IT National? Anyone else have this experience at a driver's meeting this year?

[shwah]

I'm pretty much done with this game now though

jjj
Paint it how you want. Your not debating anything IMO.

[tnord]

here's an issue kirk (and Andy since he deals with this on the SMAC).....

if IT were to go Nat'l, it would only take a year or two for people to figure out which car in ITR/S/A/B/C is best at the runoffs specific track - of which i have no doubt that there is one specific model best suited for topeka or elsewhere, especially given the rightful refusal of the ITAC to make adjustments to cars that are within 100lbs of target. you will then see a massive move amongst the nat'l ranks to all build that specific make/model, which will undoubtedly generate countless requests for what amounts to competition adjustments, but will be veiled as another "realigning" because the performance target has now shifted. of course, many may not chose to build that car, but stay away from the runoffs all together......runoffs participation decreases.....CRB/BOD pressure for "comp adjustmets" increases......

i don't see any way the ITAC can stop this from happening, even if they try and stick to their guns.

[lateapex911]

Strictly in terms of skill level, I have little doubt that the cream of the National and Regional crops are equally talented. Further, I tend to think that the distribution of talent is probably similar - the good, the bad, and the ugly are pretty much distributed similarly in both populations.


...but make no mistake (and this is one of the more important points, i think): We will face that challenge regardless, if the popularity and competitiveness of IT continue to grow - for whatever reason - so we'd best all be on the same page.

K

I'd go out on a limb and say that IF, for example, ITA was a Runoffs class, I'd have a harder time cracking, oh, say, the top 15, then I would in say F-Prod, all things being more or less equal, (ie money /effort spent)

Kirk is right though, that if IT were to be Runoffs eligible, that pressure on the ITAC would naturally increase, and I believe that because it would become a more popular category.

Popularity = competition, which equals effort required in time and money.

[jjjanos]

jjj
Paint it how you want. Your not debating anything IMO.

Thank you for your input. This is inconsistent with class philosophy.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Thank you for your input. This is inconsistent with class philosophy.

Agree or not, that is funny right there.

[shwah]

That it is. Still done, but smiling.

[jjjanos]

i don't see any way the ITAC can stop this from happening, even if they try and stick to their guns.

DA: It can be made very difficult to do, however, provided that the BoD is willing to be limited. Enshrine the requirement in the Class category and in the by-laws of the Club.

Example: Changes in minimum car weights for the IT Category, except for cases where a car is reclassified to a new class within the IT Category, shall be made in increments no less than X (50lbs?100lbs?) and shall require the unanimous consent of the BoD, the CRB and the ITAC. No amendment or revision to these rules shall invalidate this requirement.

There are work arounds to the prohibition, but it would require a greater willingness to peeve the membership than has been demonstrated to date by past BoDs. Basically, the BoD would be promising explicitely not to do this to us and that's a bigger promise than simply paying lip service to the class philosophy.

[tnord]

and the regional only forever part of the SM philosophy and intent lasted all of about 5 years.

[Knestis]

Expand the intent clause to define first principles, then add a new line to the same section, declaring that the section cannot be changed...?

I guess I haven't done a good job of this but it's EVERYONE'S responsibility to work to keep this from happening and, since the rate of change has increased recently, we need to be doing it regardless.

K

[tnord]

do you agree that there will be one "cherry" car for whatever the current RO track is?

[jjjanos]

do you agree that there will be one "cherry" car for whatever the current RO track is?

DA: Don't know. Consider this, however...

If there is one "cherry" car for the ROV (Runoff Venue), then there probably is one "cherry" car for every venue. Do we see that?

I'd say not at at least two tracks:

Summit Point: 6 races last year:
ITB: 4 different types took a win and on any given weekend, any of the 4 could be there.
ITA: 3 different types took a win.
ITS: 3 maybe 4 different types took a win.

Atlanta: 5 races not including Pro-IT but including the ARRC
ITB: 4 different types won
ITA: 2 different types
ITS: 3 different types.

[tnord]

i refuse to get into a "discussion" with you.....but that's not a valid analysis.

[jjjanos]

i refuse to get into a "discussion" with you.....but that's not a valid analysis.

Enlighten me/us then - what would constitute a valid analysis? I'd love to either fire one more nail into this proposal's coffin or dismiss this as null.

[tnord]

have fun with yourself there sparky.

[IPRESS]

"Mac,
There is something I don’t understand that maybe you could help me with.
My home track, NHMS has 3 double regionals, 2 single regionals and one national a year. If someone chooses to race in a regional class they only give up one opportunity to race a year. Still I have had friends chose a national class car because they have the option of racing at a national if they chose to.
My understanding of the South West Div is there are a lot more nationals than regionals and although there are sometimes restricted regional with some nationals that the regional class drivers feel they don’t get treated fairly at these events. Again my understanding is that because of this the IT and other regional only classes are as a percentage not as popular in the SW. Given this I would assume that IT drivers there would want national status so they could get the same treatment as the other classes.
What am I missing in understanding why you are against the possibility of National status for IT? Is it solely because of your disappointment with the evolution of SM?"

