Question about race groupings [Archive] - Improved Touring Racing Forums

StephF

10-24-2006, 11:00 AM

I know I saw this discussed in another thread, but can someone tell me who we should send our thoughts and requests to in regards to 2007 race groupings? If memory serves, that will be discussed in a couple of weeks at the mini convention, right?
And what would fellow IT folks like to see as far as groupings for next year? Personally, I would prefer to run with other IT cars that at least handle the same in the corners as we do. Speed differences are easier to deal with if that race group can get by and keep going rather than getting by and slowing in the corners. Running with SM and show stock type cars is getting old. Especially having to rebuild my just rebuilt car because someone in another race group tried to use it as a bumper... :mad1:
I'm sure they aren't wild about running with us either. Fine by me, I'd prefer to watch them from the sidelines anyway. With a large bag of popcorn...
What would you all like to see?

RSTPerformance

10-24-2006, 11:10 AM

Steph-

Honestly I would think that ITC should run with ITB and whomever ITB runs with. Generally we don't have turnouts like we did at Lime Rock (but maybe that will change!!!) and adding 5 or so ITC cars would only give the ITB guys more competition. It would also give ITC cars more fun of having the challange to beat as many ITB cars as possible. If you realistically look the times, car prep, and driverability for most ITB cars and ITC cars they are somewhat similar at the New England tracks (NHIS & Lime Rock).

With recent decreases in ITS levels it only makes sence IMO to have ITS/ITB/ITC as one group.

ITA/ITR as a possible second groupe.

If need be at event specific races switch up the groupings to fit all the cars into the two groups.

Raymond

Ed Funk

10-24-2006, 11:21 AM

Just in case we have to run with the "Super Special Me" crowd, I just placed my order for lettering for the back bumper---"Don't hit me I'm an old guy". Think it'll help?

StephF

10-24-2006, 11:23 AM

Did you remember to order mine?
"I'm a woman....go ahead...MAKE MY DAY!"
B)

Rabbit05

10-24-2006, 11:32 AM

I was going to add, " If you can read this flip me back over ! " to the underside of my car as a joke. Never thought I woulda had a use for that one though ! :rolleyes:

How you feeling Ed ? Still a little sore here, but nothing a beer can't fix. :birra:

John VanDenburgh
VanDenburgh Motorsports
IT ???

Eric Parham

10-24-2006, 12:21 PM

In many classes such as IT, the mix of driver skill is relatively homogeneous through much of the field. The spread in lap times is often due in large part to other factors such as the completely different equipment, funding and preparation levels found throughout club racing.

In SPEC classes, on the other hand, the theory is that everyone is running exactly the same or intentionally equivalent equipment. In SSM (a SPEC class), this even includes the SPEC Toyo tires. Thus, the gradation of driver skill clearly peaks towards the front of the class and drops off through the mid-pack. There are exceptions, of course, but the intended drop-off of the skill versus lap-time slope ("skill-slope") is BY DESIGN in a SPEC class.

As it turns out, the SSM class is somewhat faster this year than in years past. For example, a new lap record of 1:03.4 was set in SSM at Lime Rock in Saturday's NARRC Runoffs race, while the mid-pack in SSM was turning 1:06-1:07. I haven't paid much attention to their rules so I can't say where their new-found speed is coming from. For comparison, my best time "in the clear" at Lime Rock this year was 1:05.9 (although I did find a 1:05.2 while drafting a Miata). I can knock off consistent 1:06s in the clear, and am getting to the point that I can sometimes do it when working through traffic (thus, this SSM/ITC experience has actually been helpful to my own skill development). I believe that the ITC lap record is 1:04.8, but that record is several years old and was set by one of the cars destroyed in Saturday's incident.

Unfortunately for the ITC racers, these comparative lap times place our lead cars right smack in the middle of the SSM skill-slope. I believe that the top 3 in ITC were all running low 1:06 lap times. While there may occasionally be highly skilled SSM drivers in the middle of their pack, it's a little more likely to be populated by driver's of average skill (or even less if they're pushing the car prep/equipment envelope).

As is also well known, the SSM cars that run the same lap times as the ITC cars are generally much faster in the straights and much slower in the corners than the ITC cars. This is NOT a good mix!

Thus, I agree! IT cars should run with other IT cars. Grouping ITC with ITB sounds great to me! Personally, I think the old ITC/ITA and ITB/ITS groupings worked pretty well since the faster class cars could make very easy passes on the straights (and in the corners with the 1" rim increase), but the disadvantage was that the slower class cars usually lost a lap. As it turns out, the ITC cars often lose a lap anyway with the current SSM/ITC grouping.

If ITB and ITC were combined for next year, there would inevitably be a few complaints about ITC cars getting in the way of a mid-pack ITB battle and/or ITB cars getting in the way of a front-pack ITC battle, but at least neither group would be slowing the other in the corners and dive-bombing at the end of the straights (I hope). Anyway, I think it would be worth a try.

You definitely have my vote for an ITB/ITC grouping for next year! :)

StephF

10-24-2006, 12:53 PM

It's got my vote too....(amen on the thoughts about the midpack SSM drivers. :angry: ) I remember running with C cars when we were running in B. The mix was fine. They were predictable, and you knew how they were going through a corner, and what they would do next.
It was when they stuck us with SS cars that it was a pain. Nothing like having to brake midcorner to keep from collecting a show stock car that could then squirt away on the straight.
So who do we contact to make our feelings known about next years grouping? And can we lobby to make a change, or is this a case of tough, you run where we stick ya? Hell, there's only been a few of us; it's not like we would over subscribe a race group.
Dick P...were you the one talking about this before? Any suggestions?

Andy Bettencourt

10-24-2006, 01:12 PM

So the answer to your question is contact the NARRC committee. Start with Brian Mushnick who is our NER rep on that committee. I think that the committee wants to try run consistant groups throughout the year. Check the NARRC home page for the contact names.

I like either of these groupings:

ITR-ITS-ITB

ITA-ITC-SSB-SSC

or

ITR-ITA-SSB-SSC

ITS-ITB-ITC

I think the Prod guys would like this too! SSM and SM could run together but would hurt the Region in the pocketbook as there are a LOT of Miata drivers who double dip in both run groups. I suggest attending a Road Racing comp board meeting to understand the issues - because we most certainly don't know them all. What makes sense to us here may not be feasible for a very good reason...

dickita15

10-24-2006, 01:56 PM

2006 was the first year that all 4 Narrc regions agreed to run the same race groups. The last three years data on starters at each Narrc race were culled and combined in different ways to get the least possible number of race groups. Based on those numbers we have the grouping you saw this year. When combining race groups safety is job one and that is determined by weight more than lap time. This year there were some changes in the number of cars ITA is way up and Miata is down. Will all due respect Andy the double dipping of the Miata drivers is not a consideration is scheduling. Besides if they really want to run the car in two classes they will run in ITA of ITS (yea)

By all means contact your Narrc rep but cars must be combined in a way that allows up all the most track time. A full analysis of the car counts must be done for the best shot at not having breakouts and it all has to be done soon. Reserved numbers are based on race groupings. That is one of the advantages we had this year with all the Narrc regions running the same groups, less number conflicts.

RSTPerformance

10-24-2006, 01:59 PM

Andy good groupings... I like it :happy204:

Steph and others-

Becarefull that you don't make your argument fully on the fact that "the top ITC cars are running with the midpack miatas (or whathave you), and the midpack drivers don't know how to drive thus ruin my race." EVERY class has this, even the "IT" cars. We have all even been "that person" back in the day, or we may be that person now, who knows... Everyone has thier own opinions on different people/drivers capabilities. For example, In the past I have always hated running with ITS as the mid pack ITS drivers to me were drivers who didn't know how to drive but had lots of money to buy a fast car. Times have changed, I didn't race much last year and this year thier was only 2 drivers that I herd were an issue for ITB drivers. Collectively a bunch of us went and talked to them, nothing was resolved in person, but their driving did improve at future races.

Arguable SCCA doesn't licence drivers whom don't know how to drive, thus you might not get anywhere with your argument.

Raymond "I do agree, but I havn't goten anywhere but other than hearing what I mentioned above" Blethen

StephF

10-24-2006, 02:47 PM

Ray, while we may talk here amongst ourselves about the skill levels in different groupings, I'm looking at it from the standpoint of grouping classes or cars together that handle in a similar fashion.
IT cars will corner and do the straights in the same way, unlike the cars on spec tires and stock suspension. There is less likelyhood of incidents happening because a car gets by in a straight line only to crash into you on the turn.
Look at what happened to Ed & John this past weekend. That driver apparently didn't have a prayer of making the turn carrying the speed he was carrying. And he was doing it becuase he had the straight line speed to close so much on them. So he was trying to use it to bonzai past. (or is it bonsai? which one is the mini tree?? :D )
Seems to me that this will give the least amount of interference between the groupings. We're still going to have a varying range of skill levels. We can live with that when we can equalize things out in the handling aspects.
Andy, I like those proposed groups too. And thank you Dick for the info on where to go from here. I will be tossing my 2 cents worth into the mix, for better or worse.

