Death of a championship

[RKramden]

Many years ago, Henryk Szamota had the idea of starting a championship series known as the "Area 1 Championship." It was to determine the "champion" of Area 1 in all phases of competition. This included Autocross (gymkhana), Rally, and Racing. Henryk was a very competitive person himself and had a strong focus on not only winning, but being a real sportsman while doing it. In the book "Unfair Advantage", Henryk is mentioned as being one of the better stewards in the SCCA.

(Henryk was the national cycling champ of Poland for a number of years, spoke at least a half a dozen languages, and is rumored to have kept New York Region in operation by funding some of it's operation himself. On a sad note, he lost his wife (stroke) and son (cancer) on the same day in the same hospital but remained dedicated to the club and sports car racing in the northeast.)

Today, as part of NARRC, there is the Henryk Szamota Award to be presented annually at the NARRC banquet to the NARRC participant who “has shown the qualities of character found in Henryk Szamota – the founder of NARRC. Those qualities are Competition, Sportsmanship, and above all being a Gentleman or Lady.”

The Rally and Gymkhana parts of the club didn't continue on with the championship, and a region from Area 9 wanted to join as well, so the name was changed to the "North Atlantic Road Racing Championship."

In the early years, attendance at the NARRC championship was by invitation only. (I have this on good authority, as Marianne was the one who hand wrote all the invitations!) There were requirements on the number of NARRC races run during the year and where you were in the points. You had to earn the invitation. Then you would show up at Lime Rock and race "for all the marbles." Winner takes all. The system was very close to what is used for the SCCA National Championship today.

Over the years, some of the rules have changed and the invitation only rule was dropped, but the championship has always about being the best in the area.

Today, NASCAR is often the butt of many jokes because of all the tricks that the officials use to make it "entertaining" and to assure that the cash flow doesn't stop. Even the really hard core NASCAR fans are admitting that in certain ways the outcome of a race is "fixed" or "adjusted". Money is what drives NASCAR, not the competition, and certainly not sportsmanship.

NARRC was always about the competition, but the newest rule changes have a very NASCAR-like tilt. You don't get a grab at the ring this year unless you pay lots of money to enter most of the races put on at Lime Rock by the various regions. The championship is starting to be less and less about being the best and is starting to favor those who live near Lime Rock and/or have deep pockets. If you cannot make one of those blessed races for whatever reason, then sorry, you don't get to grab at the ring. The "stewards" of the program seem to have started down a slippery slope in the quest for money and are abandoning the concepts used when the series was started. Yes, racing has always been about money, but the latest set of rules have made money even more important. Skill is now in second place.

This year, I won't be look at a NARRC Champion is the same light as in the past, as there is a new layer of tarnish on the title. Yes, some who win will deserve the championship because they are that good, but the championship is no longer about simply being the best. Worst of all, the changes tarnish the memory of what Henryk was to the club and to the many people he helped in so many ways.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Greg Amy won ITA last year without even having to attend the NARRC. Now THAT is hard to do.

I think you can look at this many ways. You SHOULD have to attend a lot of races to win. In the past 2-3 years, you had to go to Pocono to get those 12 bonus points. NO DIFFERENT that LRP this year. You can skip any of those LRP races and at MOST, you are missing out on 12 points if you win. For most guys it will be significantly less than that. Pocono is the real offender here to be honest.

But I don't mind that much. You should have to go to 10 plus races to win this thing. If it's tough, it's tough. If it was easy, everyone would be doing it. You can't 'buy' a championship if your class is well subscribed, you get your best 8...go ahead - go to 15 but you still get your best 8. 7 extra points for participation is all...

Having said that, I have no problem with looking at a total revamp - I have and will volunteer for this committee. But remember, just as many people who may want a single-event champioship - there are others who want to spread this stuff out over the year so that 'real life' doesn't preclude them from a shot at the ring. It's a tough call. Pro's and Con's either way.

[Eric Parham]

I thought the main issue was that a PARTICULAR non-ruinoffs race is now required at Lime Rock. This most certainly is different than the old bonus simply for getting to all the tracks at least once. I didn't get the bonus points last year for Pocono, and although I was disappointed that they weren't to be given for Watkins Glen, at least I felt that those who made the extra effort to make Pocono deserved the bonus.

Even though Pocono is usually a double, all one needed to do was finish (or start?) one NARRC-sanctioned race there (and one at each of the other two tracks) to become eligible for those bonus points. The new requirement to make a particular race at Lime Rock, while probably well-intentioned to try to make sure that a currently underfunded region doesn't lose money, makes a mockery of the merit basis for those bonus points.

