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

[shwah]

Well. With all due respect, if you want to keep racing in regionals, you are free to do so under either arrangement. Why then would you desire to keep those that would like to run nationals from doing so?

The only reason I can think of is being afraid of a shrinking grid.

Of course the real answer is to get rid of the Regional / National 'distinction' alltogether IMO.

[JeffYoung]

No problem, not picking a fight.

You hit on my big concern. You called it shrinking fields, I called it dilution. Same thing. Why spread the same number of IT racers across two "series" of racing?

I would be in favor of ending the national/regional distinction with the top 24 classes going to the runoffs. In that format, the "traditional" regional races would still count towards "national" points and folks would have an incentive to show up.

[Ron Earp]

I would be in favor of ending the national/regional distinction with the top 24 classes going to the runoffs.

I don't think that is gonna happen. That would eliminate many of National Classes that are darlings of the Old Guard. Put a metric on them and a bunch of the current Runoffs classes would be prevented from participating in lieu of IT classes.

[erlrich]

Put a metric on them and a bunch of the current Runoffs classes would be prevented from participating in lieu of IT classes.

You say that like it's a bad thing

[Knestis]

I don't think it's been clearly demonstrated that Nationals being an option for IT cars would decrease Regional grid sizes. It might well be that the attraction of the occasional Nat'l race (particularly in weaker regions like the NW) would be enough to sway someone to an SCCA IT car rather than some of the other options with other sanctioning bodies. Or the option of "moving up" might make IT more attractive for some drivers who currently commit to Production classes.

K

[JeffYoung]

Would respectfully disagree with the concept but agree with your narrow point -- it hasn't been conclusively demonstrated that going National would reduce Regional car counts.

But, I don't see "going National" increasing the pool of IT racers/cars, at least not significantly. I see the same pool being split over a larger schedule of races.

[Ron]

At the Jim Stark double regional, 46 spec Miata's. I think that Nat SM has hurt down south

[shwah]

But, I don't see "going National" increasing the pool of IT racers/cars, at least not significantly. I see the same pool being split over a larger schedule of races.

I disagree here. I know a few folks that have told me flat out they would never consider an IT car because it isn't national. These are people that are just getting started in road racing, and are looking elsewhere because they percieve regional only to be 2nd class. Just because we know better, doesn't mean it looks that way to the outside world. I think we would see more new IT drivers in a national class.

[Ron Earp]

You say that like it's a bad thing

No no, quite the contrary....

At the regional level I think these low level subscription groups would die off a lot sooner if run groups were decided via number of entrants. Have five cars in your group? You are last for the day and YOU have to wait around and watch the others race. Needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few and all that jazz......

That Spec Miata class seemed like a pretty cool concept before going National. Now many don't want anything to do with it because it is National.....

[924Guy]

I just don't see anything broke about IT that this would fix.

What's broke that needs fixing about the Club Racing program, well, I think everyone here sees it, though there are differing views about how to address it!

So you gotta ask yourself, why is this coming up now, and is it something you wish to get on board with.

IMO, I think that eliminating the National/Regional distinction is long overdue, and the appropriate plan of action (to address the problem). That said, I agree with the other camp - I just don't believe this is something that is going to improve my racing experience in any way. Every year, as it is, I'm on the fence about re-upping and committing to a "full" season - this might make it even harder to pursue. God knows I'd love to put together a program to get to the National Championship, but last year gave an insight as to how expensive that can be; having to run a whole mess of "away games" to even qualify would only make it worse...

[jjjanos]

Well. With all due respect, if you want to keep racing in regionals, you are free to do so under either arrangement. Why then would you desire to keep those that would like to run nationals from doing so?

Those who would like to run nationals already are free to do so. They just cannot do it in an a class that was not intended to be subject to the entire cluster fornication that accompanies a non-spec, non-sealed, national class.

Those that would like to run nationals already are free to do so. They just cannot do it in this category; a category that was not intended to be subject to the massive cost inflation associated with being a national category.

Those that have newer cars and would like to run nationals are free to do so. They simply must run their cars as BP and DP.

The only reason I can think of is being afraid of a shrinking grid.

Cost: The relative cost of building, prepping and maintaining an IT category car is going to go up dramatically. The distribution of the cost bell curve will shift to the expensive end - and that's just to maintain your relative position.

Time constraints: DC Region's National typically has 225+ cars over 8 groups. Where are we going to fit the extra cars? Run ITC in small bore with an 11+second/lap difference between ITC and EP and a 9+ second difference between B and EP? That's more than the ITC/ITS gap and we've already realized that it doesn't work for a decently subscribed sprint race group. remember, National track sessions are longer and must be adhered to. No shorting sessions because the day is running long.