Andy Bettencourt

10-24-2006, 03:37 PM

Will all due respect Andy the double dipping of the Miata drivers is not a consideration is scheduling. Besides if they really want to run the car in two classes they will run in ITA of ITS (yea)[/b]

Good to hear as we all want what is best for the Region!

itracer

10-24-2006, 04:01 PM

I like either of these groupings:

ITR-ITS-ITB

ITA-ITC-SSB-SSC

or

ITR-ITA-SSB-SSC

ITS-ITB-ITC
[/b]

I would rather not run with ITR (as an Mid-pack ITB). Our race is already shortened enough running with S. I personally would like to see:
ITR-ITS-ITA

ITB-ITC-SSB-SSC

Or Andy's second set with S, B, and C.

joeg

10-24-2006, 04:34 PM

Do whatever keeps each race group to a reasonable number of cars.

That is a tougher task than you can imagine, especially where the race organizer tries to adhere to published schedules and groups.

I have raced in all combinations and do not care about speed differentials. I do worry about super large numbers of fast cars running with ITC and ITB. That can be far too thrilling and dangerous. (Try 77 cars on the Glen's "Short Course", for example).

As for those Miatas, put them all together--including Specs, SSM(s), SSB(s), ITA versions and Production versions.

Andy Bettencourt

10-24-2006, 04:46 PM

ner88

10-24-2006, 05:19 PM

"As for those Miatas, put them all together--including Specs, SSM(s), SSB(s), ITA versions and Production versions."
Don't think you could afford the entry fees after the lost revenue.
Miatas aren't the problem, teaching drivers how to race together is the real issue. :rolleyes:

dickita15

10-24-2006, 05:23 PM

I do think that the ITS-ITB and ITA-ITC make sense because some speed differential is preferable in my mind...

[/b]
I could not agree more. I think if there is a little more difference it keeps the lead battles from being intertwined.

And ITA is way to big to be with B or S. R will fit on many places including big bore. If we see more than 3 at any race next year I will be surprised.

Tkczecheredflag

10-24-2006, 06:17 PM

All I can say is that when I heard "C" was running with Miata cowboys I put he "C" car up for sale. I had Robert Karl take me out of a race last year and then I over heard telling one of his Miata buddies that I should have known this is a contact sport - Class act. He told me I shut the door on him ( the video from another Maita right behind us told a different story). You could of driven my tow vehicle with the 28' enclosed on the back a my 8' Fisher Plow on the front, through the opening I left for him. I was not running mid pack eiither, 5th over all and was leading in the "C" race.

Greg Amy

10-24-2006, 07:03 PM

Yep, Tim. As sad and as pissy as it sounds (and I just read over this sentence three times before posting) if Spec Miatas were grouped with ITA I would not race it. I sold a completely-built and -prepped Spec Miata last summer once I did a race weekend with them (and wrecked a car in the process; unfortunately not mine). Sorry if that offends folks, but that's a pretty strong opinion of mine that is unlikely to be changed without significant opposing proof.

Be that as it may, Jerry, once they're "out there in the wild" and licensed there's no way to get new lessons across their limited/tunnel field-of-vision.

Ed Funk

10-24-2006, 07:11 PM

Thanks for selling us the car, Tim! Now we have to deal with them! And while I don't always agree with Greg's view, this time I very strongly do!

Jeremy Billiel

10-24-2006, 07:36 PM

I do think that the ITS-ITB and ITA-ITC make sense because some speed differential is preferable in my mind...

An ITR-ITS-ITA would be horrible and and oversubscribed - ITB-ITC-SSB-SSC groups would fill few grids other than the NARRC runoffs.

ITR will be VERY small for a few years so I think it fits with ITS for now...
[/b]

Plus if you put ITA in ITS the ITS field would be embarrased! Oh wait I am in ITS.... Regardless amny times the ITA cars are faster than the ITS cars so you would have HP (ITS) cars fast in the straights and slower in the corners. ITS and ITA is a bad pairing.

I liked ITB and ITS. I agree with Dick. If we have 3 ITR cars fine just add them in. I am sad to see and hear that ITS continues to get smaller each year. :(

Eric Parham

10-24-2006, 08:31 PM

I like either of these groupings:

ITR-ITS-ITB

ITA-ITC-SSB-SSC

or

ITR-ITA-SSB-SSC

ITS-ITB-ITC
[/b]

The IT groupings look fine but SSB should go with SM, and SSC should go with SSM, IMHO. That is, group IT cars with other IT type cars, and SS cars with other SS type cars.

Tkczecheredflag

10-25-2006, 05:11 AM

Thanks for selling us the car, Tim! Now we have to deal with them! And while I don't always agree with Greg's view, this time I very strongly do!
[/b]
Steph - It was either sell the car or go Production - I always thouught IT was my home. I all honesty I miss the CRX - let's talk.
Tim

JLawton

10-25-2006, 06:00 AM

I all honesty I miss the CRX - let's talk.
Tim
[/b]

Oh no, another Klvana scam!!!

hunter164

10-25-2006, 06:13 AM

Solely for the reason that I would love to see if I could beat Brandon in his 240sx, I'd love to run in ITR with ITA and be on track with the rest of the BB Racing cars.

StephF

10-25-2006, 07:39 AM

Steph - It was either sell the car or go Production - I always thouught IT was my home. I all honesty I miss the CRX - let's talk.
Tim
[/b]

Ah, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain Tim! We both enjoy ITC (except for those freaking miatas that is... :mad1: ) Good people, fun competition. I hope to see more folks getting into it.

I just wish this winter wasn't going to be so busy. We were already talking about overhauling the CRX (needs some freshening, and maybe a new cage) and now we have to repair the Civic as well. Maybe SCCA should install a new rule: you pile drive yourself into someone elses car, you haul your butt over to their place and help FIX it later!!! That might make some folks think twice about their glory moves!

On a side note: we just had a new cage installed in the Civic by Rick Leavitt, Northern Fabrication, last winter. He did a wonderful job. He's located in CT, and has done cages for other SCCA folks as well. We highly recommend his work. He is precise, to the rules, he builds one hell of a cage, and does it in a timely fashion. :023:
When we get the Civic back on track, you're all welcome to stop by and look at his work.

Dave Zaslow

10-25-2006, 07:48 AM

Eric has it right, the pointy end (aware and talented) of SM/SSM is not the issue, it is the rest of the pack..Maybe it is knowing they can just wander the track after the race and any body or suspension part they pick up can be used to fix their car ;-)

If I were king of regional race groupings for the northeast there would be eight race groups. :

ITR, S, A,
ITB, C, IT7, SSB, SSC

I see from the Mini-Con schedule that the NeDiv scheduling meeting is supposed to be Friday night, or perhaps early Saturday morning. Is this an open meeting?

There are NERRC and NYSRRC meetings scheduled, but no NARRC. Is the Saturday morning 'Club Racing Open Forum' the right place to take the grouping concerns?

Andy Bettencourt

10-25-2006, 08:32 AM

Eric has it right, the pointy end (aware and talented) of SM/SSM is not the issue, it is the rest of the pack..Maybe it is knowing they can just wander the track after the race and any body or suspension part they pick up can be used to fix their car ;-)

If I were king of regional race groupings for the northeast there would be eight race groups. :

ITR, S, A,
ITB, C, IT7, SSB, SSC

[/b]

Why is this a good solution? The groups have way similar speeds so racing each other would be common and most importantly, ITR-ITS-ITA would have 45 cars in its run group while ITB-ITC-IT7-SSB-SSC would get about 20 cars tops at a Regional.

gran racing

10-25-2006, 08:40 AM

Andy, eight race groups. As in one for each of the eight classes listed. :D

ner88

10-25-2006, 08:48 AM

:cavallo: I just struggle with the anti-Miata B.S., I just completed my 6th season in the class and have had only 1 or 2 minor incidents and I run top 10 most of the time. I can't help what other Miata drivers do but I know there are many that are dam good. I sat on the hill at LRP this past weekend and saw some pretty bad driving in all classes.
No question, Miata has it share but look at the numbers I would bet the ratio of bad drivers is the same in any class, remember it only takes one ITC driver to make 25% of the field bad( at least at most races).
I race a Miata for lots of reasons but one thing's for sure, I would probably stop racing cars before I would switch.
What would ITA be like if the field was 25 Nissans? Greg? :D

FastM3

10-25-2006, 10:11 AM

Anybody here read Gulliver's Travels?

I think it all just depends where we each sit. This issue pobably exists in each race group. ITA has really changed this year with incorporating the Production cars. Now there are people in "x"P that have come from a vintage backgorund who expect to have the whole width of the track available to try different lines and are not used to looking in their mirrors for overtaking cars. This has caused Linda to lose several laps trying to get around some otherwise very interesting machinery.
Can you believe she wants to go to SSM to get away from the ITA/Production madness.

Some of the E Production people say they are intimidated by the ITA drivers and they cannot really "race" because they don't want to get involved in flying fiberglass situations.

With ITC in SSM, same thing. Yes when ITC cars are set up right or have the new magic Hoosiers on they can go throught the Oval faster than old Toyo Proxies at NHIS. The fast ITC's are probably faster than 1/2 to 2/3 (depending on the day) than the SSM cars. That is no excuse to block or not give ample room to an overtaking SSM that is 1.5 to 2 seconds faster overall. How did that car get right behind you in the first place?

By the way.. Steph..Thanks for leaving room and holding your line at the last NHIS event. It was a pleasure because I knew where you would be as I went inside at turn 3. :023:

(As apposed to a SM car at a previous even that just pulled right over (did not see) or (went to block) and we contacted. :wacko:

The SSC cars that ran with us this year? I had to give them so much room because they were so pretty and clean. THat made it so the pass had to be planned.

