Time for IT to go national?

[ddewhurst]

*** It insures track time in my corner of the world - Regional Races get cancelled not National races in MiDiv.***

This post is not aimed at Scott BUT maybe it's time for Regional IT racers to quit supporting the National races. I read that more & more of this IT racers supporting National races across the U.S. If Regions started loosing money maybe the Regions & the CRB will start listening a little bit to the Regional customers. Hence making the transission/classing from IT to Production more seamless. Moving back to IT from Production would not be seamless nor should it be IMHJ.

The only race that I know of in CenDiv area 4 that invites IT Regional racers to a National was the Cat National at Road America. Once the Spec Miata came along the Region said adios to the IT classes & started inviting the Regional Spec Miata to the Cat National & now there is no Regional cars at the Cat National IIRC.

Have Fun
David

[Darren]

RacerBill ... "We are stipulating that there would be no differences in the rules between National & Regional IT classes."

2007 SCCA Rulebook 9.1.3.B ... "Entrants shall not be guaranteed the competitiveness of any car, & competition adjustments, other than as outlined in section 9.1.3.C, are not allowed."

Does anyone seriously believe for one minute that someone would be willing to spend the time & $$$ to build a Nationally competitive IT car w/that rule in place? Especially since every other (non spec) class in SCCA has some form of competition adjustment.

[lateapex911]

RacerBill ... "We are stipulating that there would be no differences in the rules between National & Regional IT classes."

2007 SCCA Rulebook 9.1.3.B ... "Entrants shall not be guaranteed the competitiveness of any car, & competition adjustments, other than as outlined in section 9.1.3.C, are not allowed."

Does anyone seriously believe for one minute that someone would be willing to spend the time & $$$ to build a Nationally competitive IT car w/that rule in place? Especially since every other (non spec) class in SCCA has some form of competition adjustment. [/b]

Actually, yes. I think perception of fair treatment is important, and I bet more people out there are happier with the method the ITAC uses than the Prod guys.

[Greg Amy]

Does anyone seriously believe for one minute that someone would be willing to spend the time & $$$ to build a Nationally competitive IT car w/that rule in place?[/b]

Crap, Dude, what are we doing now...?

[Darren]

ddewhurst ... "... maybe it's time for IT racers to quit supporting the National races. I read more & more that IT racers are supporting National races across the U.S."

Interesting concept. However, I think that the IT racers might be shooting themselves in the foot here for the very reason you stated ... "Once SM came along, the Region said adios to the IT classes." It looks as tho SM has taken over as the Big Dog on the porch from IT (in terms of entry #s).

[Knestis]

I've been watching this one percolate for a while, before sharing some thoughts based on having been around for a while. In no particular order...

** It may be a false assumption that SCCA Nationals are the premier amateur race series. First, the distinction between "amateur" and "professional" in this game is meaningless. Second, it must be clarified if we are talking about "premier-ness" as a result of the policy inputs (Nationals rise to the top) or as assumptions - Nationals should be treated as the pinnacle, so they get more track time, etc. As Travis (et al.) point out, by many measures, National races are not typically superior to Regionals (car counts, competitiveness, ability to generate revenue) but by others, they may be (TV exposure?).

** It's equally not safe to assume that "National status" will make IT more expensive. It might encourage some entrants to commit more $$ to their programs in an effort to win a National Championship but in all likelihood, it will still probably cost about as much to be about as competitive as any given entrant is now. No - you won't be able to win on TV from Topeka for the same money you can currently win a NW Region ITC championship but it would be silly to expect that to be the case.

** If you haven't read Old Guy's post on p. 1 of this thread, you need to. His point about increased attention and application of real competition adjustments (bleah!) should scare anyone who thinks National status - under current policies and all other things being equal - is a good idea.

** Andy's point about different outcomes in different regions is a great one. Remember that your experiences may be different than others'.

** We need to be cautious about assuming that changes in SM participation numbers is an outcome attributable to the class going National. The dynamic has been nutso in that class since its inception and it's just possible that there are other factors at work there - like the realization for some that "spec" doesn't mean "equal," and that the $5000 competitive SM is a myth.

