top of page

IMLEC PERFORMANCE RATING

All-Time IMLEC Driver Rankings

Based on IMLEC competition results from 1969–2026.

The IMLEC Performance Rating (IPR) is a historical ranking system designed to compare competitors across the entire history of IMLEC, from 1969 to the present day.

It is not simply a count of wins or an average finishing position. Instead, the rating looks at how well a competitor performed against the other drivers taking part in each individual competition, while also recognising finishing position, recent form and significant achievements.

Every competitor begins with an IPR of 1000.0. Their rating then rises or falls after each IMLEC they enter.

The basic principle

A strong performance increases a competitor’s IPR, while a weaker performance can reduce it. The size of that change depends partly on the strength of the opposition.

For example, beating a field containing several highly rated competitors is considered more significant than achieving the same finishing position against a lower-rated field.

This allows performances from different eras and different-sized IMLEC fields to be compared on a common scale.

The four parts of the calculation

For each classified IMLEC performance, the rating change is made up of four components.

1. Head-to-head performance — 65%

The largest part of the IPR calculation is based on head-to-head results.

Every classified competitor is effectively compared with every other classified competitor in that year's event.

For each comparison:

  • finishing ahead of another competitor counts as a win;

  • finishing behind counts as a loss;

  • an equal finishing position counts as a draw.

The system then compares those actual results with what would have been expected from the competitors' IPR ratings before the event.

A lower-rated competitor who beats several highly rated competitors therefore gains more rating than a favourite who simply performs as expected.

Likewise, a highly rated competitor who finishes behind competitors they would normally be expected to beat can lose rating.

This head-to-head element makes up 65% of the normal performance calculation.

2. Finishing position — 15%

A further 15% is based directly on where the competitor finished within the classified field.

Rather than treating an 8th place identically every year, the calculation considers the size of the field.

For example, finishing 8th from 30 classified competitors represents a much stronger relative performance than finishing 8th from 10.

The top of the field receives a positive contribution, performances around the middle are broadly neutral, and lower finishing positions can produce a negative contribution.

3. Achievement bonuses — 15%

Major achievements receive additional rating bonuses.

The current IPR system awards:

  • 1st place: +15 IPR

  • 2nd place: +7 IPR

  • 3rd place: +4 IPR

  • Best 3½-inch performance: +10 IPR

These bonuses recognise achievements that are historically significant in their own right.

A competitor can receive both a finishing-position bonus and the Best 3½-inch bonus in the same competition.

4. Recent form — 5%

The remaining 5% considers a competitor's recent performances.

The system compares the current result with the competitor's recent relative finishing positions.

This provides a small reward when a competitor performs better than their recent form would suggest, or a small reduction when they perform below it.

The effect is deliberately modest. IPR remains primarily a measure of overall competitive performance rather than short-term form.

Rating scale

All competitors begin at:

1000.0 IPR

There is no fixed maximum or minimum rating.

A competitor consistently producing strong performances will gradually move above 1000, while weaker results can take a competitor below 1000.

Because the rating develops throughout a competitor's career, sustained success and repeated strong performances are rewarded.

Retirements, withdrawals and disqualifications

Different non-classified results are treated differently.

A retirement or disqualification receives a small rating reduction of 2 IPR points.

A withdrawal does not count as a performance and is excluded from the rating calculation.

A result recorded as Void is also excluded.

This means a competitor who entered IMLEC but never recorded a qualifying performance may appear in the Archive without having an IPR and will be shown as Not Rated.

Why can a rating change even without winning?

Winning is obviously highly valuable, but IPR measures more than victories.

A competitor can gain rating by:

  • finishing significantly higher than expected;

  • beating several highly rated competitors;

  • producing a strong result in a large field;

  • achieving a podium finish;

  • winning the Best 3½-inch award;

  • outperforming their recent form.

Likewise, a competitor can lose rating despite finishing reasonably well if the result was substantially below what their existing rating suggested they should achieve.

Why do some competitors who did not enter this year move up or down the ranking?

A competitor's IPR rating itself does not change if they do not compete.

However, their ranking position can change because other competitors may move above or below them after the latest IMLEC.

For example, a competitor may remain on exactly 1025.0 IPR but move from 40th to 41st because another driver has increased their rating sufficiently to pass them.

The movement arrows shown in the rankings therefore refer to ranking position, not necessarily to a change in the competitor's own IPR.

Ranking movement

The current ranking compares the latest IPR table with the previous year's table.

  • ▲ indicates that the competitor has moved up the ranking.

  • ▼ indicates that the competitor has moved down.

  • — indicates no change in ranking position.

  • NEW indicates a competitor appearing in the IPR ranking for the first time.

