IT National? Anyone else have this experience at a driver's meeting this year?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt

When you say the 'rules'...do you mean the ACTUAL rules or 'how the game had to be played in order to win'?

---

both. Spec Tires happened the year it went national, although that might've happened anyway. Weight gets thrown at the runoffs winner for pretty much every class every year. Compliance Fee has been added. Cam specs have changed a few times. track width rule has now changed. and on and on and on.....

Quote:

---

Understand that I fully know that nothing would change in my program to do so as I run in an area where you have to be on your A-game, with A-prep and A-equipment to win. Heck, 2 of the last 4 ARRC winning cars in ITA are cars I have raced against week in and week out. Understand that I fully understand it WOULD effect other areas in a much different way.

---

i think you guys are lying to yourself when you think you have "100%" builds and that because you race in the big bad NE, that you wouldn't have to change anything in your "program" to remain competitive. especially with this new ECU rule, dyno time is going to be of great importance, and there really is no limit that i can see where parts development stops.

i don't want IT going National on its own because i've seen first hand, and experienced what happens. but i would be ok with it if the regional/national distinction went away and the top 24 go to the show because i think it addresses larger issues within the club.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt

The only thing I see 'broken' with IT is that we can't run for a National Championship...and I would like that chance.

---

I'm not certain whether this is in jest or not, but, in otherwords and with all due respect, this is all about what you want and to hell with whether it is good for the club, the regions and the category?

1. Identify the problem - what is currently damaging IT?
2. Does the treatment actually cure the ailment?
3. Are the side effects of the treatment more damaging than the ailment?

At this point, you haven't even satisfied condition #1 let alone demonstrated the effectiveness of the treatment or shown that the outcome will be a Pareto improvement.

For example, this is going to hurt car counts. National drivers run to qualify for the Runoffs and once they have a lock, the car gets parked to save it. IT drivers not running for a championship have no reason to park the car. IT drivers running for a region or division based championship have to run MORE races. MARRS has 9 races this year and in a well-subscribed class, you pretty much need to run in at least 7 of them to have a hope of a top three placement. In Nationals, it's 6 at most because that is all that counts and many drivers don't need to do more the 4.

I'm sorry, but I see this both as an attempt by National at a cheap fix for what they shattered and another Heartland Park deal. Topeka and many of the National Categories have rules crept themselves into irrelevance and instead of addressing the cracks in that foundation, they want a cheap fix by adding IT. I also think that it won't matter what IT drivers want regarding this. The "committee" is going to be stacked and National is going to give IT National status regardless of the member input.

Trav - the members wanted Spec tires. Weights change every year in classes that allow comp adjustments, compliance fee added because members wanted a more in depth tech, cam specs never CHANGED, they just got published. These changes aren't a result of a class going National, they are a result of member driven input, just like in IT.

JJJ - VERY fair question. I am only representing my opinion when I say what I like and don't like about IT. I feel I can counter all of your 'it's going to be a bad thing' with how it could be a good thing.

Unfortunately, I think the IT ruleset would really bring in a lot of drivers who want to run Nationally. Read Josh's post. He know what is going on over teh other side of the fence. Maybe if IT poached enough drivers from classes people really don't want to be running, we would lose less members to NASA and the PTB would have the ammunition to kill those classes for good and put the time into developing some classes that could be more popular than 2 H-prod cars at a National.

Just beacuse there is no open wound to put a band-aid on is no reason to not go to the gym and try and build on a good foundation.

Your points about what a National driver does to qualify for the RO's are spot on. I believe this must be addressed across all classes before National racing can be successful again. I know the PTB are working on it.

It's a shame that some think the SCCA is using IT to bolster revenues. If you don't want to run Nationals, don't. Your program won't change and they won't get your money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt

The only thing I see 'broken' with IT is that we can't run for a National Championship...and I would like that chance. .

---

So Andy, if the national recognition is important why haven't you been to the ARRC or the IT fest at Mid-O? Those events along with the ITTC would bring big recognition. There is the oportunity to go 'national' in IT.

R

I'm not picking on anyone specific and yes there is some jealousy in this statement, but the people that are really pushing for a National IT are people that have multi car teams and have a MUCH higher then avg budget towards these cars, even if they are IT. There are still quite a few IT drivers out there that touch the car maybe 4 to 5 times in a winter to get ready for the year, don't spend days on a dyno, don't spend $10-$50/gal for fuel, don't buy more than 6-8 tires a year, don't spend $400 a wheel in Volks, don't have a $5k motor with a spare fully built $5k non junk yard motor in the trailer, and still would like to be a little higher than mid pack. Maybe not contesting for the win, because we know there are the people that will do what's listed above, but there are far less of them and still a chance they could go off or not finish. Make IT national and you are going to have to do what's listed above just to stand a chance at 10th.

I don't see anything wrong with IT now. I'm kinda against the IT Triple Crown for the reasons listed above, but you make IT National and the sponsorship money starts flowing, us lowly self sponsored people are really going to lose our taste for the "fun". I'll let you know now that my office has "helped" me a bit this year and there are times that I look at the problems I'm having and say, "you know, if so and so wasn't helping me, I would just take a little break." You feel a need to make your best showing always and because of that mentality the fun starts to go away. I got into IT racing because it was Regional, I liked the rules, and it was just fun. Please let's not ruin the fun. I know there are quite a few other Grassroots IT racers that feel the same way.

This issue is serious enough, and effects all of us, such that it should be done by a vote of all IT racers. Decision by committee on this one is not the right way to go about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt

Trav - the members wanted Spec tires. Weights change every year in classes that allow comp adjustments, compliance fee added because members wanted a more in depth tech, cam specs never CHANGED, they just got published. These changes aren't a result of a class going National, they are a result of member driven input, just like in IT.

---

cam specs did change in the middle of the 2006 season.

actually, i think the changes are a result of going national, it's just not as easy to see. if it wasn't for the whole national thing, you wouldn't have people pushing the envolope to and beyond the limit, and i'm sure this will be a controversial statement, but i think people care less about compliance in a regional series.

the compliance fee happened as a result of the $7000 motors and crazy development of everything on the car creating huge gaps between the regular guys and the fat wallets. this gap led to the perception of cheating and everyone calling for more tech, and we ended up at the compliance fee (which isn't working for sh*t).

the changes may be driven by member input, but the member input would be different if it wasn't a national class.

and now to get out the tin-hat....we wouldn't have the whole clusterf*ck of 99+ cars in the class if SM wasn't predestined to be National from the start. ya know the 5year rule in IT? i wouldn't count on that sticking around. remember, the CRB can still do whatever it wants above the ITAC, and Albin can't stop it by himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doc Bro

So Andy, if the national recognition is important why haven't you been to the ARRC or the IT fest at Mid-O? Those events along with the ITTC would bring big recognition. There is the oportunity to go 'national' in IT.

R

---

A combination of a few things but neither of those are a recognized National Championship...they are just the best we have to offer because there is no NC.

(Edit: timing and money are the REAL reasons I haven't gone so far...the same reason I wouldn't have gone to a NC in past years. This year I am going to the ITFest and as money allows, the ARRC...but a real SCCA National Championship is what I would want.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffYoung

This issue is serious enough, and effects all of us, such that it should be done by a vote of all IT racers. Decision by committee on this one is not the right way to go about it.

---

And understand this is way over the ITAC's head. If you fee like you need to weigh in, PLEASE do so to the CRB. As with any letter, try and state your desire and back it up as best you can so they have something to sink their teeth into.

Andy, we will have to agree to disagree.

I think you guys want a Runoffs appearence so bad that you are looking past some of the bad. And in bad I mean for the class as a whole.
IT has been as successful as it is because of several factors.
1. There is not the National body fiddle factor involved. (S McMasters warned of this from the beginning of SM)
2. No Nat. Champ (Runofffs) to make you have to save your car, therefore you run more events because YOU LIKE TO RACE.
3. People run IT because they like it or the type car they race.
4. (Part of four) Guys who are RUNOFFS hunting don't race IT (Go National and $$$$$$ will be spent to win....you will spend them too. It will raise most all racers cost of competition.)
5. There are lots more reason it is a success story, and none of them are BECAUSE you can run IT at the RUNOFFS.