** All that said, the National/Regional distinction doesn't make a lot of sense to me in some important ways. I can see the value of regions having room to create classes that don't fit nationwide (as opposed to National) priorities. However, IT is a category recognized across the US. At face value, this seems out of whack.

** I've said it before: The ITAC, its hard work, and the "fixing" of some of IT's issues is both a blessing and a curse. We've grown awfully comfy with the ITAC's handling of issues but rest assured - increased attention is almost certainly going to result in greater political pressures being exerted on the category. IT might only be as successful as it is today BECAUSE it spent 20 years in stasis, ignored by the rules makers...

At the end of the day, I don't know that I really care. I ask myself if I would do anything differently with my racing, were ITB to become a National class - the answer I think is "no." I tend to stay close to home, spend my money on entries and the car rather than travel, and strive for efficiency rather than championships. I could enter the Oak Tree National at VIR, that would fit into my schedule nicely but otherwise... Eh.

Equally, I wonder how IT would change for me, if it made the Bigs. I doubt that a change in status would change my budget, since I HAVE a budget and decide what to do with a set amount of dough. But then, I define fun in terms of actual moments out on the track - driving AND racing. The good catch, the tidy pass, the goofy stuff that makes you laugh in your helmet. But that's just my priorities. I'm kind of an oddball too, in that I like the enduros and other kinds of racing, and I have no illusions about "climbing the ladder of motorsports" to some professional end. That ain't how it works, I know it, and that understanding clarifies a lot of things for me that confuse some other folks, I think...

K

[Darren]

lateapex911 ... "Actually, yes, I think perception of fair treatment is important, & I bet more people out there are happier w/the method the ITAC uses than the Prod guys."

Don't flatter yourself. Things were supposed to change w/the introduction of the Ad Hoc groups. All it did was give the CB/CRB another place to bury items they do not want to deal with. I've had a request buried somewhere in that circus tent for almost a year now. Hell, it wasn't even a personal item, but a general one that made the racers' life easier & took you guys out of the micro-management business (which is probably why it remains buried).

And I am still looking at a response that Andy gave to me on a car weight. The logic of that response was lost in the absolute absurdity of his thought process.

From what I have seen of late, it appears that your idea of "fair treatment" is everyone getting the same amount of ineptitude.

As far as being "... happier w/the method ...", I will give you that one only because the IT Ad Hoc group has not been drawn into the "equivalency wars" that the GT, Production & Touring Ad Hoc groups have had to deal w/for years. You stick a car in a class, & if nobody races it for 3/4/5 years, you all go DUH & reclassify it. Ya gotta admit, there ain't a lot of thought process going on here. And that was my point when I quoted 9.1.3.B. The National IT guys are not going to be willing to do business as usual in that sense (9.1.3.. At that point in time, the Ad Hoc group will be brought into having to deal w/who gets what (ala GT, Production, etc.). Put another way, nobody gets a free pass in this move.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Don't flatter yourself. Things were supposed to change w/the introduction of the Ad Hoc groups. All it did was give the CB/CRB another place to bury items they do not want to deal with. I've had a request buried somewhere in that circus tent for almost a year now. Hell, it wasn't even a personal item, but a general one that made the racers' life easier & took you guys out of the micro-management business (which is probably why it remains buried).[/b]

Well, you would be wrong. The CRB is looking at 'processes' similar to what we use for IT in both Prod and GT. There are so many variables to account for, I am not sure it can work BUT they ARE looking at it seriously. The day to day shucking and jiving requests and weights and all the BS associated with those classes is wearing thin on everyone.

