What about a PAX class?

[jbrannon7]

If we offer a PAX class, you don't have to compete in it.

So, in essence, it would become pick your competition - raw time vs pax time? Would we set pax up as "a class by itself" with it's own championship, or have we even gotten that far yet? I guess I'm a little concerned that if someone in a class we're trying to populate, like say M4, decides to just run Pax, now is M4 short on competitors again? If I choose to run Pax, and win, can I also win my "class" at the same time? Or is it one or the other? Did this paragraph even make sense?

Most clubs call the PAX class the Pro class, and it is one or the other. I don't know how Loren would do it.

[jbrannon7]

Sorry I don't know a lot about PAX but does it even factor in tires? Car classing is one thing but someone running on all seasons/summer tires vs one running on extreme performance tires are going to be huge differences. If pax doesn't even incorporate tires then isn't it all just moot then?

No,it assumes you are modified to the limits of your class.

[Loren]

So, in essence, it would become pick your competition - raw time vs pax time?

Not unlike how a certain car could choose to run in S4, or S5... or M3, or M4. If you think people aren't "choosing their competition" already, you are mistaken. Some cars have more choices than others.

Would we set pax up as "a class by itself" with it's own championship, or have we even gotten that far yet?

We haven't gotten that far yet, but we could run a PAX class if we wanted to. And we could put any "limitations" that we want to on it. We could make it a "pro" class, where you have to have won your FAST class for at least one season... or whatever. Or, we could not do a PAX class. It's merely an idea at this point.

I guess I'm a little concerned that if someone in a class we're trying to populate, like say M4, decides to just run Pax, now is M4 short on competitors again?

A valid concern.

If I choose to run Pax, and win, can I also win my "class" at the same time? Or is it one or the other? Did this paragraph even make sense?

If we set up a "PAX Class", then it would be a stand-alone class like any other.

Unless... we opt to make a separate "PAX Competition" outside of the regular class structure. Which we could do... and it would alleviate your concern above. You'd still compete in your class... but, also be vying for the Season PAX trophy. I'm not sure I like that idea, however... we COULD make it an "add-on" award, like we do with the 100%-ers.

Of course, THAT all creates more work for me. Doing a simple "class" doesn't really add any work. And we have valid reasons for not wanting to do it.

It could be tricky to get multipliers for FAST classes that work as well as SCCA class PAX stuff though. (And their multipliers are not perfect to begin with)

As I mentioned, I think PAX is probably fairly accurate at the National level where the top competitors in a given class ARE driving "the car" for their class, and they ARE prepared to the limit of the rules. At the regional level... meh. But, people still get all worked up about it. (and, personally, I think it's pretty cool when somebody in a WAY under-developed car *coughPHILIPcough* walks all over the PAX at a local event.

I'm feeling like coming up with a set of indexes (and run 'em through the grinder using some known examples of "good" cars and "good" drivers to see if they seem accurate enough) and publishing PAX Results would be a nice addition to our results. Could add some fun... and we're all about Fun!

As for a PAX Class... at this point in time, probably not. Maybe in the future, if FAST folks actually DO take an interst in PAX, we could look at doing something.

[lddavis91]

If I run an A-mod car and get a faster time than Philip in his ES Miata, am I really "winning"?

Yes. Absolutely.

You don't need a theoretically derived handicap and a calculator to win Mike, you can do it with skill alone. The difference between an AM car and an ES car is covered already with the classes AM and ES, that is why classes exist in the first place to give separate competition fields for vastly different cars. But if it is somehow going to make events more enjoyable to folks to provide a derivative of a derivative handicapping ranking system that is barely reasonably applicable on a nationals scale and barely recognizable on a local scale, far be it from me to prevent folks having fun with their calculators.

[RedBRZ80]

Would love for Fast to PAX. Offer a sticker for FTD and PTD. For those of us in “S” classes it gives us a sticker to shoot for.

And honestly. I really only look at Pax results at big events. Last Jax event at Firm was 125 people. I was 19th raw, but 5th pax. I’ll take the top5 pax.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CaptainSquirts]

Offer a sticker for FTD and PTD. For those of us in “S” classes it gives us a sticker to shoot for.

2nd this idea

[Loren]

But if it is somehow going to make events more enjoyable to folks to provide a derivative of a derivative handicapping ranking system that is barely reasonably applicable on a nationals scale and barely recognizable on a local scale, far be it from me to prevent folks having fun with their calculators.

And that's the thing. Apparently, a lot of people DO get enjoyment from it.

And if it gets people excited about autocross, I'm all for it!

[AScoda]

Pax assumes you have the best stuff, Daniel.

