ITAC News.

[Chip42]

Regarding changes to the classification review language in the ITCS:

I don't think that's true, I think there will be support from the CRB.

wow. ok, so who's drafting the new language for the proposal? submit it, and I for one will write in support of it. I can see a few others would too, assuming it meets with our expectations.

and defines error...

[lateapex911]

Or doesn't NEED to define "error". Because it's a much more open system, and doesn't have to rely on the "error clause " as an end around way to adjust cars.

(Because, according to the CRB, that's what we were doing...)

[JoshS]

ok, so who's drafting the new language for the proposal? submit it, and I for one will write in support of it. I can see a few others would too, assuming it meets with our expectations.

As I said earlier, the ITAC will do it, and I will make sure to incorporate input from the CRB so we hopefully won't run into too many hurdles on down the road. Please be patient, it will be a while. We're talking about a 2012 effective date at the earliest. We will dedicate one of our summer meetings to it. I'm sure it will go on beyond that though. At some point if we can internally agree on a strategy, we'll put out a draft and request member input, continue to work on it after that, and then eventually submit the proposal up the chain for approval.

[Ron Earp]

We're talking about a 2012 effective date at the earliest. We will dedicate one of our summer meetings to it. I'm sure it will go on beyond that though.

You've got to be kidding. Committees of the same size have coordinated the construction of the world's largest structures and planned successful invasions of countries. I'd suggest you aim a bit higher.

[JoshS]

You've got to be kidding. Committees of the same size have coordinated the construction of the world's largest structures and planned successful invasions of countries. I'd suggest you aim a bit higher.

I'm not kidding. There's a "rules season" now. There might still be a small opportunity to sneak something small and easy into the 2011 season, but not for something that's going to require this kind of effort and member input.

EDIT: The definition of "error," which is what has allowed weight changes that would otherwise violate the rules, could conceivably change prior to the 2012 season, as I don't think that would be bound by the rules season. Not saying it will, just saying it could.

[gran racing]

The BOD needs to intervene. 2012 is laughable. There won't be support for anything happening then as it waaaay too far off in the distance.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Sorry Josh but this needs to be Priority 1. It CAN get into the ITCS for 2011. Get the CRB on board, work together and push it through.

The next Fast Track could tell members of your intent and ask them to write in on the topic NOW.

This is the current ITAC's legacy.

[Ron Earp]

I'm not kidding. There's a "rules season" now. There might still be a small opportunity to sneak something small and easy into the 2011 season, but not for something that's going to require this kind of effort and member input.

Josh, you are the chairman of the ITAC. Man up and run it - develop your vision for the ITAC, get members aligned with the direction or get new ones that are, work with the CRB, and get it done. It can be accomplished if you try and don't let the typical SCCA bureaucratic bullshit get in the way.

[JeffYoung]

Josh as chairman doesn't have any real authority to force anything. He basically is a coordinator, and so it is unlikely/impossible he/we can force things through.

Changing the classing rules for IT (which is really what we have to do if we want to process all cars) will take some time. But I agree, we need to be as forceful about this as we can. Josh took the lead to make it THE topic for June. There is going to be resistance to this both on the ITAC and elsewhere -- resistance to using an objective process for all cars. There will be a lot of discussion, and it will take time.

But we will push as hard as we can. And it still might not get through.

Josh, you are the chairman of the ITAC. Man up and run it. Develop your vision for the ITAC, get members aligned with the direction or get new ones that are, work with the CRB, and get it done. It can be done if you try and don't let typical SCCA bureaucratic bullshit get in the way.

[Andy Bettencourt]

We DO need to understand that there are deadlines that have to be met and things that must be done before the 2011 GCR goes to print. It will be tight but I bet it can be done.

[lateapex911]

There is going to be resistance to this both on the ITAC and elsewhere -- resistance to using an objective process for all cars. There will be a lot of discussion, and it will take time.

But we will push as hard as we can. And it still might not get through.

Well, certainly the ITAC already HAS the process, V2, and has used it, and knows it works. That's the JOY of it, it runs itself, you just fill in the blanks. (Which still take some doing at times)

So I see the issue being getting the GCR in line with the procedure. I'd HOPE the ITAC would be on board with the concept, and it would be the wording that would take a little time.

heck, if you want a place to start, I'll write it up and send it in,