And I am still looking at a response that Andy gave to me on a car weight. The logic of that response was lost in the absolute absurdity of his thought process.[/b]

This is what you wrote:

My point was that someone in SCCA w/fat fingers input the incorrect weight when the Sentra/B13 1.6 was moved from ITA to ITB. Where this affects him is that, since they are using the SCCA listed weight of 2,520 lbs, he is being penalized for what is an SCCA oversight!!! I notice that you side stepped that issue altogether. Correct the obvious error on this end (thru E&O), & you will automatically fix his problem also.[/b]

Please enlighten us as to why you think a car doesn't have to gain weight when moving from ITA to ITB. Help us understand your distain and 'fat-finger' comments. I have a feeling you just don't understand.

From what I have seen of late, it appears that your idea of "fair treatment" is everyone getting the same amount of ineptitude.[/b]

Please expand. Are you not liking the 'process'? Do you see major flaws? Do you see major errors in the results? Please explain. If we are screwing up, we need to know. Please.

The CRB has really put real responsibility on the AdHocs. If you have an 'issue' that you feel has been buried, please restate it to the CRB - and even here. Maybe we can give you a quick answer.

Seriously, respond to all the above. You failed to in the other thread.

[Knestis]

...And I am still looking at a response that Andy gave to me on a car weight. The logic of that response was lost in the absolute absurdity of his thought process.

From what I have seen of late, it appears that your idea of "fair treatment" is everyone getting the same amount of ineptitude. ...[/b]

Well, that lasted a long time - one whole page. My respect for this particular Old Guy's point of view, that is. Endorsement retracted.

K

[RSTPerformance]

I can't handle reading all of this AGAIN but.... My brief comments...

First as said multiple times, my opinion on this changes from week to week, and post to post as this topic comes up everytime we all get bored, and then it is the same people hashing it out arguing about the same issues, its generally just another new person whom gets the fights going and is bashed to ___ . (Not always an unjust thing to do BTW )

Like I said my opinion changes from week to week.

I am 100% against all classes being eligable for both Regional and National, however sometimes I think that it is pointless to have National and Regional distinctions and everything should just be combined into something like "Club Racing" (and then have "Pro Racing" as it is now). With that though I would support individualy restricted "club races" for Open wheel, closed wheel, IT, GT, Prod, Etc. This would all depend on a regions "managment" and its members wants/needs which would probably depend on the regions #'s and profatability of such events.

On the other hand, we have a good thing going... In most parts of the country I firmly believe that IT races are the best races to watch or participate in every week. Sure it doesn't make us money, but it is the best racing IMO. On top of this we have a great following and some Specificly great events such as the ARRC, and the future IT Festival. If we were a "national Class" we would all have to go to Topeka to show off, and realisticly who wants that??? lol

Raymond "All in all enjoy what we have, it wont last forever" Blethen

[lateapex911]

lateapex911 ... "Actually, yes, I think perception of fair treatment is important, & I bet more people out there are happier w/the method the ITAC uses than the Prod guys."

Don't flatter yourself.
[/b]

Note I said "I bet"....you know why I said that? Because thats what epople have told ME...not exactly me flattering myself. But I do agree with it wholeheartedly.

Things were supposed to change w/the introduction of the Ad Hoc groups. All it did was give the CB/CRB another place to bury items they do not want to deal with. [/b]

Huh?? I'll check in the ITACs "Secret Chamber of buried items" and get back to you...

I've had a request buried somewhere in that circus tent for almost a year now. Hell, it wasn't even a personal item, but a general one that made the racers' life easier & took you guys out of the micro-management business (which is probably why it remains buried).[/b]

Ahhh...the chip on the shoulder begins to appear...still have no idea what you're talking about though.....

And I am still looking at a response that Andy gave to me on a car weight. The logic of that response was lost in the absolute absurdity of his thought process.[/b]

Again, huh? Be specific and show us the lack of logic with facts..I seem to recall the explanation(s) were pretty obvious.

From what I have seen of late, it appears that your idea of "fair treatment" is everyone getting the same amount of ineptitude.[/b]

gee, thanks!