What is the purpose of IPR?

IPR is not intended to replace the official IMLEC results.

The competition result from each year remains exactly that: the result of that particular IMLEC.

Instead, IPR provides an additional way of exploring the Archive by asking a different question:

Across an entire IMLEC career, how strongly has this competitor performed relative to the opposition they faced?

By combining head-to-head performance, finishing position, achievements and form, the IPR provides a single evolving rating that can be used to compare competitors from across more than five decades of IMLEC history.

Rank

Driver

IPR

Movement

1
Lionel Flippance
1211.9
2
Steve Eaton
1178.3
3
Alan Crossfield
1155.7
4
Paul Tompkins
1140.7
5
Ben Pavier
1138.1
6
Les Pritchard
1108.5
7
Percy Wood
1106.4
8
John Heslop
1085.6
9
Glyn Winsall
1084.9
▲ 3
10
Geoff Moore
1081.1
▼ 1
11
Kevan Ayling
1078.9
▼ 1
12
Billy Stock
1078.2
▼ 1
13
John Cottam
1071.9
14
Kelvin Moonie
1071.4
15
Brian Remnant
1067.3
16
David Mayall
1056.2
▲ 11
17
Laurie Joyce
1054.1
▼ 1
18
David Sutcliffe
1050.6
19
Fred Winsall
1050.3
20
Marcus Peel
1049.5
▼ 3
21
Bill Perrett
1049.3
▼ 1
22
Roy Amsbury
1047.9
▼ 1
23
Norman Spink
1047
▼ 1
24
Len Steel
1046.8
▼ 1
25
John Ellis
1045.8
▼ 1
26
Len Labram
1042.6
▼ 1
27
Jason Pattinson
1039.7
▼ 1
28
Jim Elliott
1039.3
29
Ballan Baker
1039.3
30
Neil Mortimer
1036.7
31
John Hurley
1032.8
32
Andrew Siddall
1031.7
33
George Winsall
1029.1
34
Ray Wilkinson
1028.1
35
Austin Heyden
1026.9
36
Pat Killian
1026.5
37
John Drury
1026.4
38
Michael Barnett
1024.5
39
David Morris
1024.5
40
David Neish
1024
41
Jim Ewins
1023.7
42
Dennis Bannister
1023.7
43
Alan Jacobs
1023.4
44
Arthur Bowling
1022.5
45
Steven Botterill
1022.4
46
Denver Watkins
1022.2
47
Alan Bones
1022.2
48
Martin Staniforth
1020.2
▲ 1
49
Geoffrey Symes
1019.4
▲ 1
50
Vincent Williams
1019.2
▲ 1
51
Alasdair Croft
1018.4
▼ 3
52
John Cashmore
1017.8
53
Neil Skellon
1017.8
54
Chris Summersall
1017.7
55
Joanne Flippance
1017.7
56
Graham Gain
1017.4
57
Martin Parham
1017.3
58
Derek Heydenrych
1017.2
59
Paul Pavier
1017
60
John Groom
1016.8
61
E. Fillmore
1016.7
62
D. Pring
1016.5
63
Nigel Gregson
1016.2
64
P. Dupen
1016.2
65
Ken Ellwood
1016
66
Alan Howarth
1015.6
67
Les Morgan
1015.3
68
Dave Cutts
1014.2
69
Trevor Collyer
1014.1
70
Melvyn Zabrocki
1014
71
Adrian Hinchcliffe
1014
72
David Wainwright
1014
73
Julian Atkins
1013.7
74
Alan Bibby
1013.6
75
Dennis White
1013.6
76
John Hancock
1013.5
77
Geoff Gregson
1013.4
78
Andrew Jones
1013.2
79
Brian Baker
1013.2
80
Robert Pardey
1013.1
81
Geof Austin
1013.1
82
Robert Hurst
1012.8
83
Bruce Hope
1012.4
84
D. S. Kellet
1012.3
85
Dave Roberts
1012.3
86
A.H. Castle
1012.2
87
Graham Hawkins
1012.1
88
Don Horsfall
1012.1
89
John Walker
1012
90
Harry Godding
1011.9
NEW
91
H. Reeve
1011.9
▼ 1
92
Jack Busbridge
1011.8
▼ 1
93
Bill Dwyer
1011.8
▼ 1
94
Ian Jameson
1011.7
▼ 1
95
J. Appleton
1011.6
▼ 1
96
Fred La Roche
1011.2
▼ 1
97
Paul Bexfield
1011
▼ 1
98
Simon Holroyd
1010.8
▼ 1
99
Keith Tilbury
1010.7
▼ 1
100
Richard Kellaway
1010.6
▼ 1
bottom of page