-------------------- Begin Original Message --------------------
Message text written by Andy McKee
>>" Other National level events and series didn't
>>see much more participation. IMHO, that is not nearly enough data on
which to
>>determine a number. With all of the Street "X" variations this year I
think
>>some of the PAX indexes assigned to them are just WAGs.
IMHO, there is NEVER enough data upon which to base a PAX number! The
differences in course design between what we see here and the other regions
is significant. Only the Topeka courses are similar to ours.
>>Granted, this is probably coming across as a "me me" argument since I
compete
>>in the PAX class. I understand the limitations of the PAX system and
that some
>>classes have a "soft" PAX, but at least they are in the ballpark if you
take a
>top car in a given class driven by a top driver."
Yep! I find certain aspects of the PAX class to be unacceptable. Thus I run
in my "normal" class even though the handicap is considerable. I do not
trust anybody who tells me the way to win is to filter the scores through a
magic black box.
The PAX concept was invented by Jim McKamey as a device to stage
Professional Autocross events (PAX being Pro auto-X). It is Dave Beck's
intention that PAX be used as an informational tool, not as the basis for
class competition.
I prefer heads-up competition.
--John Kelly
|