Question about race groupings

[StephenB]

Andy,

Can you propose to add 1 lapfor ITB if we run with the ITR/ITS/ITB group. we always get the shaft and loose a lap at almost every race. We pay the same entry fee for tha same # of laps. OK OK I know that will never happen.



but How about split starts so we can race without the Midpack ITS drivers messing with us. a few drivers in the midpack like that Black BMW (The one without the rear window at NHIS) are terrible drivers and cause issues with the front running ITB cars. I would rather have a split start and pass the slower cars and never catch the ITS cars that are doing the same lap times. It would also allow the 3rd place ITB car actually have a chance at being in the hunt for number 1. All to often we have 6 or 7 cars stuffed in between pos 1-3 and usually the top cars in B are all within .5-1 sec of eachother. 3 rows back makes it difficult to catch the leader if your all turning the same lap times.

Personally I don't like running with ITS at all, the leaders are great when they lap us but midpack is a tough place to be.

Stephen

PS: I had inquired about a split start at LRP but since raymond qualified pole with an ITB car ITB would have been first and ITS second. I didn't think that would help anyone on track.

[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)

[Ed Funk]

Amen, Doc Bro I like it too!!

Dave, maybe we should put a hold on future new classes. Seems we should be able to fit just ablut every interesting car into an existing class. Oh wait, there is one---my fathers '63 Pontiac, if I can dig it out of the barn and find one more driver (?are you on, Tim?), we can have SS Star Chief, and run with SSM

[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.

[FastM3]

I don't know.... Maybe this would work.

Let ITC have their own run group during lunch. 4.2 cars should be manageable.

Use a standing start. This eliminates need for the pace car !

All the other groups can stay the way they were for 2006 which seemed to work fine

Have one corner worker monitor the race from a booth at the top of the stands. This can be a SM/SSM competitor selected randomly on a rotating basis.

Problem solved Let's Party

[Andy Bettencourt]

No way Steph. SSM is a Regional class just like ITE, SPO, SPU and a variety of open wheel specials. If we can fit them, so be it. They put up 5X what ITC does in terms of participation. They have just as much right to a run group as you do - in a REGIONAL scenario. When the classes in the GCR start to get big enough to mess with the groups - THEN I see some clamping down on undersubsrcibed, regional-only stuff.

Everyone in IT has the opportunity to double dip. When was the last time I ran in ITE? Never - can't afford two race groups. Just because we don't doesn't mean we can't. SM's are faster than SSM's. They look like the same car but they are not.

ITC isn't shrinking because of SSM. It's was just as strong this year as it was the last few years. It MAY shrink in the future but if you love ITC, you love it. ITA is strong because the cars are new, diversified, easy to find parts for and popular - it's not simply a ebb and a flow.

Open wheel guys complaining!!!???!!! They ought to look toward their own house. When I see "Wings and Things" (FA, FC, FF, CFC, FSCCA, SRSCCA, DSR, CSR, S2000, FM) put up UNDER 20 cars in total for 9 or so classes, it makes me wonder if that run group could have been better utilized. At least the Miata guys are putting up the numbers.

Miata club of America. BS. Happens to be a great car with great support that 'fits' in many spots. Oh ya, people actually want to race them. You could run a VW Golf in just as many classes sans SSM - but if you had 20 guys in ITB Golf III's who wanted to run 'Spec III', we would accomodate them as well. It's about what people want to run - and the numbers speak for themselves.

Now - having babbled all that, I have often thought about the idea of a Restricted Regional. First start with cars that are NOT eligible to attend a National race. IT, SSM and all the Regional classes. Add in SM, SRF or whatever other largely subscribed classes you want - goal - 4 run groups and maximum track time. Raise the entry fee to National-level money and see if it works.

[gran racing]

Right there we have the C field dwindling down to 'marginal' entries thanks in part to the race group that they run in.[/b]

Do you REALLY think that’s the case, or are you just writing out of Miata frustration? Come on, that bs. Remember that you need to think nationally here, not just the region you race with. In other regions, ITC races with classes other than Miatas – are those classes also the reason for decline in ITC nationally?

If you run well enough, you race. If you don't, well see my comments above.[/b]

You have to be joking, right? Is a front runners entry fee worth more than a back markers? Funny, many of the back markers don’t have as much of a budget as front running drivers yet those would be the people who this would hurt financially. Others are new and still have much to learn; yeah, let’s take away their track time.

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.[/b]

That’s kinda funny considering the class you race in.

It would be nice to have more restricted regionals though.

[FastM3]

I don't know.... Maybe this would work.

Let ITC have their own run group during lunch. 4.2 cars should be manageable.

Use a standing start. This eliminates need for the pace car !

