Scca It Is Time For Change Now!

[Robert Zecca]

Dear Fellow SCCA Members,

Last November I attended my first NEDIV mini con in Albany. At this event the regions get together and decided who is going to race, where and when. The bottom line and we predicted this then was THERE ARE TOO MANY EVENTS IN THE NE. We are overtaxing our drivers and workers. Now we are well into the year and every event regardless if it is regional or national, we are losing money. There is too much supply and not enough demand plus with the addition of tracks bring more problems. Bottom line is for 2010 we need to cut events and make every event profitable instead of a losing situation. THE REGIONS MUST UNDERSTAND THIS AND MAKE A CHANGE NOW. If not we may see fewer regions next year putting on events or being out of business. This is not fair because we are SCCA, we are members of a organization and not just a region. PLEASE think of everyone, both drivers and workers and the well being of all regions and not just some. Drivers attend events from different regions as do the workers. We need to think down the road about our future and not just today. This is the reason why our competiting clubs are kicking our butts because they are dictatorships and rule in a proper way and this is what is needed at this point in time. We can no longer have regions running autonomously as in the past. We must think of the realities of life today and work with our fellow regions for the good of SCCA and not just one region.

I work extremely hard at trying to grow our sport and club and honestly I am getting tired and worn out. Personally I have put in over $7k into promoting a race series in hopes of growing participants and workers alike. I want to see the regions come together once and for all for the good of the club so that we have a future. If you truly understand what is going on in our country today and our economy and lifestyle of our participants you will see that what I am saying will work. LESS EVENTS but lets make them special and then they will each be profitable. Then with additional competitors per event we can even reduce the entry fees. It is simple. Let's work together and grow SCCA. Topeka is unable to do this for us we must take this upon ourselves to make the change.

Let me know your thoughts.

Yours for the sport,
Bob Zecca
NNJR Secretary

[Greg Amy]

Amen, brother Bob. Amen.

[NORRIS]

Bob.

Just curious as to haw many regional events you run a year in the North East? While we're at it I'd like to hear from as many other regions.

I'm on the BOG in Calclub (Sopac) We are running 8 double regional weekends this year and are thinking of cutting back to 7 doubles next year.

We also ran 1 single and a double national this year (But who cares about them, they don't have IT :))

[Robert Zecca]

I do not know the exact number but I believe it is about 20 events in total. I will look into this and get back to you.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Bob.

Just curious as to haw many regional events you run a year in the North East? While we're at it I'd like to hear from as many other regions.

I'm on the BOG in Calclub (Sopac) We are running 8 double regional weekends this year and are thinking of cutting back to 7 doubles next year.

We also ran 1 single and a double national this year (But who cares about them, they don't have IT :))

The multi-regional series up here is the North Atlantic Road Racing Championship (NARRC). This year we have 10 weekends (4 doubles and 6 singles) that produce 14 points-paying events.

Add into that a new Pro-IT series that 'supports' both Regionals, Nationals and an ARCA race(s)...8 events on 8 weekends.

Here is my suggestion for 2010:

Give up the May Lime Rock, keep the June (school) and October race
Give up the May double NHMS, keep the April (school) and September double

That brings us down to 8 weekends over 7 months. Maybe a double race at NJMP that had us run Lightning on one day and Thunderbolt on the other...that would shave another event bringing us to a reasonable 7 events over 7 months. Add ProIT to ONLY REGIONAL SCCA events. Limit weekends and add features that provide value.

It may be a time for Regions without tracks to temporarily shut down their road racing programs (NNJ, MoHud, NYR, etc). Wait until demand comes back so that we can apply for dates that we want to add and then divvy those up if we can get them. If we can't, so be it. At least that will mean the events that are being put on will be packed.

Give the drivers good choices (all the tracks in the area - NHMS, LRP, WGI, NJMP L&T, Pocono) and put on the best dang events you can with support from Pro IT.

[StephenB]

Great ideas Andy.
The only thing I disagree with is running the Pro-IT with Regional events. I think a large number of people can't afford and will not double dip and will run one or the other. Running the Pro-IT as support races to other events will get some people to run more. If they don't run more they will at least add entries to the other events that wouldn't have had the entries. Running support races with spectators can also be used as advertising to let people (spectators) know that we exist and that "entry level" wheel to wheel racing exists.

To add to that:
I also think that SCCA needs to identify if running National Events and Regional Events is something that adds value to the SCCA brand. Both Regional and National events are "entry level" or "stepping stones" for someone to get into a racing carreer, or to just have fun racing wheel to wheel a few weekends a year. I personally do not think running Nationals vs. Regionals has any value to the SCCA brand and eliminates or cuts into its own revenues. In my mind Nationals and Regionals are run seperatly as if they are two seperate companies competing with eachother for the same drivers. I do think the "National Championship" structure adds value to the SCCA brand and I do think that SCCA should have a "Runnoffs" like they currently due to determine a "National Champion".

I would propose running SCCA events (no National vs. Regional) then allow competitors to pay the "extra dues" to gain National points towards running in the National Runnoffs televised on TV to become the "National Champion". I understand a cost is involved in running the "runnoffs" and therefor higher entries is justified for those that are running for National Points and the "Runnoffs".

my .02 and I strongly feel as that this National vs. Regional thing has to go away.

Stephen
PS: I am not running the NARRC series due to time (AKA Opportunity cost) and actual cost.

[raffaelli]

I havent thought that running the Pro It with Regionals was a good idea. Seems to me that it is the same group that would enter in both. Maybe the Pro IT should run at Nationals.

Real or not, my perception is that there is a race almost every weekend when you look at the tracks I consider - WG, LRP NH, Poc. Seems way too much to me.

[Andy Bettencourt]

The PTB can fill us in on how viable running an 'event' with no National or Regional designation. I have always thought, given the size of LRP and NHMS and the historical size of our IT fields that there was no room for classes like IT, SSM and ITE...that can be as much as 3 and as little as 2 extra run groups.

[ulfelder]

I agree with much of what I'm reading here. Stephen B, your idea regarding Regional vs. National is excellent - it's something that should be explored.

Looking at the big picture, it seems the deep problem is that some of those who run regions, divisions, RR boards, and even SCCA National are forgetting that the drivers are the consumers who need to be served. (Certainly not everybody forgets this; when Brian Mushnick was the RR Board chair in NER, he beat this drum constantly.)

If you strip out SCCA history and simply look at the way races in NEDiv are presented, you see a system that is insanely complex and difficult for a newbie to learn. NERRC! NARRC! Pro-IT! NYSRRC! National! Regional! Sign up for a race here! Oops, not that race, silly - sign up over there! Go here for results! Also here! But not there! What? No payment yet? Then you're considered a late registrant! Oh, you did it that way at the last LRP event? Well that was an NNJR race, and this is an NYR race!

Memo to regions, divisions and national: Simplify, simplify.

Steve Ulfelder
Flatout Motorsports
05 ITS

[gran racing]

Politics. Egos.
Those are two things that continue to hurt SCCA as a whole, and eventually it impacts the regions that might be a part of the issue.

Funny, I know regions had contacted Mike Dickerson (previously at Topeka :( ) and a few years ago he made the suggestion of fewer races. No one or at least very few listened.

I know this won't be popular, in part because of my first response.
In addition to consolidating races, maybe in some instances it would be worthwhile to consolidate or at least revisit our regional structure. Maybe it's not necessary but do think it deserves some further thought.


Running support races with spectators can also be used as advertising to let people (spectators) know that we exist and that "entry level" wheel to wheel racing exists.

I absolutely agree. We as a club need more exposure. An extremely limited number of people know that any form of "Average Joe" Club Racing exists no less SCCA.

World Challenge. I'm sorry, but WTF? Why are we not using this promotional tool in a much better way? I went to LRP two years ago to drop off a supply of flyers for them to utilize. NO ONE knew where the WC truck was located. My wife and I walked the paddock multiple time, asked the information booth, security, :shrug: . We finally found it and realized that we walked right by it multiple times. Nothing was out there about SCCA. I later went to another event, and faced the same problems finding it. The flyers SCCA (the "club side") to be put out in an effort to promote club racing were burried in the truck somewhere. I recognize we might not be able to have SCCA ads during the races although I do wish that were possible, pressure drivers to plug SCCA club racing when interviewed. Require that each car put decals on their car advertising SCCA. A simple "You can get involved and start racing - visit SCCA.com" type of thing.

Bob, There are too many of us in the tired and worn out. I know I am with my efforts. Hopefully we all can get re-energized some how. You and Darrel have helped me get a bit more motivation again. Thanks!

[Tom Blaney]

I attended the Pocono event this past weekend, and frankly I was suprised at how small the field was and from what I picked up from discussions with a couple of drivers it that they are tired, frustrated, and overtaxed. So I think the old discussion should be brought back up about bringing back spectators and making the events more enjoyable to watch. To do that you need to do two things 1) combine the regional and national program into one group. The idea that regionals are training grounds or less expensive is silly, the preperation costs to field a competitive IT car has passed "national" production cars years ago, and drivers who are inexperienced can still race at a "national" event by attending 4 regionals don't crash and off you go "here's your national license. If you combine the events, it will force more drivers to attend fewer events, and if your competitve enough you EARN points to go to the runoff's, since going to the Runoff's was suppose to be a EARNED opportunity, not accomplished because you ran 4 nationals and the field only had 3 cars. If you run the events and don't wish to go to the Runoff's then you decline the offer and the next highest points gets a shot. But no matter what, during the season you actually raced with more cars, and more people at the events so you had more fun and learned about what other drivers and cars are like.

