>In a message dated 5/12/99 9:55:03 AM Central Daylight Time,
>msirota@isc.upenn.edu writes:
>
><< GSMnow@aol.com wrote:
> > For this year, HStock got a faster index than EStock. This was
> > reflected at Nationals as well as here where we have some serious HS
> > drivers and EStock is lightly perscribed, but due to the light index,
> > we now have a few new EStock drivers. And EStock just won overall
> > index at our last event.
>
> This is exactly why I prefer the PAX index over the RTP. As I
> understand it, the RTP is generated largely mathematically, while the
> PAX is generated largely by intuition and common sense. Am I right?
>
> Intuition and common sense say that ES should have more potential than
> HS, the results be damned. >>
>
>The decision to put the ES/HS index where they fell was voted on again by
>members, and the hottest cars were taken into account. We had several fast
When and where was this voted on?? I never heard anything about it.
And while we're on the subject, I'd just like to say that I really don't
appreciate how Rick (Mr. RTP) really stuck it to AM this year.
He's always said (over and over) that you can't make an index
based on 1 event (Nationals) and that you can't base an index on
only 1 car in a class. However, he appears to have done just that
when creating the 1999 index.
Just my 2¢.
>drivers in both classes, and one who jumped from an HSock Celica ST to an
>EStock Celica GT because he even thought the PAX index difference was good
>enough. The index difference is .780 to .781, so it is hardly at all. Per got
>the win in his Celica GT, but he deserved it from watchng his run. Patrick
>Washburn got second just .3 seconds back in DStock, Darrel Padberg got Third
>only .001 behind him, and our hot HStock guy (in a Celica ST) who got 6th at
>nationals came in fourth about .26 behind them. The next 16 cars are within a
>second.
>
>PAX does look beyond the numbers to some extent, but bases it heavilly on
>nationals, but only moves it about 80% of how far nationals moved. (this is
>based on looking at the numbers using the past and new indexes.) Not that
>that is bad, and it does work well at big event sites. The EStock/HStock deal
>was also looking beyond the numbers. The performance of some of the top
>HStock cars appears to have exceeded the EStock performance. The cars in
>question are scheduled to move there, so it makes sence. Some of the slower
>cars in HStock are not real happy, but they know they have to chase those
>times to win the class anyways. I am seriously thinking of getting a 94
>Celica ST, and if it moves to EStock I still might. On sweeping courses where
>you can carry speed, it can beat the bigger motored GT, but where you have
>slow downs and acceleration, the torquey 2.2 can out pull the 1.8. So it will
>be course dependant. I ran my second fastest run in my STU car with no turbo
>boost since a hose blew off. I was smoother without upsetting the chassis as
>much, and not spinning the tires out of the corners. If I was also 200 pounds
>lighter like the ST-GT debate, I might have been as quick.
>
>The cars are quite different, but run very close. The Neons are the same way,
>the ES and DS ones are very similar, it is suprizing they get separate
>classes. Both are 2.0L with similar torque. The ACR's have a suspension
>tuning advantage, but the Sports have to run head to head in DStock. There is
>no way everyone will be happy.
The Neons have always had 2 classes because of manufacturer support.
>
>For now the RTP looks odd with ES being slower than HS but 3 clubs all voted
>to use it around here. There was only ONE HS car and it finished 4th. I can't
>say he was biased against. The rest of the HS cars were in Street tire and
>the finished HS ES HS ES with a coule other cars fitting in between. How much
>better does it get?
Once again, I want to know -- what 3 clubs and when did they vote??
How could I have missed both Chicago Region and Tri-State?
(I'm assuming that the 3rd club is/was WAI.)
>
>Total st finishes
>SS,FS,FS,GS,HS,ES,FS,BS,HS,ES,DS,GS,GS,DS,GS,ES,BS,FS,ES,FS,ESP,CSP,GS,HS,GS,C
>SP,HS,CS,AS,GS,SS,CSP,GS,CS,AS,DS,ES,DSP,FS,FS,GS,GS,HS,ES,CSP,GS,HS
>
>For what we can see, it looks like the SP cars are at a disadvantage, but
>other then that, it is a good mix up of classes from top to bottom. Of course
>there are good drivers and not so good of drivers, so the lower in the list
>the bigger the differences. But 20th to 30th was only a 1.9 sec spread.
>
>Like we have all said here, no index is perfect, and we let the competitors
>decide which numbers to lock in for a year. If we are wrong, we fix it next
>year.
>
>Gary M.
>
>This is my last post to the list on this, I don't want to take up any more
>bandwidth. If you want to discuss it in private mail I will , but I already
>agree, indexing is a crap shot, who has the best dice throwing arm?
Families are about love overcoming emotional torture.
- Matt Groening
|