Big Picture of IT - Share Your Opinions

[JeffYoung]

Most of the folks I race with in ITS SEDiv view IT as the destination -- no thoughts of going prod.

[lateapex911]

...If I have race results showing for example that even the best prepped ITS Civics and Del Sols can't run against midpack ITS cars, I would reconsider that and arguement. .......

I'll skip the usual comments about "finishing position 'data' being...errr...hard to use as 'evidence', but will mention that your world is Honda front drive centric. Interestingly, there are TONS of Honda FWD cars to choose from, some newer than others. Your Del Sol, though is, what, 15 yrs old? Every car has strengths and weaknesses...but, V2.0 has handled FWD just a bit differently. If THe CRB approves it's use, FWD cars may get more, or less of a weight break, as it is now figured as a percentage of it's weight, as opposed to the flat pounds off in V1.5. The basic 'bogey' remains similar, but heavier cars were getting screwed.

2) To clarify the question regarding why I recommend that the class focus on reasonable cost and lots of competitive cars, I believe we need to get the participation numbers up in IT. At this point of time, I don't see a lot of difference in cost between a front running IT and a front running Prod car which I think is wrong if IT is supposed to be SCCA's feeder class. .... As I see it, its a problem to grow IT if half the cars in the race are 20 years old. Nobody can find those cars, knows how to work on them, or is particularialy excited by them.

Gotta stop you here.

There are lots of newer cars in the ITCS. The opportunity is there...but, as mentioned above, newer cars aren't 'reasonable' to run. Older cars are often simpler, the 'book' on how to race them is written, the aftermarket support is there, and built examples are available for a fraction of a new car. How is eliminating old cars going to make racing cheap? You mention IT as a 'feeder' category....isn't buying an old built car the single BEST way to get in the game? Your argument is rather conflicting, I think. Really, this one has me scratching my head.

I may be naive, but I think that SCCA is more likely to get new cars and new racers if it focuses on cars that are recent.

What newer cars would you like classed? Request 'em! If they fit, we'll class them! We LOVE doing that.

But as I also mentioned, to hedge the bet, I also think SCCA should focus like NASA on some classes where there are sizeable participation likely like a Honda,

Cuz, yea, the Honda Challenge series has what, a dozen guys nationwide? (yea, an exaggeration, but...it's no Spec Miata)

944,

Which is TWENTY FIVE years old! What happened to newer cars atracting drivers?

3 series

There are a DOZEN 3 series cars classed in IT.

I know, you mean classes for ONLY those cars. I think you want to go after a different type of diver, one that wants to ONLY race against his model car. (Heck, currently, ITR could be considered a spec class for 3 series BMWs!). That concept is a whole different kettle of fish. That type of racing is strong with the marque clubs. More classes. Not really something we, the ITAC can do much about. Spec Miata started here in SCCA, didn't it?

Do nothing, my feeling is with declining workers and fields, SCCA will take a hard look and eliminating regionals and morphing IT with prod.

It's interesting you say that. nationally, it's the REGIONALS that are making money, and the NATIONALS that are losing money. National races are adding "restricted regional" classes...often IT...to bolster the bottom line. Many of the higher ups see IT as one of the healthy categories in the club, and stats suggest that IT racers are second in enrollment to SM. (I better dbl check that, but I think that's correct...if not, darn close)

I don't know for sure, but I bet some of the big head honchos have considered/pushed making IT national for purely profit driven reasons, and old guard grand poobahs have nixxed it for old guard reasons. (but that's PURE speculation)

[Knestis]

I think Bob has a point about someone having to look out for the strategic - cross category - picture at the Club.

I think NASA has done some smart things, because they aren't a "club" as such, but equally they have done some dumb ones. They do however have an arguably clearer focus, mission, and priorities in practice than SCCA.

Your "merge with Prod" concern is well founded, Bob, but my guess it would come about because of the implosion of Production rather than fundamental failures of IT. That is precisely the kind of "anti-strategic" decision that I see our current cultural/organizational structure capable of. It's "keep the dinosaur on life support" that has had Prod hovering on the edge for the three decades I've been watching it and - not to put words in your mouth - I have a feeling it's THAT behavior that you're scared of us slipping into...

If so, I share that worry.