I like the idea of just posting the PAX results for comparison and bragging rights. Mine won't be correct since I am running an M2 car in M0, but I can figure that out on my own.

[twistedwankel]

A Mod (unlimited lunatic fast, light, giant wings car with fat Race Tires) is 1.000 if that helps. They get no multiplier.

Since I take the time to x out all the FN cars all ready maybe it would save me some time?

[RedBRZ80]

Ya. I would not create any more classes. Just post overall pax results and make a sticker.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[twistedwankel]

Mine won't be correct since I am running an M2 car in M0, but I can figure that out on my own.

Since no one ever shows up with an A Mod in R1 maybe we could have a FDP = Freakin' Drew Pax where you are 1.000

[Loren]

2018 PAX Indexes have been announced:
http://solotime.info/pax/rtp2018.html

Looks like they've changed quite a bit.

[Loren]

Don't get too excited about this, it's purely experimental.

Here's how I derived the Indexes:
- Randomly made R1 0.900
- took the 2018 PAX indexes, and made each FAST class the average of the indexes of the SCCA classes that make up that class.
- for Stock Classes, added 0.005 to the base because they "should" be slightly faster due to more relaxed rules.
- made S5 0.010 less than S4 due to no LSD and 195 tire limit. (would like this index to be less than HS... but, it's close enough)
- for Mod Classes, added 0.025 to the base. That's 0.020 more than Stock. Puts M2 on par with STR, and M3 on par with STS. Seems reasonable. M0 and M1 have pretty tough indexes... but, the potential is there. (whether anyone is fully prepped or not)
- made M4 0.010 less than M3 due to no LSD and 205 tire limit. (should be similar to STS, but with less tire)

Indexes are:
R1 - 0.900
M0 - 0.841
M1 - 0.832
M2 - 0.821
M3 - 0.810
M4 - 0.800
S0 - 0.821
S1 - 0.812
S2 - 0.799
S3 - 0.797
S4 - 0.793
S5 - 0.783

I'm not saying this is what we should use, or even that I like it, this is just what I came up with very quickly that doesn't seem unreasonable for most classes. I like it because it's a simple formula that we can easily update with the annual PAX updates. Y'all feel free to discuss.

Here's the *EXPERIMENTAL* PAX results from 11/18 using the above indexes.

2017_11_18_By_PAX.pdf

(213.29 KiB) Downloaded 463 times

[Carracer]

Les's hates PAX so much he makes sure his overall position is the same regardless of PAX or raw time!

[JasonS]

Since this system puts me above Freakin' Drew I think it is spot on

[RedBRZ80]

Don't get too excited about this, it's purely experimental.

Here's how I derived the Indexes:
- Randomly made R1 0.900
- took the 2018 PAX indexes, and made each FAST class the average of the indexes of the SCCA classes that make up that class.
- for Stock Classes, added 0.005 to the base because they "should" be slightly faster due to more relaxed rules.
- made S5 0.010 less than S4 due to no LSD and 195 tire limit. (would like this index to be less than HS... but, it's close enough)
- for Mod Classes, added 0.025 to the base. That's 0.020 more than Stock. Puts M2 on par with STR, and M3 on par with STS. Seems reasonable. M0 and M1 have pretty tough indexes... but, the potential is there. (whether anyone is fully prepped or not)
- made M4 0.010 less than M3 due to no LSD and 205 tire limit. (should be similar to STS, but with less tire)

Indexes are:
R1 - 0.900
M0 - 0.841
M1 - 0.832
M2 - 0.821
M3 - 0.810
M4 - 0.800
S0 - 0.821
S1 - 0.812
S2 - 0.799
S3 - 0.797
S4 - 0.793
S5 - 0.783

I'm not saying this is what we should use, or even that I like it, this is just what I came up with very quickly that doesn't seem unreasonable for most classes. I like it because it's a simple formula that we can easily update with the annual PAX updates. Y'all feel free to discuss.

Here's the *EXPERIMENTAL* PAX results from 11/18 using the above indexes.

2017_11_18_By_PAX.pdf

Looks about right for a fast event. The Stock cars should be at top. (Most M class cars are not fully prepped )


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Loren]

Looks about right for a fast event. The Stock cars should be at top. (Most M class cars are not fully prepped )

One could argue that at our level, and especially with FAST's relaxed "stock" prep rules, most of our Stock class cars are also not fully prepared. Driver is going to make a significant difference, as always.

