Quote:
"Suck it up", Andy?? Way to go, addressing legitimate membership concerns about your proposed policies. If you can't take the criticism, I suggest you consider your motivations and your own personal agenda.
Maybe you'd feel better if all the committees went closed-door again and pronounced their declarations from on high after implementation...?
And as far your paranoid "anti-Miata" fears, there are none. The same argument stands if they're Hondas, or Chevies, or Nissans, or Yugos. It's irrelevant; my "agenda" is nothing more than a desire for parity.[/b]
(On edit - I apologize for that suck it up statement. It just appeared that , like a couple people before you, it was just a 'I hate so many Miata's on the track' sentiment with no real reason why.) Greg, I fail to see a legitimate member concern - at least one that can't be solved at teh Regional level. All it sounds like is "I hate Miata's". Your real concern is finally posted in your post so we can address it.
Quote:
Be that as it may, Dick, the end result is that now these cars - which used to be in one slightly oversubscribed class - are now running multiple classes, further exacerbating the situation. Whereas before they were simply oversubscribed, the addition of another group has encouraged them to dual-enter, making the situation ever moreso, effectively unrecoverable (the genie is out of the bottle now). A good example of unintended consequences, probably something that was not considered when it was done.
Now that SM is National, how do the Regional race group numbers look, if you took the time to go through the entries and remove doubles? Would it still be 2X, or would you find that without the doubles the class would fit real nice back into its own race group? Check the pre-race stats for the upcoming LRP event: six SSMs entered, of which three are also entered in SM. Total group count with ITC: 11. Total count for SM group: 9. Total cars allowed on the track at LRP: 40?
If we found that at all races were we to combine the groups and remove the double entries, that it would still fit nicely, would there be a consderation to do so? Or, would we simply look at the total entry count without considering the doubles, see it oversubscribes the class, and continue to have extra groups?
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of increased entries and giving folks the ability for extra track time. What I don't like is it being done for only selected groups of people, and not giving that same opportunity to everyone, while possibly reducing track time for everyone else due to the additional race group. - GA [/b]
So good stuff in these paragraphs. As far as unintended consequenses, I am betting that they were not considered when this was done - but the result is a nice boon in revenue for the Region...and as of right now, no detraction from your - or my - weekend. Win.
Quote:
I don't know why some people still cling to the initial concept of IT2, when it wasn't that long after Kirk first proposed the idea, that some of the limitations (no RWD) went away. I agree w/ Kirk, ITA today is pretty much what IT2 was operationalized to. If you look at all the cars in the ITCS as a continuum, the band known as "ITA" was shifted towards a higher performance level. I don't know if the band was widened or narrowed, but it was definately shifted.
Also, I don't think any of the proponents of a formulaic approach to classification ever thought a 'hard and fast' formula was the answer (or that it would even work). I know I didn't. What it was about, was having an objective model that treated all cars the same. And, in the event of an anomoly, you could recognize it.
[/b]
Bill,