2) It is also time to start dropping classes altogether, if after a few years of combined operation a class cannot make the attendence minimum, then it's done. Not too many people watch races where 4 cars are in the race and each one is in a different class so there are 4 winners. You want to have spectators to help fund the operation, and you are not going to get that with 25 races in one day with 25 winners in 9 groups.

Fortunatly and unfortunatly this discussion has been around a long time, and there is always a few people who make a lot of noise because it will change their operation and they don't really care about the event or the club as a whole, it is all about them and screw everbody else. Well now as Bob indicated the club as a whole is at a critical juncture and real decisions have to be made that will affect everyone, and perhaps the selfish ones will finally have to change or leave.

If the SCCA can put on a limited number of events, have full fields, with competitive races (perhaps 4-5 groups with 2 classes) where the winner actually is being chased to the checker, than people will start to come back to watch a few events, and vendors will sell product, and the cycle starts fresh again.

[BruceG]

Just like GM, SCCA National never listens to their "customers".

They think they have all the answers.

[tom_sprecher]

I do not want to offend anyone, but IMHO this is a Division level problem that you guys need to work out. Believe me when I say I understand some of what you're dealing with, but you are looking in the wrong direction for help.

The SCCA is there to provide a ruleset and insurance for those who wish participate within those rules. Promoting, producing and profitting (or not) from an event is for the hosting region to deal with.

Whoever feels there are too many events and is losing money should make the first move and drop one of theirs from the calendar.

$ .02

[JoshS]

If you strip out SCCA history and simply look at the way races in NEDiv are presented, you see a system that is insanely complex and difficult for a newbie to learn. NERRC! NARRC! Pro-IT! NYSRRC! National! Regional! Sign up for a race here! Oops, not that race, silly - sign up over there! Go here for results! Also here! But not there! What? No payment yet? Then you're considered a late registrant! Oh, you did it that way at the last LRP event? Well that was an NNJR race, and this is an NYR race!

I'm not in the northeast, but the more I read, the more I think you guys up there just need to restructure. You've got points series of regional events that covers the same area as your entire division. IMO (nothing to base this on), the idea is that regional events are supposed to be entry-level, requiring less travel, and if you want to travel and compete for bigger stakes, then you race your entire division and run national races. You guys have 5 tracks covering a huge area for your regional series.

I think part of the problem is that there are so many tiny regions up there that want to play. We don't really have that problem on the west coast.

Here in CA, we have 6 tracks covering less travel distance, but guess what? It's split into two series, one put on by Cal Club using the southern 3 tracks, and one put on by SFR covering the northern 3 tracks. Since the entire season is presented by the same club with the same officials, every weekend feels pretty much the same, just at different tracks. Both the CalClub series and the SFR series typically each have 8 race weekends, 13-16 races. There aren't many drivers who cross over and run the other series, so there's not much travel required, and both clubs have great turnouts (even this year, down, but pretty decent.)

On the west coast, Nationals aren't doing so well, in my opinion, because they require so much travel to compete for the division. (Of course, those 6 tracks are not in the same division.) Here near San Francisco we have to travel 12 hours up to Portland and 15 hours up to Seattle to race in our same division. If you are near Los Angeles, racing in your division requires you to travel to Phoenix.

[lateapex911]

Too many classes, not enough drivers. Simple.

National level Runoffs should be open to all classes. Most subscribed goes. Period. Let the strong survive. Serve the customer, not force the customer to pick a loser class just for a trip to the Runoffs.

And ditch the whole National/Regional distinction. And with it strip the travel halfway across the county to compete at different tracks mandate. Who can do that anymore? Push the PDX program and fold it into the schools program. Or vice versa. And offer more of them. Novices go and race in the Novice group in the PDX world before they get to run in the races. Right now, we sure make them jump right into the fire.

Too many events. Historically racers had more "say" in the family, and less options. Now, it's an equal say relationship in most families, and there are hundreds of options....and obligations that just didn't exist a decade or two ago. Kids soccer, lacrosse, rowing, little league, etc etc etc. Parents must be there, and must support the organizations. Masters athletics, and the constant stuggle to "get ahead"..whatever that means, lots of foks do it. Then there's the kids at the track factor. Most kids would rather spend a day on the boat tubing and water skiing that waiting waiting and waiting at the track. And an 18 foot runabout is far cheaper than racing.

But the Club as an entity doesn't "get" this, I fear. They are still thinking in the ways of the 60s and 70s, to some degree.

Also, egos have become bigger. More and more guys are happy going to track days and calling it 'racing". Their acquaintances don't know the difference. Marque clubs like the Porsche Club and BMWCCA etc have seen strong growth. The effort level is less, the risk is less, and the family disruption is less than racing. And the ones with real money go get themselves on TV.

We are not the only game in town when it comes to getting the car on the track anymore.

For the SCCA to prosper, it needs to provide avenues for the new breed of car guy. And that might not be Club Racing as we know it today.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Here is another thought on National vs Regional. As an IT guy, I don't want it. I hate the format. I want to race, not to practice a gazillion times and qualify. This months Memorial Day Triple is an example of excellent customer service - that we get every year.

Again - maybe to Patullo...is it even feasible for us to run an event with all of our Regional only classes at a National? Even if it was...so much time for a single. No thanks.

LESS EVENTS + MORE VALUE = MORE DEMAND.

I know it stings to allow events to fade away, but really.

[Cobrar05]

I do not want to offend anyone, but IMHO this is a Division level problem that you guys need to work out. Believe me when I say I understand some of what you're dealing with, but you are looking in the wrong direction for help.

The SCCA is there to provide a ruleset and insurance for those who wish participate within those rules. Promoting, producing and profitting (or not) from an event is for the hosting region to deal with.

Whoever feels there are too many events and is losing money should make the first move and drop one of theirs from the calendar.

$ .02

I have my issues with SCCA. Mostly about classing. On the otherhand SCCA SEDiv consistantly puts on successful events.

The Pro-IT conversation can go both ways. I have a significant haul to whichever track I attend. I am always attracted to the chance to get more races for the same travel costs. Give me a double SARRC and an enduro or a Pro-IT anytime.

I realize there are others that live near and would prefer to keep entry fees down because travel is not an issue.

[ner88]

First I want to say that at this years convention I twice asked why Nationals? and twice got no real answer????
Now regarding too many races/events, seems to me that with the new track at NJ, races have been added by them so, we/NER should do away with our events?:shrug:
We/NER do our best to offer the best racing for your buck and our events offer variety.
I'm not going to debate any of these issues here, please feel free to contact me with your thoughts. I'll be in garage 6/south at NHMS Memorial Day weekend.
Jerry Rigoli, Club Racing Chairman NER
SSM 88 :D
508-561-6001

[gran racing]

Why Jerry, is NER to big to omit some of its races? Many times I don't think of SCCA as a Club where regions work together for a single goal. But hey, let the franchises compete against each other right?

For those who don't know, I'm a member of the NER.

[Doc Bro]

Cancel classes prior to the event that are undersubscribed....period. Why hold a run group for 6 cars? You have to draw the line somewhere. As a business owner I know very clearly I can't cater to everyone. Pick your market and cater to them. Ditch the groups that aren't "producing" the numbers and give the others more time. Sure it will make the SCCA even more Miata centric in the short haul, but it may also encourage others to "protect their investment" by forcing their friends to show. The 50+ classes eliglble in a weekend shows very clearly that there is a lack of clarity, and that decisions are made with history and nostalgia in mind. If this were my business I'd run it quite differently.

PS I've always run a BMW so that I can go to BMW Club racing at any point. I can't tell you how many times I've considered it....especially when our run group gets cut short because one of the 6 FV's in the group before us blew up.

R

[raffaelli]

....and difficult for a newbie to learn. NERRC! NARRC! Pro-IT! NYSRRC! National! Regional! Sign up for a race here! Oops, not that race, silly - sign up over there! Go here for results! Also here! But not there! What? No payment yet? Then you're considered a late registrant! Oh, you did it that way at the last LRP event? Well that was an NNJR race, and this is an NYR race!
Steve Ulfelder
Flatout Motorsports
05 ITS


Exactly. I just sort of sorted it out. Now I am trying to help two buddies, one building, one about to race in SE, through this stuff.

[jjjanos]

If you strip out SCCA history and simply look at the way races in NEDiv are presented, you see a system that is insanely complex and difficult for a newbie to learn. NERRC! NARRC! Pro-IT! NYSRRC! National! Regional! Sign up for a race here! Oops, not that race, silly - sign up over there! Go here for results! Also here! But not there! What? No payment yet? Then you're considered a late registrant! Oh, you did it that way at the last LRP event? Well that was an NNJR race, and this is an NYR race!

Memo to regions, divisions and national: Simplify, simplify.

1. We have three kinds of club racing events, not the multiplicity you suggest. We have Nationals - more track time, no IT; Regionals - IT and home-grown classes; and restricted Regionals - enduros and IT-adders for a National. If someone is unable to understand that simple delineation, I doubt their fitness to live, let alone enter a club race.