All the other groups can stay the way they were for 2006 which seemed to work fine

Have one corner worker monitor the race from a booth at the top of the stands. This can be a SM/SSM competitor selected randomly on a rotating basis.

Problem solved Let's Party


Phil SSM / SM / ITA or ITA / SSM / SM

[lateapex911]

Yea, bashing Mazda and saying that they are lining the national office's pockets, and that's the reason our run groups suck is pretty darn funny.

It has NOTHING to do with Miatas. Except that Mazda made a car that fits into the SPORTS car club of America better than most, is cheap, plentiful, and more reliable than nearly any car preceding it. Oh...it drives great too. No wonder it's popular. heck if it wasn't such a girlie car, i bet the numbers would be even higher! (sorry)

Bottom line is that in some ways, all the Miatas make life better. Imagine having 300 entries at Lime Rock, and having them all be individual cars! We'd be paddocking up on the hill!

As to regional classes, like SSM, it's VERY hard to find fault with a Regional class that out subscribes nearly EVERY single Nationaly recognized class. They put the numbers up, they pay their way, and they take less resources than many others, so we have NO right to complain about it.

If the issue is running with other classes that you don't like, (like the formula car guys have to EVEY race), the best solution is to "sell" your class to others. The bigger it gets, the less room in a group for others.

The strong survive, the others have to adapt.

[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???????

[gran racing]

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. [/b]

Your statements were much broader in scope than two people left ITC because they were grouped with SM/SSM. I have a tough time believing that is a significant motivator for people moving away or simply not entering ITC. (In ITB and ITA we've been grouped with SM/SSM, so it's not just ITC)

Steph, if your car is getting beaten up by others doing stupid stuff, you need to speak with the driver and if that doesn't resolve things file a protest.

[Ed Funk]

Dave, speaking with the driver rarely does any good. I tried to speak with an SSM driver at NHIS who had forced me over the curb (all 4 wheels) in 6. What I got from it was a group of SSM drivers telling me that I was supposed to get out of their way and to not try to pass them in corners.

Filing a protest isn't very helpful either. A few years ago we went to pick up protest paperwork to protest a fellow itb driver that we felt had purposely hit Steph to spin her, he wasn't very good at that either, because he then drove into her left front tweaking the frame and costing big bucks to fix. As we were picking up the papers we were told by a steward that he wouldn't hear the protest! He knew nothing about what we were there for, just that he didn't want to hear us. When we got to the witness room this same steward tried to exclude me from the room. I had to point out to him that as the entrant, I had the right to be there and that I wouldn't leave. He also told us that we needed to handle that type of thing in the paddock, when I told him I had a baseball bat in my trailer and asked if that was what he meant by "handle it in the paddock", he decided to hear the protest.

A few years ago we decided that enough was too much and started racing out of the NE, we found drivers that could drive, workers that could work, stewards that knew their job and just generally a pleasant experience. When we came back we were greeted by Kathy Barnes who wanted to know where we'd been, we explained and were assured that things were different now. I'm not too sure about that, I'm sure that some will be happy if we pack up and leave again, I won't be as by and large the people here are good. But I won't be bullied and I know that Steph won't be bullied, even by Dave Lyons (the big tough guy that brought Hilda Richardson, aka "Grid Grannie", to tears a few years ago).

Maybe I should walk away from the keyboard for a day or two!

[Doc Bro]

I understand the frustration that the Funk's are feeling, however you can't please all the people all the time. The fact is the only way to appease all the masses is if EVERYONE had their own run group. At that point the only complaint would be that there wasn't enough competition and that the race weekend took a week to complete. It's an impossibility. Race cars get torn up....it stinks but it happens. Look at the NHIS ITA race earier in the year. If that wreck had been caused by an SM or SSM evryone in ITA would be complaining. Instead it was caused by a fellow ITA (who is a total bone head!!! ) and even that caused speculation and fits of rage. No one wants their stuff beat up it adds way too much to the expense BUT, it's a risk and if anyone is uncomfortable with the risks to themselves or their cars or their wallets, than wheel to wheel racing may not be a perfect fit for them. I'm not inviting anyone to leave at all but, that's just the way (IMHO) that most will view this thread.

Sorry,
R

[StephF]

I understand the frustration that the Funk's are feeling, however you can't please all the people all the time. The fact is the only way to appease all the masses is if EVERYONE had their own run group. At that point the only complaint would be that there wasn't enough competition and that the race weekend took a week to complete. It's an impossibility. Race cars get torn up....it stinks but it happens. Look at the NHIS ITA race earier in the year. If that wreck had been caused by an SM or SSM evryone in ITA would be complaining. Instead it was caused by a fellow ITA (who is a total bone head!!! ) and even that caused speculation and fits of rage. No one wants their stuff beat up it adds way too much to the expense BUT, it's a risk and if anyone is uncomfortable with the risks to themselves or their cars or their wallets, than wheel to wheel racing may not be a perfect fit for them. I'm not inviting anyone to leave at all but, that's just the way (IMHO) that most will view this thread.

