRI, but the car classification are not that accurate either.

The only completely accurate system is best time wins, and while it is accurate, it is a long way from fair for lots of reasons.

When you really think you have optimized the car and track, let Eric K or Mark R drive your car for a few laps and see if maybe you didn't leave a coule of seconds out there...

I think Jad pretty much nailed a lot of this discussion with his above post and my 2012 season proves this. This season was the first season I attempted to optimize my car for the class I was in and my BRI results reflect this. In years past I had been just working on the driver for the most part. That said, I didn't pull out all the stops to optimize the car and there are still a couple changes I could make to make the car even faster and still stay within the same class. Bottom line, I didn't want to spend big money setting the car up so I just optimized with what I had to work with...my goal this year was to consistently be in the top 10 in raw times. Since the car has been in it's current trim I've placed 8th, 3rd, 4th, 7th, 4th and 3rd in the TTOD and 11th, 3rd, 4th, 4th, 3rd and 2nd in the BRI. And, I've been as close as .3 seconds off TTOD. If I were more skilled at setting up a car (and/or wanted to spend more money) or I was a more skilled driver I could have had even better results this year. The point is, my results are a combination of a fairly well optimized car for its class and a decent driver who is familiar with the car that is driven.

[LUCKY DAVE]

Guys, it's the BRI - Bench Racers Index, AKA Bull$hitters index. It's just for fun. One look at the "trophy" and the fact that it is awarded with BEER should tell you that.

The index will be perfectly fair about the time Yugos start dominating CC16 at Big Willow. In other words, never.

Until then, enjoy it for what it is for, humor and BS-ing.

[pecivil]

The index will be perfectly fair about the time Yugos start dominating CC16 at Big Willow. In other words, never.

Until then, enjoy it for what it is for, humor and BS-ing.

the sanest words uttered on this post! Like Jad said, the only way to determine results is with times. Everything else is "optimized guesswork". To many the BRI is fun, used for ribbing and enjoyment. I personally think that is great and as it should be. If you think it is more than that, or try to make it more than that you have missed the point I reckon. There is only 1 way to "take the car out of the equation" when trying to determine driver skill. it is putting everyone in the exact same car, letting everyone get equal seat time, and have a competition in similar conditions. We all know this is impossible to do in practice pretty much. BMW club has a weekend where all the class winners on Saturday then have a "runoff" on Sunday where they all run in a "mystery" car that is only revealed right before the runs. I am not even sure if that really does find the best driver, but it is closer. It would still be the same people winning if we did I am sure.

At any rate, trying to optimize and data point the BRI is really just fooling yourself that it actually means something more than "humor and BS-ing" as Dave so eloquently puts it. The fact that the same people popup on the top 10 times list and the BRI list shows some correlation, but that does not make it "accurate" by any means. We all know who the good drivers are by looking at the raw times, right? People like it so by all means keep it, but dont try to play numbers "ad nauseum" to make it "accurate" since we all seem to agree it can never be that. I look to the Top 10 list to compare myself too. If I am on it I had a good day, if I am not I didnt. Easy. The best drivers in our chapter are almost always on that list and that is the way to judge driver skill IMHO because it only involves actual times, irrespective of class or BRI.

[ttweed]

There is only 1 way to "take the car out of the equation" when trying to determine driver skill. it is putting everyone in the exact same car, letting everyone get equal seat time, and have a competition in similar conditions. We all know this is impossible to do in practice pretty much. BMW club has a weekend where all the class winners on Saturday then have a "runoff" on Sunday where they all run in a "mystery" car that is only revealed right before the runs. I am not even sure if that really does find the best driver, but it is closer.

Your comments are most welcome and appreciated, Monte. The BMW club "runoff" you mention sounds to me like a contest to see who can adapt to a different and unfamiliar car the fastest!

At any rate, trying to optimize and data point the BRI is really just fooling yourself that it actually means something more than "humor and BS-ing" as Dave so eloquently puts it. The fact that the same people popup on the top 10 times list and the BRI list shows some correlation, but that does not make it "accurate" by any means. We all know who the good drivers are by looking at the raw times, right? People like it so by all means keep it, but dont try to play numbers "ad nauseum" to make it "accurate" since we all seem to agree it can never be that.

I hope I am not being "ad nauseum" about this subject. My intention, as stated previously, is to keep improving the index or just get rid of it completely. Parsing your comments, I am putting you on the side of keeping it, from the "people like it" part. Yes, it is unofficial, just for fun, and imperfect, but is that a good reason to quit trying to improve it? The accuracy may be suspect, but why not take logical steps to make it better, if we can determine what those might be?

I look to the Top 10 list to compare myself too. If I am on it I had a good day, if I am not I didnt. Easy. The best drivers in our chapter are almost always on that list and that is the way to judge driver skill IMHO because it only involves actual times, irrespective of class or BRI.

I'm glad you said "almost always" about the Top 10 list, because there are definitely people driving slower cars who NEVER get on that list and are nonetheless great drivers. Two that come to my mind immediately are Gary Burch and Jess Osterberg. I don't think I have ever seen either one of them in the top 10 on raw time, but they drive the wheels off their relatively underpowered, "under-tired" cars at every event and can often get into the top 10 (or even win) on indexed time. These are the kind of drivers the index was created for, and I think it gives an added dimension of fun to our events. From what I've heard so far, there is plenty of skepticism (or cynicism) about the BRI out there, but no one has come out and just said "I hate it, it's a waste of time, we should $hit-can it!" If anyone does feel that way, go ahead and say it--I can respect that. But if we aren't going to do away with it, we should keep improving it or it will only become more irrelevant and inaccurate. That doesn't serve anyone, whether you like the BRI or not.

TT

[pecivil]

I totally understand your point Tom. And I do vote for keeping it, because it is a great way to end the awards and I love to rib the winners! I definitely didn't mean in disparage the fast guys in slower cars at all, that is just what I use to judge my performance. I am not in the top 10 that often either, but I want to be! Adam Gill, do you hear me? Stop bumping me down the list dude! lol.
And I am sure I have seen Gary in the top 10 at least a few times!!

I think you are right about the BMW club runoff weekend. But part of the feeling is adjusting to a different car, and still being able to drive it fast, is part of being a good driver.

I am sure you will come up with a scientific way to make it more accurate and more power to ya!

[LUCKY DAVE]

I too enjoy the BRI and don't want it to disappear.
Tom, I encourage you to continually tweak the index to make it a fair as possible. I just want everyone to remember it's just for fun (all competitive driving is just for fun after all) and not take the BRI too seriously. Drink your beer.....
Personally I measure myself in reference to TTOD (how far back I am is my measure of how I did that day). Pretty close.... I drove well. Waaaayyyy back there..... Not so well

[Jad]

Tom,

In case I wasn't clear, I also like the BRI and think it should continue and be refined. Just don't spend too much time looking for perfection, it is a good benchmark, but not an absolute science as there are too many uncontrollable variables.

Thanks.