are posted:
http://www.scca.com/clubracing/content.cfm?cid=44472
Printable View
So, IT remains regional only for the foreseeable future...
Am I the only one who has trouble opening SCCA PDFs in Google Chrome? They never seem to work for me, but will in IE.
I have the same problem. Save to your download folder and open from there.
If you want to disable Chrome's built-in PDF reader and use whatever is the default for your PC instead (like Adobe or Primo, etc) check here:
http://superuser.com/questions/39555...ader-in-chrome
That was a fairly emphatic FU from the CRB. Sure IT cars can run in ST. Hell, they can run in Prod. The chance of running at the front is zero if there's more than 3 cars running. Kirk's request was just for the *possibility* of IT becoming a national class and they couldn't even do that.
David
Since a couple of people asked why I "wanted to make IT national," I should share that the question was frankly intended to get exactly this result.
With the advent of the Majors program, an initial (and arguably successful) year of the IT National Tour, and conversations about ST perking along, it just seemed like an appropriate time to affirm the intentions of the CRB vis-a-vis the IT category.
I had exactly ZERO expectation that the prohibition would be removed, even though it still doesn't make any sense in the big scheme of things.
Among us chickens, I think the CRB has pretty much confirmed their view of the irrelevance of IT to the future of Club Racing.
K
A bit melodramatic. Fixed for you.
I'm quite certain that the CRB is well aware of the value of Improved Touring to Club Racing as a whole; only a fool would suggest otherwise. All that happened here is they affirmed that they like where it is now and do not wish to add it to the National racing program.
GA
Fixed yours. I'm not certain the CRB knows which way is up. What is certain is that anyone who had hopes of IT becoming a national class and going to the Runoffs in IT will now move to another class or leave SCCA all together. Either way it's a loss for IT.
David
....were not reading the rules. That verbiage has been in there since the class was created in 1985, and it has been affirmed by the CRB many times over the last nearly 3 decades -- twice in response to emails from me.
Sorry, no empathy.
Kirk is a close friend of mine but I see his request, and all the others that followed it, as nothing more than a non-sincere attempt to throw a stink bomb into the room and get people all upset. Again. And that's verified by Kirk's admission above that, for all intents and purposes, he knew it wasn't going to work and all he wanted to do was throw a stink bomb in the room and get people all upset.
Looks like it's working.
GA
What's that smell?
Kirk's stink bomb.
In all seriousness, now that the CRB has officially confirmed again that it will never go National/Majors, I am sad. Near term for me: kids; long term car classification: who knows. So sad.
1. Whether you support IT being Ruboffs-eligible , it is disappointing and mildly insulting that the CRB did not even put it into the what do you think section.
2. Seems to me that the CRB is being marginalized by the BoD in regards to the future of Club Racing. They essentially said that everything to do with the Majors Program is out of their hands.
Not intended to be a stink bomb at all.
Some things were changing and rumors were bubbling up suggesting that the regional/national distinction might change on the heels of the Majors introduction. ST has SUBSTANTIALLY changed the context around IT. Greg can confirm that I shared that opinion with him on our VIR 13 trip. The SS and Touring rules are in major flux.
With everything spinning around IT as it has been for the past 18 months or so, affirmation that something is *not* going to change is as important to members' planning for future seasons as getting confirmation of a rule change.
Yeah, I'm sad about it too because I think that intransigence on the part of a few has compromised what IT could have been. With just a tiny number of exceptions (FVee?) NO category has survived since the mid-'80s without pretty major changes. When motivated, the PTBs can change (or ignore) any GCR rule. IT is Regional-only NOW for reasons completely unrelated to the existence of that one line in the book but that truly doesn't matter. What does matter is that we're all clear what the category will NOT be moving forward.
At this point, I'm not building another IT car, even as I have no powerful motivation to run Nationals/Majors.
K
Times change. You of all people know IT is not what it was when it was started. I think there are a lot of people that would like to be able to compete at the Runoffs in IT and held out hope that the CRB/BoD would entertain that idea. Some people have no desire for the increased modifications that moving to Prod or ST entails. I see the requests as an attempt to ascertain if things were any different within SCCA than before. The resounding answer is no. IT is still one of the strongest categories in SCCA and deserves better treatment than it gets. I think this just re-affirms what the people running the show think of IT. How that translates into IT car counts only time will tell.
David
I can see both sides. I know the CRB had. at the time I was on the ITAC, reservations.
-One was a tech issue with old cars that couldn't be documented properly winning the Ruboffs. (there were solutions proposed, none were accepted)
-Another was the fact that IT sets weights via the Process, and the CRB was loath to allow that into the Ruboffs without dictatorship control (competition adjustments) over weights should some car dominate. (We were, at the time, told to give the 'grand experiment' some time regarding the Process and it could be revisited)
- And there were real concerns that it would hurt Regional car counts, that people would run reduced schedules saving up for the big trip to the Ruboffs, and IT and the Regions pocketbooks would suffer.
