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

[Dave Patten]

Jake,
I'll give you some of my personal experiances on going from Regional to National racing and why I say those that focus on National Racing will more than likely run less events than they did racing Regionals.

In 2007 I raced in NEDiv in GTL, 6 National races over 5 weekends plus the Runoffs. It took 15 vacation days to cover the Friday race days (LRP & Pocono double), the Runoffs and travel time. If I stayed within a 4 hour drive of my home I could have raced 8 weekends at Regionals and used only 4 vacation days to do it. And let’s not forget the fuel costs for towing. ($1200+ in fuel costs to go to the Runoffs at $3.25/gallon, make that $1600 for 2008)

By focusing on National racing the idea of damaging your car at a non-point Regional becomes a huge concern when there is only like 8-9 events in your Division you can earn points at for a Runoffs invitation. This is a huge detraction from entering Regionals for these drivers.

This is why I say the total event entries (Regional & National) will drop for any particular Region rather than stay even. I suppose everyone will have a differing opinion on what could happen and until IT becomes a National class no one can say with any certainty what the results will be. I don’t have the numbers but the SM statistics might show some trends of giving a Regional class, National status regarding total annual entries.

[Knestis]

Wrote this last night when the site was down but cleverly saved it when it didn't submit. It might still be pertinent - K


* * *

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

No.

I think that a perception could easily arise that there IS one "best answer." However, in the grand scheme of things, considering all of the factors that contribute to this thing we call "competitiveness," I firmly believe that the make/model of car is not a statistically significant contributor.

There might well be some models that are out at the other end of the curve far enough that they are bad enough to be a problem, but driver skill, testing days, dyno time, and a bunch of other variables - all hinging on BUDGET - will pretty much trump the kind of metal box someone starts with. There are plenty of cars that have NEVER won a Regional, that The Greg Amy could win an ARRC IT race, given sufficient development budget.

An Old Fart story to illustrate: David Hobbs and Willy Ribbs won almost every Trans-Am race in 1983 (a formative year for me), driving a pair of those "stock car" chassis Camaros we talked about earlier. The cars were kind of nappy, frankly - partially (I was told) because the team owner and crew chief believed in lots of testing, so they got miles put on them.

About the same year (plus or minus one), another team was trying to develop a Mercedes 450SL for the same series. It was underfunded and didn't have much success.

Now, did the Camaro have an unfair advantage when DeAtley won the title? So what if DeAtley had had the SAME success but been the only team running the Mercedes? Did your answers consider that there were other Camaro runners in '83? How do we separate out the influences? How are perceptions influenced by our assumptions?

* * *

After the ARRC, there was talk about those damned MkIII Golfs. All three of them were essentially new and pretty much top-shelf builds. Was it the platform or the effort? At the last VIR Regional, I had little luck matching the pace of one of the same cars, but its team partner MkII Golf was right there, like within hundredths.

Was it about the CAR or the drivers? Those pesky Canadians had spent the entire previous day testing in the wet. I'm fair-to-good in the rain and was almost 2 seconds short in the same conditions in practice, with the same tires. Make? Model? Rust. (Not on the car - on me.)

Perception says "you gotta build a Whatsis GT if you wanna win the IT National Championship," so a few serious competitors do it. They spend big, develop, practice, get good, and run up front. Self-fulfilling prophecy.

K

[tnord]

No.

I think that a perception could easily arise that there IS one "best answer." However, in the grand scheme of things, considering all of the factors that contribute to this thing we call "competitiveness," I firmly believe that the make/model of car is not a statistically significant contributor.

not statistically significant? seriously? i can't count the number of times i've heard that certain cars suit certain tracks well (CRX at MO, Miata at LRP?, anything with big motor at RA, etc), or that the process isn't meant to balance cars on the tip of a pin, but more like the head of the nail. this very philosophy of classifying cars means that there will be one theoretical best option for each track.

There might well be some models that are out at the other end of the curve far enough that they are bad enough to be a problem, but driver skill, testing days, dyno time, and a bunch of other variables - all hinging on BUDGET - will pretty much trump the kind of metal box someone starts with. There are plenty of cars that have NEVER won a Regional, that The Greg Amy could win an ARRC IT race, given sufficient development budget.

After the ARRC, there was talk about those damned MkIII Golfs. All three of them were essentially new and pretty much top-shelf builds. Was it the platform or the effort? At the last VIR Regional, I had little luck matching the pace of one of the same cars, but its team partner MkII Golf was right there, like within hundredths.

and there are plenty of people out there that could win the ARRC in Greg Amy's car.

anyway, that's just the thing about this "hinging on BUDGET" comment. Budget no longer becomes an issue for a large chunk of the field at the ROs. i'm not so sure that there really are any 100% builds out there in IT right now, some darn good ones for sure, but 100% i question. within a couple years, a change to national would bring 15+ real 100% builds out there of differing options for each class, each with a driver capable of winning. mix in a week of testing, a week of qualifying, and a race. the result is you get some seriously good data on identifying trends for that track.

