Our division's 'regional' points series is just that. If you compete in the runoffs in your class, you are not eligible for competition in the regional points series, so a national driver coming to 'test' at a RA regional a week before the June Sprints does not play spoiler to the regional racers in national classes around here.
Those who would like to run nationals already are free to do so. They just cannot do it in an a class that was not intended to be subject to the entire cluster fornication that accompanies a non-spec, non-sealed, national class.Quote:
Originally Posted by shwah
Those that would like to run nationals already are free to do so. They just cannot do it in this category; a category that was not intended to be subject to the massive cost inflation associated with being a national category.
Those that have newer cars and would like to run nationals are free to do so. They simply must run their cars as BP and DP.
Cost: The relative cost of building, prepping and maintaining an IT category car is going to go up dramatically. The distribution of the cost bell curve will shift to the expensive end - and that's just to maintain your relative position.Quote:
The only reason I can think of is being afraid of a shrinking grid.
Time constraints: DC Region's National typically has 225+ cars over 8 groups. Where are we going to fit the extra cars? Run ITC in small bore with an 11+second/lap difference between ITC and EP and a 9+ second difference between B and EP? That's more than the ITC/ITS gap and we've already realized that it doesn't work for a decently subscribed sprint race group. remember, National track sessions are longer and must be adhered to. No shorting sessions because the day is running long.
Dander: Topeka wants to suckle at the teat of the ARRC and ITFest. Having treated IT like a bastard step-child, unfit to associate with the gentry, I see no reason to recognize Topeka's attempt to invite us in to sit with civilized society since the only reason they are doing it is because they see us as a cash cow. Having completely fubared the Runoffs (tm) by allowing so many National classes to wither and then putting the patient into shock through Startline Steve's ramming Heartland Park down the club's throat, Topeka wants one thing and one thing only - our money. As it now stands, IT has its own "championships" and Topeka has got its panties in a knot because they aren't getting their blood money.
And, yes, moving IT to National will dilute car counts. Budgets are limited. If I've got enough money to run 6 weekends, then increasing my options doesn't add more money to that pot.
nope, you're not missing anything kirk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knestis
if this scenario were to play out i do believe the cost to maintain your current finishing position. the reason i'm ok with it is because i think it would be for the greater good of the club as a whole.
because i don't feel like being long winded and eloquent.....
too many classes = thin grids for everyone
no national/regional distinction + top 24 go = "market" forces at work and classes live and die out naturally
jjjanos,
Are you saying that the cost of competing at regional events will go up as well? I don't agree with that. I definitely see Production cars run at our regionals that are lower budget efforts than a good IT program. Someone that wants to stay regional would become more competitive without spending a dime.
The only argument I'm buying so far is shrinking grids, and it is relatively legit. I mean we are lucky to have 3 ITS cars around here, and the one that shows up every time is a pretty quick one at the ARRC, so he surely would move up. So would somone fill the void and get some easy wins in an underprepped car, or would ITS fade away for a while at our races?
I agree with this, but I also think this is a much larger challenge to implement within the club, than changing the status of one category. It is really a separate issue, that we should start writing some letters about IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by tnord
jjjaNos has it covered IMHJ.:happy204:
****Dander: Topeka wants to suckle at the teat of the ARRC and ITFest. Having treated IT like a bastard step-child, unfit to associate with the gentry, I see no reason to recognize Topeka's attempt to invite us in to sit with civilized society since the only reason they are doing it is because they see us as a cash cow. Having completely fubared the Runoffs (tm) by allowing so many National classes to wither and then putting the patient into shock through Startline Steve's ramming Heartland Park down the club's throat, Topeka wants one thing and one thing only - our money. As it now stands, IT has its own "championships" and Topeka has got its panties in a knot because they aren't getting their blood money.****
IT cars ARE 70% of ALL entries for Club racing.
As we all know many Divisions could not make it if their Nationals didn't have restricted Regionals assocated with them. Golly ain't Restricted Regional called inviting IT cars.
Car counts have been sliding for a couple years from my eye viewing.
Is the U.S. in a recession or what ever you want to call it.
IT National WIIL raise the cost
IT National WILL lessen the Regional car count. (ala Spec Miata)
I just don't see anything broke about IT that this would fix.
What's broke that needs fixing about the Club Racing program, well, I think everyone here sees it, though there are differing views about how to address it!
So you gotta ask yourself, why is this coming up now, and is it something you wish to get on board with.
IMO, I think that eliminating the National/Regional distinction is long overdue, and the appropriate plan of action (to address the problem). That said, I agree with the other camp - I just don't believe this is something that is going to improve my racing experience in any way. Every year, as it is, I'm on the fence about re-upping and committing to a "full" season - this might make it even harder to pursue. God knows I'd love to put together a program to get to the National Championship, but last year gave an insight as to how expensive that can be; having to run a whole mess of "away games" to even qualify would only make it worse...
Some silly statements need correction. In 2007, all IT class entries (including those such as IT Truck which are region-specific classes not recognized in the GCR) totaled 6293. All regional entries were 22540 and all national entries were 9988. Thus, IT entries were 28% of regional entries and were 19% of all Club Racing entries.Quote:
Originally Posted by ddewhurst
Dave
I did not check your numbers but they seem to ring true with what I remember from a SportsCar a few months ago.