Dick, I wrote a novel on this yesterday and when I pushed the submit button it went poof! Just as well as it was a lot of what I have already stated. But here is a smaller version.
SW does have some problems between Reg. & Nat. but it looks like it is being worked on. I think (they / we) have lost some racers to other places because of few Rest. Reg. (two days of racing) in the past. They are working on that. I started racing up in the Mid Div a little several years ago, and have done most of my racing there the last two years. The MidAM & IT Tour series are fun and good competition. Being in the Northern half of the state I can get to tracks in the Mid Div. Also from a equality standpoint, I think the Regional racer is not treated as second class in Mid Div. SW is a heavy National influenced Div. I was told a long time ago by a PTBer if I wanted equality get a national car. I still run SW (and have a lot of friends) but not as much. With the changes I hear about, I think things are getting better.
(So you would think I would want IT going National.)
I don't mind that, would be for it, but as much as Andy & others want it, I am totally against RunOffs eligibilty for IT. We can go national, just no RunOffs.
I love the guys who are committed to the class. I have traveled pretty far to races, towed to the NE once & to CA, go to RAtlanta twice a year, Love racing RAmerica, and the IT folks all over are the best. I think they have the right mix of fun, to competition, to money spent.
If the RunOffs becomes an IT prize everything about the class will escalate (some maybe good but IMHO a great deal bad.) Probably the one thing I don't like the most is that IT will attract the 4 race prize hunter who cares zero about the class and basically just helps stoke the "dollar burning". There are several other reasons, but I have posted most of them already.
As far as SM I think it is a great racing class. I've got a lot of time (and money) invested in SM. At a certain ability level, I would point a young racer in that direction if he has the means. SM now is totally different then SM back when. Several more experienced guys warned of that and of the negatives of it going national. (Ex. Serge up in your area, Shannon down here) With that said, I think IT has the traits SM lost going national and will also lose them if the RunOffs is offered as the prize at the end of the rainbow.
Here is something to think about.
IF You guys are RIGHT and Improved Touring will be the same as it is now if it goes National. You gain more track time, the RunOffs, and crossover interest from other classes.
IF myself and others are RIGHT you stand to lose what we have now as one of the most successful places to race in Club Racing.
I don't like the odds.
Since I don't make the decision all I can do is make my fingertips sore!

[Andy Bettencourt]

So the question is: Is the risk worth the reward? I think the risk is low and the reward is high while most here seem to think the risk is high and the reward is low.

My main issue is that I feel many are mis-applying the failures of other classes onto this potential endevor of IT. Think about how each of those classes would be fairing if they had NO comp adjustments and a real classification process...

It's at the core of why I think the risk is low.

If the membership doesn't want to take the plunge, I would never support it from an ITAC persepctive.

[Ron Earp]

If the membership doesn't want to take the plunge, I would never support it from an ITAC persepctive.

And I think this is important for you and the other ITAC members to act accordingly. I could see in some places on this thread it appeared as if the ITAC highly supported the concept and would go for it despite the membership. I'm not saying that was going to happen for sure, but it felt like that at some points in the dicussion.

Thanks,
Ron

[IPRESS]

Andy,
Your idea that IT is bulletproof from problems in basically every other national class is why I am sure we should stay where we are. PTB, Mfgs, crazy ass RunOff chasers....non of them care about IT now at least enough to mess with it) and they don't bring the pressures of what comes with NATIONAL CHAMPEEN interest to IT.
You put that RunOffs out there and the Firm Fist of the ITAC will have way less clout. It is just a by product of all that comes with shooting for the stars.
I guess one of us is wrong.

On a personal note, I really can't grasp why you aren't making a stab at the RunOffs in SM. I know, I know, you like the fiddle factor of IT, but obviously you have the situation that would allow you to take a shot at Topeka with a car you are good in. Not that I think this, and the above, have anything to do with each other, but I was just curious.

[Dave Patten]

My only comment is National racers on a whole enter less races than Regional racers do. The goal for a National racer is to qualify for the Runoffs. Divisional Championships exist but they have little to no importance to these drivers. That means 3 finishes and 1 start (4 entries) and a top 10 in Divisional Points gets you to the big show. No need to race any more than that.

The Current top 10 IT drivers in a Division enter more than 4 races to contest their Regional level Championship. This is where the hurt is going to come from with IT becoming a National Class. It will be in overall entries collected by the Regions and the resulting increase in event entries to cover those losses.

[JoshS]

My only comment is National racers on a whole enter less races than Regional racers do. The goal for a National racer is to qualify for the Runoffs. Divisional Championships exist but they have little to no importance to these drivers. That means 3 finishes and 1 start (4 entries) and a top 10 in Divisional Points gets you to the big show. No need to race any more than that.

The Current top 10 IT drivers in a Division enter more than 4 races to contest their Regional level Championship. This is where the hurt is going to come from with IT becoming a National Class. It will be in overall entries collected by the Regions and the resulting increase in event entries to cover those losses.

This is a generalization that's just unfair. I personally entered 9 Nationals in 2006 and 10 Nationals in 2005.

While some may run as few races as necessary, others think racing is what makes one more likely to be able to win. In my opinion, sitting idle for most of the season isn't conducive to a Runoffs win. And I was certainly not the only driver entering lots of races.