PCA GGR Point System, Time to start figuring out how to fine tune it Options

[anthony]

First, remember that Trekkor and Grant essentially have race cars. Those cars are classed much higher than a stock 911.

I was talking stockish 914-4 versus your Carrera or my SC. At GGR AXes, usually Alameda, at least 60% of the time I feel that my SC has the upper hand over my 914 2.0L. And I'm talking courses where I didn't even get out of 2nd gear in the SC.

The year before at the Zone 7 2-day AX school we had a short and tight course where the 914s were king but on the long and fast course my stock SC was several seconds faster than Bi level 914s.

[anthony]

I was looking at the proposed 2007 rules. If this approved it will make 914s much more competitive.

Base points for 914s

From: Bill Dally

Proposal: Change the autocross base points for a 914 2.0 to 225 for a 914 1.7 or 1.8 to 200 and for a 914-6 to 250. Change the time trial base points for a 914/6 to 175.

Rationale: The current AX base point assignments for mid-engine cars are not appropriate. A base point assignment in line with the 2005 PAX scores would be more fair. A 914 2.0 had a 2005 PAX score of 0.881 which less than the 0.885 of a 911T (class G) which is currently assigned 250 points. The 2.0L 914 has a power to weight ratio comparable to an early 924 which is assigned 150-175 points or a 912 which is assigned 175 points.

The argument that 914s deserve a 150 point differential from their TT base points for autocross because they handle well is not valid. Under the current rules, car modifications such as springs, torsion bars, and sway bars are relatively inexpensive (in terms of points) making it easy to achieve balanced handling on all cars. Thus penalizing a 914 by 150 points for balanced handling puts it at a serious disadvantage compared to a 912 or 911T with suspension modifications.

This proposal does provide a "mid engine" penalty over and above the TT base points for 914s but makes this penalty a more reasonable 75 points for a 2.0L 914.

The base points adjustment proposed for a 914/6 is based on the fact that a 914/6 (class F) has exactly the same 2005 PAX rank (0.881) as a 914 2.0 and a weight to power (20 lbs/hp) only slightly better than a 914 2.0 (23-25 lbs/hp) and less than a 911T (16-18) and hence deserves only a small penalty (25 points) compared to a 914 2.0 for both autocross and time trial. The 914/6 is about 100 lbs heavier than a 914-2.0 and has 15 more horsepower - 110 vs 95. This is a small difference - worth 25 points, not 100.

As further data to support this proposal, the attached spreadsheet shows all times recorded for cars in classes A, B, C, G, and F for the 2004 and 2005 autocross series. All times are normalized to the TTOD (i.e., 1.28 means the time is 1.28 times that of the fastest car that day). Times above 1.5 times TTOD were discarded as outliers - this is clear from the scatter plot. The results show that the three 914s belong at 200, 225, and 250 respectively. The 914 1.8 has an average time of 1.33, slower than any of the other car types compared. The 914 2.0 had an average time of 1.28 - tied with an early 911T (250 points) and a 912 (175 points). The 914-6 had an average time of 1.26 - between the early and late 911Ts. Note that all of the 914s are slower than the 944 (225 points) and 924S (275 points).

[DanT]

First, remember that Trekkor and Grant essentially have race cars. Those cars are classed much higher than a stock 911.

I was talking stockish 914-4 versus your Carrera or my SC. At GGR AXes, usually Alameda, at least 60% of the time I feel that my SC has the upper hand over my 914 2.0L. And I'm talking courses where I didn't even get out of 2nd gear in the SC.

The year before at the Zone 7 2-day AX school we had a short and tight course where the 914s were king but on the long and fast course my stock SC was several seconds faster than Bi level 914s.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

[ConeDodger]

First, remember that Trekkor and Grant essentially have race cars. Those cars are classed much higher than a stock 911.

I was talking stockish 914-4 versus your Carrera or my SC. At GGR AXes, usually Alameda, at least 60% of the time I feel that my SC has the upper hand over my 914 2.0L. And I'm talking courses where I didn't even get out of 2nd gear in the SC.

