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

[cfullgraf]

When I was racing in the late seventies and early eighties there were constant discussion about too many classes in club racing. I take a 17 year absence from SCCA and return in 2003 and there are not only concerns about too many classes, there are more classes than in the eighties! (note, IT was just starting when I retired)

One thing SCCA does well for its racing members is that cars are rarely legislated off the track (ASR, BSR, Sports Renault, and maybe one or two others are exceptions. Showroom Stock is also an exception but for different reasons). The club usually finds some place for the obsolete class cars to run. You may not be competitive, but you can go racing. In most cases that I remember, the obsolete class cars that are now uncompetitive eventually disappear from the track altogether for various reasons.

One thing SCCA does not do well is keeping the club racing classes current with mainstream street automotive technology because it continues adjust the rules to allow older race cars to be competitive and not adjust the classes to fit current production cars. As a result, many classes are filled with 20 to 50 year old race cars. It is kind of difficult for a youngster interested in racing to identify with a car that is older than his or her father.

One place it seemed to me that SCCA had made improvements over the time I was gone was it seemed that there was a structure in the rules that you could start with a car in IT. After a time, when you wanted to go National racing and go faster, you could move the car to Production. Again, when it was time to go faster and challenge your engineering skills you could then move the car to GT. Granted not all cars eligible for the various categories are not eligible for all categories but there are a number of cars that are eligible for all three levels.

For the National program, SCCA has finally decided that there needs to be a limited number of classes competing at the Run-offs. Makes sense. If there are are more than 24 classes, the classes that do not make the Run-offs will die because a percentage of the competitors will move to other classes making the participation levels even worse.

If IT were made National and now there were 30 some odd classes competing for the 24 Run-off spots, some classes will disappear. Some will be IT classes, some will be from other categories.

IT should be left as a Regional only class. The rules should evolve to include more cars that can be updated through the various categories of classes.

Now that I have written all of the above and reflecting on what to say next, maybe a different approach is needed.

IT racing is competitive and relatively inexpensive. Folks want to have higher exposure venues for their racing but many are fearful of skyrocketing costs if that were to happen.

Adjust the IT rules so that rules creep will be absolutely prevented. Mandate it in the rules. Say in the rules that at some point when factory parts are no longer available the car will not be able to compete. And so forth and so forth. It would be a daunting task for the ITAC.

Also, maybe the IT National Championship should be separate from the Run-offs. The IT Triple Crown is a step towards building that and, if successful, will build prestige that it could be equal to or even eclipse the prestige of the Run-offs.

Enough rambling. Thanks for your interest.

[JeffYoung]

My evil plan exposed. ITS WILL be Spec Lawyer TR8 by next year.

On the other hand, if as you noted a bunch of rich pansy lawywers get the itch to go racing and all showed up with professionally prepared TR8s that were capable of running WITH the current front-runners, that would be a different story. I too would welcome that competition without hesitation.

.

[Knestis]

Thanks, Earl. That helps me to isolate the influences at play in the discussion.

I deal in my daily work with what we call "causal pathways" or "logic models." These are illustrations of how we think "projects are supposed to work" - how they translate actions into outcomes. These models SHOULD be based on "antecedent conditions" - the underlying causes that result in problems that we desire to solve or mitigate. The model I'm getting from your explanation is something like...

IT goes National > IT becomes attractive to big $ teams > Big $ teams enter > Prep standard at front of grid increases > Speeds increase > Current drivers are less competitive > Current drivers do something else

The model tells a story of sorts, with each connection being the basis of an if-then statement based on assumptions and beliefs of how factors relate to one-another (e.g., we assume that National status will make IT more attractive - which may be viewed as "good" in some respects, though potentially "bad" in others).

There are almost always other factors that don't fall in a straight line between the most distal condition (IT goes National) and the ultimate outcome (Current drivers bail on IT). Travis describes, for example, questioning whether to follow that last link, or if it might be worth his time/energy/money to stick it out. There might be other factors too, not described in the model, that matter. If some influence OTHER THAN National status helped IT to become more popular, we might well see the same outcome. That was kind of what I was trying to understand about your (and others') position.