AS this seams to be a hot topic what say we hear from a few more of the ITAC.

Also, if there is a majority of the ITAC who want to take IT down the National "Primrose" path, please get it out so we know....... Because I don't agree doesn't mean I am mad, it will just save my fingers!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt

they are just the best we have to offer because there is no NC.

---

And what is wrong with that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spnkzss

I'm not picking on anyone specific and yes there is some jealousy in this statement, but the people that are really pushing for a National IT are people that have multi car teams and have a MUCH higher then avg budget towards these cars, even if they are IT. There are still quite a few IT drivers out there that touch the car maybe 4 to 5 times in a winter to get ready for the year, don't spend days on a dyno, don't spend $10-$50/gal for fuel, don't buy more than 6-8 tires a year, don't spend $400 a wheel in Volks, don't have a $5k motor with a spare fully built $5k non junk yard motor in the trailer, and still would like to be a little higher than mid pack. Maybe not contesting for the win, because we know there are the people that will do what's listed above, but there are far less of them and still a chance they could go off or not finish. Make IT national and you are going to have to do what's listed above just to stand a chance at 10th.

.

---

I'm quoting this passage, but my response is not to the writer, but more general.

I'm a guy who knows the results blues. You get them when you finish 6th or so in a class of 25, but, over time, more and more of the "hot car" show up, and you slide down to 8th or 10th average finishes. Hey, that's life. To me, 6th? it's ok, and so is 10th. But lets face it, neither are good, much less great.

but, you have to look at things in perspective....

If you know you aren't doing the full prep thing, and you get beaten by those that are, so what? What's it matter if you finish 7th or 10th? Listen, I have plenty of finishes like that, so don't take this the wrong way, but really, 7th? 10th? who cares!? Did you have a good race with the 8th place guy? Did you beat a better car? If you say you're racing for "fun" on one hand, you can't turn around and complain about your actual position on the other....

Now, I hear jjjjanos going on about how IT HAS a National championship, and others who say that IT doesn't need the Runoffs, what they have is fine.

And having been to the ARRCs now many times, as a driver and a crew, and to the inaugural IT-Fest, I can tell you that those are great events, and the competition is stout, and the racing good. More should attend.

But they won't. At least not to the ARRCs, because it's just not worth the haul, the time, and the money for those who are a long way away. It's just not the same prestige as the Runoffs. We Northeasterners are the exception...you don't see a lot from the upper middle, and really nothing from the Rockies and west. I've talked to a lot of IT guys, and if they had a chance to go to the Ruboffs, and be on TV, that travel distance shrinks pretty quickly.

Don't get me wrong...the ARRC organizers and the IT-Fest committee have done, and are doing a GREAT job, and the IT Championship thing is a GREAT thing for IT...but if IT goes the the Runoffs, you will see full fields, and some of the best races all week.

Finally, from a marketing standpoint, I don't think the SCCA could do anything better for participation and membership than making IT run at the Runoffs. The ruleset is very attractive to the average racer wanna be, there are cars he and she can identify with, and the races will look great on TV. For the club as a whole, its a powerful tool gone unused for years.

If IT goes National the character of the class is sure to change. Rule creep and high dollar builds have already made IT less appealing as an entry level class. National status is sure to expand the expensive end of the IT spectrum and leave beginners and low budget racers farther behind. It would be another big step toward becoming the new "Production" class and a step away form the role in the club that it has served so well for years.

I think the real problem is not that Improved Touring lacks National status, but rather that there isn't a good next step beyond IT for the racer who aspires to the Runoffs and National competition. The Production or Prepared classes should serve this role but their rule makers have made little effort at making these classes accessible to IT drivers who want to "Move up".

As it is, Improved Touring is too good of a class to screw up in an effort to fix the problems of the club's National Program.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Broring

If IT goes National the character of the class is sure to change. Rule creep and high dollar builds have already made IT less appealing as an entry level class. National status is sure to expand the expensive end of the IT spectrum and leave beginners and low budget racers farther behind. It would be another big step toward becoming the new "Production" class and a step away form the role in the club that it has served so well for years.

I think the real problem is not that Improved Touring lacks National status, but rather that there isn't a good next step beyond IT for the racer who aspires to the Runoffs and National competition. The Production or Prepared classes should serve this role but their rule makers have made little effort at making these classes accessible to IT drivers who want to "Move up".

As it is, Improved Touring is too good of a class to screw up in an effort to fix the problems of the club's National Program.

---

I know this may be WAY out there, and DEFINITELY not something done over night, but I think you are kind of right that there isn't a place for IT cars to go except production and there are quite a few things much more appealing about IT then production. What about making a place for IT cars to go. Keeping with the "stock" mentality. No tube chassis, but maybe allow the RR shocks with 4 way adjustments and little things that IT doesn't find ok. Maybe even make it run by the same IT committee, but a Nationally recognized set of classes. An IT car could go run in these classes, but a full built XX car couldn't come back because it would be illegal.

Keeping the same IT mindset, but straying away from comp adjustments that Prod lives on. I know it's vague, it would need a HUGE expansion, but seriously. Why not? Let guys like Andy (not picking on you) just bolt a couple extra go fast goodies onto his ITA Miata making your IT car faster and a National class. Win, win , win in my opinion.

I stress again, that it is my personal opinion, not the ITAC's. This is not an ITAC issue, it's CRB and BoD currently. Please send in your opinions to the CRB.

My net position is that I love IT and I want to have the ability to run for a true NC in IT. I don't think it will have a net negative effect on the class given the way the rules are set up. Opinions vary and good arguements abound on both sides. We can agree to disagree, I just think most are looking at this from a very local persepctive. I guess we would hav eto white-board the ideas on how it effects SCCA as a whole.

>> I got into IT racing because it was Regional, I liked the rules, and it was just fun. Please let's not ruin the fun. ...

I'm trying to understand how National status would change things for someone with this goal. Help?

K

Quote:

---

too many classes = thin grids for everyone

---

Going along with what Travis said, we’ve already learned that too many racing events = thin grids for multiple regions. More options sometimes can have a negative impact especially with how things have been going with our economy.

Quote:

---

I just don't see anything broke about IT that this would fix.

---

That’s the thing Vaughan, I don’t see this as something being done to fix or help IT but rather other Club Racing issues. Right now IT is the best it has ever been. When we take a look at the classes and the various makes/models that could potentially win races, it’s pretty amazing. I think the majority of us will agree this will have a big impact on the IT category, whether or not that will be a good thing is obviously quite debatable and depends upon ones perspective. People have worked very hard to get IT to where it is today, and now we’ll jeopardize it?

Quote:

---

My desire to build, maintain and race a car with the ruleset and cars I think are the best fit for me - for a SCCA National Championship.

---

Andy, don’t we (including the ITAC) often say that people chose the cars they race in IT and should know what they’re getting including the good and bad when making the decision? Why is choosing the category we race in any different? It’s not.

Quote:

---

Your definition of dilution is someone elses definition of having a chance to win...

---

This dilution is much broader than simply one person’s ability to run with a lesser competitive field.

I do not like splitting the category into two – either it’s national or it’s not. Let’s say IT is made into both National and Regional. Many of us including myself would be very torn where to do our racing and due to budget constraints, the answer couldn’t be doing them all.

In one sense I’d like to race in the national races where the competition is high. On the other hand I have friends who I know wouldn’t be racing in National events, so maybe I’d do that instead? There’s a social impact on this decision as well. I will also agree with what others have said in regards to thinning out the participation numbers among National & Regional.

Quote:

---

simply because it's not a National class and there's no official national championship to strive for.

---

Thinking of this from a club’s perspective, that’s okay as long as they’re racing with SCCA. I’m not convinced it’s a bad thing that some people are motivated to race in other categories because they want the perceived prestige (I can’t even name one Runoffs champion). One category can’t be all things to all people nor should we try to make it that way.

Quote:

---

Finally, from a marketing standpoint, I don't think the SCCA could do anything better for participation and membership than making IT run at the Runoffs. The ruleset is very attractive to the average racer wanna be, there are cars he and she can identify with, and the races will look great on TV. For the club as a whole, its a powerful tool gone unused for years.

---

Since you reminded me of my bondo explosion yesterday, how cool would that have been to capture on TV? LOL Yeah, the IT races will look great on TV at 2 a.m. I will agree it has the potential of being a powerful tool if used properly, but the club would also need to be very careful it doesn’t ruin a great thing it has.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ddewhurst

Seperate subject

To those who created the SECOND Triple Crown (ITTC), are you not aware the CenDiv has had a Triple Crown for National level drivers for several years. Win your Division, win the Sprints & win a National Championship.

---

We were aware, have always thought highly of the concept and wanted to provide IT drivers the same oppurtunity hence the IT Triple Crown. We just hope everyone here will support and participate in this series whatever the outcome of the subject of this thread should be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spnkzss

... What about making a place for IT cars to go. Keeping with the "stock" mentality. ...

---

It's old content but we kicked around ideas for a thing we called "Modified Touring" - more at http://www.it2.evaluand.com/compare.php3

Or what if "National IT" were the same exact rules applied to cars newer than the current 5-year rule allows? Make the eligibility the inverse of the Regional rules (i.e., a car ages OUT of National status only as it ages INTO Regional status)...

Just thinking outside the box.

K

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy Bettencourt

Unfortunately, I think the IT ruleset would really bring in a lot of drivers who want to run Nationally. Read Josh's post. He know what is going on over teh other side of the fence. Maybe if IT poached enough drivers from classes people really don't want to be running, we would lose less members to NASA and the PTB would have the ammunition to kill those classes for good and put the time into developing some classes that could be more popular than 2 H-prod cars at a National.

---

1. Perhaps, perhaps not. Show me the market research/polling data that demonstrates or indicates current non-SCCA drivers will move to SCCA.
2. Poaching from Prod/etc - Expound upon how this helps the Club while addressing the potential ill-effects of alienating the remaining prod drivers. E.g. Describe how a prod-IT war similar to the open-wheel/IT war will not be waged.
3. Poaching from Prod - Have a hard time reconciling how someone attracted to the anything goes lifestyle of production will be satisfied with the limited tinkering of IT simply because it offers a national championship. I know of several prod drivers who race only in regionals and who simply like to tinker. Nationalizing IT will not change that.
4. Poach from NASA? NASA, for all practical purposes, doesn't run IT. It's all mods and whether the newer Cochran warp drive should give you enough points to go to PT1 or PT2 and what about that cloaking device? Just how many points is that worth? Me thinks that the sort of person who is enamored with such tinkering is neither going to be interested by IT nor would be welcome in IT without an attitude adjustment.
5. Killing classes - the solution is known. What is lacking is the fortitude. I'd rather that Topeka and the rule setting bodies of these classes grow their own set rather than borrow a pair from IT.

Quote:

---

Just beacuse there is no open wound to put a band-aid on is no reason to not go to the gym and try and build on a good foundation.

---

True, but the first thing one is suppose to do is get a physical to determine whether you can start the workout program. I refer you back to the 3 steps I gave earlier.

Quote:

---

Your points about what a National driver does to qualify for the RO's are spot on. I believe this must be addressed across all classes before National racing can be successful again. I know the PTB are working on it.

---

Well, my mama always taught me that before you invite guests over, you need to clean house. I think that lesson applies here. Before they invite IT over for dinner, Topeka needs to clean house in the National program because I'm 100% opposed to entering into a sty.

Quote:

---

It's a shame that some think the SCCA is using IT to bolster revenues. If you don't want to run Nationals, don't. Your program won't change and they won't get your money.

---

It's a shame that Denver/Topeka has made decisions that furthered its interests over that of the Regions'. It's a shame that Denver/Topeka has proven so pliant to the demands/interest/whims of "connected" drivers and the National program at the expense of the Regions/Regional Racing. It's a shame that Denver/Topeka has left the impression, rightly or wrongly, that Regional racing is simply a cross they must carry to have a National Program and the Runoffs (tm). I.e. Don't blame us because we have a well-earned sense of cynicism when it comes to Topeka/National Racing and how they are here to "help" us. They can pick up their own bar of soap, thank you very much and I'd appreciate it if the BoD walked in-front of me.