PCA GGR Point System, Time to start figuring out how to fine tune it |
|
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG.
This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way. Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners. |
|
PCA GGR Point System, Time to start figuring out how to fine tune it |
nine14cats |
Nov 15 2006, 06:39 PM
Post
#1
|
Bill Pickering -- 914-6 GT aka....Leeloo Group: Members Posts: 2,618 Joined: 10-February 03 From: Campbell, CA Member No.: 287 Region Association: None |
A few of us run PCA events in the Golden Gate Region and Zone 7. This year GGR instituted a points system that took the place of the decade old system that had cars classed by type (mostly). This system needed updating and the points system addressed some of the updates, most notably incorporating the newer water cooled cars.
Unfortunately, the system needs tweeking to make it equitable. A glaring example would be Grant's current car in the same class as Andrew Blyhoder's ride. Both are in AX3. Or in Time Trials where TT8 has some cars that in technology and power to weight are very uncompetitive car to car. I'm getting ready to respond to the Zone Rep in a PCA forum and encourage anyone wanting to join in the debate to do so. Go to www.pca-ggr.org and click on "online community". Just register and join in. Here are some datapoints from my looking at it. I compared 2005 (the last season run under the old rules) and 2006 (the current season with the new points system). I'll compare AX participants: 2005 = 227 different participants 2006 = 195 different participants Number of classes where a minimum of (1) participant competed at least once: 2005 = 69 2006 = 23 Based on the above number the points system really was succesfull in cutting out the number of classes. Now let's look at the number of classes that had enough particpants to qualify for the competition standings/year end awards. Number of classes where particpants qualified for awards: 2005 = 26 2006 = 18 You could make the argument that people wanted someone to compete with, so they tried fitting into some classes under the old system. Total number of drivers qualifying for awards: 2005 = 50 2006 = 53 Average number of drivers qualified for awards in each class: 2005 = 1.7 2006 = 2.5 This is a very interesting statistic. On the surface you would think that under the new points system that the average number of drivers qualified for awards would be substantially higher with the reduction in classes. I then decided to take out the biggest class in terms of number of qualified participants from each year (N class in 2005 and AX10 class in 2006), in case the number of drivers in these classes were skewing the data. Here's what I got for average qualified award participants: 2005 = 2 2006 = 3.1 Statistically, the percentage growth per number of qualified award participants was substantial, >30%. But in whole number terms....all this debate and we average 1 extra qualified driver per AX class? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/WTF.gif) One nice benefit we did see with the new rules is the reduction of single driver classes from 15 to 3. But the data says we moved that single driver into a class that had 2 drivers and made it 3.... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/av-943.gif) It's my opinion that we need to make a few more adjustments with the new system. Here's a few charts of what it looks like. The red bars show total particpants per class (even if just 1 time the entire season) and the blue shows the participants qualified for year end competition awards (in this case a minimum of 5 out of the 9 events). Bill P. Attached image(s) |
DanT |
Nov 15 2006, 10:01 PM
Post
#2
|
Going back to the Dark Side! Group: Members Posts: 4,300 Joined: 4-October 04 From: Auburn, CA Member No.: 2,880 Region Association: None |
I was after the Adhoc Committee (they proposed the points system) for 3 years trying to get them to address the starting points values....they are grouped too closely together, yielding just what you pointed out in my class. I can hold my own but not against cars with 3x the horsepower...All the tracks GGR uses are HP friendly... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)
Going up the hill from 5-6 and 6-7 at Laguna is not going to be a fair fight between my car (even with the new slug) and the cars...(boxsters, 911s, 964s etc) in my class for TT. At AX I think we are pretty close since HP is not as big of a factor... Bill, the DEC is only there to pass judgement on the proposals presented to them each year...they are not there to write new rules or change anything.... If you or anyone perceives an inequity in our current points system, then they make a proposal to change them in some way like BillD did this year... Our bilaws are not set up to enable the DEC to make wholesale changes...of course individuals of the DEC or the DEC as a group can detect inequities just like any of us and then make proposals to be discussed by us all and then voted upon by them... THis is what happened in the early 90s....the Evolution Comm was made up of the DEC and some other interested folks and they came up with our old rules... You are right the silence says volumes just as it did at the end of last season... Larry is willing to concede that changes are needed and inevitable, David on the other hand is of the belief that things are just about perfect....but then again he and the majority of the Adhoc Comm that brought us these rules no longer run with us in TT or AX. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) |
nebreitling |
Nov 16 2006, 07:28 PM
Post
#3
|
Member Emeritus Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-March 03 From: San Francisco Member No.: 478 |
QUOTE Larry is willing to concede that changes are needed and inevitable, David on the other hand is of the belief that things are just about perfect....but then again he and the majority of the Adhoc Comm that brought us these rules no longer run with us in TT or AX. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) weird.... not that i have (or ever had) a stake in it, but anyone who thinks the TT rules are fair is smoking some pretty optimistic shit. |
DanT |
Nov 16 2006, 08:53 PM
Post
#4
|
Going back to the Dark Side! Group: Members Posts: 4,300 Joined: 4-October 04 From: Auburn, CA Member No.: 2,880 Region Association: None |
QUOTE Larry is willing to concede that changes are needed and inevitable, David on the other hand is of the belief that things are just about perfect....but then again he and the majority of the Adhoc Comm that brought us these rules no longer run with us in TT or AX. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) weird.... not that i have (or ever had) a stake in it, but anyone who thinks the TT rules are fair is smoking some pretty optimistic shit. ......and there you go. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif) Thank you Nathan.... it takes some folks looking from the outside to put this all into perspective. I believe that is part of the reason you saw so very few 914s of any kind or modification compete last season... |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th May 2024 - 06:51 AM |
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002 |
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community! We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ... |