I worry about this academic crapola because we can easily make decisions that are not grounded in a shared understanding of how these factors all hook together. Or we can jump to conclusions if we ignore mediating factors (those in the middle of the model), like we do when we say something like "National status will be the death of IT."

K

[tnord]

i agree with your logic strand start to finish, and it's exactly what i've witnessed in SM.

in some places that have enough people/cars to do it, that "something else" has been SSM, SMT, SM(sealed engine), etc. here in MiDiv, we never really had more than 30-35 cars, so that "something else" has not been racing related. i can rattle off a good 6-10 names that just plain aren't heard from anymore.

[lateapex911]

Dave, perhaps, taken as an absolute, my statement is less than 100% true. yes, there are other things the club could do that might net better results.

But, my point is, (and yeah the time slot sucks) that given the Runoffs broadcast, bringing IT cars to the mix, might yield a better recruiting result.

Yes, retention is shaky. Giving free memberships to Subaru buyers, but canceling a major rallying program doesn't help, but membership is about numbers..I care more about participation. Which is better, 1,000,000 members with 10,000 active and doing some program, or 700,000 with 40,000 active? (Obviously the finances need to be juggled to recoup the lost $50 x 300,000 bucks that came in with no liability)

Think about it. Lots of cars we race are popular with the 20-40 year old enthusiast. Cars like the Integra, Miatas, BMW E36s and E46s, S2000s, RX-8s, Z cars from all years...on the broadcast introduce each class with a quick, knowledgeable rundown of the simple ruleset and I bet lots of trackday guys might perk their ears up. Really, IT is, at it's essence, a bolt on category. Stock engine internals, bolt on suspension bits, header, and safety stuff, and you're out there racing. Simple. That's enticing. No custom molded rear windows, custom shaped fenders and quarters, cranks ground from billets, and the like that Prod has...IT is so much more "available" appearing to most folk....guys see the races on TV, then look out at their driveway. Sure, we all know that's not the "smart" way to go racing, but it's a powerful aphrodisiac...

And the racing is pretty darn good, I imagine the races might actually be exciting....with full fields of guys who want to be there to race...which isn't what I see when I watch a lot of Runoffs races.

And yea, you're right, why we don't do a 2 minute piece on every World Challenge race on the club things like PDXs, and autocrossing, and schools is beyond me.

[tom_sprecher]

IT goes National > IT becomes attractive to big $ teams...

Perhaps the reason why many think this would happen should be explored. SM seems to be the example du jour but there are other classes like FB and BP that became National classes recently and I haven't heard of huge crowds of big $ teams flocking to those classes. Was SM a class with maybe the participation of ITA or ITS and then when it went nation its participation increased 4-5 times that or was it extremely popular before going National, everybody saw the $ potential and only then did it become attactive to the National office and the big $ teams?

I have no illusions...

After reading your post Paul, the next time we race together we need to sit down and have a beer. I did not quote the whole post because it would take up space but you described how and why I race IT to a "T".

[Charlie Broring]

i agree with your logic strand start to finish, and it's exactly what i've witnessed in SM.

in some places that have enough people/cars to do it, that "something else" has been SSM, SMT, SM(sealed engine), etc. here in MiDiv, we never really had more than 30-35 cars, so that "something else" has not been racing related. i can rattle off a good 6-10 names that just plain aren't heard from anymore.

Yes! Sometimes people don't appreciate how good they have things until they loose them.

I wonder how many advocates of IT going National have seen or participated in National racing or the Runoffs?

[Racerlinn]

An FYI - this thread is getting more popular - I received an email that was broadcast to many members of GLDiv this morning from our Area Director asking folks to look in and give feedback regarding the whole situation.