2. The alphabet soup of series you list are choices drivers make and have nothing to do with the 3 kinds of club races. They were instituted at the request of drivers who needed a season-long ego boost to accompany their race ego boost ("I'm a series champion!") and/or by regions as a means to increase entries ("Our late October race at Gildersleeve never draws cars, but if it is part of a championship, people will enter!")

3. Race entry is far easier and more simple than in the past. To enter a race, all one (typically) has to do is go to the webpage of the hosting region and find the link. If someone is unable to navigate a webpage, I doubt their fitness to race. The software might not be identical, but the annoyance factor is minimal. If someone is unable to cope - either through attitude or intelligence - with retyping some information, I doubt their fitness to race due to a lack of intelligence and temper. In the pre-computer days, you got an entry MAILED to you that you had to complete by hand and return via USPS. If you weren't on the SEDIV mailing list and wanted to go from PA to SC for the Memorial Day event, you had to call or write the hosting region.


It is also time to start dropping classes altogether, if after a few years of combined operation a class cannot make the attendence minimum, then it's done. Not too many people watch races where 4 cars are in the race and each one is in a different class so there are 4 winners. You want to have spectators to help fund the operation, and you are not going to get that with 25 races in one day with 25 winners in 9 groups.

1. Turning away entries to raise entry counts seems a foolish strategy.
2. Many/most of our tracks lack either/all of a - the PR infrastructure to promote a large spectator draw; b - the sanitation facilities to handle anything above the walk-up crowd; c - the desire to impact their communities with yet another weekend of noise and traffic jams.
3. Virtually no region has the funds/staffing to promote their races to spectators. In the NE, National racing once drew large crowds and the reason for that was the driver of a Datsun (rest his soul).


If the SCCA can put on a limited number of events, have full fields, with competitive races (perhaps 4-5 groups with 2 classes) where the winner actually is being chased to the checker, than people will start to come back to watch a few events, and vendors will sell product, and the cycle starts fresh again.

So, in otherwords, burn the village to the ground to save it? If you take an old farm house down to its stone foundations and rebuild everything above the ground with modern materials... can you honestly claim to be living in an old farm house? In addition, how do you intend to ensure that the winner will be chased to the checker?


I'm not in the northeast, but the more I read, the more I think you guys up there just need to restructure. You've got points series of regional events that covers the same area as your entire division. IMO (nothing to base this on), the idea is that regional events are supposed to be entry-level, requiring less travel, and if you want to travel and compete for bigger stakes, then you race your entire division and run national races. You guys have 5 tracks covering a huge area for your regional series.

And there's the disconnect. Regional events are entry-events requiring less travel. Don't want to travel? Don't. Want to race in a championship? This one travels because the drivers want it to travel. Nobody says that Speed Racer has to compete in the championship. If Speed wants to race 5 weekends each year, he usually can do so without every leaving his home track.

The championships increase entries for two simple reasons - 1. We, the drivers, are stupid. We race for a championship position and that means competing in most/all of the events. 2. At least for MARRS, you know that when you travel to an away MARRS race, you will see many familar faces.



Too many classes, not enough drivers. Simple.

Nope - not enough drivers covers it. The additional classes ADD drivers to an otherwise low car count.


But the Club as an entity doesn't "get" this, I fear. They are still thinking in the ways of the 60s and 70s, to some degree.

Perhaps, but it for MARRS, it was the drivers who wanted an expanded schedule for this year, including an added out-of-region event.


Why Jerry, is NER to big to omit some of its races? Many times I don't think of SCCA as a Club where regions work together for a single goal. But hey, let the franchises compete against each other right?

If NER is putting on successful races, why should it give up an event to funnel entries into a track/event that isn't successful.

Let's talk Pocono. A crappy place to race and a crappy place to volunteer. The only saving grace are the people who attend. I've never heard a driver or a vol say they like the place. The only way the venue survives as an SCCA venue is because of the championships and the double National. So, NER should give up a weekend pulling lots of cars to pull the fat out of the fire of the regions racing at Pocono?

Personally, I think that's faulty logic.


Cancel classes prior to the event that are undersubscribed....period. Why hold a run group for 6 cars?

1. This weekend last I heard, the SMs lost "their" run group for a lack of entries.
2. Because we can't combine those cars with anyone else?

Let's cut to the chase... the thing that sucks time out of the day like Dracula at a blood bank are the open-wheel cars. Throw them to the wolves and the survivors get more track time AND get to go home earlier.

Around here, we've got 2 run groups whose combined total is less than run groups who stand alone. Try to combine them and, at least around here, the stewards wet their pants.

Want to cull the walking wounded? Easy enough to do using market forces. Charge each race group a fixed fee for the amount of track time it uses. Small groups pay more/car than big groups. Weak groups will whither.

Example: The 8 groups we have need to raise $40,000. That's $5,000 per run group. Put 50 cars on course, those guys pay $100 to enter. Put 10 cars on course, those guys pay $500 to enter.

[TomL]

I was going to chime in, but jjjanos hit nearly all the points that I was going to make. Only disagree with the last idea - and that is because it repeats the fallacy that several of the other posts make. There's been a lot of talk about "customer service" and getting more entries. Then the same people talk about eliminating this or that group or class - as long as it belongs to somebody else. How the hell does throwing out a bunch people who want to race with SCCA constitute "customer service" and how is that going to increase entries?

Let me give you a very graphic example. A bunch of SEDiv RX7 drivers got together when the CRX came in and made their cars hopelessly uncompetitive in ITA and pushed for the creation of IT7. Over the objections of some regional officials who objected to more classes or just didn't like it ("You only want it so you don't have to compete like everyone else," I was told, and "I suppose we've got to give every car its own class," another official smirked) it was finally approved. And guess what. The year before, there were 334 entries in ITA (including RX7s). After the change there were nearly 250 ITAs and 250 IT7s for a couple years. Then the forces of opposition returned and IT7 was eliminated. The following year 334 ITA entries appeared. So this mindless action cost SEdiv about 150 entries in one year before IT7 was reinstated. Fortunately, the SEDiv officials usually get it right, but this was a case of not thinking customer service. Eliminating somebody else's class is not the route to more entries and more money for the regions. To cure one problem jjjanos and others bring up, all it takes is officials willing to make the hard call and, per jjjanos example, combine the fast and slow formula cars when the fields are small. It can be done - and it has happened at at least one SEDIV race this year.

Finally, I see some discussion about how if we have just a few classes with big car counts we'll make club racing a spectator attraction again. Beyond the customer service problem (see above), the world has changed. Frankly, I don't see that ever happening again. Club racing was a spectator sport in the 50's and into the 70's primarily due to a lack of competition. You couldn't even get the Indy or Daytona 500s on TV, so for people who wanted to see racing, club racing was an available option. But now with multiple racing options available on TV every weekend, we're unlikely to ever see any but the hard-core sports car racing nuts - and there just aren't that many of us. We're no different than minor league baseball or, these days, short track stock car racing. It's hard to get people to pay for a minor league product when you can see the best for free.

And even in its heyday, club racing was rarely as big spectator sport most people like to think. Even in the early 70s when sizeable crowds were attending the Runoffs at Road Atlanta, the maximum paid attendance was (according to a former high SCCA official I discussed it with) never more than 4000. Maybe a few prime events (June Sprints, Runoffs at Mid-Ohio or Elkhart) can draw a crowd, but a run-of-the-mill regional or even National? Not likely. Every SCCA event at Road Atlanta is spectator and the Region even runs TV spots to advertise. But the number of paid spectators (non-crew) is so small that my understanding is that the tickets sold don't even cover the cost of spectator insurance. Maybe it's worth it for attracting some new blood, but it's never going to be a prime source of revenue.

Not to say things can't be improved. Yes, it would be better to have fewer classes with a lot more entries in each. But I think that most of the "cures" I've seen are worse than the disease.

[lateapex911]

Tom, my thoughts about eliminating classes has much to do with one of the reasons people are "stingy" about coming to races: lack of track time. Give them multiple races, and they are much more likely to come. But....the difficulty in doing that is acute here in the NE. We have limited group sizes because our tracks are often short. And, some tracks throw even more salt in that wound by having very restrictive hours of operation. Scheduling groups becomes dicey, and cleanups can throw the schedule out the window. The number of groups is often limited to 8 due to the limited hours.

So, when a group of 3 or so classes only musters 6 or 8 cars for it's session, yet can not be combined with another group, it seems like we could be wasting a resource: track time. That group could be eliminated and turned into an ITX group, for example, for double dippers and car sharers to use. SFR does this to huge success.

Net result could be 8 lost entries, but 30 gained entries. Even if those entries were discounted 50%, the region would be better off. Not to mention it would be more likely to attract more entries to start with, as the double dipping idea has economic benefits for the car sharers.

On top of that, Lime Rock, for example, charges $53K to rent the track. Add the other expenses and a region needs over $70K in entries to break even. So having 15% of the available track time go nearly wasted really puts a hurt on things. Jeff Janoskas idea of charging by the group speaks to this issue, but has obvious issues with it's implementation.

IT7 was a late addition here in the NE, perhaps because of pride, who knows. I'd say that we have more IT7 cars coming out now than if we didn't have the class. But, if we needed a group to ourselves, I'd be the first to say "Eliminate us and put us in ITA." But we run with ITA now, and obviously fit fine. Due to the lap times, the Region has lots of options if the math makes the fit in ITA problematic. We can run with the Miatas, or ITB or ITC, or ITS, and it will be fine. So, THAT kind of extra class can be a win win.

