2004 Vs 2005

[Mr Happy]

2004 5 out of 9 rounds counted

class no in class *arrowright*number did =>5 rounds %

1 6 6 100

2 20 14 70

3 16 10 62.5

4 10 5 50

5 18 7 38.88888889

6 5 3 60

 

 

2005 7 round of 13 counted

class no in class number did =>7 rounds % number did =>5 rounds %

1 7 1 14 3 *arrowright*42.85714286

2 21 10 47 *arrowright*14 *arrowright*66.66666667

3 22 7 *arrowright*31 *arrowright*9 *arrowright*40.90909091

4 11 5 *arrowright*45 *arrowright*5 *arrowright*45.45454545

5 18 *arrowright*4 *arrowright*22 *arrowright*6 *arrowright*33.33333333

6 7 3 *arrowright*42 *arrowright*4 *arrowright*57.14285714

 

 

 

class 2004% *arrowright*2005%

1 100 *arrowright*14

2 70 *arrowright*47

3 62.5 31

4 50 45

5 39 22

6 60 42

 

 

coments

 

TM

 

Edited by - TM on 19 Nov 2005 11:20:53

 

Edited by - TM on 19 Nov 2005 19:20:40

 

Edited by - TM on 19 Nov 2005 19:26:39

[GrannY OrB TuneR]

Tim

 

Formatting has gone up the shoot. Can you reformat 🤔 Makes it difficuolt to read.

 

From what I can quickly gather trhe point you are trying to make is that less competitors completed the minimum no of championship rounds in 2005 as compared to 2004 🤔

 

Which raises the question - is there too many rounds 🤔

By keeping 13 rounds does that present more variety & therefore make the championship more appealing from a circuit point of view 🤔

 

Gary

 

GrannY OrB TuneR

😳 Tweaker Of Fine Granny Orbs ! 😳

Superlight No: 170

[Jason Plato]

coments?

 

yes - who are you for a start and it would probably be more constructive if you actually made a conclusion and contribution yourself rather than posting information in an illegible manner and then expected eveyone to understand what your point is

 

I assume you are making a case to reduce the number of qualifying rounds ?? or are you simply trolling on your second ever posting 🙆🏻

 

your input as ever is appreciated 😬

 

[Gambo]

Youout for a pint tonight Dave 🤔

 

RED 2.0 HPC now on throttle bodies

[Jason Plato]

[sjmmarsh]

Within the bounds of statistical error, it doesn't tell you much, but you can draw some conclusions:

 

1) More rounds mean that more sprints take place in total, but the increase in entries was lower than the increase in the number of rounds

 

2) Novices don't enter as many sprints as more seasoned competitors

 

3) Class 1 entrants are either a) mainly novices or b) getting fed up having the slowest times

 

Steve

[robmar]

So are the number of rounds diluting the championship?

 

quick bit of research/math as follows

 

Year Vs Average number of class entrants (champiosnhip runners only)

 

Year *arrowright*1 *arrowright*2 *arrowright*3 *arrowright*4 *arrowright*5 *arrowright*6

2004 *arrowright*4.8 *arrowright*14 *arrowright*11 *arrowright*6.6 *arrowright*8.8 *arrowright*3.9

2005 *arrowright*2.7 *arrowright*13 *arrowright*10 *arrowright*5.1 *arrowright*7.8 *arrowright*3

 

hope formatting works

 

average number of championship entrants per round

2004 *arrowright*46.66

2005 *arrowright*41.15

 

number of times 12

2005 *arrowright*24

 

rob

[Steve Robinson]

I guess it's bound to as we have introduced a number of events that are a long haul for a good number of competitors, and also I suspect people are keener to drive our exclusive events than those where we are invited to other events.

 

In addition if you have 5 counting out of 8 events most people will try and do at least 6 so they can drop a bad one, whereas when you have 7 out of 13 you can afford to miss a load and still do OK.

 

Steve

 

 

 

[robmar]

so just looking at the club only events

 

llandow, 2 curbuggers 7 MIRA

 

2004 *arrowright*average 68 entrants

2005 *arrowright*average 72 entrants

 

events in last 2 years with harewood *arrowright*23 entrants

2005 *arrowright*Elvington *arrowright*20 entrants

2005 *arrowright*aintree *arrowright*25 entrants

2005 *arrowright*wiscombe *arrowright*17 entrants

2005 *arrowright*harewood[AR24 entrants

 

so the last 3 events of this year where the worst supported, why was that 🤔 was it becuase most of the champioship was sorted 🤔was it becuase they where all so close 🤔

 

personally for me Harewood and wiscombe are 2 of my favourite venues

 

I am not saying we have too many or too few, just giving out the stats...

 

personally I am happy for us ot have 13 events

 

 

 

[Steve Robinson]

Couple of reasons, both applying in my case:

 

1) I'm usually running out of money by the last few events, so if I have qualified for the championship but not in top 3 (or able to move up) then I'm unlikely to go.

 

2) By end August I feel I have asked enough of Sally and Holly (and now Ben) to either follow me around or be at home alone so I don't push my luck.

 

I'm sure if I was in the hunt I'd find the money and make it to Aintree and so on. Hopefully we'll see in 2006

 

Steve

[david nelson]

Reading the above you could look at it in 2 way

 

1. to many events

 

2. point system means all is sorted out before the 13th round.

 

 

For me the main points of intreast

 

in 2004 class 100% did the champoinship were in 2005 only 14%

class 5 in 2004 22% in 2004 39%

 

is this becouse of time or the point system?

 

If less people do the whole champoinship dues this lessen the champoinship?

 

David

 

 

[Mr Happy]

So what was disided 🤔 🤔

 

TM

[RichardO]

Not sure it's a fair comparison though - most of the new venues are invited events, not L7C organised. This makes it very hard for us to maintain the historically high entry numbers at all rounds - no one is going to allow us 50+ cars as an invited club! I know that Longcross, Loton and Aintree were all fully subscribed; I suspect that Harewood and Wiscombe were too.... strip those out and the figures look much the same year on year.

 

R