[tnord]

extremely popular before going National, everybody saw the $ potential and only then did it become attactive to the National office and the big $ teams?

keep in mind that a lot of this happened before i was even an SCCA member, but i did spot the class when i was starting to think about what race car i wanted circa 2000/2001.

there are some black helicopter theories about it, but this is mostly true. i think everyone but the nat'l office saw the potential early on. big teams like OPM/BSI/Advanced Autosports/MER/etc saw the potential very early. people like jim daniels (vomit) and others fought hard to get the class even recognized nationally like IT. it then absolutely blew up and you saw something you almost never ever see with race cars. you could build the cars cheaper than you could buy them because the demand exceeded the supply. this is when i built in 2002-2003 timeframe.

now....how exactly it got to be a national class is up for debate, whether it was destined to be through a deal with mazda from the start, or it was member input, or the BOD saw the $ potential, whatever, i don't know. but it happened. the very next year the whole thing changed. the culture in the paddock, the $ people were willing to spend, the level of talent that showed up....everything.

[erlrich]

Isn't it about time for a poll?

[Knestis]

>> Perhaps the reason why many think this would happen should be explored. ...

Now you're talking, Tom. I agree that this isn't a foregone conclusion, and if that link doesn't connect, then it's not possible to attribute subsequent outcomes to that "cause."

It's a tendency of human beings to see connections - it's what helped us avoid getting eaten as we gained eminence in our environment. The problem is that we often see connections where none exist. It's entirely possible that Travis' "6-10 names" would have quit anyway, for whatever reason. As a club, we do a LOUSY job of capturing data re: "mortality."

I personally think that most drivers who quit do so because they're financially overextended, having sucked on the go-fast crack pipe and gotten addicted, only to discover they can't afford the habit. If that happens coincidental to some other factor, it confounds understanding about which "causes" matter, and how much - particularly if the other factors are observable and we don't have any measure of the financial motivations. "I want to buy beach timeshare" might really mean, "I can't afford racing," and "I'd rather do NASA HPDE's" might mean the same thing.

K

[jjjanos]

But, my point is, (and yeah the time slot sucks) that given the Runoffs broadcast, bringing IT cars to the mix, might yield a better recruiting result.
.
.
snip
.
.
Think about it. Lots of cars we race are popular with the 20-40 year old enthusiast. Cars like the Integra, Miatas, BMW E36s and E46s, S2000s, RX-8s, Z cars from all years...on the broadcast introduce each class with a quick, knowledgeable rundown of the simple ruleset and I bet lots of trackday guys might perk their ears up. Really, IT is, at it's essence, a bolt on category. Stock engine internals, bolt on suspension bits, header, and safety stuff, and you're out there racing. Simple. That's enticing. No custom molded rear windows, custom shaped fenders and quarters, cranks ground from billets, and the like that Prod has...IT is so much more "available" appearing to most folk....guys see the races on TV, then look out at their driveway. Sure, we all know that's not the "smart" way to go racing, but it's a powerful aphrodisiac...

That's where the logic model breaks down IMO. The mods the track guys have done to their street/track car are not IT compliant. They don't want to race a vehicle that is slower than their daily driver, especially if the race car is the same make/model as their daily driver. They might get wise in a few years and realize you can spend more time on track racing a $6K car than a $30K car, but starting out, their eyes are full of major modifications.

If we are trying to tap new members, it is THESE people we have to pull into the club.

The folks doing track days in unmodified cars might come to IT, but they also know about IT. The instructors at these events are us.

Frankly, I'd be in favor of throwing the entire closed-wheel category structure out the window.

Level 1: IT, but allow any car less than 40 years old into the category including current model year.
Level 2: Level 1 on human growth hormone. Allow more mods and use a system similar to NASA's PT system to class the cars, but it would need to be more rational.
Level 3: Level 2 on growth hormone and steriods. Even more mods upto and including swapping engines from the same manufacturer but allow no car specific competition adjustments.

Level 3 can bolt on those stupid wings. No tube framed cars unless that was stock. Every car must rely on the stock frame/unibody. Body panels can be substituted in at least level 3 and maybe level 2.