And that's always up to the regions.

(And so is eliminating classes, I guess, and running a Restricted Regional. Of course, it wouldn't be popular, which is precisley the reason so few classes get eliminated Nationally.)

[gran racing]

So, NER should give up a weekend pulling lots of cars to pull the fat out of the fire of the regions racing at Pocono?

No, but if a NER event starts to hurt because of the new tracks in NJ (heck, we'll include Pocono for the heck of it), they should give up a weekend even if they've been running that event for many years prior.


Charge each race group a fixed fee for the amount of track time it uses. Small groups pay more/car than big groups. Weak groups will whither.

So when I sign up for a race, I won't know how much my fee will be until after the first session?

You've also over simplified the "where to register" issue. The problem is locating that registration site. Most of the events I register are on one site, which also list Summit Point races. It appears one can register for those events on the site but no, there's a different site that a person would have to do some research to learn hopefully still in time. Not impossible but possibly more difficult and confusing than need be.

[Jeremy Billiel]

Wow... Where to start....

Note this is MY opinion ONLY!

This discussion has been going on for a long time and is typically surrounded in politics and NOTHING to do with economics of racing. 2 years ago I was very vocal at the annual meeting and NARRC meeting about regions trying to create demand be using the NARRC races to attract customers. It is my opinion a race weekend needs to stand on its own to be successful.

This is where the politics come in. There are simply too many regions in the Northeast vollying for track time at the same tracks. At the end of the day IMO we simply do not need this many regions. Its cheaper for National to have less regions and the small regions are all on their death bed. They do not have the flexability to offer unique events, try new stuff, etc. This year the drivers are doing the talking. This is the wake up call. The drivers are going to the unique events offering track time, etc. The past gimmicks are no longer working.

So far the NER events have broken even. This can not be said about the others I believe. So why the differences? Some of it is the track rental differences and some of it is the events. Like it or not, Mothers Day weekend has always and will always be a badly attended race. If you took the Pro-IT and NARRC out of there how many people would attend? This is an example of an event that should be shut down IMO. Do we really need 3 LRP events? NOPE. The demand is not there given the LRP rental rates.

So what is going to happen this year? Survival of the fittest. IMO there are some small regions that are in serious trouble and they can not back out of the event. As it stands now NER is setting up to loose a lot of money as well. So if these events can not stand up why do we keep them? I know we (NER) are seriously debating LRP and Nationals.

At the end of the day, this problem is less about supply and demand and more about politics. Unfortunatley, I believe we may loose a region or two in the meantime as no one is willing to accept the realities of the situation.

If SCCA was run like a business these problems of supply/demand would not exist. It's really as simple as that. My final thought is many times there is a conflict in Road Racing. Many times the boards/regions are treating events as ways to support their regions members (after all it is a memberhsip driven club) BUT drivers are selfish bastards and only care about the end product. They do not care about who puts them on, etc... The SCCA needs to not think about this as a "club" but more like a "business"

Just my .02

[Tom Blaney]

Here is another thought on National vs Regional. As an IT guy, I don't want it. I hate the format. I want to race, not to practice a gazillion times and qualify. This months Memorial Day Triple is an example of excellent customer service - that we get every year.

Again - maybe to Patullo...is it even feasible for us to run an event with all of our Regional only classes at a National? Even if it was...so much time for a single. No thanks.

LESS EVENTS + MORE VALUE = MORE DEMAND.

I know it stings to allow events to fade away, but really.

Part of the entire racing experience is setting up the car correctly for the track your at, that is why there is a practice session, then qualifying and then the race.

Your willing to spend an extra amount of money to attend a Lime Rock event with "a practice day" added as a bonus, why not go to an event where you get to do more with the car, than at the current regional format, where you get a short practice/qualifying session, a very long period where you stare at the car, or sit in the lawn chair, while all 25 other classes get their one shot, then a short race 1/2 the distance of a national race hoping that somebody's car doesn't crash or blow up and cause a full coarse yellow for 1/3 of the race.

If you want race time than consider the fact that at a national format event, you get lots more track time to setup the car, qualify against the competion (to see what they are going to beat you with), and a race that is twice the distance of a regional format -- all in the same time frame as a regional race and all within the same driving distance. So it gives you the track time you want and you might actually have more than 2 competitive cars in the race.

Since your an IT guy, you should also look to the problem as an SCCA member not an individual focused on your own needs. The club needs to change badly and it needs the membership to work as a group to come up with a reasonable solution for all the drivers and most of the cars. Yes there needs to be a blood letting of cars and classes, finally accept that nobody really cares how many IT or Formula car classes there are, narrow it down to big and small, work out a formula that balances the races so that there are a reasonable amount of car marks that can run in the combined IT/Prod/T2 class, or Formula Large bore, Small bore, and GTLarge and GTSmall.

Let go of the I'm a IT guy or I think Open Wheel is real racing mentality and work to make the entire program work.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Tom,

Test days or HPDE days are a WAY better value for testing and car set-up data and tweaking than any practice session at a National. Track specific set-ups are documented and placed on teh car BEFORE the race, no? I do all that prior to coming to the track.

As far as qualifying? 20 minutes is plenty of time to get in your best lap. If you can't, you are doing it wrong.

All I am saying is that as a racer, I want to maximize RACE time. For me, nothing to do with the class I run in except that the changes I can make are minimal - but see my first point above - the way a National is structured is not optimal. Thereby making a National - Regional combo a bad idea for me.

This whole thing is so simple. Pull some events. We don't have the demand for 3 LRP's. We don't have the demand for 4 NHMS's. Pocono on MD weekend is a tough sell. These things are staring us right in the face.

Add Pro IT. People who like the series will run it. People who want mucho track time will run it. It adds potential value to that event. Think up other 'Pro' Series to do the same. Pro-FV or Pro-SRF...anything to add to the revenue line without hurting the value others have placed on the event.

And here is where it hurts like I said in my first post. The small regions who have no track that put their fiscal nuts on the line every time they host a race - STOP! Why? If it was just NER deciding how many races to have, it would come into focus REAL FREAKIN' quick what was a saturated market. Step on some toes. Work together for the betterment of SCCA.

How about a mid-year meeting at the LRP school? We need NER RRB reps there.

[jjjanos]

No, but if a NER event starts to hurt because of the new tracks in NJ (heck, we'll include Pocono for the heck of it), they should give up a weekend even if they've been running that event for many years prior.

Of course, but that's not what I thought you were suggesting.


So when I sign up for a race, I won't know how much my fee will be until after the first session?

Easy enough to solve. Entry fee is $x for this group. Rebates may be issued if the car count exceeds y.


You've also over simplified the "where to register" issue. The problem is locating that registration site. Most of the events I register are on one site, which also list Summit Point races. It appears one can register for those events on the site but no, there's a different site that a person would have to do some research to learn hopefully still in time. Not impossible but possibly more difficult and confusing than need be.

As easy and simple as it could be? No. I should be able to go to scca.com and register for any scca event right there on their website.

Difficult and complicated to turn away entries? Not by a long shot. Anyone incapable of finding most online entry forms shouldn't be in a racecar. Anyone frustrated enough to boycott an event to protest the small effort needed to enter shouldn't be in a racecar - clearly a case of red mist.

I do not believe that any national organization allows single point entry for every event they sanction.

The issue isn't classes... the issue is # of run groups. I have no problem having a run group consisting of 50 classes as long as it puts 50 cars on course. I think most people wouldn't either, at least from a resource utilization stand-point.

MARRS drivers wanted more track time and more racing. We dropped two run groups this year and offer a 10-lap race on Sat and a 20-lap on Sun. The combinations are not optimal, but given the constraints we faced, were the best we could do in the face of steward opposition.

The Regions are listening but remember that they do need to hold onto the dates. Give up a date and you won't get it back. It's OK to lose the date if you think things won't get better in 2 years... otherwise, you suck it up for now and wait for better days. Kind of like dealing with pregnancy hormones in the SO.

[Ron Earp]

As easy and simple as it could be? No. I should be able to go to scca.com and register for any scca event right there on their website.

Amen to that. Just contract it out to DBLRacing or the other big one that already has solved the problems, no need to re-invent the wheel as the SCCA is prone to do.....

[cooleyjb]

Let's cut to the chase... the thing that sucks time out of the day like Dracula at a blood bank are the open-wheel cars. Throw them to the wolves and the survivors get more track time AND get to go home earlier.

Around here, we've got 2 run groups whose combined total is less than run groups who stand alone. Try to combine them and, at least around here, the stewards wet their pants.

Want to cull the walking wounded? Easy enough to do using market forces. Charge each race group a fixed fee for the amount of track time it uses. Small groups pay more/car than big groups. Weak groups will whither.

Example: The 8 groups we have need to raise $40,000. That's $5,000 per run group. Put 50 cars on course, those guys pay $100 to enter. Put 10 cars on course, those guys pay $500 to enter.

Here's the problem with this idea. You are using your little world of the SCCA to compare to the entire country. If they used this mentality in the CENDIV many of the IT classes would be left by the wayside.

[Ron Earp]

Here's the problem with this idea. You are using your little world of the SCCA to compare to the entire country. If they used this mentality in the CENDIV many of the IT classes would be left by the wayside.