[dickita15]

and there are plenty of people out there that could win the ARRC in Greg Amy's car.

Of course there are horses for courses, but I think that we jump to the conclusion of which they are way to quickly. Remember Bob Stretch taught us the 240sx was unbeatable in ITA at RA until Anthony Serra did it. So now we have the truth the Integra is unbeatable at RA even though plenty showed up that could not win, but the fact are clear the teg in the car to have until the egg beat it. Ok now we know the truth, the Nx is the car to have for the Arrc.
Trust the process and of course bitch slap anyone who tries to tamper with the process.

[Knestis]

>> ...the process isn't meant to balance cars on the tip of a pin, but more like the head of the nail. this very philosophy of classifying cars means that there will be one theoretical best option for each track.

The processes put in place in attempts to "solve this problem" got Production to where it is today, paved the way for SS trunk kits and escalating performance, and got the GT folks SIRs. Based on what I think hear people saying about their perceptions of the success of IT, I don't think those are better answers regardless of what events are called or how points are accrued.

K

[tnord]

>> ...the process isn't meant to balance cars on the tip of a pin, but more like the head of the nail. this very philosophy of classifying cars means that there will be one theoretical best option for each track.

The processes put in place in attempts to "solve this problem" got Production to where it is today, paved the way for SS trunk kits and escalating performance, and got the GT folks SIRs. Based on what I think hear people saying about their perceptions of the success of IT, I don't think those are better answers regardless of what events are called or how points are accrued.

K

Kirk i completely agree that the current IT process of balancing cars is better than the trunk kits, SIR, etc method. All I'm saying is that there will be a theoretical best car for each given track, and that participating in the RO would put a far greater emphasis on one specific track, resulting in more people building that specific car, creating pressure from both membership and the CRB to "equalize the field."

i hope the system doesn't succumb to those pressures....it's just how i see this playing out.

[tnord]

Of course there are horses for courses, but I think that we jump to the conclusion of which they are way to quickly. Remember Bob Stretch taught us the 240sx was unbeatable in ITA at RA until Anthony Serra did it. So now we have the truth the Integra is unbeatable at RA even though plenty showed up that could not win, but the fact are clear the teg in the car to have until the egg beat it. Ok now we know the truth, the Nx is the car to have for the Arrc.
Trust the process and of course bitch slap anyone who tries to tamper with the process.

my point didn't come across very clear, my fault.

the point was that Greg Amy is not some 'magical' driver that could win in any car at any track any where. the point of the comment was only to de-emphasize what i felt was kirk's over-emphasis of the driver. it takes equal parts car and driver to win the RO, and i felt like kirk was communicating it was more like 75% driver 25% car.

[Eagle7]

... There are plenty of cars that have NEVER won a Regional, that The Greg Amy could win an ARRC IT race, given sufficient development budget....

my point didn't come across very clear, my fault.

the point was that Greg Amy is not some 'magical' driver that could win in any car at any track any where. the point of the comment was only to de-emphasize what i felt was kirk's over-emphasis of the driver. it takes equal parts car and driver to win the RO, and i felt like kirk was communicating it was more like 75% driver 25% car.

I took it the other way around - that "The Greg Amy" could develop most any car to be a front-runner.

[lateapex911]

Look at the ARRC ITA races over the past few years.

-Stretch wins in a 240SX with a truck motor. It is now THE car to have for Atlanta
-Serra shows up, and beats Stretch in a real back and forth battle. The Integra is now THE car for Atlanta.
-Amy shows up (he'd been there before, but Puff the Magic Dragon-ed the motor), and HE beats the now impressive array of Honda products, including, I think, Serra. (or was it one of Serras' cars?) The Egg is the car for Atlanta! Go find an Egg!!!
- The Mosers show up, and the egg is whipped. The CRX is the car for Atlanta! Wait! it thought it was the car for Mid Ohio!

Side comments/observations/quotes:
- Stretch says after the race with Serra, "I thought the SM race was going to be the tough one. i should have tuned my Nissan, and put in good brakes"
- Integra prices skyrocket. Amy builds another engine.
- Amy brings all his horse to bear over the next season, Serra spends some of his energy putting together his Grand Am plan. After qualifying, he states "Man, I am just off...just not in the grove"
- CRXen cry foul on the Eggs unfair weight advantage, or, actually, about their own "unfair penalty". They vow to show the world.
- The final chapter has the CRX team loaded for bear to prove something, and reportedly "A" compound tires are used on the light cars in cool weather to good effect. After race comments were made to the effect that the Egg was still the car to beat, and the CRX was unfairly penalized.

So, read above, and tell me what you believe, and what the car for the track is....


-