As far as being "... happier w/the method ...", I will give you that one only because the IT Ad Hoc group has not been drawn into the "equivalency wars" that the GT, Production & Touring Ad Hoc groups have had to deal w/for years. [/b]

No, it's because the IT guys (ITAC) created architecture (Performance envelopes for each class), then created a process which is documentable, and repeatable to organize the category. People can come to me or Andy or nearly anyone on the ITTAC, and say, "Here are the specs on my car, what would it weigh if it were to be classed?" and get an answer. And once the weights are set, it's not easy to change them, or get the car moved. The ITAC knows that one of the key elements IT drivers like is stability, and the lack of Prod style year to year dicking with weights and ratios and compression...when you talk to lots of IT drivers about going to Prod, their eyes glaze over, the hair stands up on the back of their neck, and they mutter about "comp adjustments" and back away like you're the devil, LOL.

The National IT guys are not going to be willing to do business as usual in that sense (9.1.3. . At that point in time, the Ad Hoc group will be brought into having to deal w/who gets what (ala GT, Production, etc.). Put another way, nobody gets a free pass in this move. [/b]

IF IT goes National...it's my promise that I will hold the line, and I think every one of the other 9 guys on the ITAC will agree. You don't know what gets discussed on con calls, and you have no idea of the ideas that have been kicked around...the ITAC has done a good job digging it's heels in and drawing the line.

Look....... IT is popular, (IMHO) for these main reasons:

-The ruleset...not too much (don't HAVE to be a degreed motorsports engineer) , not too little (cars are fun to drive because you can do easy and cool stuff to them)

- The stability and category management (more of a reson for good return rates, actually)

- The flexibilty afforded by the ruleset, which means you can build as you go it thats your pleasure.

- Easily available cars that peolple identify with.

Which all adds up to good racing.

Any change to the stature of IT can NOT change those basic cornerstones. and as long as I'm involved, I'll work to ensure they stay.

Finally, anyone who wishes to contact me via PMs or my email (in my sig) should sign their name...if they expect a response or any credibility at all. Hint hint.

[lateapex911]

** Andy's point about different outcomes in different regions is a great one. Remember that your experiences may be different than others'.

[/b]

I agree with all the points Kirks made, but this one (Andy's actually) stands out. We hear that IT going National will put an end to "fun racing" because the "Big guys" will ruin it and the little guys will just go home.

But, if you look around, there's an amazing corrollary....the fastest cars come from the areas with the best participation. Seems obvious, until you look at the prediction that the little guys will go away when the fast guys start racing in their little sandbox. Not necessarily so. Look at NE: Greg Amy won the ARRCs...and Bettencourt had his number at a number of races...plus quite a few others nipping at their heels. Tough crowd, right? yup...but ITA often saw 20 -30 car fields. The little guys didn't stay away. Nor did they when Serra was running...and ended up winning the ARRCs in ITA as well.

And look at the middle of the country..I get the impression Ruck races in a big class...and he also stands on the ARRC podium pretty regularly.

So, it is not a sure thing that the little guys will disappear just becuse the best in the country race in your backyard.

** I've said it before: The ITAC, its hard work, and the "fixing" of some of IT's issues is both a blessing and a curse. We've grown awfully comfy with the ITAC's handling of issues but rest assured - increased attention is almost certainly going to result in greater political pressures being exerted on the category. IT might only be as successful as it is today BECAUSE it spent 20 years in stasis, ignored by the rules makers...[/b]

I think IT has been as popular as it has been is mostly due to the combination the ruleset and the easy access nature of the class. We can never lose that.

[Bill Miller]

lateapex911 ... "Actually, yes, I think perception of fair treatment is important, & I bet more people out there are happier w/the method the ITAC uses than the Prod guys."

Don't flatter yourself. Things were supposed to change w/the introduction of the Ad Hoc groups. All it did was give the CB/CRB another place to bury items they do not want to deal with. I've had a request buried somewhere in that circus tent for almost a year now. Hell, it wasn't even a personal item, but a general one that made the racers' life easier & took you guys out of the micro-management business (which is probably why it remains buried).

And I am still looking at a response that Andy gave to me on a car weight. The logic of that response was lost in the absolute absurdity of his thought process.