IT Entires at 6293 is significant. 63% as large as the ENTIRE National Program and we're only talking about IT. The entire Regional Racing Program dwarfs the National Program.
To get the true picture I think you need to break down the National numbers. If I recall correctly Spec Miata (a former regional program) and SRF make up most of the National entires. Without SM the National program would be hurting worse than it already is.
I see this proposed move the way jjjanos sees it - Topeka wants to grab some of what IT has to offer. One way or another IT won't be the same if this comes to pass.
Ron
I respectfully disagree. See Spec Miata. Going national and attracting the fat fingers of Topeka and the attention of drivers with a certain attitude first dramatically increased the cost of a national program and it trickles its way down to Regionals.Quote:
Originally Posted by shwah
Nor does the absence of competitors make a car/driver more competitive.
Dave,Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Gomberg
Not doubting, I just want the numbers - could you give a link or pm the car counts by class?
Thanks,
Jeff
Wouldn't matter to me one way or the other. My concern is that as a national class it may thin out the regional level competitors. Worse case is I'll have a great solo I car.
I suppose that's all moot once gas gets above 7.00/8.00 a gal. At that point I'll go back to playing tennis.
G. Potts
I forgot to mention in my original post, that the first question I asked in this post driver's meeting was:
Has the CRB seen what the IT community has created with the ITTC, and that it may already serve the 'purpose' of being national and runoffs eligible?
To be honest, I am really happy with where IT is today, and the ITTC fills my desire to try and find the best competition, but I would run nationaly if IT went national because that is where I would expect to find that higher level competition.
It would also be a good individual exercise to dig into your division's National calendar and dummy up a schedule of what we each think we might do, were we to consider a "National" run.
I'm left thinking that there are - broadly speaking - going to be two major ways of looking at this puzzle: From the perspective of current IT entrants and from others. While there are undoubtedly going to be a bazillion smaller ways that current entrants are going to respond (we all have different interests, expectations, and opinions), there MIGHT be some big concepts that we as a community can agree upon.
For example, I can imagine a statement that defines as a position our collective interest in the discussion ONLY if we've been satisfied that the National program has made a good faith effort to get its house in order first: If IT is being used as a solution to problems that current national class/category entrants aren't willing to solve for themselves, or that require decisions that are politically/organizationally too difficult for the committees and board to deal with, then that's a first-order issue that needs to be worked out.
Question Number One in response to opening this discussion needs to be, "What current problem is the possible move to National status intended to solve?"
K
Here is the link to national car counts this year. http://www.scca.com/documents/Club_E...n%20MASTER.pdf
What is broken that I see this fixing? 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. Yes, I can go National racing in Prod, GT, SM, SRF, etc...but those classes don't interest me as much. I like to upgrade - but not to the tune of Prod, so IT is perfect for me.
As far as 'going National' raising the cost of being competitive in IT - that is a misguided sentiment. POPULARITY raises the cost. The more people, the more competition, the more money. If National status raises the popularity of IT (which I think is inevitable), then costs will rise for some areas.
Opinions will vary on the affects - and that is because in some areas nothing will change in terms of money and prep level. Some areas will see an influx of full-prep cars...and the affects of THAT is also debatable.
You could easliy make the arguement that if the 'heavy hitter' in some of the lesser subscribed pockets goes National, it may actually INCREASE regional competition because the perception of that door opening for the 'average racer' could be there as that HH leaves for a different group of fish to fry.
What is best for the class Nationally is a tough call IMHO.
I understand the concern about fitting extra cars into an existing well-subscribed national. If your track isn't long enough to handle the additional cars in your existing race groups, I can see that you might have a problem. But if there's room on the track, then go for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jjjanos
I don't understand the concern about the lap time differences. Yes, the slower cars in a group might get fewer laps than the faster cars (because they get lapped), but guess what? Apparently that's okay, because this routinely happens at the west coast Nationals. We have huge speed differentials, and guess what? The drivers are smart enough to handle it. Even in our REGIONALS, we run *all* of the IT classes together, including ITR. No problem. This isn't spec racing. This isn't the Runoffs. We run multiple classes together. We live with it. We even like it.
So I think this whole speed differential thing is a red herring. It's not a big deal. We do it all the time out here, at both regionals and nationals. And yes, we have very full fields, with 50-60 cars on track together at pretty much every race.
Let's assume that the National/Regional thing goes away and every GCR-recognized class is eligible for the Runoffs - here is what I would do:
'Reward' the top 10-15 classes in average participation with their own Runoffs run-group. The bottom 'half' still get a chance to run for the gold, but they must do so by sharing a track with someone else. Split starts a must...but until numbers warrant it, you pay the price of getting invited by having to share the track with another class or classs.
This way you can fit the Runoffs into a more compact time frame, which is a common complaint.
+1. I like that idea.
I don't see any reason/benefit to make IT national. If anything, I would perhaps eliminate the National/regional distinction. I like the racing and prep level of IT currently and am happy with the ARRC and newer IT Fest.
My opinion is this:
Get rid of National and Regional status.
Run all races as Club Races.
Top 24 make the runoffs.