Don't kid yourself, Todd. All caveats about the ratings needing more
tweaking aside, those are excellent scores. Most of us use the adjusted
ratings most of the time, but there are exceptions. Especially easy
courses, that would be courses with lots of same radius turns, over a
short (30 second or so) run, are easier to peg out the rating system.
But no matter how you slice it, you have to drive well to score that
well.
--Byron
Todd Green wrote:
>
> >Also, should I not expect my overall scores to be similar from event to
> >event? I've seen courses where an overall score in the 90% range felt like a
>
> Hey all. Just used GEEZ for the first weekend at an Idaho/Utah
> "divisional". Lots to type up, no time to do it :( Very briefly, I assume
> everyone is using raw unadjusted data|ratings for their display?
> Without doing so I had 99% ratings in everything but smoothness which
> was in the mid 90's. I know that I'm not that good of an autoxer ;)
> Using the raw data put me in the low to mid 90's, which is more in tune
> with the times I turned and how well I felt I drove.
>
> Hopefully I'll have time type up the full report after work today,
> Todd
|