The situation is probably worsened by the increased entry fee for that particular race (although most of us realize that it's more a problem with Lime Rock rather than the sponsoring region). I'm sure that even the NARRC members who voted for this year's bonus points system have probably realized their error by now. A points system that is supposed to be based on merit cannot survive such an obvious monetary corruption. A better option, and it might not be too late, would be to do something special to actually encourage drivers to attend rather than trying in any way to coerce them into it. If it's not obvious, drivers tend to be too independent for such a short-sighted tactic to work.

[RSTPerformance]

The "stewards" of the program seem to have started down a slippery slope in the quest for money and are abandoning the concepts used when the series was started. Yes, racing has always been about money, but the latest set of rules have made money even more important. Skill is now in second place.

This year, I won't be look at a NARRC Champion is the same light as in the past, as there is a new layer of tarnish on the title. Yes, some who win will deserve the championship because they are that good, but the championship is no longer about simply being the best. Worst of all, the changes tarnish the memory of what Henryk was to the club and to the many people he helped in so many ways.
[/b]

Be careful how you use the 'Stewards" quote, and be sure to realize that the "SCCA Stewards" are NOT the ones whom make any changes or set any rules on how a region or regions conduct races and/or championships. They only enforce the rules they are given. - Just wanted all to be clear on that.

As for the comments, Andy, I agree that the Pocono rule is also bad for the series. Right or wrong I accepted it as it has been that way for years.

The additional rules that were added this season has not completely changed my thought on whom the "NARRC" champion is. At the end of the year each champion will need to be looked at closely to see if this really did or did not have an effect on the actual competition.

What these new rules have done is give me zero desire to compete for the championship because I never have run all the Lime Rock Races (couldn't afford it then, definatly can't now) and if it is required then I wont stand a chance, because many people will run all the events required. As a side note I have not ever concentrated on the NERRC series simply because I am not a 100% interested in running all the NER events, and my car isn't suited for the local track (NHIS). It is a GREAT championship that is far more fair, and is especially great as a local championship!!! Maybe next year I will simply think about that series...

Eric your comments are spot on...

What will be interesting to see is if anyone is able to grab a championship without all Lime Rock events and without the double points at the Runoffs.

Raymond Blethen

[dickita15]

Be careful how you use the 'Stewards" quote, and be sure to realize that the "SCCA Stewards" are NOT the ones whom make any changes or set any rules on how a region or regions conduct races and/or championships.
[/b]

Now that’s funny, I don’t care who you are.
Raymond “rash” Blethen telling Dave to be care with his choice of words.

[RSTPerformance]

yeah yeah, where is the foot in mouth "smiley" that I do need so often??? lol


Raymond "I am suprised you still read my posts " Blethen

[disquek]

Bottom line for me is: This is amatuer club racing. True sport. Not entertainment. Not for profit. The championship should not be used as bait to get attendance up and make more money for the regions.

The championship should stand on it's own merrit. It should be based on what the competitors think qualifies the winner as the best. Period. Nothing else.

-Kyle

[RKramden]

Be careful how you use the 'Stewards" quote, and be sure to realize that the "SCCA Stewards" are NOT the ones whom make any changes or set any rules on how a region or regions conduct races and/or championships.
[/b]

Which is why it is lower case and in quotes, to expressly differentiate it from referring to those anencephalous (1)(2) people who populate the track on race weekends.

The reference was to the stewards of the NARRC championship, e.g. those eight people who put such self serving rules in place.

---------------------------------------------------

(1) This is a footnote just for Dick, because he seems to like it when I post here with footnotes.

(2) anencephalous - adjective - characterized by partial or total absence of a brain [syn: anencephalic]
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.

[lateapex911]

Dave, good post. Thanks for the history lesson. Nice use of a long word. I wouldn't say it applies to the entire subset though, but it still got a good laugh from me.

I also wonder if, in the attempt to bolster the attendence at events in an artificial manner, it might backfire, and actually reduce attendance at those events and others. Will some now just throw in the towel, knowing they weren't a strong contender, and skip other races as well? Perhaps in favor of other options?

And with the IT festival being so close in Ohio, and having lots of interest from lots of IT folks in a wide circle, I wonder if many IT'ers will decide to try some different tracks like MO, and others, this year?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Solution time: What do we do? I will get with Serge and Doug on how we can all get involved for 2008. If a drivers committee is needed, who is in?

[Eric Parham]

Solution time: What do we do? I will get with Serge and Doug on how we can all get involved for 2008. If a drivers committee is needed, who is in?
[/b]

I think that's a great idea. I'd be willing to try to make a difference, albeit from a purely idealist or driver's perspective.

[dickita15]

Working with Doug and Serge will have little value. NER is very lucky in that their entire racing program does not rest with one track. If we take a hit at lime rock cheap date will not be as cheap. If some regions take a hit it could end their program. NER members cannot solve this.

