>first ProSolo this year. I didn't see the '99 Wendover ProSolo results
>listed on the Utah website like I did the '98 Wendover ProSolo. You are
>correct that this one event is a counterpoint to my analysis.
The '98 Pro was my 4th Solo event *ever*. If your point is that I've
improved, yes, that is a given. I'm not sure what you are driving at,
if you'll pardon the pun.
>There was another group of classes that included SS cars (P2 and P3). So the
>SS class placement isn't a valid comparison.
But you took the time to point out that Jerry was the 1999 SS Champion.
Why did you not mention that the top dogs were in the Pro series? You
also failed to mention that I was the '99 ProSolo CSP National
Championship Runnerup according to the year end points flyer I got (and
I didn't even go to Nationals and only attended one event.) Perhaps it
was a soft field? (Again, Jerry is one hell of a driver, but the whole
Pro/Nat split last year was a rather nasty monkey wrench.)
Again, my point is you cannot keep throwing out numbers without their
context.
>At the 3 ProSolos in '99 that Bob ran in, Jerry Hodge's ProSolo Indexed
>times averaged 98.75% of the driver with the low ProSolo Indexed time at the
>event. This year, excluding Bob Tunnell's indexed times, Jerry is at 97.40%.
>Not enough of a decline to explain the huge relative improvement you've made
>over Jerry.
Oh, we just get to arbitrarily throw out competitors' times? Even
accepting that (and the fact that the PAX is flawed), Jerry has slowed
down by 1.35%. My gains in Pro's over him, during the same time period,
have been 1.09%. Crap, maybe I'm not getting better, Jerry is just
getting old (Just kidding Jerry.)
>But as you say, you changed a bunch of things in your car (how much of it
>was after the Oct 24 autocross?).
All the changes I've listed were done after the end of the '99 season,
except for all of the weight. I believe ~20lbs was taken off towards
the end of the '99 season (I have to fudge, because you never have the
exact same fuel load when you are weighing.)
>Perhaps that is correct. I can't say whether the difference in running a
>ProSolo format and Solo II format is the overwhelming factor.
It is a huge factor. When you are relatively inexperienced getting 12
cracks at a course, is much better than only having 3 to 4. (Yes,
technically you only get 6 per side, but the courses are very similiar
at a Pro, not to mention quite a bit less technical, IMHO, than NT
courses.)
>Given that it was a borrowed car, I threw out that data point.
Again, we just throw out the datapoints that we don't like?
>I'm not sure how all the sarcasm helps here.
I have to do something to entertain myself, while I have to go dredge
through all these numbers.
>Anyway, Bob did make a change over the winter since he switched to Hoosiers.
Oh yes, the magic Hoosiers, I almost forgot. So if Bob goes back to
BFG's can we stay in ESP? ;)
>I don't know much about the Houston Region except that the large number of
>ESP entrants makes it much more likely the person had more competition.
Well let's see which stock classes beat Mr. Dorchester at those events:
1st Event: SS, AS, BS, CS, GS
2nd Event: SS, AS, BS, ES, FS, GS, HS
3rd Event: SS, AS, CS, FS
4th Event: SS, AS, BS, CS
5th Event: SS, AS, BS, CS
An ESP car getting beat by ES, GS, and HS? I'd have to say that ESP
competition isn't that strong in Houston. (Where competitive is being
defined as being able to do well at Nationals.)
My point still stands, you cannot just drop Joe Blow into an M3 and have
him trophy at National events due to the car.
>CSP in Utah AVERAGED 1.6 drivers per event in 1999.
So what you are saying is that posting only part of the story can be
misleading. Thanks for making my point.
Since you like to crunch numbers, how about doing this? Go to the
recent Topeka Nats results, and show the average finishing position
based on car type. I'd like to know if the Mustangs were competitive in
ESP even before the M3 came to town.
Todd
|