2009 MARRS Format - speak up now or live with it

[spnkzss]

I dont want us to push and progress to the 2 day double format, noone liked it when we ran that with SARRC, why would they like it 2 years later for the entire series?

Most of us didn't like it because of 90 cars on the track at one time, not so much the double format. Personally I like it. I actually like the NASA format even better with a Practice, a Qualifying session, and a race EACH day. SCCA won't ever see that due to the pure number of cars and can't fit it in one day, which I understand completely.

[JamesB]

Most of us didn't like it because of 90 cars on the track at one time, not so much the double format. Personally I like it. I actually like the NASA format even better with a Practice, a Qualifying session, and a race EACH day. SCCA won't ever see that due to the pure number of cars and can't fit it in one day, which I understand completely.

For you it was car count, for others it was the lack of time to fix their car after either the car count or an overlooked piece of prep (and maybe a few didnt prep at all) left them flailing to get the car fixed in time. I heard many of stories after that weekend and many more where unfavorable then favorable. Also to do a 2 day double format with good races we will have to further push the groups together and you are looking at averaging 45 cars a group.

[spnkzss]

For you it was car count, for others it was the lack of time to fix their car after either the car count or an overlooked piece of prep (and maybe a few didnt prep at all) left them flailing to get the car fixed in time. I heard many of stories after that weekend and many more where unfavorable then favorable. Also to do a 2 day double format with good races we will have to further push the groups together and you are looking at averaging 45 cars a group.

While I understand a lack of time to fix something that happened on track, I can't give ANY sympathy for lack of prep. That's part of the game.


We've (WDCR) I think is rather spoiled. I like it, but we are.

[JamesB]

Yes I am well aware of the NASA splits and they do a great job of it. The standing starts they have scare me as you have 2 more groups comming up the line if things going horribly bad. But WDCR has never done a split with multiple pace cars which is why people get a sore spot when it comes to the start.

Eh, I like the MARRS format the way it was. Changing it just pushes me away, if it brings 2 others into the fold then great the comp comittee or whatever they are called has made the correct decisions. If it doesnt improve at all, then how do you undo what has been done for 2010?

[Dave Gomberg]

.... But WDCR has never done a split with multiple pace cars which is why people get a sore spot when it comes to the start.

I don't think you've been around long enough (or your memory is failing), but the DC region has done split starts with two pace cars. It has been quite a while, however.

Dave

[JamesB]

I don't think you've been around long enough (or your memory is failing), but the DC region has done split starts with two pace cars. It has been quite a while, however.

Dave

Dave,

I have not been around long enough then. At least since 2003 I have never seen a race with a true split start using multiple pace cars. Only the situation of the pole sitter flagging the start, which I never thought was a great idea as someone will always have an issue with that.

[Gregg]

These are not the "split grids" that ITC/SRX7 and ITC/ITB ran in '06 and part of '07.

Split starts for '09 will have not more than two "mini-groups" of classes. We may have two pace cars if drivers/cars are available, but the second mini-group will always get a pace car.

As was mentioned, some groups have already provided how these "mini-groups" will be broken out and they will be written into the supps. For your run group I would recommend splitting them as (IT7/SSB/SSC) + (ITB/ITC) but that's for the different reps in that group to decide.

For a much more detailed report on what our '09 format than what Charlie provided, see what I sent my drivers on Saturday night.

http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/...A/message/1833

If it's important for you to know what the vote breakdowns were, I can certainly provide that information as well.

[erlrich]

As an ITA driver I'm fine with the 8 groups, the composition of the groups, and the weekend race format that has been proposed. As a MARRS driver I'm not too keen on IT cars in big bore, but I don't know any way to fix that short of adding another group, which really defeats the purpose of the exercise. There are some really slow ITS cars in our series though... guess they will just have to learn to watch their mirrors. I do also think there is the potential for the same kind of problems we had in ITA/S/R last year in other groups, but I think until we try it and give it a chance we aren't going to know for sure. I do believe the split starts are going to be a big factor in making the groups work, and if we can't get the stewards/chiefs on board, as well as the drivers behaving themselves, the whole thing doesn't have much of a chance of working.

On your proposal Gregg; I like it with the exception of the Labor Day weekend. I would really love to have two back to back 20-lap races on Sunday and Monday, and get the qualifying out of the way Saturday. But that's a minor difference, and not a deal breaker for me whichever way it goes.

I did have one thought/question on the Labor Day event - is it legal (per SCCA) to require a driver to document that they have completed at least one race in the current calendar year, as a prerequisite to entering an event? If so, that might be a solution to the issue of holding those two races under a single sanction.

[dj10]

Count me out of any racing at summit point if we have to race with big bore. I had 3k worth of damage from some asswipe in a gt1 car last race @ Mid Ohio and had a few very bad experiences at summit when running with big bore a couple of years ago. I won't subject my car to these increased risks. It's bad enought to run with big bore at the glen or mid ohio where the track is wider but on a narrow track.......well it's not if..........it's when.

[mlytle]

Count me out of any racing at summit point if we have to race with big bore. I had 3k worth of damage from some asswipe in a gt1 car last race @ Mid Ohio and had a few very bad experiences at summit when running with big bore a couple of years ago. I won't subject my car to these increased risks. It's bad enought to run with big bore at the glen or mid ohio where the track is wider but on a narrow track.......well it's not if..........it's when.

i am probably out of the marrs series, and most racing this year for reasons other than big bore and economy, and i am afraid the big bore mix with its/itr has a significant number of other its racers staying home or going to other venues. it is unfortunate that jamming its in with big bore will kill the resurgence the class has experienced over the last two years. same thing happened last time its was with big bore. we don't learn from history.

[JamesB]

Earl, Just keep laborday under a single sanction. The format, eh, I have read in enough times that ill think about it before I shell out my money. I am already missing M1 due to a friends wedding, so I will get to hear about how the event went in the weeks that pass before the next event under the new format a few months later. VIR is still up in the air for me right now due to our national security confrence is generally around the mothers day weekend and I need them to announce the week so I know if I can make it down there. No way am I going to fly in Fri eve and then tow down to VIR.

[Gregg]

On your proposal Gregg; I like it with the exception of the Labor Day weekend. I would really love to have two back to back 20-lap races on Sunday and Monday, and get the qualifying out of the way Saturday. But that's a minor difference, and not a deal breaker for me whichever way it goes.

For some reason I didn't see the clearest answer in the wee hours when I was finishing up the proposal. I like your idea better and it works just as well. Time for proposal #2.

And Dan, sorry that you feel that bad about those increased risks. Unfortunately many times it doesn't matter what types or classes of cars you race with but who you race with. Many of us have incurred substantial damage to our cars over the years, much of it being from dumb luck to dumb driving. That's one of the risks of being out there. Given what I saw of Big Bore this year, I'm not too sure all of your fears are justified, but I can definitely sympathize.