Does the pp system work?

[Johnnypenso]

Oh c'mon now. Number 1, as you know it's not my data it is a FITT data link presented as-is, Number 2 removing extreme outlier data from a set is perfectly acceptable, as you yourself excluded the GT40, taking the outlier from the other (slow) side is not cherry picking. Now in the Standard Classic series observing driver's times another outlier is noticed.

Number 3 you seem to discount driver's skill as an independent variable upon which the laptimes are dependent. This random sample of FITT data shows the driver skill has more to do with the time difference than PP.

I get it, you established a position and now refuse to look at a contrary view despite the independent evidence. There's another rhetorical term for that which you probably know.

If you have to discount driver skill as an independent variable then your conclusions are completely meaningless aren't they? See what I did there? Didn't see that coming did you?

Well you FITT guys were on the right track even though demonstrating PP was not your aim, your group presented test data which illustrates a number of factors. Removing or limiting the driver variability or being careful with averaging is useful. The exhaustive solo tests by people such as SuzukaStar and Midfield Maven have already shown the good PP correlations, using constant test methodology and standard conditions. Just open your eyes a bit more and enough with the knee jerk denials. I hope you're not so stubborn in your work-a-day life.

Again, you are just seeing what you want to see, pulling out the handful of cars that are close from SuzukaStar's testing and ignoring the bulk of the cars that are spread out all over the place in lap times. Even a random PP system will be close some times but for the system to have any validity at all, the majority of the cars should fall within a fairly tight range otherwise it's no better than taking a simple power/weight comparison and using that instead. Perhaps you should read this post again to refresh your memory.

 

[Polsixe]

If you have to discount driver skill as an independent variable then your conclusions are completely meaningless aren't they? See what I did there? Didn't see that coming did you?
Again, you are just seeing what you want to see, pulling out the handful of cars that are close from SuzukaStar's testing and ignoring the bulk of the cars that are spread out all over the place in lap times. Even a random PP system will be close some times but for the system to have any validity at all, the majority of the cars should fall within a fairly tight range otherwise it's no better than taking a simple power/weight comparison and using that instead. Perhaps you should read this post again to refresh your memory.

It would appear you are outvoted in the OP Poll on the matter, let the public decide I suppose.

 

[Johnnypenso]

It would appear you are outvoted in the OP Poll on the matter, let the public decide I suppose.

Yes, because "well enough to be used in spite of it's flaws" is such a ringing endorsement.

 

[cjr3559]

It's the poll that's flawed. I don't think the PP system works perfectly yet it works well enough for rough estimates. I couldn't tell you if it's *flawed*, so option two needs revised.

Should be:

1. Works perfectly
2. Works acceptably
3. No opinion
4. Not that great
5. Terrible

 

[pb5]

Online it works to a point but off line I'd rather be able to use any car anywhere regardless of it's pp value as the higher pp value cars are usless off line as the pp values are to high use them in career races at all.