And that is ok. You guys would have lots of open wheel classes, some regions would not. I know that at a few races in the SE many hours are spent with two cars having a practice, qualifying, and race while a paddock of hundreds looks on. I know this is a NE thread but I imagine this gets repeated in other regions. Not sure how to solve it though.

I will ask a question that will either show my ignorance or relative newness, one or the other.

How come we can't mix open wheel cars with closed wheel cars that run similar times? Or dissimilar times depending upon your strategy of combining cars? I don't see that the open wheel cars would suffer any more or less in this situation.

[lateapex911]

Here's the problem with this idea. You are using your little world of the SCCA to compare to the entire country. If they used this mentality in the CENDIV many of the IT classes would be left by the wayside.

The difference is that the Formula cars *must* have their own group, for safety reasons. Where IT cars can slot into many groups. Regions have a large fixed cost they need to cover. And they need to fill groups to make that happen. Reserving a group for one car is obviously going to end in tears.

Regions need flexibility to adjust groupings, and they have it. Up to a point. But cars that must have their own group, yet only have counts of 6 or 8 for that group as a total really put a Region in a bind, as that group can be the difference of losing money or making money.

The issue in the NE is rather acute, and unique. If you take say, Danbury, CT as your "epicenter", you have Lime Rock (1 hour tow), NHMS (3 or so hour tow) Watkins Glen (3 or so hour tow) Pocono, (3 hour tow) and NJMP (4+ hour tow). And theoretically, Palmer (1,5hr tow) will be online in a year or two.

Lime Rock, NHMS and Palmer are all in New England, and are "owned" by NER. Yet, MoHud Region, New York Region, New England Region and Northern New Jersy Region ALL call Lime Rock home, as it's the closest track to those regions. I think Watkins Glen is shared by Finger Lakes Region and NY Region.

(i might have a couple details wrong here, Regional execs correct me please)

Now, NER could be a dick and tell the other regions to pound sand, but they don't. So it becomes problematic. NER hosts a bunch of races at NHMS, and has historically done well, and want's to "hold" it's dates at Lime Rock, for fear of losing them forever if they let them go. A good compromise has been to let the other regions run events there, but now, with yet another track to go to (NJMP), and dollars that are harder to come by, those regions are looking at bankrupcey if they hold events, due to the astronomical rental there.

It's funny to me also that as a racer, the events are pretty much the same, no matter who runs the event. Sure there are differences, but first or second year competitors would be hard pressed to notice them. Heck, I see the same faces ( :) ) in grid from NHMS to NJMP!!

If those Regions DID go away, I wonder if anyone not involved in their operation would even notice?

I know, I'll get icy stares for saying that, (or worse!) but to a degree, we all now it's the case. I think that it might be time to work towards combining some of the smaller regions proactively, before it gets ugly and everyone suffers.

[lateapex911]

How come we can't mix open wheel cars with closed wheel cars that run similar times? Or dissimilar times depending upon your strategy of combining cars? I don't see that the open wheel cars would suffer any more or less in this situation.

I'm not the guy who makes those calls, but my understanding of the situation is that
A- Closed wheel cars don't mix with open wheeled cars for safety reasons. Dissimilar weights, visibility concerns, lack of respect for open wheeled cars from a contact point of view, etc.
B- All open wheeled cars can not be in the same group because of the excessive speed differentials between say the Formula Atlantic car and the Formula Vee car.
C- "the way they race"... you know, the fast in the corners yet no hp, vs the turd in the corner yet fast on the straight issue which is magnified when you mix categories.

[TomL]

Jake, I understand the time constraint issue. I know there are some events where more track time (or at least open time for problems) would be nice. But I just don't see how getting rid of one run group (down here it would usually be the small formula cars) does much to solve the problem. If you drop one group, it frees up about an hour, with on-track time plus clean-ups. With 5-7 other groups, that means you can give around ten more minutes to each other group. Nice, but I can't see 30 people saying, "Wow, there's no way I would go with two 15 minute qualifying sessions, but now that they are 20 minutes, sign me up!" (Or, my single 20 minute session is now 30.) To me, at least, it makes absolutely no difference.

It also sounds like a lot of solutions are being proposed globally for a problem that is, if not unique, at least particularly difficult at Lime Rock. Short, fast track; rigid operating hours; big fields. We don't need to "cure" problems that don't exist as much elsewhere.

I agree that having an 8-car FV/F500/FF field is not a particularly efficient use of track time. And that if the overall formula car numbers are really small, they ought to be combined. It can and has been done. But also remember why the stewards are reluctant to do so. The speed differential between FA/C&DSR/FB, etc. and FV is about the same as the differential between ITA and GT1. If you've ever shared the track with one of those beasts, you understand why FV drivers (and the FA guys for that matter) and stewards really don't want to go there.

But I still don't think that growing the club is going to be enhanced by treating some of our members as second class citizens, and I think that's what a lot of these proposals do.

[lateapex911]

No real proposals from me Tom, just trying to illuminate some of the issues.

On the group thing, I think eliminating that group WOULD have big benefits. But not as you described, which was to give the remaining groups more time. But to add another group, like SF does, for double dippers. I think they call it ITX.

But, yea, eliminating that group is the tricky part, for the reasons I, and you mentioned. Not to mention the political cost.

But, sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Just playing devils advocate here.

[JoshS]

But to add another group, like SF does, for double dippers. I think they call it ITX.

SFR didn't add a group for double-dippers, per-se. Rather, our group 1 has two classes in it that are attractive to a lot of cars: ITE (our rules just say tub chassis and DOT tires, otherwise anything goes) and ITX (SM, ITA, ITB, ITC, or anything that was ever an SS car, built to SS rules + IT suspension). The group also contains the SS, T and ST classes, along with a regional, small, spec RX-7 class.

We have quite a good number of purpose-built ITE cars (they are FAST), but then ITE is also a good place for P (w/DOT tires), ITS and ITR cars to double-dip, albeit uncompetitively. ITX is a good place for those other classes to double-dip. So now, Group 1 is usually our 3rd-largest group (behind group 7, SM, and group 5, IT, which itself has a lot of SM double-dippers in it). Schedules are always set up so that groups 1, 5, and 7 don't butt up against each other, making it easy to run in 2 or even all 3 of those groups.

Our formula car groups have good turnout. SRF has GREAT turnout (they get their own group). Our lightest turnout group is big-bore (GT*, EP, AS, and a couple of regional classes.)

[Robert Zecca]

Keep it coming. I think we may be able to come up with a solution for next year. We need more input from more people and other forums.

[jjjanos]

If you drop one group, it frees up about an hour, with on-track time plus clean-ups. With 5-7 other groups, that means you can give around ten more minutes to each other group. Nice, but I can't see 30 people saying, "Wow, there's no way I would go with two 15 minute qualifying sessions, but now that they are 20 minutes, sign me up!" (Or, my single 20 minute session is now 30.) To me, at least, it makes absolutely no difference.

Ahhhh but if it allowed for the survivors to have a 10-lap race instead of a 15-minute qualifier, would it matter to you?


I agree that having an 8-car FV/F500/FF field is not a particularly efficient use of track time. And that if the overall formula car numbers are really small, they ought to be combined. It can and has been done. But also remember why the stewards are reluctant to do so. The speed differential between FA/C&DSR/FB, etc. and FV is about the same as the differential between ITA and GT1. If you've ever shared the track with one of those beasts, you understand why FV drivers (and the FA guys for that matter) and stewards really don't want to go there.

Yes and no. How many of the fast formula/SRs typically run a regional? How many of them are actually fast? How many of them will go 50% distance? It's one thing if the issue is 20 of the fast guys combined with 20 of the slow guys, but, for most regions its 2 maybe 3 fast cars and none of them will be in contact with each other racing for position. (Some regions may vary.)

Mixed classes is something the fenders have dealt with for years.
The March Atlanta Regional saw a 24 second gap between the fast OW and the Vees.
At the same event, there was an 18 second gap in the lap times in the big bore group.

At the last MARRS, the OW spread was about 21 seconds (fast to slow with vees in own group). The spread in the big bore group was 19 seconds. One is safe and the other isn't?


But I still don't think that growing the club is going to be enhanced by treating some of our members as second class citizens, and I think that's what a lot of these proposals do.

I disagree. If we do something to keep 100 drivers happy and lose 300 to aNAother SAnctioning body that can add the classes those drivers want, we're turning away members.

It's one thing to tell your 5 Vee drivers that they cannot play. It is another to tell those 5 drivers that they can play, but they have to do it here.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Each Region has their own issues driven by theor own circumstances. What you guys are talking about is 10,000 foot stuff that may or may not apply to everyone. I am certainly not an advocate of excluding people. Having the PTB do their best with the run groups is all we can ask for here.

This thread was born from attendance problems in the Northeast. I see nothing other than oversupply.

[spdmonkey]

The Regions are listening but remember that they do need to hold onto the dates. Give up a date and you won't get it back. It's OK to lose the date if you think things won't get better in 2 years... otherwise, you suck it up for now and wait for better days.

This is the issue as I see it from afar. Here in GLDiv there were some regions that gave up dates and now the (good ones) are gone forever. In fact we have the opposite problem. Not enough races. I am chairman of the Champ Series and we have half as many races this year as we had 5 or more years ago. I have drivers calling me all the time wanting more dates, but regions gave them up for a variety of reasons and the drivers ultimately lose. Yet we have other regions that hold races which the drivers don't show up (me included) for a variety of reasons. I think each division has its own set of issues that need to be solved separately. No across the board changes are going to help. I know we in Ohio Valley region have listened to drivers and picked up a date that was dropped to host a second double regional. We also this week opted to move to online registration. As Regional Executive of the region I'm happy to say that we attack the issues head on. Not every region does that and thats what brings this issue up.

Be careful how much you pare down. You might end up like GL after the split

db

[Beran]

Is this too many regions for the number of tracks we have and geographic area covered?

Blue Mountain Region (97)
Regional Executive Merlin A Miller (484)824-4253

Central New York Region (5)
Regional Executive Mike Donofrio (315)451-7169 [email protected]

Central Pennsylvania Region (59)
Regional Executive Ronald A Dotts (814)355-4293 [email protected]

Finger Lakes Region (62)
Regional Executive Michael L Toombs (585)328-2617 [email protected]

Glen Region (71)
Regional Executive Edward A Zebrowski (585)330-6142 [email protected]

Mahoning Valley Region (80)
Regional Executive Stephen R Kryder (330)854-4889 [email protected]

Misery Bay Region (104)
Regional Executive Gary Neckers (716)355-4389 [email protected]

Mohawk Hudson Region (65)
Regional Executive Jack Hanifan (518)438-3754 [email protected]

New England Region (22)
Regional Executive Chris Franson (860)306-7424 [email protected]

New York Region (23)
Regional Executive Christopher Morales (516)978-6472 [email protected]

Northeastern Pennsylvania Region (25)
Regional Executive Thomas P Knorr (610)863-4709 [email protected]

Northern New Jersey Region (26)
Regional Executive Darrell T Anthony (973)697-5891 [email protected]

Philadelphia Region (31)
Regional Executive George J Bloeser, Jr. (610)965-0585 [email protected]

South Jersey Region (84)
Regional Executive James P Tornetta (609)893-5701 [email protected]

Southern New York Region (37)
Regional Executive Darryl P Lindsay (607)642-8973 [email protected]

Steel Cities Region (39)
Regional Executive James R Farrar (412)751-5235 [email protected]

Susquehanna Region (92)
Regional Executive Steve Limbert (717)432-4116 [email protected]

Washington DC Region (42)
Regional Executive James Noel (301)668-8804 [email protected]

Western New York Region (43)
Regional Executive Dale R Kunze (716)774-2714 [email protected]

[dickita15]

To be fair less than half those regions are “Racing Regions”. SCCA does other things besides race even if most of us here do not notice.

[jumbojimbo]

DB is correct. GLD has an awful regional schedule. 3 champ events in the first 4 weeks of the season then 17 weeks until the next champ event? In between a couple of restricted races mashed into national weekends. The only bright spot is IT-Fest in August.

Compare this to the NASA midwest calendar. Races are pretty much 4 weeks apart, usually the same weekend of the month. Now that's a race schedule.

How do we change our schedule? How do we get a fricking June regional race date? Some region has a to find an available weekend at a track, hopefully not ORP, sign a contract for it and then wait for the fall scheduling meeting? And give up their current date in he meantime, which gets snapped up by someone else?

I completely disagree with jjanos. I think the incoherent image we put out with a hodge podge of registration methods, results postings (if done at all), etc does hurt attendance.

I don't understand why we don't have a page at the national level with online registration, entry lists, results, protest results, pictures, video, lap times, blogs, etc. Sure, you can post your video on myscca, but who goes there? Even if you do, you can't easily see all the video from a certain race, it's a mess.

As several people have pointed out, people want to race at events with lots of other people in their class. We need a place to see who is registered so we know we are not gong to be the only car in class And an organized national results page would help novices understand that there really are people out there racing in regional races. Lack of visibility is killing us. The days are long gone when a tiny region can mimeograph some entry forms and send them snail mail.

[TomL]

Each Region has their own issues driven by theor own circumstances. What you guys are talking about is 10,000 foot stuff that may or may not apply to everyone. I am certainly not an advocate of excluding people. Having the PTB do their best with the run groups is all we can ask for here.

This thread was born from attendance problems in the Northeast. I see nothing other than oversupply.

This is the real answer to the problems - the PTB need to think about the best interests of the club as a whole and not focus on their "What's best for my region?" perspective. I don't know how NEDiv does date selection, but down here, the REs and race directors have a couple big meetings a year (and lots of phone calls) where all this stuff gets hashed out. I hear they are "lively", but overall the results seem to be schedule with generally well-attended races. If that isn't the case up north, maybe you need new REs. :)

I refrained earlier from making a smart-aleck remark when I saw Bob Zecca's original post, but here goes. To summarize that post: We need to cut back on the number of races or something really bad is going to happen .... We'll have to cut back on the number of races. Sounds like a self-correcting problem to me. :p

But it would be better to fix the problems yourself rather than having the solution forced on you.

[lateapex911]

Tom, I think the issue I see is different. We need to, as a group of regions, cut back...or the smaller regions that operate with less in the bank for a rainy day (or year), will go under.

Of course, the smaller region that only runs one race a year doesn't want to give that up, and prefers the bigger regions to cut back.

I hope it works out so everybody gets everything they want, but as always, it will come down to time and money.

[jjjanos]

I don't know how NEDiv does date selection, but down here, the REs and race directors have a couple big meetings a year (and lots of phone calls) where all this stuff gets hashed out. I hear they are "lively", but overall the results seem to be schedule with generally well-attended races. If that isn't the case up north, maybe you need new REs.

NEDIV does this late - like November - and the only things over which NEDIV has de jure authority are the scheduling of Nationals and whether Pocono gets a Double National. Unless it has changed recently, there's little or no information sharing in advance. Cross-polination of a series is done in advance. As a region that has a (so far) successful racing program, I'm 100% opposed to granting NEDIV any authority to limit our ability to schedule regional races.


Tom, I think the issue I see is different. We need to, as a group of regions, cut back...or the smaller regions that operate with less in the bank for a rainy day (or year), will go under.

C'est la vie. As the flag said, "unite or die." The smaller racing regions that currently hold 3 events across 3 regions but can only support 2 will need to go the Tri-Region method and share 2 dates among themselves.

[John Nesbitt]

NEDIV does this late - like November - and the only things over which NEDIV has de jure authority are the scheduling of Nationals and whether Pocono gets a Double National. Unless it has changed recently, there's little or no information sharing in advance. Cross-polination of a series is done in advance. As a region that has a (so far) successful racing program, I'm 100% opposed to granting NEDIV any authority to limit our ability to schedule regional races.


And there's the problem in a nutshell.

I think that we all agree that there are too many events compared to the total number of entries and volunteer days. The problem is how to improve the ratio.

As it is currently structured, SCCA Club Racing is essentially a regional affair. Each region gets its own track dates and promotes its own events, with little-to-none in the way of higher level coordination or authority.

So, in times like these, each individual region has little incentive to give up a track date (which it might never get back) in favor of the 'greater good'. The rational (for the individual region) move is to keep the date, and eke out the dollars, in hopes that the economy and entries will recover later. And in hopes that some other region will go bust and lose its date.

If one is '100% opposed' to letting some higher authority guide decisions on how many events will be scheduled, one cannot fuss when each region acts in its own interest, and we end up with the current over-supply of poorly-subscribed events.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Of course, the smaller region that only runs one race a year doesn't want to give that up, and prefers the bigger regions to cut back.



Let's look into the dynamics of an LRP event. First, NER 'lets' a smaller region in the Division host it. Why? Because there has been enough demand in the past to have X amount of events and in reality, it is almost an neccessity to spread the WORK load around. Registration, tech, corners, etc, etc. Part of it is just being a good 'neighbor' I am sure but it IS born from a need, right?

Times are different now. Pull back events. Smaller 'non-racing' regions need to take a real look at if they want to litteraly 'risk it all' to host an event that at best may break even. If I were a Rally or a Solo competitor in one of those regions, I would be screeming to stop the madness. Wait until the market comes back and then see what can be done.

The economy is weak. Demand is lower then normal. Supply is too high. Costs are NOT declining.

Economics 101 people. Decrease supply so demand for remaining events goes up. We have some great Comp Chairs up here. They add value and each event has highlights. There are just tooo many of them.

Pull a LRP and a NHMS at minimum next year - and consider dropping the MD Pocono if it can't make money.

Shoot for 1 race per month. Maybe even have all the Regions agree to one NEW SERIES that we can all work together on...

Again, do we need a meeting at LRP over some beers for some tough talk? POINT OF FACT: We drives DO NOT know all the little issues that are in play. What makes sense to me may or may not be doable. Educate us all so we can be part of the solution.

[Jeremy Billiel]

I always ask that Regional Executives as themselves this simple question.

What would you do if this was your business and your money was invested in it? I have found that answering this questions typically gives a different (right in my opinion) answer than what is currently happening. It's very easy to make politically based decisions when its not *your* money on the line.

Just my .02

[jjjanos]

So, in times like these, each individual region has little incentive to give up a track date (which it might never get back) in favor of the 'greater good'. The rational (for the individual region) move is to keep the date, and eke out the dollars, in hopes that the economy and entries will recover later. And in hopes that some other region will go bust and lose its date.

If one is '100% opposed' to letting some higher authority guide decisions on how many events will be scheduled, one cannot fuss when each region acts in its own interest, and we end up with the current over-supply of poorly-subscribed events.