The year before at the Zone 7 2-day AX school we had a short and tight course where the 914s were king but on the long and fast course my stock SC was several seconds faster than Bi level 914s.

It seems we agree then... What I am saying is that in GGR with your big courses with room for long straights the 911 based cars have an advantage. That is what I am saying when I say culturally relevent. In the GGR culture of big venues with room for long straights the GGR base point difference between the 911 and 914 make more sense. In SVR and other venues, we don't have room for the 911 to stretch its legs so the base points are unfair to the 911.
Looking it over though, the TT rules are the place where the need is greatest for review.

[DanT]

we never had the 911 vs 914 vs 986 vs 944S2 vs 951 with the old rules.
Until your car was in the street modified or fully modified classes you ran like cars against like cars.
suspension, tires, wheels, brakes, etc were the same for everyone...that modified their cars to the limit of each car classification be it B, BI, BP, BX etc...
car became less of a factor and the driver was what made the difference.
Now the driver may or may not have as much of an effect as the person the looks at the points and picks the car that looks most capable of being built right and staying within the points totals...yielding top dog cars as much as top dog drivers. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

[anthony]

Dan, what are you (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) about?

In SVR and other venues, we don't have room for the 911 to stretch its legs so the base points are unfair to the 911.
Looking it over though, the TT rules are the place where the need is greatest for review.

Aren't we just talking about GGR here anyway? Or does SVR adopt GGR rules?

we never had the 911 vs 914 vs 986 vs 944S2 vs 951 with the old rules.
Until your car was in the street modified or fully modified classes you ran like cars against like cars.
suspension, tires, wheels, brakes, etc were the same for everyone...that modified their cars to the limit of each car classification be it B, BI, BP, BX etc...

It does seem like we have lost something. I can understand the other side though - if only 3 or 4 914s show up per event there isn't much class competition. The old system though would still work for Boxsters where a good number show up at every event.

[DanT]

all of the regions within Zone7 adopt and use the GGR rules..this includes, Diablo, Sacramento, Redwood, Yosemite, LPR etc.
Always have because GGR was the region with the most competition experience and the TT series.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) because I would not call Trekkor's or Grants cars to be essentially race cars at this point.
Full bodied cars with most or all metal panels. Full interiors etc.
Until either of their cars go on a very strict diet I would not consider them as anything more than modified street cars. If you notice at the events that Trekkor, Grant and I all attended they did not finish appreciably higher than I did.
My car is certainly not a "racecar" at this juncture...at least I don't consider it one. Maybe others do?
Actually neither of their cars are any more modified than my car other than the 6 cylinder motors.
their cars are pointed so high because 914s are penalized at least 75 points in AX due to mid engine configuration (just like the Boxsters) to start with and then points for the conversions, and other items.

I would happily AX a stock (Bi) style 914 VS a Ki (SC) or Li carrera and at most
venues the well driven 914 would prevail...IMHO (your mileage may vary (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) )

BTDT with 3 four cylinder 914s and two Carreras (an '84 and an '87)
Rarely is there a course that really favors the high HP vs the light nimble 914.

[anthony]

You may not call them "race cars" but they are almost dedicated autocross cars. You can't really compare cars like theirs with flared fenders, race tires, and some fiberglass to a stock 914 like mine or a stock SC or Carrera. That was all I meant.

[DanT]

You may not call them "race cars" but they are almost dedicated autocross cars. You can't really compare cars like theirs with flared fenders, race tires, and some fiberglass to a stock 914 like mine or a stock SC or Carrera. That was all I meant.

OK (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[McMark]

I know this is completely out of left field, but what if you classed people on how fast they run on average. That would completely eliminate the arduous task of trying to classify an almost infinite number of engine build and tranny build and suspension build options. If you focus on the times, the people who are running fast are competing with the people who are just as fast, and the slower people are with the slower people. I know it's a crazy leap from the way things have usually been run, and I'm definitely one of the last people who knows anything about GGR classing, but I'm curious what you guys think about it, even if it is just hypothetically.

