ARRC Schedule

[bobpink]

The unofficial 2006 ARRC schedule is posted on the main page of the website as a PDF file.

www.arrc-online.com

[Greg Amy]

Ow, ITS and ITA are racing together? Nearly 80% of the two fields completely overlap in times!

This is a terrible pairing; these cars will be completely intermixed during the race and will decisively and detrimentally affect the results of the race, especially in ITA!

But, hey, on the plus side, the Miatas have yet another group to race in...

[dazzlesa]

maybe they will do a split start

[zracre]

ITS and ITA are premier groups...they shouldn't change the format. We always run with ITS down here and it makes life difficult...it was always a big seller for me to have ITA as the fastest group...now it will be just another regional.. I will start sending letters...

[Greg Amy]

maybe they will do a split start[/b]

A nice idea, but it wouldn't help. Compare the times of the two groups from last year: you give ITS a 30-second head start and the ITA leaders will hit ITS traffic within 2-3 laps while the ITS leaders will hit ITA traffic within 4-6 laps. The ITA cars that need to keep up their momentum will be constantly balked, and the race *is* going to be decided outright by traffic conflicts.

I'm no event organizer, and i don't even play one on TV, but if you HAVE to combine classes for this race it seems to make much more sense to put together classes that have a clear distinction between lap times, say less than 50% overlap (like, maybe ITA and IT7...?). Then you start this group as one big one, not a split start (all a split start does is give leaders a few laps of clear track before conflicts arise anyway; thus, you make it a 5 lap sprint). Given the slower group started in the back the only folks the leaders of the faster class will catch are the slower group's stragglers, and the speed differential will be sufficient to minimize (but, unfortunately, not eliminate) conflicts.

I'm sure that the IT7 guys didn't like being with ITA, but I'm equally confident they like being with "ARRC Spec Miata" even less...

Each of the ITS and ITA races can be counted on being the best of the weekend; there's no reason to combine these and destroy both. - GA

[zracre]

I agree...although I have lots of practice running with them... could benefit me...hehehe

heres what a ITS/ITA start looks like...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdGLyaM3I74

[Joe Moser]

Combining ITA & ITS would effectively destroy any notion I had of this being a premier, "Championship" caliber event!

I am vehemently opposed to such grouping, it definitely turns this event into "just another regional". I understand that the schedule is subject to change, but I would hope it is changed immediately to avoid losing any entrants!

The IT ONLY classes have always offered (IMO) the best racing of the weekend! The other vehicles have always seemed like a side-show to me... why cater more to them? Why was this change made? To add an additional Miata class? They can already race in Groups 1, 4, 5 & 7.... They need their own Group 9?

I love the ARRC, I love the spirit of the competition, I love that it seems "different" than the other races each year. Please don't kill the 1 regional event that I plan the rest of my racing year on!

Bob, can we get some insight into this change?

- Joe Moser

[Andy Bettencourt]

I agree with all of you. The time for action is NOW. If the supps have been approved by Topeka, you will have a real hard time getting anything changed but you need to apply professional but HUGE pressure immediately is anything is to be resubmitted to Topeka for approval.

Local IT drivers rep?

[Greg Amy]

I am vehemently opposed to such grouping...[/b]

Joe, you're the first person I thought of when I read this schedule. You will be totally screwed. Once you lose your momentum - and it will happen - cars like the Integra and NX will eat you alive. As we all saw last year, your only method of survival is in the corners...

They can already race in Groups 1, 4, 5 & 7.... They need their own Group 9?[/b]

Wow, I didn't even notice that. Maybe we should change the event name to ARRM...And before you guys start beating on me for hating Miatas - which I don't - take a moment read the ARRC's web site, especially its stated purpose:

The American Road Race of Champions welcomes drivers who compete in the Sports Car Club of America's regional-only roadracing classes. These classes follow a nationwide rules structure set forth in the SCCA's General Competition Rules, but do not compete in National races.

...and the description for ARRC Spec Miata:

...ARRC Spec Miata uses the National Spec Miata rules but requires no specific tire be used. In addition, drivers accepting entry to the National Runoffs in Spec Miata are not eligible to compete in the ARRC sprint races in ASM. Those drivers WOULD be able to enter ASM in the Pro-IT, “Miata Madness ” and/or Enduro events. They can also enter ITA or SSM for the sprint races as well.

What's next? ARRC T1, ARRC T2, ARRC T3, ARRC SSB, ARRC SSC, ad nausea for all the other drivers that can't go to Kansas? What's makes the Miata so special among National classes (except for their ability to spend a lot of money on entry fees...?)