Dander: Topeka wants to suckle at the teat of the ARRC and ITFest. Having treated IT like a bastard step-child, unfit to associate with the gentry, I see no reason to recognize Topeka's attempt to invite us in to sit with civilized society since the only reason they are doing it is because they see us as a cash cow. Having completely fubared the Runoffs (tm) by allowing so many National classes to wither and then putting the patient into shock through Startline Steve's ramming Heartland Park down the club's throat, Topeka wants one thing and one thing only - our money. As it now stands, IT has its own "championships" and Topeka has got its panties in a knot because they aren't getting their blood money.

And, yes, moving IT to National will dilute car counts. Budgets are limited. If I've got enough money to run 6 weekends, then increasing my options doesn't add more money to that pot.

[JoshS]

Time constraints: DC Region's National typically has 225+ cars over 8 groups. Where are we going to fit the extra cars? Run ITC in small bore with an 11+second/lap difference between ITC and EP and a 9+ second difference between B and EP? That's more than the ITC/ITS gap and we've already realized that it doesn't work for a decently subscribed sprint race group. remember, National track sessions are longer and must be adhered to. No shorting sessions because the day is running long.

I understand the concern about fitting extra cars into an existing well-subscribed national. If your track isn't long enough to handle the additional cars in your existing race groups, I can see that you might have a problem. But if there's room on the track, then go for it.

I don't understand the concern about the lap time differences. Yes, the slower cars in a group might get fewer laps than the faster cars (because they get lapped), but guess what? Apparently that's okay, because this routinely happens at the west coast Nationals. We have huge speed differentials, and guess what? The drivers are smart enough to handle it. Even in our REGIONALS, we run *all* of the IT classes together, including ITR. No problem. This isn't spec racing. This isn't the Runoffs. We run multiple classes together. We live with it. We even like it.

So I think this whole speed differential thing is a red herring. It's not a big deal. We do it all the time out here, at both regionals and nationals. And yes, we have very full fields, with 50-60 cars on track together at pretty much every race.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Let's assume that the National/Regional thing goes away and every GCR-recognized class is eligible for the Runoffs - here is what I would do:

'Reward' the top 10-15 classes in average participation with their own Runoffs run-group. The bottom 'half' still get a chance to run for the gold, but they must do so by sharing a track with someone else. Split starts a must...but until numbers warrant it, you pay the price of getting invited by having to share the track with another class or classs.

This way you can fit the Runoffs into a more compact time frame, which is a common complaint.

[JeffYoung]

+1. I like that idea.

[ITC Racer]

I don't see any reason/benefit to make IT national. If anything, I would perhaps eliminate the National/regional distinction. I like the racing and prep level of IT currently and am happy with the ARRC and newer IT Fest.

[jjjanos]

What is broken that I see this fixing? My desire to build, maintain and race a car with the ruleset and cars I think are the best fit for me - for a SCCA National Championship. Yes, I can go National racing in Prod, GT, SM, SRF, etc...but those classes don't interest me as much. I like to upgrade - but not to the tune of Prod, so IT is perfect for me.

And your IT vehicle, with a minimum of 3 minor safety modifications - cell, tabs, system - is capable of contesting an SCCA National Championship - Production and Prepared. It might not be competitive, but that would be consistent with the philosophy of the ruleset and cars that you think are the best for you. "not be guaranteed the competitiveness of any car.."

I would like to compete for an SCCA National Championship in a prototype equipped with unlimited boost, full ground effects including skirts and traction control. Yes, I can go National racing in S2, CSR, DSR etc.... but those classes don't to interest me as much. I like to upgrade.

I understand the concern about fitting extra cars into an existing well-subscribed national. If your track isn't long enough to handle the additional cars in your existing race groups, I can see that you might have a problem. But if there's room on the track, then go for it.

There isn't room on the track for that mix of classes.

I don't understand the concern about the lap time differences. Yes, the slower cars in a group might get fewer laps than the faster cars (because they get lapped), but guess what? Apparently that's okay, because this routinely happens at the west coast Nationals. We have huge speed differentials, and guess what? The drivers are smart enough to handle it. Even in our REGIONALS, we run *all* of the IT classes together, including ITR. No problem. This isn't spec racing. This isn't the Runoffs. We run multiple classes together. We live with it. We even like it.

And having perused the results at SFR, it is clear why there is no problem - the slower IT classes effectively do not exist. 2 ITC cars, 2/3 ITB cars. We regularly put more ITC cars on track for a Regional than SFR's combined ITB+ITC count.

