I described in this thread (
http://www.ccsforum.com/index.php/topic,25286.0.html ) the major flaw with the Performance Index (P/I) calculation and a solution to fixing it.
Using P/I (in the corrected way I described in that other thread) for calculating the Amateur jump point to Expert would be a good thing because it would be based on actual results (wins vs last place finishes), I think that calculation should be used in ALL situations for the Expert bump (including the 1st time). When using P/I if someone was finishing Top 3 constantly it would be heavily reflected in their adjusted points - they would get to 400 points quickly - but if they were constantly finishing poorly their adjusted points would be very low and it would be very difficult for them to reach the Expert jump point in a season. In my opinion the only time an Amateur who's reached the bump point should be allowed to finish out the season is if it's their 1st time as an Amateur.
Another twist on this is to have an alternate 'Sandbagger Calculation' that applies to
Amateur racers that have raced for more than 1 season with CCS, this would be designed to stop people from remaining an Amateur (who finishes well) for years on end by only racing enough to keep them below the bump point (ultimately the sandbaggers ruin it for all the true Amateurs who feel they don't have a chance against the sandbaggers). This would actually be very simple and would also use the
per race P/I calculation (not averaged calculation), CCS could come up with a P/I and number of races that they believe is a fair point where someone is obviously not an Amateur and should be bumped up to Expert status. If (for example only) CCS decided the number of races was 10 and the P/I was 900 then as soon as someone had 10 finishes that had a 900 P/I or above they would be bumped to Expert per the 'Sandbagger Calculation' for their next event. This doesn't mean 10 finishes in a row with a 900 P/I, it means
ANY 10 finishes with a 900 P/I or above - here's an example of P/I's that would eventually count toward the bump:
785,
909,
1000,
965,
900,
920, 810,
1000, 740, 830,
975,
910, 500,
1000, 770,
935The biggest decision with this is what P/I is appropriate and how many races to use, but I would imagine the 900 P/I and 10 individual races isn't too far off since it would represent numerous Top 3 finishes in average size Middleweight races. Another option not using P/I at all is to say (for example) a certain amount of finishes that are Top 2 - maybe 10 could work here as well.
Something I've also seen as a discouragement to true Amateur racers is what I call 'Contingency Snipers' who only show up to race at 1 or 2 events in a season strictly for the contingency at those events - when they clearly are not Amateur racers. My solution for that is a single event Amateur 'Contingency Sniper' rule for those who just hop from org to org cherry picking the highest contingency payouts from Amateurs. Since contingency generally pays out based on finishing position (and not P/I) CCS for example could say 3 wins at a single event
in any classes paying contingency would immediately bump that rider to Expert status at the end of that event. My justification for that is because an Amateur in almost any race class who wins 3 races at a single event should be able to finish in the Top 10 and possibly even the Top 5 as an Expert in those same classes either immediately or in a short period of time (at a regular Regional event). This rule wouldn't apply to riders in their 1st season with CCS.
That's my idea!
