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

401
David Mills
992.6
▼ 7
402
S. Baker
992.5
▼ 7
403
Geoff Elliot
992.4
▼ 7
404
W. Van Der Heiden
992.4
▼ 7
405
Bob Howard-Alpe
992.3
▼ 7
406
Chris Wall
992.3
▼ 7
407
Wilfried Wagner
992.3
▼ 7
408
Dennis Pearson
992.2
▼ 7
409
Ian Priest
992.2
▼ 7
410
Philip Holroyd
992.1
▼ 7
411
Roy Gregson
992.1
▼ 7
412
Anthony Holdsworth
992.1
▼ 7
413
Vic Whittaker
992
▼ 7
414
Roger Caple
991.8
▼ 7
415
John Evans
991.7
▼ 7
416
Jeanie Walker
991.6
▼ 6
417
Les Nelson
991.6
▼ 6
418
James Tilbury
991.4
▼ 6
419
Keith Morris
991.3
▼ 6
420
Terry Longbottom
991.2
▼ 6
421
D. Ashworth
991.2
▼ 6
422
Eric Lindsey
991.2
▼ 6
423
Ray Hillman
991.1
▼ 6
424
Jeremy Lewis
991.1
▼ 6
425
Don Freeman
991.1
▼ 6
426
Dave Holland
991.1
▼ 6
427
D. Caseley
991
▼ 6
428
Alan Philpott
991
▼ 6
429
Paul Massam
991
▼ 6
430
Martin Kennedy
990.9
▼ 6
431
George Davidson
990.9
▼ 6
432
Geoff Burlington
990.8
▼ 6
433
Graham Harris
990.8
▼ 6
434
Mary Knapman
990.7
▼ 6
435
Mike Parrott
990.7
▼ 6
436
David Chalk
990.7
▼ 6
437
Lee Sutherland
990.5
▼ 6
438
N. Lockwood
990.5
▼ 6
439
Barry Sumsion
990.4
▼ 6
440
Sam Petrie
990.4
▼ 6
441
Nigel Way
990.3
▼ 6
442
O. J. Weston
990.3
▼ 6
443
A. Clapperton
990.2
▼ 6
444
Geoff Hatfield
990.2
▼ 6
445
Dennis Postlethwaite
990.1
▼ 6
446
Terry Booth
990.1
▼ 6
447
Mike Foreman
990.1
▼ 6
448
S. Procter
989.9
▼ 6
449
Brian Andrews
989.9
▼ 6
450
Wallace Aitken
989.9
▼ 6
451
Harry Edie
989.9
▼ 6
452
Jim Cross
989.8
▼ 6
453
Bill Edmondson
989.8
▼ 6
454
David Haddock
989.6
▼ 6
455
Howard Lumb
989.6
▼ 6
456
Pete Titan
989.6
▼ 6
457
Fred Dodden
989.5
▼ 6
458
Mike Smart
989.5
▼ 6
459
Iain Mackenzie
989.4
▼ 6
460
Peter Willey
989.1
▼ 6
461
Sam Ashing
989
▼ 6
462
Graeme Monk
988.9
▼ 6
463
Don Jelly
988.9
▼ 6
464
Stephen Titley
988.8
▼ 6
465
Amy Parsons
988.8
▼ 6
466
Terry Childs
988.8
▼ 6
467
Alf Manktelow
988.8
▼ 6
468
Ed Thornley
988.7
▼ 6
469
David Alexander
988.7
▼ 6
470
John Brady
988.7
▼ 6
471
P. Smith
988.7
▼ 6
472
Peter Rainbow
988.7
▼ 6
473
Raf Loosen
988.7
▼ 6
474
Robin Battersby
988.7
▼ 6
475
Ken Mattock
988.7
▼ 6
476
Fred Morley
988.7
▼ 6
477
Carl Mayhew
988.7
▼ 6
478
Robert Potter
988.7
▼ 6
479
Arthur Dalton
988.7
▼ 6
480
Andrew Collyer
988.7
▼ 6
481
Dr J. B. Hollins
988.7
▼ 6
482
Harvey Fisher
988.7
▼ 6
483
G. Lindsey
988.6
▼ 6
484
John Avon
988.6
▼ 6
485
G. Sherborne
988.6
▼ 6
486
C. Rudkin
988.6
▼ 6
487
Chris Cubitt
988.6
▼ 6
488
G. Cheverton
988.6
▼ 6
489
R. Weaver
988.6
▼ 6
490
Ken Rose
988
▼ 5
491
Stephen Harrison
988
▼ 5
492
Karen Howard
987.7
▼ 5
493
John Lloyd
987.4
▼ 5
494
Toby Lampitt
987.1
▼ 5
495
Tim Jenkins
987
▼ 5
496
Mike Casey
986.9
▼ 5
497
Ed Hocking
986.7
▼ 5
498
Michael Halliday
986.6
▼ 5
499
Edward Beales
986.4
▼ 5
500
Dave Gregson
986.3
▼ 5
bottom of page