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

201
Andrew Wilcock
1000.6
▼ 3
202
Andrew Leahy
1000.6
▼ 3
203
J. Thomas
1000.6
▼ 3
204
Philip Bevan
1000.5
▼ 3
205
Brian Collyer
1000.4
▼ 3
206
Cameron Stephenson
1000.3
▼ 3
207
Alan Gent
1000.3
▼ 3
208
Gerry Mole
1000.1
▼ 3
209
W. Burnett
1000.1
▼ 3
210
K. J. Webber
1000
▼ 3
211
Richard Prideaux
1000
▼ 3
212
L. Taylor
1000
▼ 3
213
Derek Perham
1000
▼ 3
214
Phil Heath
1000
▼ 3
215
John Snazell
1000
▼ 3
216
Malcomb Clements
999.9
▼ 3
217
Frank Morley
999.9
▼ 3
218
David Kane
999.8
▼ 3
219
Paul Clarke
999.7
▼ 3
220
Bob Evenett
999.6
▼ 3
221
John Linkins
999.6
▼ 3
222
Richard Stoddart
999.6
▼ 3
223
John Hale
999.6
▼ 3
224
Christopher Aldridge
999.5
▼ 3
225
George Meldon
999.5
▼ 3
226
Ron Heathcote
999.5
▼ 3
227
Christopher Ball
999.4
▼ 3
228
Nick Taylor
999.4
▼ 3
229
Alan Bray
999.3
▼ 3
230
Matt Butler
999.3
▼ 3
231
D. Forster
999.1
▼ 3
232
John Acton
999.1
▼ 3
233
Jimmy Woods
999.1
▼ 3
234
Lawrence Tatton
999
▼ 3
235
Alan Moon
998.9
▼ 3
236
Alan Church
998.8
▼ 3
237
R.E. Atkins
998.7
▼ 3
238
James Duncan
998.6
▼ 3
239
Eric Hudson
998.6
▼ 3
240
Philip Preston
998.6
▼ 3
241
Ken Cribb
998.6
▼ 3
242
R. Heijnen
998.5
▼ 3
243
Ray Milliken
998.4
▼ 3
244
W. Pearce
998.4
▼ 3
245
Alan Riley
998.3
▼ 3
246
Denis Cross
998.3
▼ 3
247
F. Pullen
998.3
▼ 3
248
Roy Blackwell
998.1
▼ 3
249
Allen Bellamy
998
▼ 3
250
Ben Cox
998
NEW
251
Ben Dunster
998
▼ 4
252
Bev Fallows
998
▼ 4
253
Bruno Taylor
998
▼ 4
254
Daniel Hamblin
998
NEW
255
Dave Bateman
998
▼ 4
256
Dave Bradwell
998
▼ 4
257
David Barton
998
▼ 4
258
Derek Moss
998
▼ 4
259
Derek Warrington
998
▼ 4
260
Dick Penn
998
▼ 4
261
F. Raw
998
▼ 4
262
Fred Palmer
998
▼ 4
263
George Ganley
998
▼ 4
264
George Harrison
998
▼ 4
265
Graham Ashby
998
NEW
266
Harry Lumb
998
▼ 5
267
Harry Roberts
998
▼ 5
268
Harry Wilcox
998
▼ 5
269
J. Turner
998
▼ 5
270
Jan Gravemaker
998
▼ 5
271
Jim Nunn
998
▼ 5
272
John Addison
998
▼ 5
273
John Cavalier
998
▼ 5
274
Leslie Donn
998
▼ 5
275
Lionel Woodhead
998
▼ 5
276
Martin Weekes
998
NEW
277
Matt Jeffries
998
▼ 6
278
Michael Naylor
998
▼ 6
279
Mike Firth
998
▼ 6
280
Nick Edwards
998
▼ 6
281
Nick Jackson
998
▼ 6
282
Norman Rossiter
998
▼ 6
283
Paul Tomlinson
998
▼ 6
284
Peter Mackay
998
▼ 6
285
Phil Mortimer
998
▼ 6
286
Philip Moore
998
▼ 6
287
R. Stark
998
▼ 6
288
S. Williams
998
▼ 6
289
Sean Pritchard Frankham
998
▼ 6
290
Steve Warburton
998
▼ 6
291
Steven Papworth
998
▼ 6
292
T. E. Aitchison
998
▼ 6
293
T.J. Morris
998
▼ 6
294
Ted Head
998
▼ 6
295
Roger Hopkins
998
▼ 6
296
Adrian Strachan
997.8
▼ 6
297
John Alfred Turner
997.6
▼ 6
298
Stan Jackson
997.5
▼ 6
299
James Dickson
997.4
▼ 6
300
John Price
997.4
▼ 6
bottom of page