1. I'm not certain there is systematic over-supply. At this point, I think it's a cyclical effect.
2. If there is systematic over-supply, let those regions who have a problem endure tha pain and leave healthy programs alone. If WDCR or NER is happy with its program but GOP needs those regions to drop an event to make the GOP event profitable, then TFB for GOP.

The immediate effect of NJMP will be decreased car counts every where else in NEDIV. NJMP may ultimately increase car counts, but not immediately. The economy is hitting us hard now. The economy hit us hard last year too.

Ham-fisted regulation by NEDIV that is of questionable legality vis-a-vis anti-competition laws is not needed. If events are losing money or low quality, they'll die on their own.

[dickita15]

The events at NHMS are similar in my mind to the events at Summit. Each has enough of a constituency to run events with just there regulars so there is no reason to drop events there. We do a lot of data analysis on entries. Last year when the gas price spiked at $4 per gallon we ran a very good event (170 cars I think) and going over the entry list found only three drivers not from New England. 5 regional weekends is not too much at NHMS.
Now the National we only do as a perceived obligation to our regions national drivers.

[Robert Zecca]

I love the participation and ideas. Andy B hit it on the head, education and understanding is key and though this may be a temporary problem because of the economy we need a long-term solution to grow SCCA. Let us all figure this out as racers and explain to the regions what may be best. YES I believe we need only one great regional series whatever it may be and have it mean something. Then we could work on the promotion, etc.... and the numbers will come.

[FastM3]

Hi Gang

There is no agenda in this message and I have no side, just a comment and a view from a family that races in the New England Region.

Linda and I live in Central Mass. We are 2.5 hours from Lime Rock and the same from NHMS. 7 hours from Watkins GLen and 7.5 from NJMP. We used to go to Summit when we raced Lay down Karts but that is over 10 hours. We do not go to Pocono (6 plus hours) as we never really enjoyed it when we raced karts there.

We have eliminated Lime Rock from our schedule. While the place is beautiful and great fun and a challenge to drive well it is :
Too Expensive for the race time you get.
Too easy to get a race cut short due to an accident
There seems to be a hight percentage of carnage there.
It is a lot of work for a one day event and the DE/Race combination is too expensive for a family with two drivers.
I do however enjoy instructing there for DEs.

We usually do all 5 events at NHMS and do not feel there are too many days there. The May triple seems to be the Jewel of the year. We especially enjoy the value of Doubles and would rather they all be doubles for the number of races and the value.

We travel to Watkins Glen 2 times a season recently. One to instruct at a DE and then the Fun One or the Last Chance Enduro.

Last year we also went to NJMP for the October event. Great fun and we plan on maybe 2 trips there this year. One DE with SCDA and then a race late in the season.

I also try and do 2 or 3 instruction DE days at NHMS.

So this is pretty busy for two old Farts who do it for fun.

We do not care about points. I agree with Steve Ulfelder's post completely. We do not race for points. We race for fun and enjoy seeing the same people at events so we can compare lies.

So that is about 12 events through the summer with maybe 3 or 4 autocrosses just to stay sharp.

If a Lime Rock day goes away it has no effect on us. If a NHMS day goes away we are not going to go to a Lime Rock or a Pocono event to make up for it. We will just be a little sadder as we grow older.

I do not know what the final answer is. Maybe give up the May 30 LimeRock and pick up a mid June event there to spread things out a bit. I agree, having races on back to back weekends is not a good idea. Having races that lose money is even worse. There needs to be more open communication between groups to better schedule the events.

Anyway just a viewpoint from midpack.

Phil Kogan

[Andy Bettencourt]

Phil,

Thank you for that perspective. I am the polar opposite of you and Linda. I am a points guy. The thrill for me is the championship hunt. But when the PTB were formulating points for the 2008 season, they scrubbed down the particiation numbers and saw that 80% of the racers did 4 events or less. They tried to incent drivers to get to that 5th race with some points.

What that tells makes me realize Phil is that I am in the 20%. What *I* think makes a great series is probably irrelevant. Maybe we need a few good LOCAL series instead of one Regional series.

Just thinking outloud. We need the PTB to stand up in front of us and tell us all the angles of all the issues.

[RSTPerformance]

I have not read all the posts... Been very busy lately :(

I think it Phil best describes "most" of the racers in respect to having individual preferences for races, tracks, or even series. Cutting race weekends won't increase participation IMO. Every event in the Northeast has it's own special feature that attracts certain people.

I personally think that the "club racing" regions need to be combined into one. We should not be selecting what races to host based on the profatability of a specific region, it hasn't and won't work. As long as regions compete in something they should be working together at (growing scca) it will forever fail. Knowone wants to be that region that stops hosting races but something has to give. Are we growing regions or scca?

Also if you want real answes ask the tough questions... Do a survey at every race for a year, you will get much better results/info than you will on line where most people lurk instead of write for fear of pissing someone off, and let's face it... This is political stuff we are talking about.

Just my opinion...

Raymond "SCCA supporter" Blethen

[Andy Bettencourt]

Cutting race weekends won't increase participation IMO. Every event in the Northeast has it's own special feature that attracts certain people.



This is the only thing I can't agree with. If each of us is going to do 4-5 weekends, and there are 12 weekend to choose from you can derive an average car count. Right now, that car count is tetering on 2 things: 1. Not enough drivers to make the race fiscally viable and 2. Expensive enough to exclude drivers - see #1.

With fewer events to choose from, those events fill up, they become less risky, less expensive and viable choices.

[Dave Zaslow]

I have been in the room for the NARRC meetings as NYR's drivers rep. Everyone in that room is dedicated to make the best decisions that they can in electing which races are NARRC races and how many there will be. Most of all they

Lime Rock has always been a bone of contention amongst the NARRC regions. These regions are New England, Northern New Jersey, Mohawk-Hudson, and New York. At one time everyone made money or at least broke even on these races. With Lime Rock's prices having gone to the very expensive, and the restrictions on starting and ending times each region. This year there are 3 regionals and 1 national.

Test and Tune 5/29/2009 NNJ LRP
I got your stimulus right here Regional 5/30/2009 NNJ LRP
School 6/19/2009 NER LRP
Regional 6/20/2009 NER LRP
National 7/31/2009 MHR LRP
TeamDI Pro IT Round Five 8/2/2009 MHR LRP
NARRC Runoffs 10/3/2009 NYR LRP

NNJ has elected to add value by offering a full test day and then a one day regional.
NER elected to again do a well timed school (the last until the fall Glen school) along with a one day regional.
MoHud elected to do the national along with Pro-IT, hoping that Pro-IT will keep the event solvent.
NYR does the runoffs as a traditional two day regional event.

The one day regionals were seen as popular because a Friday off from work is not needed and there is one less very expensive motel night to pay for.

Does this make sense? It does to me as a schedule, but not as an overall strategy for Northeast Region's races here. I would keep the one day events as restricted regionals, slash the run groups to 6 (as at Pocono) or 7 (splitting IT into 2 groups, unlike Pocono) and giving the SM, SSM, IT, SRF, and small bore F longer races and qualifying sessions. A 12 lap ITR/ITS/ITB race only lasts 15 minutes (!). If your group cannot produce the numbers, why should we not look to attract more people into the well attended groups? High entry fees and very short races are not a value proposition and value is what we must deliver. The remaining groups can run the National and we could allow NARRC points for only those groups. Anyone brave (stupid) enough to try this next year?

The Mother's Day double at Pocono was stuffed with a double regional, Pro-IT, and an enduro. The event barely broke even. It is scheduled immediatly after a NHMS event for Pro-IT which may or may not have an effect for racers looking to get their first fix of the year. But Pocono is a well run and entertaining event that has a track that has different challenges. Drafting is something that is a skill we should learn. I hope it continues.

The Glen races have a fabulous track that will always attract racers.

I hope NJMP fares well this year, especially as MARRS vs NARRC events we will run with folks we may not see again throughout the year.

For me, Summit, Nelson and Beaverrun are "geographically undesireable".

Yes there are too many events for this year's population of racers, but if dates are lost can they be regained when circumstances change? It certainly keeps things interesting for our directors and executives. Anyone know what is happening on the NASA side of the playground? EMRA? SCDA? PDA? BMW Club? Porsche Club?

Another 2 cents,

DZ

[Robert Zecca]

Guys,

Again thank you for all the great responses. I have posted this post in other forums as well and it is great to see that people truly care and understand that there is a problem. Some believe that this problem pertains to the NE and I am sure they are correct.

What we need to do now is analyze the info and make changes going into 2010. I think we need to get 20-30 drivers involved up at the NEDIV mini-con in November and work with the regions before we make our schedules for 2010. We need to see what will work best for the majority and hopefully changes will be made so that we can see less races, fuller fields and hopefully costs stay the same or go down. Everyone speaks about NASA and the reason why they do sell well in the NE and are growing is because they have one leader who makes the decisions for everyone and this works well for them. On the other hand SCCA has many regions who make their own decisions and in the past this has worked well but personally I feel we need to work together as one SCCA and not many regions to move ahead going into the future.

Think about it and lets see what we can do. You guys are on the right track.

thanks,
Bob Zecca

[gran racing]

From all I've known, NASA in the NE has been more of a DE than racing. That's where they make their money.