From what I have seen of late, it appears that your idea of "fair treatment" is everyone getting the same amount of ineptitude.

As far as being "... happier w/the method ...", I will give you that one only because the IT Ad Hoc group has not been drawn into the "equivalency wars" that the GT, Production & Touring Ad Hoc groups have had to deal w/for years. You stick a car in a class, & if nobody races it for 3/4/5 years, you all go DUH & reclassify it. Ya gotta admit, there ain't a lot of thought process going on here. And that was my point when I quoted 9.1.3.B. The National IT guys are not going to be willing to do business as usual in that sense (9.1.3.. At that point in time, the Ad Hoc group will be brought into having to deal w/who gets what (ala GT, Production, etc.). Put another way, nobody gets a free pass in this move.
[/b]

I'm not going to waste a whole lot of time on this one. Needless to say OG, besides not having much of a clue, you're pretty rude for someone who's only been around for a couple of months and doesn't have the sack to use his real name. Others have come before you, and others will come after you, but one thing's pretty much a given, if you don't have the sack to stand behind what you post by using your real name, don't expect too many people to pay any attention to you.


Now, on to the business of this thread. Andy's comment is spot on, IT going National will have a different impact in different parts of the country. I also think that the 'no guarantee' clause will need to come out, if IT goes National. But then again, I've felt that it should have been removed years ago (about the same time the dual-purpose language was removed). Those that think that just because a Wombat XCR wins the Runoffs, that every Wombat XCR will get a lead trophy haven't really been paying attention. They do that in Prod and GT because they have no idea how they got to where they are. Whereas IT has developed a proactive, objective process for classifying cars and setting spec weights. And as more data come in, the model gets refined (see changes in FWD adders for faster classes). And from that standpoint, I see IT going National as an upside. You'll for sure get more people that will bring their A game, so you'll get a better picture of the true performance potential for a given car. I don't see how that's a bad thing. And if a car's true potential doesn't fit the model, you've got the ability to adjust the weight. That exists today, via PCA's.

I personally don't see anything wrong w/ balancing performance w/ weight. I don't have any fear that IT will ever go the Prod route w/ choke size adjustments, alternate brakes, etc. etc. What you'll have, is a category w/ a stable ruleset where the cars are spec'd by an objective process. As an outsider, I would see that as much more attractive than some other category where things are much more of a moving target.

[Ron]

Just a question, the prod guys and there constant rules mdifications, is that based on how the cars do at the runoffs? What I am getting at is that my little ITB Mustang runs great at Roebling Road, nice fast sweeping turns with not a lot of stop and go. At Road Atlanta it is different, hills, big brake zones and our gear ratios don't work out well. Thats racing, some cars are better than others at certain tracks. I can hold David Lera in his Golf off at Roebling Road, at Road Atlanta he gets me.
Are too much of the rules changes in the national classes based to much on one race weekend?

By the way I am all for SCCA reducing the number of classes across the board. In GT, Open and closed wheel, and yes put IT in with prod. I think NASA is strting to do this.

[RacerBill]

I agree with all the points Kirks made, but this one (Andy's actually) stands out. We hear that IT going National will put an end to "fun racing" because the "Big guys" will ruin it and the little guys will just go home.

But, if you look around, there's an amazing corrollary....the fastest cars come from the areas with the best participation. Seems obvious, until you look at the prediction that the little guys will go away when the fast guys start racing in their little sandbox. Not necessarily so. Look at NE: Greg Amy won the ARRCs...and Bettencourt had his number at a number of races...plus quite a few others nipping at their heels. Tough crowd, right? yup...but ITA often saw 20 -30 car fields. The little guys didn't stay away. Nor did they when Serra was running...and ended up winning the ARRCs in ITA as well.

And look at the middle of the country..I get the impression Ruck races in a big class...and he also stands on the ARRC podium pretty regularly.

So, it is not a sure thing that the little guys will disappear just becuse the best in the country race in your backyard.
I think IT has been as popular as it has been is mostly due to the combination the ruleset and the easy access nature of the class. We can never lose that.
[/b]

Here, Here!!!!!!!

