Competition Averages

[brucepick]

Originally Posted by CO ZX2

rh77, Rick,
Guess I'm not understanding this very well. How does the proposed new rule differ from the currently posted Version 2.0 rule quoted below??

Excerpt from current Version 2.0 rules:

Calculations:
6. The ?Final Percentage over EPA? is figured by the cumulative, Gaslog-sourced MPG values vs. the vehicle?s EPA FE-Combined (?Cycle-End Cumulative Percentage Over EPA?) ...

If I may be so bold as to answer this one...

Actually I don't think the proposed method does vary from #6 above (my interpretation of it anyway). I think the method of averaging all the mpg values from the gaslog doesn't really reflect #6 as it weights the miles in a short tank much more heavily than those in a long tank.

I think it's a matter of us agreeing on what was the intention of the rule, and stating it clearly so there won't be a question on it.

My two cents.
My thanks to Rick and to all of us for following this.

[rh77]

Originally Posted by LxMike

I don't think a rules change in mid "season" is right. with the mileage that some get here they would only get 1 fill and it would get posted near end of cycle.

For the season, single-fills wouldn't be affected. It's when multiple tanks are used:

Example:

Tank 1: 400 mi / 15 gal = 26.67 MPG
Tank 2: 350 mi / 13 gal = 26.92 MPG
Tank 3: 100 mi / 3 gal = 33.33 MPG

The current method takes the MPG averages: (26.67 + 26.92 + 33.33) / 3 = 28.97 final MPG

Proposed "cumulative" method: 850 miles / 31 gal = 27.41 MPG

The newer method weights each "gallon" equally as Bruce just mentioned.

Baselines would be calculated similarly...

-Rick

[brucepick]

Note, in Rick's example above, the 100 mile short tank had by far the best mpg of the three tanks So when averaging the three individual tank mpg numbers the short tank pulled the result up to a higher number.

For a case where the short tank has a very low individual score, averaging the individual tank mpg's together will give you lower score than you would get if you average by dividing all miles / all gallons.

[CO ZX2]

I just selected cumulative calculations when I voted. A vote should not have been necessary. This method is delineated in the Version 2.0 rules and should have been used from the start. But anyway, good to have it straightened out.

[repete86]

Cumulative makes more sense. If I fill every great tank at 3 gallons, then let the bad ones run until I am nearly empty, it will be falsely bumping my standing.

[usedgeo]

Cumulative. That is the only way it makes sense and seems fair to me. I alwags thought it was that way but did not pay much attention.

[s2man]

Originally Posted by usedgeo

Cumulative. That is the only way it makes sense and seems fair to me. I alwags thought it was that way but did not pay much attention.

Ditto. I thought we were doing cumulative, and I didn't bother to look a the calculations in the Standings spreadsheet.