The problem most likely goes back to the schools that we provide for our club drivers. Maybe we need to have specific sessions labelled:

Track Ettiquett, Passing Manners, Use of Mirrors, Do not Assume, Safety is Number 1.

None of these items were mentioned when I went through the school.

Coming from Laydown Karting where 115 mph and bump drafting on the straight at Summitt point teaches respect for other drivers.

I may not be the calmest person in the world, and I may not be smooth in my manner of striking up a conversation (I promise to work on that), but I have spoken to a few ITC people and at least one has been better at giving point by's and leaving room in stead of cutting down on people.

I certainly know there are some (more than some?) in the SM/SSM community that need to learn some serious lessons about passing and leaving room. It is frustrating. AND it does frustrate many in SM/SSM about how to police the situtaion. :angry:

BUT I will add that I have some great racing. An awsome battle for next to last place in the rain on old post enduro. Linda had an Awesome ITA race at the Glen.

I have tried to smooth out a bit and have some more patience on track as I am tired of doing body work and alignments. :birra:

As far as the class combinations for the future......Be careful what you wish for. You might make the situation worse.

That's it, I'm done. My hands are tired from typing. :024: Have to go back to work

Phil

88 SM / ITA

Doc Bro

10-25-2006, 10:21 AM

I had a spec miata driver run over the back door of my NEW enclosed trailer with his enclosed trailer. My Dad watched him do it (at LRP this year). He looked around to see if he was "caught", and didn't notice my dad watching. When I got back from tech he got a wicked tongue lashing from me. Then we spent the next 45 min fixing the trailer door.

Crap like that doesn't help the plight of the SM/SSM crowd. You can keep 'em as far as I'm concerned.

And by the way, I'd rather drive with a full field of Nissans in IT.

R

Ed Funk

10-25-2006, 12:32 PM

I'm sorry Andy, equal lap times do not mean that racing will be good for everyone involved. As an extreme example, a AA fuel dragster could probably equal your time at LRP, but it' not going to be fun, pretty or safe for anyone if you're out there at the same time. SSM's are faster than ITC on the straights and slower in the corners. I've been blocked, chopped, forced over curbs etc all season long by cars not in my class who just didn't want to get passed by a 20 year old Honda. If I did the equivalent and actively blocked on the straights, how long before I was black flagged? But when an SSM car does it I hear "oh, I was just taking my line". BS that line needs to be the same from lap to lap. And the good book does require the car being passed to leave racing room, any tires over the curb is not "racing room"!!

Phil, I assume I'm one of the ITC people you spoke to this summer. If I recall, your request was that I get out of your way going into corners by going off line, and then trundle around behind you through the corner rather than go under you in 6 at NHIS. Again BS, everyone has to play by the same set of rules or there will be a problem.

Don't think the problem is going to go away without someone with wisdom and authority (rare, just look at the US government) taking charge and making some tough decisions. If Paul Newman can be my role model, I'm not going away either for another 21+ years, sorry Shelby, Phil, Nigel, Andy.

dickita15

10-25-2006, 01:05 PM

I see from the Mini-Con schedule that the NeDiv scheduling meeting is supposed to be Friday night, or perhaps early Saturday morning. Is this an open meeting?

There are NERRC and NYSRRC meetings scheduled, but no NARRC. Is the Saturday morning 'Club Racing Open Forum' the right place to take the grouping concerns?
[/b]

There will be a Narrc meeting and that is the only place this conversation would be appropriate. this is not a NE Div issue and discussion of this there would be unapproriate. actually showing up at the narrc meeting and complaining about race groups would most likely not be of any help either. race groupings are about safety and track time. I agree that the groups need to be realigned due to the change in participation and sometimes you can make the other problems better at the same time.

Ed Funk

10-25-2006, 01:39 PM

Sorry for the aggressive rant! Just checked my pill bottles, thought I was taking my prozac but popped two viagra instead!

lateapex911

10-25-2006, 02:44 PM

Well, at least Sheph could get something out of it, but it's too bad you wasted the opportunity when she's at work!

Tch tch tch...

;)

Andy Bettencourt

10-25-2006, 03:36 PM

I'm sorry Andy, equal lap times do not mean that racing will be good for everyone involved.

[/b]

Ed, I think we all know it can never be perfect...but we need to try and make it the best it can be for teh most people. I think it's best for the majority of racers to have some speed differential built into the design.

My point is that you don't want equal lap times - it facilitates easier passing and less issues. As long as the differential isn't so large as to shorten races for 'slower' classes, I think it is the right thing to do in the name of safety and racing.

RKramden

10-25-2006, 03:43 PM

I know I saw this discussed in another thread, but can someone tell me who we should send our thoughts and requests to in regards to 2007 race groupings? If memory serves, that will be discussed in a couple of weeks at the mini convention, right?
[/b]

Historically, Marianne and I made up the groups. (As part of doing the prefered numbers.)

We would look at the actual groups run by the various regions, at the many tracks, and bunch them based on which cars ran with which other cars the most often in the previous year. We kept asking for the 4 NARRC regions to get their acts together and have some form of common grouping (each region would do "their own thing", and anyone else be damned), but that was all but impossible.

Last year, Dick P., and Brian got the other regions to agree to commonality at Lime Rock, and based on that, and the 2005 car counts, a set of groups that was acceptable was developed, and we went from there. Laurie Sheppard did the most of the work, and given the constraints, a good job.

Since it is based on the previous years counts, it is always somewhat of a crap shoot, because no-one can accurately predict what will happen in terms of class turnout. SM going national this year was a big question mark, because it bled off a bunch of national level drivers who were running regionals because that was the only place for SM.

Some of the regions "cheated" and modified the groups after the fact, and it is never an easy task.

Would you rather have consistent groups that may be over subscribed, with some of you told to go home without racing, or end up running with Showroom stock and SM cars so everyone gets to race? That is the basic question that each region has to address. The answer is never pretty, but based on hard looks at the numbers from the previous year, it can be made less painful for EVERYBODY. Changing groups at the track is never easy and results in lots of pissed off drivers and workers.

So, last year was the first for having an "agreement" on groups, and who knows if it will continue to next year. Only if you go to the NARRC meeting will you know.

And, Marianne IS NOT DOING NARRC NUMBERS this year. Yes, she is still doing numbers for nationals, but not for NARRC/NERRC. So don't send us your number requests, please. And since someone else is doing it, I'll bet the rules will change, too.

Ed Funk

10-25-2006, 03:43 PM

I very much agree with speed differential as long as the speed comes in similar areas on the track. Therefore, IT with IT and I don't care if I lose a lap to an very well driven and prepared ITA Miata, I just don't want to lose my race or more to an idiotically driven SSM.

Oh, and Jake, Steph has Wednesdays off!! So I feel much better now!! :happy204:

JLawton

10-25-2006, 04:00 PM

I realize putting run groups together is a tough and challenging task, no doubt about it. One of those where you can't please everyone!!

I do have my personal issues about running with other classes but I won't get into that. It sounds to me, that most people would be happy having IT run with only IT classes. We don't like running with Prod, they don't like running with us. We don't like running with Miata's (especially Andy, but only cause he's too fast!!) and they don't like running with us.

I would much rather run with other IT classes. ITC, ITB, ITR?? I don't care which one. I think it makes it better when everyone knows everyone else, like in IT. And IT cars are generally different enough where there are many different passing opportunities.

Yup, IT racers aren't perfect (just look at my rear bumper), but I'd rather run with them!!

lateapex911

10-25-2006, 04:11 PM

Oh, and Jake, Steph has Wednesdays off!! So I feel much better now!! :happy204:
[/b]

Sigh...TMI

(Too Much Information...)

;)

Eric Parham

10-25-2006, 05:00 PM

Andy's correct. Given the number of classes we currently have to squeeze into a race weekend, there's no way to make everyone happy.

Ed's also correct, speed differential is fine as long as two different classes aren't grouped together that have opposite speed differentials for straights versus corners.

One partial solution is to reduce the number of classes. Why do we have so many Miata classes anyway?
Here's an idea for a single class/group adjusted so that a variety of cars can be competitive:
http://www.casc.on.ca/documents/regulation...ulator2006.htm# (http://www.casc.on.ca/documents/regulations/TGTCCalculator2006.htm#)

Another partial solution is to group the classes based on similar cornering speeds rather than on lap times or even lap time differentials. After all, passing on the straights is easier for everyone and significantly reduces the chances of interclass incidents. People shouldn't mind being behind someone who corners at the same speed. The faster car can simply pass on the next straight without much loss of time. The IT classes generally have similar cornering speeds (except for the 6" versus 7" rim differences). Such cornering speeds are generally much greater than the SS classes for obvious reasons. Thus, in an ideal world, no IT classes should ever be grouped with any SS classes (whether SSB, SSC, SSM or even SM).

Some folks (e.g., Tim K.) have opted not to run a class that is to be grouped with a conflicting class. Other folks may simply not put their best foot forward (e.g., I have a replacement ITC shell, which is actually straight, that I decided not to run this year mainly because of the SSM grouping). I'm really not complaining. I myself had a fun year and learned a lot in the process. I felt that most of the SSM drivers really made an effort to co-exist on the track. They're there for the same reasons that we are! There were some oversized egos near the front, some admitted beginners near the back, and a real mix in between, but I took it as a challenge (and, for the record, I actually preferred racing with the SSMs over the SSB/SSCs that I've run with in the past). I am very disturbed that my competition was unfairly eliminated from the final race by a conflicting class car, and I am also concerned that the ITC fields were artificially reduced during the year due to others not wanting to run with the conflicting class cars.

