1001 replies to this topic

[cam]

If someone can compile race results for the past several years with the year car noted, I can run a regression analysis with grouping on which years are consistently winning. I can run categories of 90-93, 94-97, 99-00, 01+.  I need a sample size of at least 30 races in order to have a high level of confidence. It will be inferential statistics on the whole population.

 

I'll gladly post the results here.

 

PM me for my personal e-mail.

[James York]

I can tell you now w/o any number crunching..  99-00 are winning the majority.

 

Unless you mean you want to compare number of entries vs. win %

[cam]

Would like to use a statistical model to show to probability of the various models of SM to place well relative to location (track) and taking into consideration how many cars are entered.  Currently, the majority of cars entering SM races are 99-00 so it is fully expected for those years to place higher.  But the 1.8 NA models (94-97) do not enter very many aces and as expected, do not win and do not think they even place very well.  The same seems to be true to a lesser extent for the 1.6 NA models (90-93).  But on the flip side, since most of the entrants are 99-00, those are also most of the mid pack and back of the pack.  By using regression analysis, I should be able to show the relative success of each model type as long as there is a large enough sample size. 

 

I have easy access to SCCA SouthWest Division results, but not to NASA or other SCCA divisions.

[Steve Scheifler]

It might have been interesting shortly after NBs were added but I see absolutely no value in it now. You may as well analyze the success rate of casual marathon runners against top Kenyans and Ethiopians. The importance of the base stock is nothing compared to the level of effort and preparation.

[Johnny D]

Keep 1.6 bullshit in it's place.
 
Right here. (well you can use the next post)
 
Carry on.

https://www.youtube....h?v=9FnO3igOkOk

J~

[LarryKing]

Parity across model years is the future of Spec Miata...

 

 

 

 

...and always will be.

[Steve Scheifler]

But as the late great Yogi Berra once said, "The future ain't what it used to be."

[Alberto]

Currently, the majority of cars entering SM races are 99-00 

 

Not in SFR SCCA.   Where are you getting your stats?

[cam]

According to the 2015 SCCA run-offs, out of 62 entrants in SM, 3 are 1.6, 0 are 94-97 and 59 are 99+.

 

In my area in Texas, typical SCCA and NASA events with around 30 entrants typically have around 3 to 4 1.6, 1 or 2 94-97, and the rest are 99+.

 

What is SFR look like?  What about other areas?

[Todd Green]

According to the 2015 SCCA run-offs, out of 62 entrants in SM, 3 are 1.6, 0 are 94-97 and 59 are 99+.

 

In my area in Texas, typical SCCA and NASA events with around 30 entrants typically have around 3 to 4 1.6, 1 or 2 94-97, and the rest are 99+.

 

What is SFR look like?  What about other areas?

For NASA Utah (counting just locals)

 

1.6: 75%

1.8: 8%

99+: 17%

 

I believe.  I don't generally look under hoods so maybe one of the 1.6's is a 1.8, but that should be close.

[Johnny D]

SFR SCCA. SM, SMT, and SSM all run together but look for yourself. A ton of 1.6's in each class this year.

http://www.sfrscca.o...tsstandings.pdf

J~

[Bruce Wilson]

Entry counts pretty average for NW this year with Rose Cup pulling in 25 cars and Ridge season closing race with 28 cars.  1-99 in each field and 1 or 2 1.8s   For the most part, all had pro motors in SCCA and a handful were top prep.  There are a good number of 99s after last season, but they got parked because we love our 1.6s!

[Johnny D]

Long meeting yesterday. Lots covered and debated back and forth. I am sure Todd will put out a summery.

Take your time Todd, get settled back from the runoffs and your thought together, no rush.

I'm sure most are interested.

J~

[Tom OPM]

Long meeting yesterday. Lots covered and debated back and forth. I am sure Todd will put out a summery.

I met with Ralph at the Run-Offs and I think I got him all straightened out. Im sure they will fill us in soon.

[LarryKing]

No adjustment required. For the third year in a row the 2016 Runoffs will be held at a "1.6 track".

[Jim Drago]

No adjustment required. For the third year in a row the 2016 Runoffs will be held at a "1.6 track".

Now all we need to do is get some to show up

[38bfast]

I think I won't get into too much trouble for disclosing a portion of the 1.6 adjustments.

The SMAC will not be recommending a lighter flywheel to the CRB. Member input and MAZDA did not support the recommended change to the 1.6.

[Bench Racer]

http://freedomfeens....4/03/image1.jpg

[LarryKing]

 

I think I won't get into too much trouble for disclosing a portion of the 1.6 adjustments.

 

Ralph, don't disclose anything else. I don't want you to spoil the surprise.

[Sean - MiataCage]

I think I won't get into too much trouble for disclosing a portion of the 1.6 adjustments.

The SMAC will not be recommending a lighter flywheel to the CRB. Member input and MAZDA did not support the recommended change to the 1.6.

 

Most importantly..... Nor did the science (not opinion) that several took the time to work up and present through the appropriate channels.