It's your show, kids, you can most certainly run it as you want. You just better hope that the Miata fad dies long before the event name loses its luster and no one else shows up... rant off. - GA

[R2 Racing]

Combining ITA and ITS is an absolutely horrible idea and I can't see the rational behind it. Spec Miata drivers were given the ability to go and run at the Runoffs and now, at our "Regional Runoff", they're being given even more? Huh? This is OUR championship event. The championship event for the regional drivers who have no where else to go and have nothing to call their own. By doing this, the ARRC is destroying what it worked so hard to create in the first place: A premiere event for regional only classes that is recognized by the people who race it as being their championship event, without any outside factors like overlapping 80% of the field with cars outside of their class, messing up their race.

ITA and ITS always made for two of the largest fields and two of the greatest races of the weekend. Why would you destory that? So Spec Miata drivers who already have their own official national championship elsewhere can run their car three or four times?

Seriously, who should the emails be directed to?

[Andy Bettencourt]

I think the solution is simple. Let these guys know how you feel. The concensus is that it will lose it's "premier" and/or "championship" flavor with groupings like this - and you are right.

If you tell the PTB that without that, it is doubtful you will go...it can have an impact.

Frankly, if this stands, I would be more than happy to try an help organize an IT festival at Mid-Ohio with the help of SCCA Corp and bill it as a National Championship....

[Butch Kummer]

I am the person responsible for the groupings and your message(s) have been received - no need for additional e-mails. I combined ITA & ITS because of car counts the past two years, not necessarily to give Miatas another race.

I assume ITA & IT7 play together pretty well (although there HAVE been issues there in years past). (A)SM tends to run in packs (which we realized when combining them with SRF earlier this year), so we need to be careful who we combine them with.

In 2005 we had the following counts in each group:

ITB - 19 + ITC - 13 = 32 total
SM - 48; that should be less this year
ITA - 28 + IT7 - 12 = 40 total
ITS - 24

Because of other commitments we need to fit those classes into three groups in 2006 and we're allowed a maximum of 67 cars per group. SSM will run in Group 1, which has plenty of room with only 16 entries last year.

The counts aren't the problem, so I guess the comparable relative speeds ARE the problem in combining ITA & ITS. I also know the ITB and ITC guys don't like running together, perhaps again for the same reason.

How about this (and I need to hear from the ITB and ITC guys as well)?

ASM & ITC
ITA & IT7
ITS & ITB

Split starts for all groups.

I cannot commit without discussing it with the ARRC Committee, but I CAN guarantee that your input will be considered before I send the Supps to Topeka for approval.

Butch Kummer
Atlanta Region Competition Director

[Greg Amy]

My immediate response is - WOW! Thanks for listening!

My next response is - oh crap, now I gotta give this some serious consideration and get back to you with reasonble input.

And I will.

Thank you. - GA

[Andy Bettencourt]

I cannot commit without discussing it with the ARRC Committee, but I CAN guarantee that your input will be considered before I send the Supps to Topeka for approval.

Butch Kummer
Atlanta Region Competition Director [/b]

Now THAT is all anyone can ask for. MANY thanks.

AB

[RSTPerformance]

Butch/Bob-

First I want to thank you for listening to what people have to say, it is great to have people working (volunteering) so hard for everyone!!! I must warn you though that everyone on here for the most part is with ITS and ITA, and I hate to be against what everyone here says, but frankly this website is VERY BIAST to ITS and ITA, with only a few outspoken people from ITB and almoast nobody from ITC. I think your original schedule was fine.

My Input:

I DON'T want to run with ITS, if we are forced to run with ITS our race will:

1) get cut short by being put a lap down, no questions asked.

2)Traditionaly the fast ITB cars get stuck in mid pack ITS cars. This would be fine, however a lot of those mid pack ITS drivers have a few screws loose sometimes and can't get around the track without messing up the ITB race. Everyone can say what they want, but ask any ITB driver who has had to "deal" with ITS cars over the past years. In the Northeast we have figured out who to watch out for and we now stratagize our race based on using lousy ITS drivers as picks. It has become fun, but it is certainly fustrating at times. (This is in no reference to my race last weekend at NHIS where my mom misunderstood a comment I made, I did NOT have any issues last weekend at Lime Rock with the ITS drivers I raced with).

3) The ITS race will definatly be messed up as this is a championship race, the leading or even mid pack ITB cars will NOT move out of the way for the ITS cars, this will certainly cause issues for any fast ITS driver who is lapping the field.

__________________________________________________ _____________________________________

I don't understand what has changed since prior years races... what is being changed and why?

ITB and ITC works great together. Both groupes have similar lap times, thus with a split start the leaders are generally not racing against each other and knowone gets lapped.

ITA and ITS works great together for the same reasons. Only problem is that ITA drivers whome want to win the overall race might not look like such a star as they feel they will get lost in the mid pack class lead, welcome to the general ITB/ITC ranks.

Personally I like the SM idea, I thikn it is great to work into the weekend, however thier race groupe is with SSM correct? I don't see any need for them to have thier own race groupe... start the 67 cars for the sprint race if need be.

I may be being a bit of an @$$ or poor sport but If ITB is grouped with ITS you may loose 2 entrants in ITB. I am not interested in travaling 18+hours to battle with some ITS driver who can't get around a turn and blows me away on the streight. -again if you are in ITS and you don't like my comment sorry, its the truth.

Raymond "you wanted input, that is the other side" Blethen

[zracre]

I run in the SE where ITA and ITS are combined at EVERY race...see above video...our times are too similar and it would turn into a war of "he blocked me" and "I was racing for position" and "so was I" etc...see daytona video...it is the one race weekend they should put sm and ssm together or asm whatever...ITA and IT7 worked in years past for us in ITA (im not sure about the IT7 guys). This is the one weekend sabatical away from that for me...otherwise it is just another regional.

[dazzlesa]

itb and its together stinks! the b leaders will catch the slower s cars.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Why not just take the 2005 groupings add SSM to ITS? Here is why I think it works:

- SSM is bound to be small enough as to not overfill the RG

- SSM/SM's have high cornering speeds and won't hold up ITS cars

- ITS cars should be able to power by on the straights

- The speed differential coupled with the split start should keep clean racing for a long while.



The bottom line is that SOMEBODYS class has to be the slowest of a run-group and the top cars of that class will always tangle with the back-side of the 'faster' class...the PTB need to cater to the premier classes (what the definition of that is up for discussion and may be Region specific) in this respect.

AB

[Greg Amy]

I can see this will get ugly, no matter what happens. Name one slower class that wants to run with a faster one? The problem I read above is that ITB doesn't want to run with ITS because they're too much faster (and too slower); the ITA guys don't want to run with ITS because the times are too close (or not close enough.)

Face it: no one will get their own run group, especially the slower ITB and ITC classes. There's just too many cars that have to fit into a tight time budget. So, with that said, which faster group DO you want to run with?

For the record: I firmly believe that putting ITS and ITA together is a terrible idea, for all the reasons stated above. However, I also realize that by doing so you will be handing me a SIGNIFICANT competitive advantage, one that I will use to my extreme advantage...And THAT, my friends, really sucks on multiple levels.

I do not want to win a race because someone else got held up, but I'll do it without a bit of remorse.

GA

[RSTPerformance]

Why not just take the 2005 groupings add SSM to ITS? Here is why I think it works:

- SSM is bound to be small enough as to not overfill the RG

- SSM/SM's have high cornering speeds and won't hold up ITS cars

- ITS cars should be able to power by on the straights

- The speed differential coupled with the split start should keep clean racing for a long while.



The bottom line is that SOMEBODYS class has to be the slowest of a run-group and the top cars of that class will always tangle with the back-side of the 'faster' class...the PTB need to cater to the premier classes (what the definition of that is up for discussion and may be Region specific) in this respect.

AB
[/b]

Andy your thoughts seem to make sence to me... but

What I don't understand is why SSM and SM can't run together? They are basically the same car, right? I still don't even understand why we have the 2 classes in the first place. It makes no sence to me that we have 4 "IT" classes for a bazion different makes/models and we have 2 miata classes not including the IT classes that a miata already fits into. Thats another story altogether though, but I still FIRMLY believe that SM and SSM should be grouped together.

as for the "bottom line" I agree but the issue comes up having cars on the track that don't mix well such as ITS and ITB. Major speed difference on the streight and then in the corners the ITB cars eat up the less driven ITS cars. its like ITS and AS together... Not so great IMO.

IMO the premier classes are ALL of the regional only classes, and no class should get a "better" rank just because it has more entries or more interest on the internet. Some of the best races in general that I have seen are ITC with only 4 cars in the group all battling for the lead. I also have to say I love the ITT class... way cool to see those trucks runnng around!!!

Raymond

I can see this will get ugly, no matter what happens. Name one slower class that wants to run with a faster one? The problem I read above is that ITB doesn't want to run with ITS because they're too much faster (and too slower); the ITA guys don't want to run with ITS because the times are too close (or not close enough.)

Face it: no one will get their own run group, especially the slower ITB and ITC classes. There's just too many cars that have to fit into a tight time budget. So, with that said, which faster group DO you want to run with?

For the record: I firmly believe that putting ITS and ITA together is a terrible idea, for all the reasons stated above. However, I also realize that by doing so you will be handing me a SIGNIFICANT competitive advantage, one that I will use to my extreme advantage...And THAT, my friends, really sucks on multiple levels.

I do not want to win a race because someone else got held up, but I'll do it without a bit of remorse.

GA
[/b]

Greg-

I firmly believe that if classes have to be combined it should be ITA/ITS and ITB/ITC with split starts. equal lap time cars wont catch each other or hold each other up in this case, and the leaders in both groupes should get a full race in without being lapped.

If need be put SSM & SM with ITB and ITC just don't put ITB with ITS or ITA!!!

Raymond

PS: Greg how is it possible that running with ITS will give you an advantage? That doesn't make sence with me...