[RacerBill]

I am not in favor of combining National and Regional races into just one big catagory of 'club races' Aside from being qualifying races for the Runoffs, National and Regional races generally are different distances with National races requiring more attention to tire management, etc.

I am still on the fence as far as IT going National. I see pros and cons. On one hand, I would not like to see the prestige of the ARRC deminished. Atlanta has built up this event on there own and deserves a lot of credit. But it would sure be nice to see IT receive some TV air time that in some form or another we help fund being members of the SCCA (or USSR, I mean USCR - Union of Sports Car Regions -tongue out of cheek now).

[gran racing]

But it would sure be nice to see IT receive some TV air time[/b]

I used to think it would be cool to have our races on TV a 3:30 a.m. LOL

(Not picking on you Bill, but other than for other IT drivers does the t.v. time really mean much given aired time?)

until you look at the prediction that the little guys will go away when the fast guys start racing in their little sandbox. Not necessarily so. Look at NE: Greg Amy won the ARRCs...and Bettencourt had his number at a number of races...plus quite a few others nipping at their heels. Tough crowd, right? yup...but ITA often saw 20 -30 car fields. The little guys didn't stay away. Nor did they when Serra was running...and ended up winning the ARRCs in ITA as well.[/b]

I'm not entirely sure what the effect would be nor is anyone else. That is part of the problem with this decision. Jake, you are correct in your evaluation of today's IT world. I do wonder what would happen if the fast drivers with goobs of money and development in their cars becomes much more of the norm. I can't help but wonder what I would have done when looking into IT if that were the case. I do know it would have been more intimidating to start racing.

Possibly this is way off base, but I somewhat think look at the ARRC as a case study. Yes I know, there are many differences but that's just what comes to mind. The ARRC is a regional that anyone can who races in IT can participate just like any other regional race. It just so happens that the region did a fantastic job building the hype up about this event and it draws many top IT racers to it each year. When talking to people who are either mid or toward the back of the pack, they often choose not to attend because of the money and talent that will be at that particular event. If the "ARRC caliber of racers & cars" becomes the standard, will people be more tempted to find an alternative to IT and even SCCA?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Good question Dave. What I think is reality however is that when you look at each National in it's own fishbowl, you will see the same spread of talent and prep that you see at every NARRC IT race. There are fast guys in fast cars, fast guys in slow cars, slow guys in fast cars and slow guys in slow cars (actually, this isn't true becasue that would assume 4 drivers in each class and most classes can't muster that!!! )

True racers seek competition and strive to get better every week. In all forms of racing (and life) you will find people who seek out the easiest path...should we create a place for mediocrity to flourish? I can't think of a form of racing where it isn't intimdating to a nOOb when they look at the current winners...but everyone had to start somewhere. Did you ever think when you started that you would start the 2007 season with a Pro motor?

Like I said before, in some regions national status changes nothing, in some it would change their racing culture forever. We just have to decide if that is a good thing or a bad thing.

[lateapex911]

I used to think it would be cool to have our races on TV a 3:30 a.m. LOL

(Not picking on you Bill, but other than for other IT drivers does the t.v. time really mean much given aired time?)



I'm not entirely sure what the effect would be nor is anyone else. That is part of the problem with this decision. Jake, you are correct in your evaluation of today's IT world. I do wonder what would happen if the fast drivers with goobs of money and development in their cars becomes much more of the norm.
[/b]

Dave, remember Hoosiers? The movie about the underdog college basketball team. And when they went to the big game the coach made them measure the hoop height and the foul line?? He was making the point that the court was the same, and nothing else mattered. It was about the team, not the stadium...

Fancy trailers, nice rigs and great decals don't make a racecar, and we know that. Sure, super jammy this and that add a bit, but lets face it, there are diminishing returns. The ruleset does a pretty good job of not allowing you to spend money. No super pimp wings that rip off and bend every time you brush a tire wall, no carbon fibre hoods/fenders/flares to be replaced constantly, no huge Brembo brake allowances, no bigbucks valve spring allowances and so on. Want to spend $6K on dampers? Go ahead...are they $4600 better than a $1600 set? Doubt it. 99% of us would be better off using the $4500 to go to more events and test more.