[DanT]

I know this is completely out of left field, but what if you classed people on how fast they run on average. That would completely eliminate the arduous task of trying to classify an almost infinite number of engine build and tranny build and suspension build options. If you focus on the times, the people who are running fast are competing with the people who are just as fast, and the slower people are with the slower people. I know it's a crazy leap from the way things have usually been run, and I'm definitely one of the last people who knows anything about GGR classing, but I'm curious what you guys think about it, even if it is just hypothetically.

how would you break down the classes Mark?
Interesting point of view, if folks didn't sandbag to get into a slower class (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

[ConeDodger]

all of the regions within Zone7 adopt and use the GGR rules..this includes, Diablo, Sacramento, Redwood, Yosemite, LPR etc.
Always have because GGR was the region with the most competition experience and the TT series.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) because I would not call Trekkor's or Grants cars to be essentially race cars at this point.
Full bodied cars with most or all metal panels. Full interiors etc.
Until either of their cars go on a very strict diet I would not consider them as anything more than modified street cars. If you notice at the events that Trekkor, Grant and I all attended they did not finish appreciably higher than I did.
My car is certainly not a "racecar" at this juncture...at least I don't consider it one. Maybe others do?
Actually neither of their cars are any more modified than my car other than the 6 cylinder motors.
their cars are pointed so high because 914s are penalized at least 75 points in AX due to mid engine configuration (just like the Boxsters) to start with and then points for the conversions, and other items.

I would happily AX a stock (Bi) style 914 VS a Ki (SC) or Li carrera and at most
venues the well driven 914 would prevail...IMHO (your mileage may vary (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) )

BTDT with 3 four cylinder 914s and two Carreras (an '84 and an '87)
Rarely is there a course that really favors the high HP vs the light nimble 914.

I would say Grant has moved more to the racecar side of the world and will do more so over the winter. Trekkor has become a very good driver so what he lacks in equipment he makes up for in dance moves...

I have not attended enough GGR events to say that they are faster or not... I know they could be. With all that room OMG! Most SVR courses are 914 courses because of our lot size. When I see what is in the same class as me in our results I am confused. I would just enter in the FUN category but I am competitive by nature.

I would vote for Parade Rules but I bet that isn't even being considered.

[DanT]

all of the regions within Zone7 adopt and use the GGR rules..this includes, Diablo, Sacramento, Redwood, Yosemite, LPR etc.
Always have because GGR was the region with the most competition experience and the TT series.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif) because I would not call Trekkor's or Grants cars to be essentially race cars at this point.
Full bodied cars with most or all metal panels. Full interiors etc.
Until either of their cars go on a very strict diet I would not consider them as anything more than modified street cars. If you notice at the events that Trekkor, Grant and I all attended they did not finish appreciably higher than I did.
My car is certainly not a "racecar" at this juncture...at least I don't consider it one. Maybe others do?
Actually neither of their cars are any more modified than my car other than the 6 cylinder motors.
their cars are pointed so high because 914s are penalized at least 75 points in AX due to mid engine configuration (just like the Boxsters) to start with and then points for the conversions, and other items.

I would happily AX a stock (Bi) style 914 VS a Ki (SC) or Li carrera and at most
venues the well driven 914 would prevail...IMHO (your mileage may vary (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) )

BTDT with 3 four cylinder 914s and two Carreras (an '84 and an '87)
Rarely is there a course that really favors the high HP vs the light nimble 914.

I would say Grant has moved more to the racecar side of the world and will do more so over the winter. Trekkor has become a very good driver so what he lacks in equipment he makes up for in dance moves...

I have not attended enough GGR events to say that they are faster or not... I know they could be. With all that room OMG! Most SVR courses are 914 courses because of our lot size. When I see what is in the same class as me in our results I am confused. I would just enter in the FUN category but I am competitive by nature.