Synchronize ProRacing with ClubRacing. Absolutely NO ProRacing series where the cars cannot transfer back and forth seamlessly between the two. Club Racing sets the rules, regs and standards for what categories and classes ProRacing may use. ProRacing decideds whether those standards are worth a pro series, but ProRacing must use the IDENTICAL technical rules. I.e. This weekend I run a regional in my L3A Corvette, during the week I do a pre-race check and the following weekend, I bolt on new tires and go race in ProRacing's Acme Rocket American Iron series.

[shwah]

Yes! Sometimes people don't appreciate how good they have things until they loose them.

I wonder how many advocates of IT going National have seen or participated in National racing or the Runoffs?

I have (though not as a driver), in the whipping boy "Prod" class GP. What I saw was incredible competition at the top of the grid, but a steep fall off after that. That is driven by a few things.
1. Those top guys bring an AA+++ game, in design, prep, and talent
2. The other guys include a few that aspire to join that group (and I have seen a few make headway), and more that are 'just happy to be there' - to the point of being way too slow in some cases.
3. There were not a whole lot of drivers in the pool to begin with - so the pickings are slim (this looks better to me now that G was starved to death).

These last two are also likely influenced by the quality of the top group, which makes participation at all, and participation at the front a more daunting proposition to anyone.

I don't expect IT to be the same way (at least not ITS and ITA, ITB is resurging IMO but not quite on the same level yet) simply because there are a lot more drivers.

[gran racing]

Good points Jake.

If IT went national, should there be restrictions on the age of the vehicle (again, ala Prepared)? If not, does it hurt things by having an old Prelude, Volvo, Wabbit, RX7, or other now antique as the marketing face?

Will the high level prepped cars become the norm compared to now, and thus deter newbies from giving it a try?

[Knestis]

...there are some black helicopter theories about it, but this is mostly true. ...

Don't forget the perception (it being 99% of marketing) that SM was the new career path to big-time pro racing. And that since the cars were all equal, a "real talent" would shine. Put a free ride on the prize list and it HAS to have an influence. Picture what would happen to popularity - and probably the competitiveness - of the ARRC ITC race, if it were announced that the winner would receive a fully funded season of Koni Challenge racing.

I'd wager that that influence ALONE could account for measurable increases in the sales prices of used C cars...

K

[RX3]

If the National car count is falling off then there is a reason for it. It is most likely because the Board of Directors has mismanaged the rules and listened to the few and not paid attention to the silent majority. If they add the five IT classes to the National list then they will need to cut the number of classes that can run.
The CRB has posed many class changes that the board would not adopt. The national car count proves there is a problem.
IT cars going National may fix the car count problem, but as the Board of Directors plays with the rules in the spirit of making cars equal, this is what will kill the classes. There is a point when old cars no longer have parts and it’s time for them to go. Hard to say, but true.
Regional racing is where the cars are and is what most people want to do, which should be evident to everyone by the shear number of cars that are competing on the Regional level. Maybe we should just drop National racing and just have Regionals, or just have one type of racing with the best going forward.

[Knestis]

I'm having a little trouble reconciling how one of the most popular categories is NOT a good public representation of what the Club has to offer. That presumes that IT has nothing to offer a younger demographic, and I'm not sure I buy that...

K

[tnord]

Don't forget the perception (it being 99% of marketing) that SM was the new career path to big-time pro racing. And that since the cars were all equal, a "real talent" would shine. Put a free ride on the prize list and it HAS to have an influence. Picture what would happen to popularity - and probably the competitiveness - of the ARRC ITC race, if it were announced that the winner would receive a fully funded season of Koni Challenge racing.

I'd wager that that influence ALONE could account for measurable increases in the sales prices of used C cars...

K

i agree, it absolutely would have an influence on the ARRC if that were up for grabs.

and it's not just perception, it's reality that within the club racing world, SM absolutely does have the most achieveable ladder to a racing career there is. but none of that would have been possible if it hadn't gone National in the first place.

[RedMisted]

Going national sounds interesting, but will this mandate changes to existing IT cars such as the addition of fuel cells?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Why would going National require any rule changes?