(That said, is there room at the top for improvement? Sorry to say, yes, I think there has to be, as proud as we are of our top IT dogs. History has shown that when some of our better IT guys graduate, they struggle on teams with known "pros"...I can think of several examples. But can also think of an exception too. ) But, yes, if lots of big money came...combined with big talent, then the top eschelon could get jacked up a bit. But I don't see the classes being redefined as some do by that possibility.

And lets not be too sure the money would automatically fly into IT, just because it's a National class....look at the other National classes.

As you point out, the ARRCs are just a regional, and lack the prestige that the Runoffs have......but even so, the Runoffs drew TEN classes (of 25 total!) that had the same or less entrants than the ARRCs had for ITA!

Thats right, of 25 classes, 10 couldn't be bothered to show up to run the National Chamionship at the same participation level as a regional in Atlanta that is said to have the best of the best.....the carrot of a National Runoffs invite isn't the huge carrot it's cracked up to be, evidently, or more than 25 guys might have bothered to show up.

Again, I think that IT is popular because of the ruleset...and I think that would make it a popular National category...and it would be even more important to be triple extra vigilant about protecting the foundation and core of that ruleset..

[gran racing]

True racers seek competition and strive to get better every week. In all forms of racing (and life) you will find people who seek out the easiest path...should we create a place for mediocrity to flourish?[/b]

I do not believe we should create a place for mediocrity to flourish. My concern isn’t so much what impact this will have on what it takes to win, just what effect it will have on SCCA’s entry level class and the impact to actually enter (regardless if it’s a reality or perception).

I can't think of a form of racing where it isn't intimdating to a nOOb when they look at the current winners...but everyone had to start somewhere. Did you ever think when you started that you would start the 2007 season with a Pro motor? [/b]

Some forms and classes of racing are less intimidating than others. To answer your other question, I would have been surprised to believe my racing package would be where it will be in 2007. I will say that I have always been extremely determined and hungry to continually reach new levels in racing, so maybe it shouldn't be too surprising. If I hadn't destroyed my bondo sponsored car in '06 and used the extra time working a part time job, it wouldn't have happened this year. It's funny how things work out.

Fancy trailers, nice rigs and great decals don't make a racecar, and we know that. Sure, super jammy this and that add a bit, but lets face it, there are diminishing returns. The ruleset does a pretty good job of not allowing you to spend money. No super pimp wings that rip off and bend every time you brush a tire wall, no carbon fibre hoods/fenders/flares to be replaced constantly, no huge Brembo brake allowances, no bigbucks valve spring allowances and so on. Want to spend $6K on dampers? Go ahead...are they $4600 better than a $1600 set? Doubt it. 99% of us would be better off using the $4500 to go to more events and test more.[/b]

I agree, but only up to a point. There are two aspects of this, the first being mental. Since I mentioned my idea of the ARRC being a case study: When I was considering going to the ARRC in ’05, I was very intimidated by the thought. I kept thinking I totally be out of my league. The thought of me showing up with my rusty car on a tow dolly next to some of those huge rigs. Let’s just say I made numerous excuses of why I couldn’t go and the only reason I did was because Melissa convinced me that one day I would look back and regret it. I later found out that one of the top drivers even said “Dave’s really bringing that thing down to the ARRC??” In this case I had a racecar; the risk and investment wasn’t as great as it would be to start racing.

While the Hoosier movie reference is nice, racing is about man and machine. Sure, I believe that especially in the club level if someone focuses hard enough on the driver they can overcome what my lack in budget compared to other drivers. It’s great that the importance of the machine is somewhat kept in check in IT. At that same time without the money, it is not possible to obtain a nearly optimum racing package (driver and racecar).

This is a tough one and I certainly don't claim to know the answer.