Sorry,
R
[/b]

Rob: I've been there done that, understand the risks, stuff happens in racing. That's something we both know well. You can't always stop something from happening.

I've raced with Spec Racers in the Moroso 24 hour race, at night. (now that was....interesting...)
I've run test days in an ITB car with Rob Dyson in his World Cup (or whatever it is) car out there too.
I've run with Show Stock, ITB, ITC, ITA, Spec 7, etc. I've been hit, spun, tagged, etc. Most of the time it's just one of those things. People's brakes go away. Their tires get too many heat cycles. Oil on the track. Driver error. Stuff happens. Sometimes it's avoidable, sometimes it isn't.

It would be wonderful if we all had our own group, but that's a fantasy. And I don't care if I run with other groups. And, if I am reading the posts correctly, the other people in our group are expressing the same opinion.

All I want is to be IN A GROUP THAT IS SIMILAR IN HANDLING TO MINE. I don't care if I lose a lap. I don't care if it's a huge field. I don't care if I'm a back marker. I don't mind if it's rough and tumble racing. I can rub fenders, although I prefer to race cleanly with people. It's more fun that way anyway.

What's getting frustrating is the bunching up, blocking and chopping on the corners and being unable to get by on the straight. It's bunching up our group to the point that stuff happens, such as the NARRC-offs showed.

And I'm not bashing Mazdas. This IS happening in our group, for whatever reason. And I'm sure it happens in other race groups with dissimilar cars too.

I let other race groups by, especially if I can tell it's either a faster group or the race leaders. I won't move off line in a corner, or 'get out of the way', but I will point them by when I have a free hand , or will hold out there to allow them through. I try to NOT interfere with someone else's race.

That isn't happening all the time to us.

Some of the people are good at not jamming us up if we are battling each other and are getting by them in the corners.

Some of them are not.

Ed and John were taken out because some midpack drivers in the other race group didn't recognize or care that these were the leaders for the other race. And Eric said he almost got taken out as well, later on.

So...tell me how this is 'Mazda bashing' or 'sour grapes"? This is (at least I hope it's coming through!) a request to find out how to try to get the grouping changed to the benefit OF ALL.

I said it before and I'll say it again, I'd prefer to WATCH their race anyway. With a large bag of popcorn.

[Doc Bro]

Reading between the lines Steph, it sounds like one of your points involves something that is a fleeting commodity in todays society. Common courtesy. We raced with the prod guys this year and I can't tell you how many times a SLOW guy would not offer a point. It's like they're all excited that there's someone to play with. I think that attitude permeates our sport. It's a race ....anytime, anywhere, anycar, any class- it's game on. So what if I'm not on the lead lap...I raced the leader to stop him from putting me a lap down, or another lap in some cases. It's the NASCAR University of Racing for the Gifetd (spelled purposely that way).
We need more etiquette tought in our regional schools and less tough talk about "you own the corner,and, it's all racetrack it's just not all paved." I think that that sends the wrong message to a beginnner.

.02

R

[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]

[Eric Parham]

You didn't, but Eric did. [/b]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I was talking about priorities in terms of how to fairly and safely group the large number of classes (that is, whether a given run group is to be SS/IT/Prod/formula based). I did NOT say that the non-GCR classes had to be eliminated! My intended point was that if we're going to run non-GCR classes that are based on GCR classes with some cost-reducing spec (such as the spec tires in SSM and NCF), that the sub-class or subset of the original GCR class should run in the same run group as the original. That's all. Dave then made the point that the NCF class sometimes runs with slower formula cars instead of with FF. I admit that it makes some sense based on the dwindling car counts for some of the slower formula classes, but I'm not qualified to determine how safe that is since I've never even run one (except for a Skippy car). The truth is that I'm actually in favor of the cost-reducing subset classes, but not at the significant cost of sacrificing safety in the resulting combined run groups. Is that any clearer?

[Eric Parham]

I do think that SM and SSM would ideally be in the same run group, but here I'm trying to compromise. I don't know if groups 1 and 2 need adjusting, or if group 4 would be over-subscribed. I also don't see any way to break the GTs (on slicks) out of group 7.

G1: FF, CF, NCF, FC, CFC, FSCCA, FM, F1000, FV, F500

G2: SRF, SRSCCA, DSR, CSR, S2000, FA

G3: ITR, ITS, PD

G4: ITA, ITB, ITC

G5: SM, T3, SSB

G6: SSM, T4, SSC

G7: T1, T2, AS, ITE, PB, GT1, GT2, SPO

G8: GT3, EP, FP, GP, HP, GTL, SPU, Legends

[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.