[Doc Bro]

I think that this is indicative of a slightly larger problem. One of involvement. It seems that decisions may be made without group consensus. I do realize that pissing off everyone is a consensus...but it may not be best for the club. I find access to the "process" difficult to come by for many aspects of this club. I would be VERY interested in being more involved. How? While I don't think this is a secret back room, special password type of club, I do think we could do a better job seeking (or receiving) the help of our members.

R

[RKramden]

Part of the perceived problem is that the NARRC committee is not representative of the drivers, it is representative of the member regions. It clearly does not act in the interest of the drivers. If it did represent the drivers then 6 of the 8 members on the committee would be from NER. A few years ago, Ms. Barnes asked me to count such things, and IIRC, about 70-80% of the entries in NARRC were from NER members that year.

There are a lot of trade-offs in making races NARRC races. It draws a few more cars, but it costs the region a small fee per car (somewhere near $1,000 per event, car count dependent, and twice that if the event is a "double"). I don't think that anyone can tell you exactly how much more or less it effects the car count. Any number would only be a guess.

If NER were to drop all NARRC events (and other regions to keep them), then the series would be smaller than NERRC, and just about all of their funding would go away. They certainly would not have money for trophies and checks for the drivers.

Because NER actually has two events at LRP, the "lock-in rule" is only half effective for us. Drivers can choose which one event they want to go to and skip the other. So it is a rule that really has benefit for the other three regions.

Also, it pressures the NARRC drivers to save their budgets and run LRP rather than other places, trading a track where they get more track time per event for events where there is little track time even if everything goes perfectly. Some weekends at NHIS have given drivers too much track time, with drivers complaining that they wanted some shorter races. (We once had a 25 lap regional as part of a double weekend, for example.)

I don't think there is any one solution that is good for all drivers. The only question is what is the best compromise.

The question for Serge and Doug is: "Do NER drivers (and not just the vocal ones) want the region to participate in NARRC?" Or maybe: "Do NER drivers understand all the implications of pulling out of NARRC in the first place?"

Maybe that is something to find out on Memorial Day weekend.

[Dave Patten]

To me it is obvious that the 2007 NARRC rules changes are a reaction to financial issues first and not for series enhancement. There are issues I have with the way the NARRC rules are established and administered from a driver’s viewpoint.

First they are handled by the “administrators” of the Regions. This is not by choice, but by default. The competitors are not involved and by their lack of involvement the work is done by the administrators. For this to change competitors need to be involved. In NER the Road Racing Board meets monthly in Worcester, MA @ 7:30PM on a Friday. Few drivers without any administrative ties attend these meetings. This is where driver input and participation starts. If you as driver want to gain control of the NARRC series rules, you need to be involved in the administrative process; otherwise you are at the mercy of the decisions made by those that for the most part are administrators and non racers. (and I thank them for doing so)

Secondly, the NARRC series rules are established based on the “vote” of 4 regions. This grossly misrepresents most of the drivers in the NARRC series. Telling an NER driver, (who is 70-80% of the participation numbers, per Dave Lyon’s research) that they have 25% representation in the decision making process is BS. There needs to be a system that more closely represents the drivers. I would suggest creating a system that establishes seven (7) NARRC committee districts. Each district represents one seventh of the drivers from all four regions. The “districts” are established by taking a spread sheet listing all the drivers in the four regions and sorting the list by zip code. By dividing that sorted list into seven equal parts, you establish equal driver representation. Each district will then get to elect a representative. This will establish parity of representation by both locale and driver numbers, without Regional membership bias.

Just my opinions.

[gran racing]

In NER the Road Racing Board meets monthly in Worcester, MA @ 7:30PM on a Friday. Few drivers without any administrative ties attend these meetings. This is where driver input and participation starts. If you as driver want to gain control of the NARRC series rules, you need to be involved in the administrative process; otherwise you are at the mercy of the decisions made by those that for the most part are administrators and non racers. (and I thank them for doing so)[/b]

Which Friday and where is the schedule posted on the NER website??

[RSTPerformance]

Which Friday and where is the schedule posted on the NER website??
[/b]

http://www.ner.org/schedule.htm

Raymond

[Andy Bettencourt]

But remember, going to this meeting will have no affect on NARRC stuff. Just ain't the right people. The reason I said Serge and Doug is because they can give us the off-line insight into the NARRC world and how we may become involved - as they are the NER reps to that series.

If we want it in the hands of the drivers, we need to take it.

[benspeed]

Solution time: What do we do? I will get with Serge and Doug on how we can all get involved for 2008. If a drivers committee is needed, who is in?
[/b]

Count me in - I would participate on a NARRC race committe.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Count me in - I would participate on a NARRC race committe. [/b]

That's my boy. One NER, one NNJR...who else?