I hope the situation can be improved for next year, and improved in time for people who might otherwise avoid ITC for fear of being grouped again with a conflicting class (opposite speed differentials for straights versus corners).

ner88

10-25-2006, 07:03 PM

So a guy driving a Miata drives over your trailer door and now all Miata drivers are bad?
What color drivers suit was he wearing?
Anyone ever go to the Glen and the bog at F1 races years ago? Crowds would stand around the huge bon fire and yell "The other side sucks".....
Welcome to the SM CCA, get over it and we might let you stay and play! :P

RKramden

10-25-2006, 07:56 PM

A great bunch of ideas, but now ir's time to make the schedule work.

Here is the challange:

Come up with 8 race groups that fit in all the regional classes, and based on the car counts this year,
none of the groups can have over 40 cars. Everybody gets to race. We are a club.

You cannot mix widely different car types in the same field. GT1 with Formula Atlantic is a no-no.

8 groups, not 9, because it has to fit into a one day regional at Lime Rock. If you make it 9 groups, then everyone gets hosed because all the extra down time between groups in addition to another group will result in 10 minutes of qualifying and 15 minutes of racing. Not a good deal.

So, I'll start things off:

1: Wings and things: Faster formula cars and sports racers.
2: Slow formula cars.
3: Big Bore (Including ITE, SPO)
4: Small bore (and SPU)

So, in the last 4 groups (or mixed into the above groups), get Spec Racers, (S)SM, IT*, Touring, and Showroom Stock.

Posters here have said that where you make your speed is important, so the Touring guys shouldn't be placed in with GT cars, like they currently are, but have to be put with other "street tire" classes. If we are going to make such a big deal about that in the SM/IT groups, then it is certainly just as big a deal in the GT/Production/Touring groups. And, maybe, we need to look at spliting the Formula cars back into three groups, because the Vee's make their speed in different places than the Fords, and they are, in turn, different that the Atlantics and sports racers. (See, it is a real rats nest.)

And where does ITR go?

So, take your best shot at it, base it on real numbers, and figure out how to pack it all in.

Eric Parham

10-25-2006, 08:45 PM

Andy Bettencourt

10-25-2006, 09:51 PM

A very unscientific calculation shows these averages (based on pre-registration figures) this year for NARRC events:

ITS: 18.8
ITA: 20.8
ITB: 13.2
ITC: 4.2
SM: 24.6
SSM: 19.5

Touring and SS have so few entries at Regionals I think they can go almost anywhere. ITR will be VERY small at first and should be combined with ITS. T1 and T2 can run with Big bore. So:

1. ITR-ITS-ITB gets you to around 35 cars if ITR shows 3ish.
2. ITA-ITC-T3 gets you to around 30.
3. You put SRF with Small bore, SPU and Legends (SB gets under 10 cars...SPU under 5) for around 32 cars.
4: Wings and things: Faster formula cars and sports racers.
5: Slow formula cars.
6: Big Bore (Including ITE, SPO, B Prep and D Prep)
7. SM
8. SSM-SSB-SSC

The key is G3. All these cars are very similar in that they have fiberglass everything. Similar mindsets.

What am I missing?

Eric Parham

10-25-2006, 10:08 PM

I was wondering until I looked up the cars in T3. Yup, you guessed it, more Miatas. Maybe I'll just get one too and run it in FOUR (4) different race groups per day :wacko:
Don't forget that we're probably getting the new Prepared B & D groups next year too.

Ed Funk

10-26-2006, 05:50 AM

Andy, looks good to me, we'll e-mail Brian and encourage him to try to get groups as similar to this as possible. Everyone who cares should contact Brian also. His e-mail address is in front of Pit Talk.

Eric, B and D should fit well with Andy's groups 3 and/or 6.

Tkczecheredflag

10-26-2006, 06:04 AM

Part of the problem with the SSM/SM guys and gals, is that they have not personally experienced what the "C" drivers are experiencing, regarding agressive and sometimes thoughtless (read that dangerous)driving. Just a thought, but seeing is beleiving. It took Thomas putting his fingers in Christ's holes, for him to beleive what his friends were telling him. Maybe we shoud consider a little seeing is believing for the "fast and furious." I felt there was always a lot to be learned about courteous driving, running with faster cars, similiar to the NASA run groups. Maybe lack of "safe" run groups for the Miatas would teach them safety - sort of like welping a puppy off the nipple.

Also, wanted everyone to know I just picked up a Bildon prepared ITC Beetle :unsure: - I'm coming back to double dip in ITC - Miata or no Miata.

JLawton

10-26-2006, 06:37 AM

No question, Miata has it share but look at the numbers I would bet the ratio of bad drivers is the same in any class, remember it only takes one ITC driver to make 25% of the field bad( at least at most races).
[/b]

Nope, gotta disagree with you there. I think there are three issues that make the Miata's they way they are:

1) Easy class for beginners to get into. Plunk down $10K (or have daddy plunk down $10K) and go racing. Lots of "rookies".
2) The cars are so evenly matched. Tough to pass other Miata's resulting in lots of high risk passes.
3) This I have heard from people who have driven both IT cars and Miatas (not me). The Miata is easy to drive to within 9/10s. Makes a driver feel like Mario. However, going 10/10s ain't so easy. Inexpereinced drivers feel no fear in trying to take a Miata to 10/10s even though there skill level isn't there....

Also, wanted everyone to know I just picked up a Bildon prepared ITC Beetle :unsure: - I'm coming back to double dip in ITC - Miata or no Miata.
[/b]

Really?? No kidding??

Yeah, riiiiiiight!! <_< Hope you carry the guilt of this story into the ARRC!!

Andy Bettencourt

10-26-2006, 06:42 AM

Also, wanted everyone to know I just picked up a Bildon prepared ITC Beetle :unsure: - I'm coming back to double dip in ITC - Miata or no Miata. [/b]

Have you no shame? :)

Let's not get to down on Miata-land. This topic could be overlaid onto the one a month back about ITA - from the Prod guys view. SM-SSM have gotten much better about contact when racing with themselves - because they are evolving as drivers who are learning how to race in such close quarters. I can say the same is happening for me - we all continuously improve if we try and learn something from each race.

Keeping run-groups the same from year to year fosters inter group confidence and knowledge of each car and drivers habits. Besides, if there were 45-50 of any other make model out there it would be the same thing.

gran racing

10-26-2006, 06:46 AM

Yeah, and I'm building a Saturn.

Ed Funk

10-26-2006, 06:49 AM

Steph wants to start a "Where's Tim now?" thread. I wouldn't be surprised to see him in a well thought out and prepared Plymouth Horizon in itb. Probably be a sleeper! B)

Andy Bettencourt

10-26-2006, 07:04 AM

Tim and I had plenty of time to chat this past weekend on Friday during the second rain qualifier. I happen to know for a fact that he has 4 donors at his house now ready for a proper build. His current choices are:

Pontiac Grand Am (quad 4) for ITS
Buick Skyhawk V6 for ITA
Fiat Brava 2.0 for ITB
Dodge Colt (RWD) for ITC

2007 is gonna rock!

Doc Bro

10-26-2006, 07:27 AM

So a guy driving a Miata drives over your trailer door and now all Miata drivers are bad?

[/b]

Nope,....that's not what I said....don't misquote because you have a dog in the fight.

What I said was that kind of crap doesn't help the plight of the SM/SSM crowd. Many racers have labeled the SM/SSM crowd (rightly or wrongly), incidents like that don't help either opinion.

R

Ed Funk

10-26-2006, 08:04 AM

Man, I wish we had ITT (truck) in the NE, so we could see Tim in a Dodge Dakota, complete with snow plow! In that he wouldn't mind being grouped with SSM! Yeah, I'll probably spend the winter beating up on SSM :dead_horse:

ner88

10-26-2006, 08:22 AM

Doc, I get it, guilty by association. He's also an SCCA member just like you!
Ed, If I'm not mistaken, Brian has retired.
:D
Jerry

RKramden

10-26-2006, 08:29 AM

A daunting task indeed! I'd have to start by assigning lower priority to all of the non-GCR classes in order to make room for the real SCCA classes. Note that SSM isn't one of them ;) If anything, SSM should be a subset of SM that runs in the same group (like the NCF subset of FF that stays in the same run group).
[/b]

Got to disagree with you here.

First, at most races, NCF runs with FVee, FF runs with the faster cars. Maybe you didn't notice that. It makes room for other classes in the fast formula group.

Second, SSM pays the same entry fee you do, and it is an officially regionally recognized class, and they have just as much right to run on the track as you do. Just because their rules come from a whole lot of local interest rather than interest on the left coast or down south, or in Cendiv doesn't mean they have less right to run. They pay the same entry fee, they get treated the same.

The region has had a policy of giving racers a class if they come up with the rules and have 2 or more cars on the average at all the races. And that includes trophies at each race and awards at the end of the year. Same goes for NARRC, but I'm not sure about the number of cars required. In any case, SSM easily meets that requirement and is a class recognized by the NARRC committee and the region.