I would vote for Parade Rules but I bet that isn't even being considered.

no major changes until 2008.

[ConeDodger]

I know this is completely out of left field, but what if you classed people on how fast they run on average. That would completely eliminate the arduous task of trying to classify an almost infinite number of engine build and tranny build and suspension build options. If you focus on the times, the people who are running fast are competing with the people who are just as fast, and the slower people are with the slower people. I know it's a crazy leap from the way things have usually been run, and I'm definitely one of the last people who knows anything about GGR classing, but I'm curious what you guys think about it, even if it is just hypothetically.

how would you break down the classes Mark?
Interesting point of view, if folks didn't sandbag to get into a slower class (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

Kind of like bracket racing for cone heads? How about a PAX system...

[McMark]

Classes would be roughly broken down by who's the regularly in the top 10% (TTOD potentials), and then scale the numbers from there.

As an uneducated outsider, it seems ridiculous to have a ton of classes. What does a class win mean if there are 40 classes and only 2 or 3 people in your class.

Are there really people out there building AX classed cars to win? I'm serious here, I don't know. Is anyone saying, "I'm going to build the top dog AX8 car!" Or whatever class. From what little I've seen, the people who are going to the AX aren't looking at classes all day at the venue, they're looking at times. Very few people are concentrating on who's in their class and how they're comparing to those people. I could see the classes being more important if there were classified run groups, but that's not logistically possible. So it all get's mashed together.

[anthony]

In SCCA people definitely build class winning cars.

Under the old system people built cars to the limit of classes. For example, I understand that Bp used to be a very competitive and well attended class for 914s.

The old classes sort of put practical limits on the upgrades. You could only do so much before getting bumped up to the next class. The new classes are so wide open with different mods that people could come up with wild concoctions of cars.

I'm not sure if the culture has changed. Dan said they used to only have 2-3 people in Fun class and now we have 20. Is a reflection of the current membership or the new points sytem?

Maybe dedicated AXers will build cars for class wins? I kind of doubt it because there isn't much recognition for being AX## champ. It could take several seasons for people to figure out how to 'game' the points system.

[J P Stein]

OK, after reading this thread, I "get it".

The fairest Porsche AX class rules I've seen are the Parade classings.....the only problem with them are the number of classes. Condensing them by half would be a slam dunk for a smaller group. Reinventing the wheel has been done, eh? They are stable as an added bonus. All might not agree with the "cut offs" to move one to a higher class......but you can't make an omlet without breaking a few eggs.

Hooking the AX rules to the TT rules is kinda shakey, but I think it would work using the Parade AX rules. For the most part, the Parade rules have like cars running against each other.....right up the line till you hit the Mod classes.....then bring the gun of your choice.

It seems that GGR competition board (or whatever you call it), needs a house cleaning. The only way to do that is to GET INVOLVED.....more than just letter writing.

BTW, I too have wondered where the "square corner" AX thing comes from. Iz'at another "We're Zone 7 & ain't we special" deal? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

[grantsfo]

Classes would be roughly broken down by who's the regularly in the top 10% (TTOD potentials), and then scale the numbers from there.

As an uneducated outsider, it seems ridiculous to have a ton of classes. What does a class win mean if there are 40 classes and only 2 or 3 people in your class.

Are there really people out there building AX classed cars to win? I'm serious here, I don't know. Is anyone saying, "I'm going to build the top dog AX8 car!" Or whatever class. From what little I've seen, the people who are going to the AX aren't looking at classes all day at the venue, they're looking at times. Very few people are concentrating on who's in their class and how they're comparing to those people. I could see the classes being more important if there were classified run groups, but that's not logistically possible. So it all get's mashed together.

I have always wondered about the relevence of winning any class that has 3 or less competitors who consistently show up.

I think there are few out there who still want strict classing rules, but I think the number of classes can be collapsed.

[ConeDodger]

OK, after reading this thread, I "get it".