All of these issues were brought up, I should add, not as a response to any official business or request, but as side conversations on ITAC /CRB con calls, often occuring before or after the actual business of the call happened. Lots of guys on the ITAC never heard any of this.....
That, I will grant you, Prof. Though it's an answer that was never really up to question until you brought it up. We've both queried over the years in regards to National status for Improved Touring (the latest, prior to this one immediately before a current CRB member finally said, in effect, "Fine, eff it, let's create a new class to get around this. Pass me a Crown") and the answer has always been the same: "No".
That, my friend, is a self-evident truth. I'd argue that the REASON IT has lasted as long as it has without major changes is EXCLUSIVELY due to its Regional Status. Hell, Spec Miata lasted about 32 microseconds before the competition adjustments crept in. Crap, it's already starting in Super Touring Light...Quote:
With just a tiny number of exceptions (FVee?) NO category has survived since the mid-'80s without pretty major changes.
It may seem Bourgeosie or self-important, but I've personally come to believe that Improved Touring is better off with its Regional-Only status. I keep coming back to ITx each time I venture into National racing because of what it is.
But more likely, I keep coming back to Improved Touring mostly because of what it isn't.
GA
If IT went "National" or whatever the name is and the CRB got more involved than they already are things would get much much worse for IT... Currently we do not have a great class structure in SCCA "national racing" and things seem to constantly get added/changed around, I would hate to see that happen to IT.
While I agree IT should be national, I also don't think it works right now. It would only work if it was part of a simple class structure for sedan type cars (IT, Touring, Prod, GT & a few specialty classes such as AS & SM). I think that for now SCCA needs to keep things how they are if a class is working, and in a few years if things get a bit better organized re-look at it... Not to mention if an Audi won the Runoffs the entire club would fall apart ;)
Raymond "All other negative CRB comments edited out of my reply!" Blethen
Now that I'm running Nationals/Majors, and in one of the classes that isn't SM/SM-Lite/Prod SM/GT SM, I'm definitely moving more and more in the direction of "leave IT alone and be glad"... serving on two rule advisory subcommittees isn't doing much to impair that, either...
While there's no way of controlling costs in racing, it is possible to make some of those with big bucks feel like it's not as cool or prestigious. Not being a national class does this for many. I really do not believe that as being a bad thing. Yeah, there are a fair share of IT cars with big bucks in them but it's not nearly as prevalent as it would be if IT went national IMO.
We need a category where the average Joe can look at and think building or buying a car is relatively attainable, then can go racing and not get their asses totally handed to them due to everyone else outspending them. IT still serves as this critical place for the Club.
Be careful of what you wish for.
Reasonable points all, Greg (et al.). Those ideas are a big part of the reason I asked for the "never National" clause to be removed, rather than proposing that IT be granted National status.
I didn't have any interest in trying to convince anyone of anything, and didn't want to rehash all of the various positions on the subject. I just wanted to assess the boards' (CRB and BoD) current position on the POSSIBILITY.
K
One of the things that would happen IMHO is very similar to most all (except maybe SM) National classes, is the top dollar cars go run Nationals and the Regional-level cars run Regionals. After the initial giddiness of the inclusion, the water would find it's level and your 'Joe' would actually be BETTER off as the top stuff would be gone.
The easiest place to restrict cost and cash input in general, is to change the tire rule to a much higher tread wear rating.
Reduce the lap time benefit of brand new tires.
wrong. tire cost would be helpful, but you still need to get things outside of club control like the gas, insurance, rental, etc.. costs down (a huge plus in CFR due to the awesome deals we get with DIS and SIR) and take away the desire to win to drop the costs. if street tires turn out to have a sweet spot on the 3rd through 7th heat cycles (just an example) then you can bet the top guys will have extra track time booked to run in their rubber before a race weekend. that would end up costing MORE than new hohos every weekend. other stuff on the car can cost a ton too - from development to brake parts. Castrol brake fluid costs over $80/bottle. seriously, get over the tires being a magic bullet. they are just an expense. racers will always spend what is avaialble on what they can do to maximize performance within the rules. right now, a guy can run on star specs if he so chooses. if he doesn't want to spend top tier money, he doesn't have to. he wont win, but with that mentality and budget, he wouldn't anyhow.
thats the reality. racing is expensive because everything about racing in this day and age is expensive. if we were running all simple spec cars with general event fees like they were 20 or 30 years ago, yeah, tires might be a huge percentage of the weekend. now they're just another big cost, but not out of proportionally so.
legend cars! did you know they run 11 road course events at nhms! any guess on the entry fee? $30.... top of the line car is less than 15k. 132hp rocket ships. tires last all season!