Here's my take on the top 10 from that list:
Pos/Class/Name/Car/Index
1 S1 Randolph Barrera 2004 Honda S2000 0.812
2 S4 Philip Petrie 1996 Mazda Miata 0.793
3 S1 73 Dat Nguyen 2007 Mazda MX-5 0.812
4 M1 999 Mark Hackett 2003 Honda S2000 0.832
5 S2 195 Jason Souza 2016 Subaru WRX 0.799
6 S3 69 Mike Murdoch 2007 Ford Mustang 0.797
7 S5 3 Loren Williams 2015 Mitsubishi Mirage 0.783
8 M0 1 Drew Scoda 2004 Mazda Speed Miata 0.841
9 M1 24 Les Davis 1992 Chevrolet Corvette 0.832
10 M1 5 Ronald Rice 2006 Mazda MX-5 0.832

1. Randy was on his game. He could have gone a bit faster, but he was good. And his car isn't fully S1 prepared, but it's probably close enough. He earned that position.

2. Philip will tell you that ES has an "easy PAX". Maybe, but I looked at the PAXed Nationals results, and that doesn't appear to be the case. Philip is right where he should be. If he was driving a properly prepared car, he'd have easily been top PAX.

3. Dat is notoriously fast. He got beat by Randy (which points again to Randy really being on fire with his new suspension setup). I wouldn't be surprised to see Dat at the top. But, he did fall behind Randy... so, he's right where he should be.

4. Mark is stupid fast. He's in M1, with it's tough index. And in M1... he could have significantly more power, which could have made a difference on this course. If Mark had driven Randy's "S1" S2000, he probably still would have set FTD or very close to it. Here' he's a victim of his index, but I think the index is fair.

5. Jason is getting a lot faster lately, and is probably pretty well prepared for the class. Go, Jason!

6. When did Murdoch turn up the wick??? Wow! I think he's finally got the Mustang dialed in, making it a decent car for the class. This seems correct.

7. I'll be honest, I surprised myself. I was a solid half-second faster than I expected to be on my final run. I still think S5 should have an index that's a a little less than HS, but because *I* am in that class, and I don't want to hear the complaints, I'm not going to change it unless someone else says it needs to be changed. And my car is nowhere near "the car" for S5, either. I'm not ready to commit based on this one event. Yes, I drove well. Did I drive well enough to be in a higher PAX position? In an underdog car? Can't say. EDIT: Lowering the S5 index by another .005 (putting it at 0.778, HS is 0.781) only moves me up by one position.

8. Drew is Drew. And being in M0, he's got an extremely difficult index, and a car that is nowhere near what an M0 car can be. In the top 10? Yeah... because it's Drew, that make sense.

9 & 10. Les & Ron. Solid times, but both could have been faster. Reasonably well-prepared cars. Pretty close to the capability of the M1 class. Seems legit.

So, yeah... these indexes don't seem out of line. Their error is probably well within the "noise" of our wide variety of car prep levels and driver skill levels.

[puncturina]

Anything that puts me in the top 20 gets a thumbs-up

[twistedwankel]

2. Philip will tell you that ES has an "easy PAX". Maybe, but I looked at the PAXed Nationals results, and that doesn't appear to be the case. Philip is right where he should be. If he was driving a properly prepared car, he'd have easily been top PAX.

Farm Truck got his nickname driving fully prepped cars. He can never sell the fairy duster that flies.

[Loren]

Spent a few minutes on this tonight.

Simplified the "FAST PAX formula". The whole "add to the PAX due to FAST rules being looser" is not necessary. It would really only come into play if we had a legit AM car show up... and we're not even using the AM index for anything. So, the "accuracy" of our PAX compared to SCCA is irrelevant. We don't need to make that "accross the board" adjustment.

So, the formula is simply: Average PAX index for all of the classes that make up a given FAST Class, Add 0.020 to all Mod classes, then subtract 0.010 from M4 and S5.

Philip talked me into using a softer index for R1 to better match the cars we're likely to "normally" see there. I chose SSP (Super Street Prepared), which is about the fastest "streetable" race tire class.

That puts the indexes at:
Indexes are:
R1 - 0.852
M0 - 0.836
M1 - 0.827
M2 - 0.816
M3 - 0.805
M4 - 0.795
S0 - 0.816
S1 - 0.807
S2 - 0.794
S3 - 0.792
S4 - 0.788
S5 - 0.778

And I went ahead and applied it to all 5 events from this season. This is still a test. But, given that it's "just PAX" and nothing is on the line here... unless y'all balk, I might just leave it as-is and run with it. It was pretty easy to set up in AXware, and it's just one more results report to save at the end of each event. No biggie.

9/30
10/8
10/21
11/4
11/18

Discuss. Or don't.