The fairest Porsche AX class rules I've seen are the Parade classings.....the only problem with them are the number of classes. Condensing them by half would be a slam dunk for a smaller group. Reinventing the wheel has been done, eh? They are stable as an added bonus. All might not agree with the "cut offs" to move one to a higher class......but you can't make an omlet without breaking a few eggs.

Hooking the AX rules to the TT rules is kinda shakey, but I think it would work using the Parade AX rules. For the most part, the Parade rules have like cars running against each other.....right up the line till you hit the Mod classes.....then bring the gun of your choice.

It seems that GGR competition board (or whatever you call it), needs a house cleaning. The only way to do that is to GET INVOLVED.....more than just letter writing.

BTW, I too have wondered where the "square corner" AX thing comes from. Iz'at another "We're Zone 7 & ain't we special" deal? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

JP,
I agree of course on the Parade Rules thing. Not only is it stable, it is portable across all regions and you know what to expect at Parade.

Actually, on the square corner thing, in SVR which is part of Zone 7 Matt Deter designs our courses. He puts one square corner consistently into the course at Stockton. It is right in front of the trailer and at the finish chute. I have always wanted to soften it and have asked on one occasion but he feels it is a safety thing. when you drive it, it isn't as bad as it looks. It does collect some cone carnage from the inexperienced and the aggressive drivers but it is "safe". I would guess there is a timing slip person sitting 45 feet from the corner and gridded cars sitting 100 feet. The thing about this square corner is it is really only "visually slow" a well set up car with a good driver can consistently take this corner pretty hot. Steve does. Joy makes it look like poetry with perfect lines but is not as aggressive.. Less experienced drivers get pretty slowed by the corner because all of the cones look intimidating I would imagine. I think it is more of an SVR thing than a Zone 7 thing...
Trekkors course at Marina this year was definately more anatomical. In fact I refered to one section of it as the intestinal section.

[nine14cats]

When I look at GGR I see a big machine. Good, bad, indifferent it's got a huge mix of track folks and is just bigger than all the surrounding regions combined. So they do their own thing and most regions follow suit.

I think there is tweeks needed on the points system but I don't see it as being a bad system. I think by re-evaluating the base points a few of the points on the mods you could clean up some of the glaring disparities. And I don't believe the Ad Hoc committee made up the points system on the fly. Several PCA regions in the U.S. use the point system. Zone 8 has used it for several seasons before GGR. Zone 8's seems to bucket more cars together than the GGR points system.

If we want to submit something by mid year next year for review and inclusion in 2008, we need to work on it. My suspicion is that less than a handful of people are going to want to work on it. More people may wish a particular item or items were different, but probably not enough to participate.

I'm debating myself if I should continue to work the issue with GGR or call off the dogs. For me I see it as a process improvement and one of needed refinement. But the rules themselves have very little meaning for me in my particular world of competion. Randal has the Raby powered 914 waiting in the wings that will take on Hamilton Racings car for TTOD. And I've got Fritz if I want to come out and play. These 3 cars should be lumped together in some "unlimited" class in my opinion. They are so removed from production cars that in AX they should compete against each other. And if you look at the AX standings, we were always 2nd through 5th to Andrew Blyholder, so that makes sense.

The refinement on the production based cars is where I'm interested in. My Spec Boxster will be interesting to class against the production cars. I think AX wise is correctly classed, but I'm a believer of power to weight ratio on the track and it is grossly mis-classed, as are a host of other cars, not just Boxsters.

I'm just wondering if I should lead a charge for correct and/or refined classing when it really doesn't matter for me since I'll either run unlimited GT classes with Fritz or play around with the Spec Boxster and not care about classes.

As far as why the bay area 914 club members don't AX in mass, I think it's preference. The majority of club members do not AX, they socialize. That in itself is really neat, but we don't seem to be a large group of racer types. We seem to be tinkerers, but only a few of us get off running over cones or hitting the big tracks.

Bill P.