Stephen
LEGEND CARS!!!!!! Did you know you can buy them at the NHMS in thier own Dealer showroom. And they also have a working shop on race day when you crash.
All this for 30 bucks?
but wait theres more..........
And the class is smart enough to race on 300-400TW tires.
When oval tracks have a hard tire rule , IE "4cyl Box stock", 400TW tires, the class thrives. Some tracks then move to make money from the tires, allowing slicks , etc. The class dies as you need a new tire or two every week. Happens all over the country BTW.
Again, copy success. The hard tire groups are the most successful @ this point in time. Chump 190, lemons 190, legends 300-400( federal 595) Chumps can get 20+hrs out of a set of tires.
1991 My winning stock car used 10 DOT tires for 14 races, (winning 7-8)
1992, my first year of SCCA. The Yokes lasted all year.2 schools, 3 races.
Last weekend @ PBIR, ask around how many Hoosiers were used by the SM. 4 new each day for many..
Tires are a big part of the cost per race.
SCCA cant be afraid to change with the times to be successful. IMHO.
Fun per $ is the key to a successful business model.
That's been my standard response to the "If IT goes National, it will cost everybody more" argument for years now. All you have to do is look at the folks running cars in other categories at Regionals to see it.
My issue with what the CRB said, is essentially what my issue w/ the CRB has been for years. They think they run the show, and they know what is best for the members. If the members want IT to be National-eligible, the CRB's job is to implement the wishes of the membership, not give them the finger.
I would just like to know who is driving it, and what the real motivation behind it is. There is no obvious, objective reason for it.
Um, the CRB does run the show, Bill.
This is not a democracy. It actually is the Club Racing Board's responsibility to determine what is best for Club Racing (not for any specific member or explicit group of members) and implement that action appropriately.
The CRB's authority comes directly from the SCCA's Board of Directors, so if you disagree with their recommendations (all changes of which are explicitly approved by the BoD) then use your power as a club member and make your wishes known to your Board representative.
GA
We can agree to disagree Greg. My take is that the CRB should implement the wishes of the membership in a way that is as equitable to everyone as possible. If the majority of the membership wants IT to be National-eligible, they shouldn't have to go to the extreme of changing the BoD to get that implemented. Especially in a case where the only justification is "Because that's the way we say it's going to be". And I certainly wasn't the only one that saw the CRB's comment as a big FU to the membership.
It's not "disagreement", Bill; it's "fact". That's how the systems works, regardless how you want to "take" it.
And you clicking your heels together three times and wishing really, really hard - or bitching about it on the Internet - ain't gonna change that.
GA
Member driven club? Take a dam IT Nationals poll.
Most IT guys dont/cant, spend the cash to run the 3 day waste of time that the Nationals/Majors are.
The Nationals are set up for the older, non working, rich guys.
They fly in , rent a car , run for points. Not in the IT spirit at all, IMHO.
A few build their own cars.
I've taken a number of polls over the years, some informal via the internet, and some more official. I also asked everyone I could at the tracks I visited during my tenure on the ITAC. Bottom line: ten years ago, about a third of IT drivers wanted National status. The most recent one (now a few years ago) showed a significant shift, over half wanted national status.
I go back and forth on this one... Leaving the CRB out of it, tonight I think if IT went National (the way it is now) it would devide the class into two groups, regional guys/gals and national guys/gals. The major issue being that we now would have 1/2 the fields split between the evens and low car counts would significantly reduce the appeal to people like me. I don't think it would draw more people to the class.
Now if SCCA was smart, everything would just be the same and all races in a region would be eligible (Not necessarily count if you had a caped # races) to earn points towards some sort of regional points champion) and the top "X" amount would be invited to 1 National championship (The Runoffs) for all classes in the GCR.
Raymond "If you think newbies have a hard time understanding the GCR you should ask them about the multiple series that overlap regions and status... I bet they don't have a clue!" Blethen
So what exactly is the difference between Regionals and Nationals again? I get that question, try to explain it, but in the end it's more of a that's just how they did it. For the good of the Club, maybe it's time to end this distinction. Still don't invite everyone to the ruboffs. I know there will be issues and maybe it would be time to consolidate. No simple task for sure!
I was sipping my coffee when I read this. You now owe me one computer screen.
<--- Not old, working, not rich, never flown into or rented a thing, build my own cars & engines in my own shop in my own backyard, and have lots of shiny medals and plaques that say "1st Place" on them. But yes, I have been quilty of running for points, so ya got me there. :023: