Question about race groupings

[JLawton]

I realize putting run groups together is a tough and challenging task, no doubt about it. One of those where you can't please everyone!!

I do have my personal issues about running with other classes but I won't get into that. It sounds to me, that most people would be happy having IT run with only IT classes. We don't like running with Prod, they don't like running with us. We don't like running with Miata's (especially Andy, but only cause he's too fast!!) and they don't like running with us.

I would much rather run with other IT classes. ITC, ITB, ITR?? I don't care which one. I think it makes it better when everyone knows everyone else, like in IT. And IT cars are generally different enough where there are many different passing opportunities.

Yup, IT racers aren't perfect (just look at my rear bumper), but I'd rather run with them!!

[Eric Parham]

Andy's correct. Given the number of classes we currently have to squeeze into a race weekend, there's no way to make everyone happy.

Ed's also correct, speed differential is fine as long as two different classes aren't grouped together that have opposite speed differentials for straights versus corners.

One partial solution is to reduce the number of classes. Why do we have so many Miata classes anyway?
Here's an idea for a single class/group adjusted so that a variety of cars can be competitive:
http://www.casc.on.ca/documents/regulation...ulator2006.htm#

Another partial solution is to group the classes based on similar cornering speeds rather than on lap times or even lap time differentials. After all, passing on the straights is easier for everyone and significantly reduces the chances of interclass incidents. People shouldn't mind being behind someone who corners at the same speed. The faster car can simply pass on the next straight without much loss of time. The IT classes generally have similar cornering speeds (except for the 6" versus 7" rim differences). Such cornering speeds are generally much greater than the SS classes for obvious reasons. Thus, in an ideal world, no IT classes should ever be grouped with any SS classes (whether SSB, SSC, SSM or even SM).

Some folks (e.g., Tim K.) have opted not to run a class that is to be grouped with a conflicting class. Other folks may simply not put their best foot forward (e.g., I have a replacement ITC shell, which is actually straight, that I decided not to run this year mainly because of the SSM grouping). I'm really not complaining. I myself had a fun year and learned a lot in the process. I felt that most of the SSM drivers really made an effort to co-exist on the track. They're there for the same reasons that we are! There were some oversized egos near the front, some admitted beginners near the back, and a real mix in between, but I took it as a challenge (and, for the record, I actually preferred racing with the SSMs over the SSB/SSCs that I've run with in the past). I am very disturbed that my competition was unfairly eliminated from the final race by a conflicting class car, and I am also concerned that the ITC fields were artificially reduced during the year due to others not wanting to run with the conflicting class cars.

I hope the situation can be improved for next year, and improved in time for people who might otherwise avoid ITC for fear of being grouped again with a conflicting class (opposite speed differentials for straights versus corners).

[ner88]

So a guy driving a Miata drives over your trailer door and now all Miata drivers are bad?
What color drivers suit was he wearing?
Anyone ever go to the Glen and the bog at F1 races years ago? Crowds would stand around the huge bon fire and yell "The other side sucks".....
Welcome to the SM CCA, get over it and we might let you stay and play! :P

[Doc Bro]

So a guy driving a Miata drives over your trailer door and now all Miata drivers are bad?

[/b]

Nope,....that's not what I said....don't misquote because you have a dog in the fight.

What I said was that kind of crap doesn't help the plight of the SM/SSM crowd. Many racers have labeled the SM/SSM crowd (rightly or wrongly), incidents like that don't help either opinion.

R

[RKramden]

A great bunch of ideas, but now ir's time to make the schedule work.

Here is the challange:

Come up with 8 race groups that fit in all the regional classes, and based on the car counts this year,
none of the groups can have over 40 cars. Everybody gets to race. We are a club.

You cannot mix widely different car types in the same field. GT1 with Formula Atlantic is a no-no.

8 groups, not 9, because it has to fit into a one day regional at Lime Rock. If you make it 9 groups, then everyone gets hosed because all the extra down time between groups in addition to another group will result in 10 minutes of qualifying and 15 minutes of racing. Not a good deal.

So, I'll start things off:

1: Wings and things: Faster formula cars and sports racers.
2: Slow formula cars.
3: Big Bore (Including ITE, SPO)
4: Small bore (and SPU)

So, in the last 4 groups (or mixed into the above groups), get Spec Racers, (S)SM, IT*, Touring, and Showroom Stock.

Posters here have said that where you make your speed is important, so the Touring guys shouldn't be placed in with GT cars, like they currently are, but have to be put with other "street tire" classes. If we are going to make such a big deal about that in the SM/IT groups, then it is certainly just as big a deal in the GT/Production/Touring groups. And, maybe, we need to look at spliting the Formula cars back into three groups, because the Vee's make their speed in different places than the Fords, and they are, in turn, different that the Atlantics and sports racers. (See, it is a real rats nest.)

And where does ITR go?

So, take your best shot at it, base it on real numbers, and figure out how to pack it all in.

[Eric Parham]

A daunting task indeed! I'd have to start by assigning lower priority to all of the non-GCR classes in order to make room for the real SCCA classes. Note that SSM isn't one of them If anything, SSM should be a subset of SM that runs in the same group (like the NCF subset of FF that stays in the same run group).

[RKramden]

A daunting task indeed! I'd have to start by assigning lower priority to all of the non-GCR classes in order to make room for the real SCCA classes. Note that SSM isn't one of them If anything, SSM should be a subset of SM that runs in the same group (like the NCF subset of FF that stays in the same run group).
[/b]

Got to disagree with you here.

First, at most races, NCF runs with FVee, FF runs with the faster cars. Maybe you didn't notice that. It makes room for other classes in the fast formula group.

Second, SSM pays the same entry fee you do, and it is an officially regionally recognized class, and they have just as much right to run on the track as you do. Just because their rules come from a whole lot of local interest rather than interest on the left coast or down south, or in Cendiv doesn't mean they have less right to run. They pay the same entry fee, they get treated the same.

The region has had a policy of giving racers a class if they come up with the rules and have 2 or more cars on the average at all the races. And that includes trophies at each race and awards at the end of the year. Same goes for NARRC, but I'm not sure about the number of cars required. In any case, SSM easily meets that requirement and is a class recognized by the NARRC committee and the region.

If you want to start by dropping the marginal (e.g. small) classes first, maybe we should talk about getting rid of ITC.

[StephenB]

The region has had a policy of giving racers a class if they come up with the rules and have 2 or more cars on the average at all the races. And that includes trophies at each race and awards at the end of the year. Same goes for NARRC, but I'm not sure about the number of cars required. [/b]

I thought you had to come up with 6 cars on avg. ? Also I don't think I ever saw a rule that they would get there own run group... That being said they do almost deserve one since they do attract huge car counts and I'm sure they are contributing a lot to the new track.

I always thought that we should encourage Double Driving with compeditors and even giving a discount to that second run group. If the rungroup was oversubscribed then you wouldn't be able to run so you would have to choose your 1st choice and understnad that IF the second run group you wanted didn't have the maximum # of cars than you could run. If we did this type of thing we would generate extra $$ for our new track and offer more track time to our members at a better price. (We need to learn from those canadians! this is somewhat like what they do in Novia Scotia) A win win situation!

Stephen

[StephF]

Got to disagree with you here.

First, at most races, NCF runs with FVee, FF runs with the faster cars. Maybe you didn't notice that. It makes room for other classes in the fast formula group.

Second, SSM pays the same entry fee you do, and it is an officially regionally recognized class, and they have just as much right to run on the track as you do. Just because their rules come from a whole lot of local interest rather than interest on the left coast or down south, or in Cendiv doesn't mean they have less right to run. They pay the same entry fee, they get treated the same.

The region has had a policy of giving racers a class if they come up with the rules and have 2 or more cars on the average at all the races. And that includes trophies at each race and awards at the end of the year. Same goes for NARRC, but I'm not sure about the number of cars required. In any case, SSM easily meets that requirement and is a class recognized by the NARRC committee and the region.

If you want to start by dropping the marginal (e.g. small) classes first, maybe we should talk about getting rid of ITC.
[/b]

They have the SAME rights, not MORE rights to the track than we do. Which has been a theme running through this whole thread, Dave. I know Mazda (as in the company) lines National's coffers, but that shouldn't mean that everyone else gets shoved aside. Having multiple race groups for the SAME car while trashing other race groups (who only get 1 race to run in) is getting ridiculous. Put them together, and weed out the slow cars. If they don't qualify, go home. Or trim your car out for ITA or, what is it, B or D that's coming too? Jesus. We may as well rename this the Spec Miata Club of America at this rate.

And, perhaps you missed the comments from 2 people here, both who said they wouldn't run in C because of the SM crowd? How many more are there who have backed away because of this? Right there we have the C field dwindling down to 'marginal' entries thanks in part to the race group that they run in.

I have no doubt that C will come back up in numbers. Look at the popularity of A right now. A few years ago, A was the marginal class. The numbers rise and fall naturally. We don't need an artificial damper on it too.

I say group them up and let them qualify together. If you run well enough, you race. If you don't, well see my comments above.

And if you are going to pull the old chestnut of "we need to attract all the new blood we can get", then consider this. There will always be drivers coming and going. The ones who truly like this, or have some skill will likely stay on. Do we need to bend over backwards to try to keep people who may not stay long anyway? Whose interest might not be that strong, or skill levels not on par? Whose father bought a car because he always wanted to race and couldn't? You're going to do a whole lot of bending over for nothing then, 'cuz they'll be leaving anyway.

And, FYI, we aren't the only groups out there feeling resentful about the scheduling around the Mazdas. I heard bitter remarks from folks in the open wheel classes this year that they feel screwed out of track time because so much has been given over to Miatas.

If the club's philosophy is to add classes all the time, then maybe we SHOULD start eliminating some of the classes that are dying. We've had, what, 2 F500's this year? 1 S2000? And what about the older production stuff? As long as they want to stuff more miata races into the schedule, and they want EVERYONE who runs one to get to race 2, 3, or 4 times per weekend, we are going to be faced with decisions like this. You can't have it both ways.

Put Spec classes with Spec classes and Improved classes with Improved classes. Stop writing the schedule to cater to the newest 'it' car on the block. And I don't believe that they aren't doing this already, not with the politics involved here.

I like Andy's grouping ideas, but I can see one problem there too. I hear that the Prod guys aren't happy running with Spec racers, same reason we aren't happy with our spec mix.

[StephF]

They have the SAME rights, not MORE rights to the track than we do. [/b]

And what part of this sentence is escaping everyone?
Do I have all the perfect solutions? Hell no.
And neither does anyone else on here, no matter how much you all want to jump on me about it.

Do I get frustrated with the tones that start coming out? (read Lyons's comment, 'gee lets get rid of YOUR group then'...gee thanks for pissing me off Dave. Not to mention the oh so helpful replies from Phil/fastm3 )

You bet it's frustrating. Especially when I have a car that has the back end smashed to pieces. One that I've put a lot of time and money into. And one that is going to require a lot more time and money too, after just having put it back together. You want to talk budget Dave? I'm dumping lots of money right there trying to keep my car together enough to make it through another race, thanks to the way the race groups were put together this year.

So tell me then, is my right to a clean, competitive race offset by the fact that another race group can field higher entries? If I'm in a group with low car counts, I can go pound sand? Is that the theory here?

Dave, read some of the comments made earlier from other people in ITC not wanting to be grouped in with SM/SSM. I didn't make it up. You can get pissed at me and call it bs if you want, but it's out here and I didn't put it there.

And, as far as the winged people, I've heard what I've heard from them. I didn't make that up either. Go talk to them if you think I'm full of crap.

While you're at it, please tell me where all the IT cars can run without huge changes to the cars. Where is the double dipping for us?

Someone who is slower in a fast Miata group can move to one that's prepped differently, right? Different tires, etc? Seems to me there are more options and choices for them, spread out through the schedule instead of combining some of the groups.

And yes, if ITC was to dwindle until it's on the bubble, then eliminate it. Same as we would any other group.

I started this thread to see if I could get input on how to request a grouping change. I have real, valid reasons and concerns for wanting the change. I have been directly impacted (no pun intended) by this grouping.

I didn't start it to become a pissing match. (although I will admit that Dave pissed me off with his post. ) I don't think that SM or SSM or any of the M's are less than anyone else in the club. I've never said or implied that.

And neither are any of the IT groups.

And Jake, I'm not bashing Mazda groups. I'm not against big field, entry fees, etc. I am annoyed that we are getting more and more squeezed between time curfews at tracks and more race classes being added, while hanging on to all the old ones.

And I'm frustrated that we can't get separated out from them into groups that handle the same. I don't think they want to be with us any more than we want to be with them.

I just want to run with cars that handle in a similar fashion to mine, even if it means that I would lose a lap every time I race.

What's so hard to understand about that???????

[RKramden]

Do I get frustrated with the tones that start coming out? (read Lyons's comment, 'gee lets get rid of YOUR group then'...gee thanks for pissing me off Dave.
[/b]

It was meant to be humorous. Sorry you took it so personally.

I started this thread to see if I could get input on how to request a grouping change. I have real, valid reasons and concerns for wanting the change. I have been directly impacted (no pun intended) by this grouping.
[/b]

I think you got that.
My points are:
A: everybody has the SAME rights, and
B: grouping is an exercise that will piss someone off, the difficult goal is to minimize that amount of pain.

It has been easier this year because the overall entry is down from last year. If the small turnout is an aberation, then there will be more pain next year.

I don't think that SM or SSM or any of the M's are less than anyone else in the club. I've never said or implied that.
[/b]

You didn't, but Eric did. He said exactly:

I'd have to start by assigning lower priority to all of the non-GCR classes in order to make room for the real SCCA classes.
[/b]

[Andy Bettencourt]

You bet it's frustrating. Especially when I have a car that has the back end smashed to pieces. One that I've put a lot of time and money into. And one that is going to require a lot more time and money too, after just having put it back together. You want to talk budget Dave? I'm dumping lots of money right there trying to keep my car together enough to make it through another race, thanks to the way the race groups were put together this year.

So tell me then, is my right to a clean, competitive race offset by the fact that another race group can field higher entries? If I'm in a group with low car counts, I can go pound sand? Is that the theory here?

[/b]

No, you have to put your car together because a driver made a mistake. Could happen in ANY run group at ANY time. It's not unique to your group.



The theory here is that everyone has a right to the track. You make it seem like because you are with SSM this year, you automatically get into an accident. Everyone has a right to a clean race per the GCR. The fact is that the smaller group you are in, the easier it is to move you around to accomodate larger groups.

[Andy Bettencourt]

A very unscientific calculation shows these averages (based on pre-registration figures) this year for NARRC events:

ITS: 18.8
ITA: 20.8
ITB: 13.2
ITC: 4.2
SM: 24.6
SSM: 19.5

Touring and SS have so few entries at Regionals I think they can go almost anywhere. ITR will be VERY small at first and should be combined with ITS. T1 and T2 can run with Big bore. So:

1. ITR-ITS-ITB gets you to around 35 cars if ITR shows 3ish.
2. ITA-ITC-T3 gets you to around 30.
3. You put SRF with Small bore, SPU and Legends (SB gets under 10 cars...SPU under 5) for around 32 cars.
4: Wings and things: Faster formula cars and sports racers.
5: Slow formula cars.
6: Big Bore (Including ITE, SPO, B Prep and D Prep)
7. SM
8. SSM-SSB-SSC

The key is G3. All these cars are very similar in that they have fiberglass everything. Similar mindsets.

What am I missing?

[RKramden]

Touring and SS have so few entries at Regionals I think they can go almost anywhere. ITR will be VERY small at first and should be combined with ITS. T1 and T2 can run with Big bore. So:

1. ITR-ITS-ITB gets you to around 35 cars if ITR shows 3ish.
2. ITA-ITC-T3 gets you to around 30.
3. You put SRF with Small bore, SPU and Legends (SB gets under 10 cars...SPU under 5) for around 32 cars.
4: Wings and things: Faster formula cars and sports racers.
5: Slow formula cars.
6: Big Bore (Including ITE, SPO, B Prep and D Prep)
7. SM
8. SSM-SSB-SSC

The key is G3. All these cars are very similar in that they have fiberglass everything. Similar mindsets.

What am I missing?
[/b]

Well, maybe you don't remember the really BIG stink when SRF used to run with production.

Like the comments here, SRF and Prod make their speed in whole different places. It's a 5 times worse mix than having IT and SM run together. (IMHO)

[Eric Parham]

I was wondering until I looked up the cars in T3. Yup, you guessed it, more Miatas. Maybe I'll just get one too and run it in FOUR (4) different race groups per day
Don't forget that we're probably getting the new Prepared B & D groups next year too.

[Ed Funk]

Andy, looks good to me, we'll e-mail Brian and encourage him to try to get groups as similar to this as possible. Everyone who cares should contact Brian also. His e-mail address is in front of Pit Talk.

Eric, B and D should fit well with Andy's groups 3 and/or 6.

[Tkczecheredflag]

Part of the problem with the SSM/SM guys and gals, is that they have not personally experienced what the "C" drivers are experiencing, regarding agressive and sometimes thoughtless (read that dangerous)driving. Just a thought, but seeing is beleiving. It took Thomas putting his fingers in Christ's holes, for him to beleive what his friends were telling him. Maybe we shoud consider a little seeing is believing for the "fast and furious." I felt there was always a lot to be learned about courteous driving, running with faster cars, similiar to the NASA run groups. Maybe lack of "safe" run groups for the Miatas would teach them safety - sort of like welping a puppy off the nipple.

Also, wanted everyone to know I just picked up a Bildon prepared ITC Beetle - I'm coming back to double dip in ITC - Miata or no Miata.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Also, wanted everyone to know I just picked up a Bildon prepared ITC Beetle - I'm coming back to double dip in ITC - Miata or no Miata. [/b]

Have you no shame?

Let's not get to down on Miata-land. This topic could be overlaid onto the one a month back about ITA - from the Prod guys view. SM-SSM have gotten much better about contact when racing with themselves - because they are evolving as drivers who are learning how to race in such close quarters. I can say the same is happening for me - we all continuously improve if we try and learn something from each race.

Keeping run-groups the same from year to year fosters inter group confidence and knowledge of each car and drivers habits. Besides, if there were 45-50 of any other make model out there it would be the same thing.

[JLawton]

No question, Miata has it share but look at the numbers I would bet the ratio of bad drivers is the same in any class, remember it only takes one ITC driver to make 25% of the field bad( at least at most races).
[/b]

Nope, gotta disagree with you there. I think there are three issues that make the Miata's they way they are:

1) Easy class for beginners to get into. Plunk down $10K (or have daddy plunk down $10K) and go racing. Lots of "rookies".
2) The cars are so evenly matched. Tough to pass other Miata's resulting in lots of high risk passes.
3) This I have heard from people who have driven both IT cars and Miatas (not me). The Miata is easy to drive to within 9/10s. Makes a driver feel like Mario. However, going 10/10s ain't so easy. Inexpereinced drivers feel no fear in trying to take a Miata to 10/10s even though there skill level isn't there....

Also, wanted everyone to know I just picked up a Bildon prepared ITC Beetle - I'm coming back to double dip in ITC - Miata or no Miata.
[/b]

Really?? No kidding??


Yeah, riiiiiiight!! <_< Hope you carry the guilt of this story into the ARRC!!

[gran racing]

Yeah, and I&#39;m building a Saturn.