I just realized that by posting this in an existing long thread, my post will soon be buried. Thus I am moving it to a new thread. I will also bring forward the other answer that applies to the subject.
OK, this is my first post on the IT forum.
I, along with Robin Langlotz and Buddy Matthews, wrote the ECR rules and have made up the ECR Committee since the Division adopted the series. We have watched the series closely and changed the rules as needed when needed.
Well, Robin and I have spoke several nights ago and we think ECR needs a big fix or it is going to die. This year the payout is only about 1/2 what it was in 2006 and the number of registered entrants is painfully low. As a matter of fact, no driver in ITA bothered to join the series and the more than $1000 that went into ITA is not being paid out to anyone.
I am going to share with you what Robin and I feel should happen to ECR. I haven't heard from Buddy yet and I will share with you what his response is when I receive it. Robin and I feel that ECR needs to become structured like the SARRC series. No longer will drivers be required to sign up to accumulate points, just enter the race. Points will be structured like SARRC and a driver will be able to count his best six finishes. Entries in races will have to declare the driver receiving the points when there are multi drivers. We plan to ask the race regions to make all their enduros that are more than 1 hour ECR's for SEDIv points. Example, FES & CCP races of more than 1 hour would be counted for Divison ECR points.
At the same time, there will no longer be any $$ payouts, only Jackets and plaques similar to SARRC. The region would have to pay $5 per entry into the ECR trophy fund per entry.
We agreed that ECR should remain for the classes as they are now but the regions can include additional classes in their race if they wish as long as they do not displace the ECR classes. We also discussed some simplification for the pit stop procedure but that needs to further discussed internally to see if it can work.
I am sure there are some other details such as the ECR Stewards that will need to be worked out, but I wanted to get this out and hear from some of you. I'm going to be leaving town Dec 27th for the Morosso Double SARRC and then am going to attend the Sebring and Homestead National. I will watch what is posted here. You can also email me direct as you can Robin or Buddy. Our email addresses are located on the ECR website which links from www.sedivracing.org.
IT And ECR mean a lot to me since I had sat in on the original IT rules making meetings and then raced my ITS 240 Z in the first couple of years of ECR. Heck, I even won the Championship. I think it cost me $15,000 to win a $1000, but it was worth every penny.
This is an answer posted by Grafton Robertson that has many good points.
1. I agree with the main point, eliminate the cash award. We don't race for money, it costs far more for a championship effort than is ever won back at the end of the season. Copy the SARRC awards and funding structure (I would suggest up to two jackets per class champion though).
2. fix ECR 7.9 - any race which does not run the full scheduled duration should not count for points. The current rule (implemented 2007) allows the race to be stopped at any time and still count for points. GCR 6.7.5.A specifies that the race count for championship points only after half of the scheduled time or distance has been completed. In either case it is highly likely that some, but not all, of the competitors will have completed their required pit stop(s), at which point the remaining cars must be penalized for not taking the required stop(s). This can drastically affect the finishing order (as shown at Sebring 2006) and award high points to competitors who would not have otherwise earned them. This may impact season standing since the final margins are often quite small (as actually occurred in 2006). It is better that these races not count at all.
3. Firm deadlines must be established for posting of audited provisional results, final results, and points after any event. This year's performance was beyond abysmal, need I say more? I will gladly volunteer to help with this, and will understand if any competitor wants to double check the findings.
Before I propose changes to the pit timing regulations, I need to show the flaw: In the current method, the pit lap must total a minimum of 5 minutes, plus traverse time, plus best lap. In this case, the car is assumed to have traveled the pit segment twice, once in the traverse time, and once in the best lap. At most tracks, the pit segment is taken very quickly in the best lap so this time is nearly negligible. At Homestead for example, there is a slow turn entering that straight, which makes this time more significant. It is possible to violate the current rule even after stopping for 5 minutes and obeying the pit speed limit. Here are two possible solutions:
4a. Revise pit timing requirements by reducing the current traverse times by ~40% and rename them "Pit Speed Time Adjustment" or similar (just so it's not confused with the actual traverse time). The rest of the requirements and calculations are unchanged. There is no requirement that the actual stop be 5 minutes, as with the current rule. The intent is to ensure that any car that stops for 5 minutes and obeys the speed limit will be compliant. For tracks where pit stalls are located on either side of the timing line (such as Homestead, Lowes, or Sebring), the shorter of the two segments is to be used for timing requirements. I suggest the actual pit segment lengths be verified at each event, with time requirements updated at the drivers meeting as appropriate. Pit lane speed may be monitored via radar, penalties to be imposed at discretion of Operating Steward.
4b. Eliminate the traverse time. Pit lap must equal 5 minutes (or any arbitrary time) plus best lap. This doesn't enforce the pit speed limit, but honestly the current rule doesn't either. Use radar as stated in the above option. Competitors who know what they're doing will stop less somewhat than five minutes, but no one who stops five minutes will be penalized. This version is very simple. Krys Dean has proposed this same solution (except 5:30 instead of 5:00)
Grafton Robertson