If you want to start by dropping the marginal (e.g. small) classes first, maybe we should talk about getting rid of ITC. :cavallo:

Andy Bettencourt

10-26-2006, 09:00 AM

Doc Bro

10-26-2006, 09:27 AM

Here is what I will be presenting to Brian at the NER CRB meeting this Friday in hopes that he will bring it (or a modified version of it) to the NARRC committee for consideration:

Proposal for new Run Groups for 2007 NARRC/NERRC season

<div align="right">
All 'Showroom Stock" cars together
[/b][/quote]

Andy,

That looks really good to me. I think keeping the Miata's separate is a great idea. I know for many the allure of a Miata is double -dipping. If I drove one I'd D-D every weekend. Group 6 looks like it'd be most likely to oversubscribe to me.

I like it!!

R

StephenB

10-26-2006, 09:46 AM

Andy,

Can you propose to add 1 lapfor ITB if we run with the ITR/ITS/ITB group. we always get the shaft and loose a lap at almost every race. We pay the same entry fee for tha same # of laps. :unsure: OK OK I know that will never happen.

but How about split starts so we can race without the Midpack ITS drivers messing with us. a few drivers in the midpack like that Black BMW (The one without the rear window at NHIS) are terrible drivers and cause issues with the front running ITB cars. I would rather have a split start and pass the slower cars and never catch the ITS cars that are doing the same lap times. It would also allow the 3rd place ITB car actually have a chance at being in the hunt for number 1. All to often we have 6 or 7 cars stuffed in between pos 1-3 and usually the top cars in B are all within .5-1 sec of eachother. 3 rows back makes it difficult to catch the leader if your all turning the same lap times.

Personally I don't like running with ITS at all, the leaders are great when they lap us but midpack is a tough place to be.

Stephen

PS: I had inquired about a split start at LRP but since raymond qualified pole with an ITB car ITB would have been first and ITS second. I didn't think that would help anyone on track.

RKramden

10-26-2006, 09:50 AM

Touring and SS have so few entries at Regionals I think they can go almost anywhere. ITR will be VERY small at first and should be combined with ITS. T1 and T2 can run with Big bore. So:

1. ITR-ITS-ITB gets you to around 35 cars if ITR shows 3ish.
2. ITA-ITC-T3 gets you to around 30.
3. You put SRF with Small bore, SPU and Legends (SB gets under 10 cars...SPU under 5) for around 32 cars.
4: Wings and things: Faster formula cars and sports racers.
5: Slow formula cars.
6: Big Bore (Including ITE, SPO, B Prep and D Prep)
7. SM
8. SSM-SSB-SSC

The key is G3. All these cars are very similar in that they have fiberglass everything. Similar mindsets.

What am I missing?
[/b]

Well, maybe you don't remember the really BIG stink when SRF used to run with production.

Like the comments here, SRF and Prod make their speed in whole different places. It's a 5 times worse mix than having IT and SM run together. (IMHO)

Ed Funk

10-26-2006, 09:53 AM

Amen, Doc Bro I like it too!!

Dave, maybe we should put a hold on future new classes. Seems we should be able to fit just ablut every interesting car into an existing class. Oh wait, there is one---my fathers '63 Pontiac, if I can dig it out of the barn and find one more driver (?are you on, Tim?), we can have SS Star Chief, and run with SSM :bash_1_:

StephenB

10-26-2006, 10:03 AM

The region has had a policy of giving racers a class if they come up with the rules and have 2 or more cars on the average at all the races. And that includes trophies at each race and awards at the end of the year. Same goes for NARRC, but I'm not sure about the number of cars required. [/b]

I thought you had to come up with 6 cars on avg. ? Also I don't think I ever saw a rule that they would get there own run group... That being said they do almost deserve one since they do attract huge car counts and I'm sure they are contributing a lot to the new track.

I always thought that we should encourage Double Driving with compeditors and even giving a discount to that second run group. If the rungroup was oversubscribed then you wouldn't be able to run so you would have to choose your 1st choice and understnad that IF the second run group you wanted didn't have the maximum # of cars than you could run. If we did this type of thing we would generate extra $$ for our new track and offer more track time to our members at a better price. (We need to learn from those canadians! this is somewhat like what they do in Novia Scotia) A win win situation!

Stephen

StephF

10-26-2006, 10:34 AM

Got to disagree with you here.

First, at most races, NCF runs with FVee, FF runs with the faster cars. Maybe you didn't notice that. It makes room for other classes in the fast formula group.

Second, SSM pays the same entry fee you do, and it is an officially regionally recognized class, and they have just as much right to run on the track as you do. Just because their rules come from a whole lot of local interest rather than interest on the left coast or down south, or in Cendiv doesn't mean they have less right to run. They pay the same entry fee, they get treated the same.

The region has had a policy of giving racers a class if they come up with the rules and have 2 or more cars on the average at all the races. And that includes trophies at each race and awards at the end of the year. Same goes for NARRC, but I'm not sure about the number of cars required. In any case, SSM easily meets that requirement and is a class recognized by the NARRC committee and the region.

If you want to start by dropping the marginal (e.g. small) classes first, maybe we should talk about getting rid of ITC. :cavallo:
[/b]

They have the SAME rights, not MORE rights to the track than we do. Which has been a theme running through this whole thread, Dave. I know Mazda (as in the company) lines National's coffers, but that shouldn't mean that everyone else gets shoved aside. Having multiple race groups for the SAME car while trashing other race groups (who only get 1 race to run in) is getting ridiculous. Put them together, and weed out the slow cars. If they don't qualify, go home. Or trim your car out for ITA or, what is it, B or D that's coming too? Jesus. We may as well rename this the Spec Miata Club of America at this rate.

And, perhaps you missed the comments from 2 people here, both who said they wouldn't run in C because of the SM crowd? How many more are there who have backed away because of this? Right there we have the C field dwindling down to 'marginal' entries thanks in part to the race group that they run in.

I have no doubt that C will come back up in numbers. Look at the popularity of A right now. A few years ago, A was the marginal class. The numbers rise and fall naturally. We don't need an artificial damper on it too.

I say group them up and let them qualify together. If you run well enough, you race. If you don't, well see my comments above.

And if you are going to pull the old chestnut of "we need to attract all the new blood we can get", then consider this. There will always be drivers coming and going. The ones who truly like this, or have some skill will likely stay on. Do we need to bend over backwards to try to keep people who may not stay long anyway? Whose interest might not be that strong, or skill levels not on par? Whose father bought a car because he always wanted to race and couldn't? You're going to do a whole lot of bending over for nothing then, 'cuz they'll be leaving anyway.

And, FYI, we aren't the only groups out there feeling resentful about the scheduling around the Mazdas. I heard bitter remarks from folks in the open wheel classes this year that they feel screwed out of track time because so much has been given over to Miatas.

If the club's philosophy is to add classes all the time, then maybe we SHOULD start eliminating some of the classes that are dying. We've had, what, 2 F500's this year? 1 S2000? And what about the older production stuff? As long as they want to stuff more miata races into the schedule, and they want EVERYONE who runs one to get to race 2, 3, or 4 times per weekend, we are going to be faced with decisions like this. You can't have it both ways.

Put Spec classes with Spec classes and Improved classes with Improved classes. Stop writing the schedule to cater to the newest 'it' car on the block. And I don't believe that they aren't doing this already, not with the politics involved here.

I like Andy's grouping ideas, but I can see one problem there too. I hear that the Prod guys aren't happy running with Spec racers, same reason we aren't happy with our spec mix.

FastM3

10-26-2006, 11:10 AM

I don't know.... Maybe this would work.

Let ITC have their own run group during lunch. :eclipsee_steering: :eclipsee_steering: :eclipsee_steering: :eclipsee_steering: 4.2 cars should be manageable.

Use a standing start. This eliminates need for the pace car !

All the other groups can stay the way they were for 2006 which seemed to work fine :023:

Have one corner worker monitor the race from a booth at the top of the stands. This can be a SM/SSM competitor selected randomly on a rotating basis.

Problem solved :happy204: Let's Party :birra:

Andy Bettencourt

10-26-2006, 11:10 AM

No way Steph. SSM is a Regional class just like ITE, SPO, SPU and a variety of open wheel specials. If we can fit them, so be it. They put up 5X what ITC does in terms of participation. They have just as much right to a run group as you do - in a REGIONAL scenario. When the classes in the GCR start to get big enough to mess with the groups - THEN I see some clamping down on undersubsrcibed, regional-only stuff.

Everyone in IT has the opportunity to double dip. When was the last time I ran in ITE? Never - can't afford two race groups. Just because we don't doesn't mean we can't. SM's are faster than SSM's. They look like the same car but they are not.

ITC isn't shrinking because of SSM. It's was just as strong this year as it was the last few years. It MAY shrink in the future but if you love ITC, you love it. ITA is strong because the cars are new, diversified, easy to find parts for and popular - it's not simply a ebb and a flow.

Open wheel guys complaining!!!???!!! They ought to look toward their own house. When I see "Wings and Things" (FA, FC, FF, CFC, FSCCA, SRSCCA, DSR, CSR, S2000, FM) put up UNDER 20 cars in total for 9 or so classes, it makes me wonder if that run group could have been better utilized. At least the Miata guys are putting up the numbers.

Miata club of America. BS. Happens to be a great car with great support that 'fits' in many spots. Oh ya, people actually want to race them. You could run a VW Golf in just as many classes sans SSM - but if you had 20 guys in ITB Golf III's who wanted to run 'Spec III', we would accomodate them as well. It's about what people want to run - and the numbers speak for themselves.

Now - having babbled all that, I have often thought about the idea of a Restricted Regional. First start with cars that are NOT eligible to attend a National race. IT, SSM and all the Regional classes. Add in SM, SRF or whatever other largely subscribed classes you want - goal - 4 run groups and maximum track time. Raise the entry fee to National-level money and see if it works.

gran racing

10-26-2006, 11:11 AM

Right there we have the C field dwindling down to 'marginal' entries thanks in part to the race group that they run in.[/b]

Do you REALLY think that’s the case, or are you just writing out of Miata frustration? Come on, that bs. Remember that you need to think nationally here, not just the region you race with. In other regions, ITC races with classes other than Miatas – are those classes also the reason for decline in ITC nationally?

If you run well enough, you race. If you don't, well see my comments above.[/b]

You have to be joking, right? Is a front runners entry fee worth more than a back markers? Funny, many of the back markers don’t have as much of a budget as front running drivers yet those would be the people who this would hurt financially. Others are new and still have much to learn; yeah, let’s take away their track time.

If the club's philosophy is to add classes all the time, then maybe we SHOULD start eliminating some of the classes that are dying.[/b]

That’s kinda funny considering the class you race in. :rolleyes:

It would be nice to have more restricted regionals though.

FastM3

10-26-2006, 11:11 AM

lateapex911

10-26-2006, 11:42 AM

Yea, bashing Mazda and saying that they are lining the national office's pockets, and that's the reason our run groups suck is pretty darn funny.

It has NOTHING to do with Miatas. Except that Mazda made a car that fits into the SPORTS car club of America better than most, is cheap, plentiful, and more reliable than nearly any car preceding it. Oh...it drives great too. No wonder it's popular. heck if it wasn't such a girlie car, i bet the numbers would be even higher! (sorry)

Bottom line is that in some ways, all the Miatas make life better. Imagine having 300 entries at Lime Rock, and having them all be individual cars! We'd be paddocking up on the hill!

As to regional classes, like SSM, it's VERY hard to find fault with a Regional class that out subscribes nearly EVERY single Nationaly recognized class. They put the numbers up, they pay their way, and they take less resources than many others, so we have NO right to complain about it.

If the issue is running with other classes that you don't like, (like the formula car guys have to EVEY race), the best solution is to "sell" your class to others. The bigger it gets, the less room in a group for others.

The strong survive, the others have to adapt.

StephF

10-26-2006, 12:50 PM

They have the SAME rights, not MORE rights to the track than we do. [/b]

And what part of this sentence is escaping everyone?
Do I have all the perfect solutions? Hell no.
And neither does anyone else on here, no matter how much you all want to jump on me about it.

Do I get frustrated with the tones that start coming out? (read Lyons's comment, 'gee lets get rid of YOUR group then'...gee thanks for pissing me off Dave. Not to mention the oh so helpful replies from Phil/fastm3 )

You bet it's frustrating. Especially when I have a car that has the back end smashed to pieces. One that I've put a lot of time and money into. And one that is going to require a lot more time and money too, after just having put it back together. You want to talk budget Dave? I'm dumping lots of money right there trying to keep my car together enough to make it through another race, thanks to the way the race groups were put together this year.

So tell me then, is my right to a clean, competitive race offset by the fact that another race group can field higher entries? If I'm in a group with low car counts, I can go pound sand? Is that the theory here?

Dave, read some of the comments made earlier from other people in ITC not wanting to be grouped in with SM/SSM. I didn't make it up. You can get pissed at me and call it bs if you want, but it's out here and I didn't put it there.

And, as far as the winged people, I've heard what I've heard from them. I didn't make that up either. Go talk to them if you think I'm full of crap.

While you're at it, please tell me where all the IT cars can run without huge changes to the cars. Where is the double dipping for us?

Someone who is slower in a fast Miata group can move to one that's prepped differently, right? Different tires, etc? Seems to me there are more options and choices for them, spread out through the schedule instead of combining some of the groups.

And yes, if ITC was to dwindle until it's on the bubble, then eliminate it. Same as we would any other group.

I started this thread to see if I could get input on how to request a grouping change. I have real, valid reasons and concerns for wanting the change. I have been directly impacted (no pun intended) by this grouping.

I didn't start it to become a pissing match. (although I will admit that Dave pissed me off with his post. ) I don't think that SM or SSM or any of the M's are less than anyone else in the club. I've never said or implied that.

And neither are any of the IT groups.

And Jake, I'm not bashing Mazda groups. I'm not against big field, entry fees, etc. I am annoyed that we are getting more and more squeezed between time curfews at tracks and more race classes being added, while hanging on to all the old ones.

And I'm frustrated that we can't get separated out from them into groups that handle the same. I don't think they want to be with us any more than we want to be with them.

I just want to run with cars that handle in a similar fashion to mine, even if it means that I would lose a lap every time I race.

What's so hard to understand about that???????

gran racing

10-26-2006, 02:03 PM

Dave, read some of the comments made earlier from other people in ITC not wanting to be grouped in with SM/SSM. I didn't make it up. You can get pissed at me and call it bs if you want, but it's out here and I didn't put it there. [/b]

Your statements were much broader in scope than two people left ITC because they were grouped with SM/SSM. I have a tough time believing that is a significant motivator for people moving away or simply not entering ITC. (In ITB and ITA we've been grouped with SM/SSM, so it's not just ITC)

Steph, if your car is getting beaten up by others doing stupid stuff, you need to speak with the driver and if that doesn't resolve things file a protest.

Ed Funk

10-26-2006, 02:34 PM

Dave, speaking with the driver rarely does any good. I tried to speak with an SSM driver at NHIS who had forced me over the curb (all 4 wheels) in 6. What I got from it was a group of SSM drivers telling me that I was supposed to get out of their way and to not try to pass them in corners.

Filing a protest isn't very helpful either. A few years ago we went to pick up protest paperwork to protest a fellow itb driver that we felt had purposely hit Steph to spin her, he wasn't very good at that either, because he then drove into her left front tweaking the frame and costing big bucks to fix. As we were picking up the papers we were told by a steward that he wouldn't hear the protest! He knew nothing about what we were there for, just that he didn't want to hear us. When we got to the witness room this same steward tried to exclude me from the room. I had to point out to him that as the entrant, I had the right to be there and that I wouldn't leave. He also told us that we needed to handle that type of thing in the paddock, when I told him I had a baseball bat in my trailer and asked if that was what he meant by "handle it in the paddock", he decided to hear the protest.

A few years ago we decided that enough was too much and started racing out of the NE, we found drivers that could drive, workers that could work, stewards that knew their job and just generally a pleasant experience. When we came back we were greeted by Kathy Barnes who wanted to know where we'd been, we explained and were assured that things were different now. I'm not too sure about that, I'm sure that some will be happy if we pack up and leave again, I won't be as by and large the people here are good. But I won't be bullied and I know that Steph won't be bullied, even by Dave Lyons (the big tough guy that brought Hilda Richardson, aka "Grid Grannie", to tears a few years ago).

Maybe I should walk away from the keyboard for a day or two!

Doc Bro

10-26-2006, 02:55 PM

StephF

10-26-2006, 03:33 PM

I understand the frustration that the Funk's are feeling, however you can't please all the people all the time. The fact is the only way to appease all the masses is if EVERYONE had their own run group. At that point the only complaint would be that there wasn't enough competition and that the race weekend took a week to complete. It's an impossibility. Race cars get torn up....it stinks but it happens. Look at the NHIS ITA race earier in the year. If that wreck had been caused by an SM or SSM evryone in ITA would be complaining. Instead it was caused by a fellow ITA (who is a total bone head!!! :D ) and even that caused speculation and fits of rage. No one wants their stuff beat up it adds way too much to the expense BUT, it's a risk and if anyone is uncomfortable with the risks to themselves or their cars or their wallets, than wheel to wheel racing may not be a perfect fit for them. I'm not inviting anyone to leave at all but, that's just the way (IMHO) that most will view this thread.

Sorry,
R
[/b]

Rob: I've been there done that, understand the risks, stuff happens in racing. That's something we both know well. You can't always stop something from happening.

I've raced with Spec Racers in the Moroso 24 hour race, at night. (now that was....interesting...)
I've run test days in an ITB car with Rob Dyson in his World Cup (or whatever it is) car out there too.
I've run with Show Stock, ITB, ITC, ITA, Spec 7, etc. I've been hit, spun, tagged, etc. Most of the time it's just one of those things. People's brakes go away. Their tires get too many heat cycles. Oil on the track. Driver error. Stuff happens. Sometimes it's avoidable, sometimes it isn't.

It would be wonderful if we all had our own group, but that's a fantasy. And I don't care if I run with other groups. And, if I am reading the posts correctly, the other people in our group are expressing the same opinion.

All I want is to be IN A GROUP THAT IS SIMILAR IN HANDLING TO MINE. I don't care if I lose a lap. I don't care if it's a huge field. I don't care if I'm a back marker. I don't mind if it's rough and tumble racing. I can rub fenders, although I prefer to race cleanly with people. It's more fun that way anyway.

What's getting frustrating is the bunching up, blocking and chopping on the corners and being unable to get by on the straight. It's bunching up our group to the point that stuff happens, such as the NARRC-offs showed.

And I'm not bashing Mazdas. This IS happening in our group, for whatever reason. And I'm sure it happens in other race groups with dissimilar cars too.

I let other race groups by, especially if I can tell it's either a faster group or the race leaders. I won't move off line in a corner, or 'get out of the way', but I will point them by when I have a free hand , or will hold out there to allow them through. I try to NOT interfere with someone else's race.

That isn't happening all the time to us.

Some of the people are good at not jamming us up if we are battling each other and are getting by them in the corners.

Some of them are not.

Ed and John were taken out because some midpack drivers in the other race group didn't recognize or care that these were the leaders for the other race. And Eric said he almost got taken out as well, later on.

So...tell me how this is 'Mazda bashing' or 'sour grapes"? This is (at least I hope it's coming through!) a request to find out how to try to get the grouping changed to the benefit OF ALL.

I said it before and I'll say it again, I'd prefer to WATCH their race anyway. With a large bag of popcorn.

Doc Bro

10-26-2006, 03:56 PM

Reading between the lines Steph, it sounds like one of your points involves something that is a fleeting commodity in todays society. Common courtesy. We raced with the prod guys this year and I can't tell you how many times a SLOW guy would not offer a point. It's like they're all excited that there's someone to play with. I think that attitude permeates our sport. It's a race ....anytime, anywhere, anycar, any class- it's game on. So what if I'm not on the lead lap...I raced the leader to stop him from putting me a lap down, or another lap in some cases. It's the NASCAR University of Racing for the Gifetd (spelled purposely that way).
We need more etiquette tought in our regional schools and less tough talk about "you own the corner,and, it's all racetrack it's just not all paved." I think that that sends the wrong message to a beginnner.

.02

R

RKramden

10-26-2006, 04:47 PM

Do I get frustrated with the tones that start coming out? (read Lyons's comment, 'gee lets get rid of YOUR group then'...gee thanks for pissing me off Dave.
[/b]
It was meant to be humorous. Sorry you took it so personally.

I started this thread to see if I could get input on how to request a grouping change. I have real, valid reasons and concerns for wanting the change. I have been directly impacted (no pun intended) by this grouping.
[/b]
I think you got that.
My points are:
A: everybody has the SAME rights, and
B: grouping is an exercise that will piss someone off, the difficult goal is to minimize that amount of pain.

It has been easier this year because the overall entry is down from last year. If the small turnout is an aberation, then there will be more pain next year.

I don't think that SM or SSM or any of the M's are less than anyone else in the club. I've never said or implied that.
[/b]
You didn't, but Eric did. He said exactly:

I'd have to start by assigning lower priority to all of the non-GCR classes in order to make room for the real SCCA classes.
[/b]

Eric Parham

10-26-2006, 06:22 PM

You didn't, but Eric did. [/b]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I was talking about priorities in terms of how to fairly and safely group the large number of classes (that is, whether a given run group is to be SS/IT/Prod/formula based). I did NOT say that the non-GCR classes had to be eliminated! My intended point was that if we're going to run non-GCR classes that are based on GCR classes with some cost-reducing spec (such as the spec tires in SSM and NCF), that the sub-class or subset of the original GCR class should run in the same run group as the original. That's all. Dave then made the point that the NCF class sometimes runs with slower formula cars instead of with FF. I admit that it makes some sense based on the dwindling car counts for some of the slower formula classes, but I'm not qualified to determine how safe that is since I've never even run one (except for a Skippy car). The truth is that I'm actually in favor of the cost-reducing subset classes, but not at the significant cost of sacrificing safety in the resulting combined run groups. Is that any clearer?

Eric Parham

10-26-2006, 07:04 PM

I do think that SM and SSM would ideally be in the same run group, but here I'm trying to compromise. I don't know if groups 1 and 2 need adjusting, or if group 4 would be over-subscribed. I also don't see any way to break the GTs (on slicks) out of group 7.

G1: FF, CF, NCF, FC, CFC, FSCCA, FM, F1000, FV, F500

G2: SRF, SRSCCA, DSR, CSR, S2000, FA

G3: ITR, ITS, PD

G4: ITA, ITB, ITC

G5: SM, T3, SSB

G6: SSM, T4, SSC

G7: T1, T2, AS, ITE, PB, GT1, GT2, SPO

G8: GT3, EP, FP, GP, HP, GTL, SPU, Legends

Andy Bettencourt

10-26-2006, 10:07 PM

You bet it's frustrating. Especially when I have a car that has the back end smashed to pieces. One that I've put a lot of time and money into. And one that is going to require a lot more time and money too, after just having put it back together. You want to talk budget Dave? I'm dumping lots of money right there trying to keep my car together enough to make it through another race, thanks to the way the race groups were put together this year.

So tell me then, is my right to a clean, competitive race offset by the fact that another race group can field higher entries? If I'm in a group with low car counts, I can go pound sand? Is that the theory here?

[/b]

No, you have to put your car together because a driver made a mistake. Could happen in ANY run group at ANY time. It's not unique to your group.

The theory here is that everyone has a right to the track. You make it seem like because you are with SSM this year, you automatically get into an accident. Everyone has a right to a clean race per the GCR. The fact is that the smaller group you are in, the easier it is to move you around to accomodate larger groups.

RSTPerformance

10-26-2006, 11:27 PM

wow, this is an imature thread that keeps going in circles by everyone... personaly I have a problem with every driver other than AS drivers and ITB drivers :rolleyes:

To keep on original topic....

First, I have absolutely nothing against miatas, but I do think that SM and SSM should be classed together. The group will be oversubscribed but that is ok. Those in the top 5 points should get an "auto entry" and those who do not qualify should run a constilation race with the ITA/ITC group.

some problems solved (such as similar cars running with each other) but not all. Honestly though to me it makes the most sence, and it pisses everyone off not just some off :happy204: !!!

1) The SM's and SSM's who "need the most improvement" will still be with ITC
2) No double dipping (how does that term work?) in SM and SSM

Raymond "lets stop the :bash_1_: , its old and the points have been made" Blethen

Dave Zaslow

10-27-2006, 07:20 AM

All,

This really is an important discussion as it directly affects the enjoyment of our hobby and the satisfaction we get from it.

As always there are a number of points from all sides:

Slicks with Slicks, DOT with DOT;

Lap time & speed from cornering or horsepower;

Classes with a few cars in a group with a much larger count.

SRF doesn't like prod.

No one likes racing with SM/SSM :o

It will never be perfect unless there is extreme consolidation or restricted regionals.

As for increasing the entry fee to national levels if we kick someone out of the sandbox, that would be an extra $25-$70 based on this year's fees. The question, to some extent, is how much income does a region need as a non-profit service organization? If the quality of the experience diminishes, so will the car counts.

Another issue is the car counts for the NARRC-offs. It is just a different animal than the rest of the year.

I've looked at the fields from this year's races and the various groupings and have this to suggest. The bold type are changes from Andy's second grouping.

G1: FA, FF, FC, CFC, FSCCA, SRSCCA, DSR, CSR, FM, S2000, F1000

G2: FV, F500, CF, NCF

G3: ITR, ITA, EP, FP, GP, HP

G4: SM, SSB, SSC

G5: GT1, GT2, GT3, T1, T2, AS, SPO, ITE, BP, DP (CGT1, CGT2, CGT3)

G6: SRF, GTL, SPU, Legends

G7: SSM, T3, T4

G8: ITS, ITB, ITC

Remember this just our IT-centric view of the world.

Dave Z

Andy Bettencourt

10-27-2006, 07:30 AM

All,

G1: FA, FF, FC, CFC, FSCCA, SRSCCA, DSR, CSR, FM, S2000, F1000
G2: FV, F500, CF, NCF
G3: ITR, ITA, EP, FP, GP, HP
G4: SM, SSB, SSC
G5: GT1, GT2, GT3, T1, T2, AS, SPO, ITE, BP, DP (CGT1, CGT2, CGT3)
G6: SRF, GTL, SPU, Legends
G7: SSM, T3, T4
G8: ITS, ITB, ITC

Remember this just our IT-centric view of the world.

Dave Z [/b]

Amazingly, many people from other classes follow this Board. I have been contacted by a few with tweaks to my suggestion. Bottom line? Nobody is going to be 100% happy. I will submit my ideas to the NARRC committee via e-mail.

Dave - your G3 looks fine in concept except that you added a class to an already oversubscribed group.

Dave Zaslow

10-27-2006, 07:48 AM

Andy,

Besides the NARRC-offs, and with #'s taken from the NESCCA online registration site for all NHIS and LRP regionals, the highest I come up with is 37 cars if GTL runs with SRF.

I also realize that we have no provision for the Historic Race Group.

Dave Z

Andy Bettencourt

10-27-2006, 08:11 AM

Andy Bettencourt

10-27-2006, 08:23 AM

StephF

10-27-2006, 08:56 AM

In talking with other people in other classes, I think I will pull my suggestion. There seems to be more value to keeping some of these groups together so the drivers can get comfortable with each other than there is in swapping them around all the time resulting in new learning curves etc. It will never be perfect so we must adapt - and the current situation could be as good as it gets for the majority...and that I think is the goal.
[/b]

So what happened in the hour between posts to change your thought on this Andy?
You mentioned input from other classes. What are you hearing from them?
And I disagree with the last 3 sentences. We got to where we are in groupings because we keep evolving. That doesn't mean we stop dead and say, "OK, that's it." and stop changing for the better. (That also doesn't mean that I am advocating a wholesale changing of the groupings either.)
Seriously (and all of this has been typed in a conversational tone) what did you hear from the others to make you say this?

Doc Bro

10-27-2006, 09:15 AM

Just out of curiosity. Have we ever run SM with SSM? Not way back in days of yore when there were few, but more recently with higher car counts. How did it go? Did the sky fall?

R

ner88

10-27-2006, 09:33 AM

Just a couple of thoughts:
1. Andy's numbers from last year, ITA has an average of 3-4 Miatas running regularly, remove them and it would be the 4th most populated class.
2. Combine SSM and SM, I think you will see more Miatas in ITS and ITA.
3. I for one like running with SM, sorry Dave! :dead_horse:

Andy Bettencourt

10-27-2006, 09:44 AM

Ed Funk

10-27-2006, 10:59 AM

Andy et al,

If as someone implied the reason for 8 groups was to fit into a one day event at LRP, and if my memmory is correct and there are 2 one day events at LRP, why don't we have two restricted regionals. After the school early in the season have a speacial one day for open wheel etc, and on 4 July have a speacial one day for closed wheel. Or vise versa. I know the regions running those events may not be happy because of decreased $, so increase registration fee for the increased track time.

The rest of the season we could run 9 groups which should be easier to schedule and should make more people happy.

If we need something to make those one days more speacial, I could dance naked at Start/Finish at lunch! :o I'll try to continue mixing my serious comments with a little humor to keep you all entertained, you'll just have to decide which are serious and which are not! B)

StephenB

10-27-2006, 11:21 AM

I got some feedback about split starts and agree that at LRP and NH it's not a good idea since we simply have to many cars. HOWEVER someone also PM me on another awesome idea!

SPLITGRIDS! I would be in favor of starting all ITB cars at the back of the ITS grid. This would allow us to PASS the slower cars and never catch the cars we run equal times with. It would also allow us to all have a fair chance at being close to the lead car form the start not trying to make up 10+ seconds on the first lap.

How do we go about them? is it something that can be part of the supps or do we need to lobby for it every weekend?

gran racing

10-27-2006, 11:43 AM

If we need something to make those one days more speacial, I could dance naked at Start/Finish at lunch! [/b]

Now would that be before or after your viagra dosage? :wacko:

A split grid would be interesting, and I'd be in favor of giving it a try. The more traffic the better IMO! :D

dpc

10-27-2006, 12:24 PM

After reading all five pages I think the dead horse is tired of getting up and down. dave

StephF

10-27-2006, 12:24 PM

Steph,

I am hearing from Prod guys, IT guys, SM guys, SSM guys...What makes sense to me the most is that the groupings are pretty much ok, it's that drivers want a chance to get to know other drivers, their cars stregths and weeknesses, and their driving tendancies. What has impressed on me the most is that I am hearing not from opinionated loud mouths like me, but by normally quiet people whom opinions I respect!

Nobody wants to run with SM/SSM or SRF...especially SRF...and these classes are big enough so they have to be the 'lead class' in a run group.

I think we 'evolve' due to car counts and we make our best groupings based on those in a 'best case' scenario. We are all for making things better - but my thought process is evolving - 'better' may actually be the evolution of the drivers, not the classes.
[/b]

I agree on evolution of the drivers, but how do we accomplish that?

Threatening everyone at driver's meetings hasn't worked.
Training new drivers better would be admirable, but doesn't address the people out there with bad habits.
Protesting (at least from my experience it) doesn't always work very well.
Confronting another driver in the paddock is not the best thing to do.

So how do we address issues among our groups? I've heard so many different ideas on how it should be done, and nothing seems to work well. One person says take care of it yourself in the paddock. Another says write paper. Another says get back at him when you are on track again (which is a really BAD idea). There isn't one clear way to effectively deal with this.

Does each class have a 'class rep' who is the go-to man/woman for the group? Complaints are addressed to them and they talk directly to the offending party? While the peer pressure concept may provide results in cleaning up problem areas among us, it seems like an awful lot to ask of anyone. But not doing anything to stop it is leading to some hard feelings, and on track incidents. And that goes across the entire race group spectrum, not just us.

When you said "no one wants to run with SM/SSM" are you speaking generically, or is that something people are saying to you? If so why? Too large a group? Too competitive? Some other reason?

I'd think you guys would be tickled pink to have your own run group. <_<

Which is why I still support being able to move classes into another race group if the majority of the class is having problems with the grouping. Because I don't see a magic solution to evolution among the drivers. :(

And a split grid? I guess that could be one potential solution. And I do like Ed's idea, the one about the retricted regionals (not the dancing naked one...I've seen him dance before ;) )

Ed Funk

10-27-2006, 01:15 PM

:024: I'm glad it was the dancing part and not the naked part that disturbed you! :lol: For any who haven't seen me dance, I make Elaine (Seinfeld) look like Ginger Rogers! For any who haven't seen me naked, your God has blessed you! :rolleyes:

Andy Bettencourt

10-27-2006, 01:28 PM

Evolution of the drivers comes with time. Time to learn the following (and more):

Who knows you are there
Who has no clue you are there
Who doesn't care you are there
Who will err on the side of caution
Who will make you earn every inch

We need the drivers meeting talks, we need the face to faces, and we need the protests. We need it all in moderation when it is the right thing to do. Each and every one of us has different levels of toleration before they 'do' one of the above actions in response to poor driving.

WRT SSM, it is a theme throughout the spec classes. SRF, SM, SSM...anywhere there is close racing because of equal cars, passing and traffic are tough. If you put 20 ITC Honda's out there all prepared the same, you would see the same thing...nobody would want to be 'inside' that hornets nest.

I am going to see how the 2006 run groups work out in 2007 and then look at it again. Maybe there will be enough stink from other groups to make a change - I doubt it.

dickita15

10-27-2006, 02:42 PM

Classes over 10 cars, average cars per class, starters only Narrc races LRP and NHIS

SM 24.8
ITA 20.75
SRF 20
SSM 19.8
ITS 17.65
ITB 14.4
FV 11.4

Eric Parham

10-27-2006, 04:38 PM

I may choose my class for next year based on the groupings, so I don't feel like I have as much at stake here as others. I like Andy, but I don't believe that he has the requisite impartiality (Miata rentals, etc., please correct me if I'm wrong) to make the decision for IT drivers as a group to "do nothing" about the current NARRC groupings for another year.

I do agree that the particular problems that happened to crop up at the NARRC-offs were partially caused by some SSM drivers who either didn't know or didn't care about the ITC race going on around them, while most of the SSM drivers were courteous track companions (to their own benefit too, since they probably made better time by letting us pass than they would have by holding us back).

I can't imagine asking anyone (even an SSM straggler) not to run their own race. I have to wonder what 76 SSM thought when there were three (3) ITC cars breathing on her bumper. Unlike the usual situation, she didn't even have a battle of her own (I believe that the rest of her field was either much faster or well behind her). I think she would have been a big factor in the outcome of our race even if 01 SSM hadn't been in over his head and taken out 2 of the top 3 cars in our class, but isn't that okay? She must have lost some time trying to hold us back, but maybe she thought she'd lose more if she let us get by too easily. Although I don't quite understand why she didn't let the others by once one got through, I really can't blame her for that. Perhaps Ed made a mistake when he let her pass too easily with faster traffic earlier in the race. The only really culpable driver seems to have been 01 SSM. Was paper filed?

What to do? As I've implied before, if I were the NARRC god I'd put SM with SSM but limit the entries to one run group. Once the double-dippers were subtracted, I think they'd all fit anyway. My apologies in advance to Andy who might lose rental revenues in that scenario. I have nothing against anyone trying to make a living doing something that they love. Since I'm not in a position to make the grouping decision, I'll just wait to see what happens. No promises, but I may simply choose another class that basically occupies its own run group. Running with the SSMs was fine for me (recognizing their advantages and making use of their shortcomings was actually fun), but it's gotten old and I think I'd enjoy it a lot more if I ran with cars having track characteristics similar to my car's. I'll put my entry dollars where my mouth is. I'll refuse to run a first class that gets grouped with a second class, where the second class is faster in the straights but slower in the corners, and especially where novices in the second class would be running close to the same lap times as the pointy end of the first class.

Those who advocate a designed-in speed differential may be missing the forest for the trees. ITB and ITC ran together at the Watkins Glen NERRC/NARRC race this year, and it worked out very well! The pointy end of ITC was solidly in the mid-pack of ITB rather than at the novice end. When I pay my entry fee to RACE, there's nothing in that contract that requires me to INSTRUCT. The neophytes can learn gradually from the cars just in front of them in their own class much better than from cars in a different class.

On another sub-topic, I think that a split start is a bad idea if the slower class is to start last, but an interesting idea if the slower class is to start first. A split start would not have prevented the types of problems that ITC encountered at the NARRC-offs, and probably would have made them worse (if that's even possible).

Andy Bettencourt

10-27-2006, 04:53 PM

Eric,

I can assure you 100% I am trying not to look at this from any one drivers perspective. I do have an ITA-centric view and do not look at things from a rental perspective. Our rentals are all SM's and are not legal for SSM...we also do not rent to more than one person per day.

We have to ask ourselves why we want change. I submit that another year with the same drivers will help the problems exponentially. A change may look good on paper but new cars and drivers may result in a whole new years worth of learning curve. I would rather race against a pain in the ass 'car' and know what the driver is going to do than race against a unpredictable driver.

IF - and only IF, SM and SSM can fit into one group - it would be great...but I doubt it.

And make no mistake, I am in no position to make a decision...I just make proposals when I feel one is neccessary - and at this moment, I think the club is better served having another year to 'grow'. If you feel like something needs to be done and you don't make a proposal, you (anyone) have no right to complain... :)