I wonder what other things might attract more racers? A survey like mentioned could be a good idea. Beyond reducing events, it's possible we can try some new things out of the norm. Part of this stems from me having gone to a Cincy Reds game last night where they had a "bring your dog to the park". 500 dogs in with owners in a designated area, lots of sponsors (dog related products). Now I'm not suggesting this same promo, but there are other things to think about.

Maybe have a group (the same in Pro IT?) that does a different type of race. We've talked about it before, but some different stuff. A 40 min race, one required pit stop with a 1 min wait in pit lane. Many other ideas have been discussed to change things up and add to the fun factor.

[RSTPerformance]

Dave-

Your on to something... I remember an event a couple years ago at watkins Glenn that did something to promote FV and they had something like 40+ cars entered.

I think IT is where it needs to be, the regions need to do something to attract the other classes to the events... Maybe an open wheel enduro? Maybe a vintage/production car featured race and car show? The focus probably shouldn't be on IT, Bob and others have already done what was needed to get those groups out racing... We (the IT group) tend to look at penalizing other groups for low attendance which will only pushpeople away, instead we should be looking at ways to reward those for showing up... After all isn't that one reason IT and sm/ssm has grown? We have double dipping, team di proit, enduros, etc.

Andy- I agree with your less races = greater demand argument but what reagon is willing to give up a money making race to encourage people to run other less popular events? We need one organization managing the events so that the "correct" choices are made.

Raymond

Raymond

[Andy Bettencourt]

Andy- I agree with your less races = greater demand argument but what reagon is willing to give up a money making race to encourage people to run other less popular events? We need one organization managing the events so that the "correct" choices are made.

Raymond

Raymond

Raymond - is it too simple to say 'eliminate an event or two that DOESN'T make money?'

LRP events (aside from the runoffs) test the waters. Pocono too. If events are making money, then fine. The issue is that some haven't been - and it't not due to great events, just oversupply.

[RSTPerformance]

Raymond - is it too simple to say 'eliminate an event or two that DOESN'T make money?'

LRP events (aside from the runoffs) test the waters. Pocono too. If events are making money, then fine. The issue is that some haven't been - and it't not due to great events, just oversupply.


Agreed... but from what I understand regions are not willing to give up races???

Raymond

[TAC]

DB is correct. GLD has an awful regional schedule. 3 champ events in the first 4 weeks of the season then 17 weeks until the next champ event? In between a couple of restricted races mashed into national weekends. The only bright spot is IT-Fest in August.

Compare this to the NASA midwest calendar. Races are pretty much 4 weeks apart, usually the same weekend of the month. Now that's a race schedule.

How do we change our schedule? How do we get a fricking June regional race date? Some region has a to find an available weekend at a track, hopefully not ORP, sign a contract for it and then wait for the fall scheduling meeting? And give up their current date in he meantime, which gets snapped up by someone else?

I completely disagree with jjanos. I think the incoherent image we put out with a hodge podge of registration methods, results postings (if done at all), etc does hurt attendance.

I don't understand why we don't have a page at the national level with online registration, entry lists, results, protest results, pictures, video, lap times, blogs, etc. Sure, you can post your video on myscca, but who goes there? Even if you do, you can't easily see all the video from a certain race, it's a mess.

As several people have pointed out, people want to race at events with lots of other people in their class. We need a place to see who is registered so we know we are not gong to be the only car in class And an organized national results page would help novices understand that there really are people out there racing in regional races. Lack of visibility is killing us. The days are long gone when a tiny region can mimeograph some entry forms and send them snail mail.

I invite all drivers to sit in on their fall divisional meetings to see just how crazy scheduling can be. In the Nov. GLDiv. meeting the tentative schedule had a Champ Series Double Regional in each month plus the I.T.Fest. By the end of the meeting 1 hour later, there was the I.T.Fest sitting in the middle of the calendar and not a Double Regional between Memorial Day and Labor Day.

[jumbojimbo]

I invite all drivers to sit in on their fall divisional meetings to see just how crazy scheduling can be. In the Nov. GLDiv. meeting the tentative schedule had a Champ Series Double Regional in each month plus the I.T.Fest. By the end of the meeting 1 hour later, there was the I.T.Fest sitting in the middle of the calendar and not a Double Regional between Memorial Day and Labor Day.

Whoops, this is in the NE forum so I gues we are way into highjack territory here. But let's continue anyway although it sounds like the NE issues are different from the GL issues.

What do you think were the factors that impede GL getting a nice clean schedule with regionals every 5 weeks and nicely spread nationals?

One problem I see is how we make the schedule. It seems regions need to pick dates and sign contracts long before the scheduling roundtable in the fall. How can a region pick a date and sign a contract without knowing if that date will be allowed on the schedule. I could be wrong in how this actually works, but it seems like a chicken and egg problem. In June a region can't schedule a race next year, in Nov we cry and moan at the poor dates regions have as options. How can we make a schedule in Nov when the dates are already set or tracks are already booked and we have no options?

I think it is odd how in the NE discussion there is talk of cutting the races that don't make money. That doesn't seem to be an option in GLD. Either people saying such things in NE don't know what they are talking about, or NE is different from GLD. In GLD it is nobody's business except the orgainizing region whether a race makes money. And it is the regions decision whether to organize a race a not. So in GLD an unprofitable race can drag on for years before it dies.

But, the problem is that if a race dies, it dies permanently. That date is lost and our schedule shrinks forever. Once a date at a track is given up it is quickly sucked up by NASA, BMW,etc. Even the opening of a new track like Bluegrass has not added any dates to our schedule. Perhaps it will next year, maybe Indy will put on both a regional and a national like they used to do. If so, do they need to reserve a date now with the track? And they that date will either get approved or not in Nov?

I'm curious what you think the other factors are in the ugly GLD race schedule. What causes this year after year and why is it getting worse?

[dickita15]

I think it is odd how in the NE discussion there is talk of cutting the races that don't make money. That doesn't seem to be an option in GLD. Either people saying such things in NE don't know what they are talking about, or NE is different from GLD. In GLD it is nobody's business except the orgainizing region whether a race makes money.

It’s pretty easy to tell what events are covering their costs. We (the different regions) all deal with pretty much the same stuff. Lime Rock had astronomical rents, Pocono always struggles with car counts. Summit and NHMS have fair expense and a decent base of local regular entrants. The Glen is expensive to race but still attracts decent car counts. The only track in the NE corridor I have could not predict how the regions are doing in Millville because it is so new.
The problem is with the economic downturn and a 10-20% drop in entries events that were cutting it close will this year be big losers.

[jumbojimbo]

I'm not saying you can't figure out if the regions are making money, but what are you going to do about it? Unless NE works differently than GLD it is the region's problem whether the race makes money. The division can't just say "oh, you're not making money you're out."

I will say this: if you are making money and someone else can figure that out then the track can figure it out and guess what is going to happen to your track fee?

My understanding is that a few years ago in GLD there was a desire to push the little regions out of the racing business. There was a proposed rule that in order to organize a race the region had to supply X% of workers for the race. Essentially cutting out the little regions. Then the idea was changed to the region having to supply X% of the chiefs. Which turned out to be pointless since many of the little regions include more than their share of worker chiefs. I have no clue if any rule was ever implemented. And I have no clue how seriously the above ideas were taken. But if ideas like this were considered, it points to how hard it is to simply deny a race to a region because you don't want the region to have a race.

It defintely is a problem if there are races that don't make money, race that don't attract a lot of cars. I don't necessarily think that a little race that only attracts 70 entries is costing other races 70 entries because I don't think that everyone who goes to the little race would enter another race if that little race was not put on.

But little races do drag down all the other races because the perception is that racing is dying, that entries are decreasing. When a race only has 10 cars in a group people begin to fear that the next race is going to be the same and they start to wonder if it is worthwhile to go. So they don't pre-register, the entry list shows 40 cars 2 weeks before the event and noone else wants to enter because there aren't any entries.

[seckerich]

Dave-

Your on to something... I remember an event a couple years ago at watkins Glenn that did something to promote FV and they had something like 40+ cars entered.

I think IT is where it needs to be, the regions need to do something to attract the other classes to the events... Maybe an open wheel enduro? Maybe a vintage/production car featured race and car show? The focus probably shouldn't be on IT, Bob and others have already done what was needed to get those groups out racing... We (the IT group) tend to look at penalizing other groups for low attendance which will only pushpeople away, instead we should be looking at ways to reward those for showing up... After all isn't that one reason IT and sm/ssm has grown? We have double dipping, team di proit, enduros, etc.

Andy- I agree with your less races = greater demand argument but what reagon is willing to give up a money making race to encourage people to run other less popular events? We need one organization managing the events so that the "correct" choices are made.

Raymond

Raymond

Any race weekend that caters and markets to a specific group usually developes a big turnout. Look at the production festival at VIR hosted by NC region. What you need to learn from that is racers get bored running alone, or in small groups, and seek out the races with more competition. Listen to the customer (the paying racers) and give them what they want. Might be time for some smaller regions to host one large race together and share the expenses. Time to get creative and survive.

[gran racing]

The IT Fest is an excellent example of a region putting on a particularly amazing event. Lots of little things such as having stewards driving around the paddock asking how things are going and if there's anything else they could do to help. I think that's the only event where I've ever experienced something like that. I know it takes more work to put together an event like that but it also draws quite a number of racers who are willing to travel in order to participate in it.