In short, the problem doesn't exist because the solution created a new problem. This is the equivalent of people saying 'we' don't have a 'problem' combining all of the Formula classes. Of course it isn't a problem! The Vees just stop showing up and instead of having 12 to 15 of them at a race, you get 3. Shoot, I could put a single ITC in a field of Grand-Am Bash'em DPs and the ITC wouldn't be a problem, but get enough ITC cars out there to have a field and their own race and it does become a problem.

So I think this whole speed differential thing is a red herring. It's not a big deal. We do it all the time out here, at both regionals and nationals. And yes, we have very full fields, with 50-60 cars on track together at pretty much every race.

And GT1 on course with GT5 use to be viewed as safe too.

[JoshS]

And having perused the results at SFR, it is clear why there is no problem - the slower IT classes effectively do not exist. 2 ITC cars, 2/3 ITB cars. We regularly put more ITC cars on track for a Regional than SFR's combined ITB+ITC count.

In short, the problem doesn't exist because the solution created a new problem. This is the equivalent of people saying 'we' don't have a 'problem' combining all of the Formula classes. Of course it isn't a problem! The Vees just stop showing up and instead of having 12 to 15 of them at a race, you get 3. Shoot, I could put a single ITC in a field of Grand-Am Bash'em DPs and the ITC wouldn't be a problem, but get enough ITC cars out there to have a field and their own race and it does become a problem.

I'm not just talking about the region's IT group, I'm talking about lots of different groups at lots of different races, including nationals hosted by different regions with different race groupings. We routinely see lap time differentials of 10+ seconds between the LEADERS of different classes on track together. When I was in SSC doing nationals, we were grouped with T1 at nearly every race. We're talking about 160hp FWD cars on track with 400hp monsters. I just don't see the issue. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Andy Bettencourt]

And your IT vehicle, with a minimum of 3 minor safety modifications - cell, tabs, system - is capable of contesting an SCCA National Championship - Production and Prepared. It might not be competitive, but that would be consistent with the philosophy of the ruleset and cars that you think are the best for you. "not be guaranteed the competitiveness of any car.."

I would like to compete for an SCCA National Championship in a prototype equipped with unlimited boost, full ground effects including skirts and traction control. Yes, I can go National racing in S2, CSR, DSR etc.... but those classes don't to interest me as much. I like to upgrade.

I don't think you understand my position. I like the EXTENT of the IT rules. I like to upgrade (over SS, SM) to the stuff that I think makes IT cool. Shocks, bars, limited engine prep - but some, etc.

Your definition of 'contesting a National Championship' must be different than mine. Having a car that has the potential to WIN is what I want. The IT rules provide me with the best solution for my situation (budget, desire, etc). I can run in DP RIGHT NOW without changing a thing but there is difference in 'no comp adjustments' and 'not a chance in freaking hell'.

Bottom line? I like the IT rules the best of any class. I want that class to be able to run for a Gold Medal.

[shwah]

In Cen-Div we run with ITR, ITS, ITA, ITB, ITC, SSB, SSC, T2, T3, SMT in one group.

We don't really have any ITC guys, but have a range of ITB cars, and it seems to work just fine. It does get difficult when you have a race after a school and some of the slow cars are extra slow, but otherwise it works out just fine, wether on 4 miles at Road America or 1.9 at Blackhawk.

Our biggest regional classes are SM and SRF.

I'm with Andy on the why go national. I would like to race for a championship (which is why I like the ITCC - it is closer to a championship than we have been in the past), and really like the IT rule set. However I am willing to build a Prod car if I need to. It will just be a few years down the road, while I would run nationals right now in my IT car.

[JeffYoung]

A fair position to take. On my side, I wouldn't (personally) sacrifice the large fields and good racing we are seeing right now for a shot at a Gold Medal.

However, I think getting rid of the National/Regional distinction and going with the top 12 classes single run group, others mixed, at the BoreOffs is a great idea. With my limited knowledge of Topeka though, I think the chances of that happening are far less than just IT becoming "national" which on its own I don't support.

I don't think you understand my position. I like the EXTENT of the IT rules. I like to upgrade (over SS, SM) to the stuff that I think makes IT cool. Shocks, bars, limited engine prep - but some, etc.

Your definition of 'contesting a National Championship' must be different than mine. Having a car that has the potential to WIN is what I want. The IT rules provide me with the best solution for my situation (budget, desire, etc). I can run in DP RIGHT NOW without changing a thing but there is difference in 'no comp adjustments' and 'not a chance in freaking hell'.

Bottom line? I like the IT rules the best of any class. I want that class to be able to run for a Gold Medal.