K

[Ron Earp]

1) The reason I think that race results, entry counts and times are important is that it seems to me that results are the most compelling basis for adjustment and classification discussions. As an example, I commented that VTEC cars are getting a sort shrift. If I have race results showing for example that even the best prepped ITS Civics and Del Sols can't run against midpack ITS cars

I dunno Bob, from my view they are fairly competitive....have a look at this video from near the front of the pack at VIR this year. Two VTEC FWD cars in front of me, along with a mix of other cars. Racing is pretty good.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HoTfKYxGhg[/ame]

[Andy Bettencourt]

No Vee-tAk on the one directly in front of you at the start me-thinks. ITA car? But regardless, teh process gives low torque, FWD cars a break.

[Ron Earp]

No Vee-tAk on the one directly in front of you me-thinks. ITA car? But regardless, teh process gives low torque, FWD cars a break.

Maybe not, but there is VTEC Yo! on the one just to the left of me in T1.

I think the ITAC is trying to be progressive about IT. ITR was created to class many new cars, but as I recall Bob didn't like how that turned out because I think he's "Hondacentric". The ITAC got Pony cars into ITR but again I don't think Bob liked that progressive action either as he dislikes the cars and/or how they were classed.

IT is going in the right direction and IMHO the best place to race within the SCCA or NASA. I complain about IT from time to time, as we all do, but the bottom line is that if you like racing and competitive fields IT has it. Not that it means much but for me IT is the destination - I have no intentions of going National or Prod. If the CRB still has the impression that IT is the Prod breeding ground I think they are mistaken, at least among the racers I know in the SE.

[benspeed]

I will chime in that I have returned to IT because it is the destination. IT is where the some of the best competition exists, the classification process gives you a reasonably fair shot at selecting a variety of competitive cars and costs are reasonable. The quality of driving in IT is every bit as good as national driving - this is not a noob class but new people are always welcome, just as they are in national classes.

I don't see problems in IT - that class is healthy. Where I see issues is with the strategy of our club, specifically regarding race classes and field counts. From my perspective here in the NE the business of regional vs. national makes little sense. The reality is there are too many events so each event is a, "hold your breath and hope we don't lose our shirts" stress fest for our race planners. I've raced in a number of nationals and there is huge opportunity for consolidation of GT and Prod at national and regional events. Why that hasn't happened is a shame.

So here's my grand vision (leaving out open wheel cars) - take GT and Production and combine them in GT. Take the tube framed cars and put them in GT. Take the former world challenge cars and put them in GT. Make GT the place where the purpose built race cars run.

This statement will ruffle some feathers - take the model of the ITAC and put this group in charge of reclassing these production and GT cars. I believe there is a strong methodology that should be developed into institutional knowledge. The historical agenda which seems to slow the pace of change presents a weakness to our club. I define historical agenda as people refusing to force competitors to change their class and possibly become more or less competitive. Take a look in Sportscar National Race Results and count how many drivers are running in class - my wife was looking at the counts and remarked, "there's not enough cars in class to call that a race..."

Keep IT, Touring and Showroom Stock the same. Make some of these classes race in the same group.

Make purpose built cars race in GT. Form a “process” to class these cars – it will be the next challenge for the folks who have mostly figured out the IT “process”. Race some of these GT classes with American Sedan.

Combine the regional and national schedules, turn out big fields and lose less money. If national needs to make certain events special to qualify for the Runoffs - do that - no big thing.

IT turns out enough cars to call the event a race. That's not the case in the production and GT classes – It’s obvious to me those classes need consolidation.
The economy is not getting better for awhile and counts are not going to rise for several years – let’s not lose more money on events. Consolidate.

[lateapex911]

Ben, if I were further up the ladder, I'd be beating the drum on some of your topics loudly. Heck, I bet the CRB is tired of hearing me do it now.

[Bob Roth]

I don't think people are reading the same note that I wrote, but I can't fix that. I'll leave these comments regading big picture

1) Nothing else matters if there are declining cars coming to the races. Though SCCA doesn't share participation data, I believe IT is declining based on my race participation. Even if the present formula is perfect, if it doesn't stem the reduction of participation, its irrelivant.

2) In my professional world, people are expected to make fact based business cases to support their suggestions. My utter frustration in this duscussion is that SCCA shares no facts on who runs, who wins, etc. Until somebody gets the numbers, any big picture input is subject to the next responder who dismisses it as "centric". Get data, not opinions and do everybody a favor.

3) It is my point of view that the present rules do nothing to encourage car counts, and do a lot to discourage good cars from showing up. Poor rules/classifications are something that needs addressing.

I do the executive product planning for a $600m business. If I were working for the CEO of SCCA, My guidance is based on how you are presently running the class, I'd look to cost reduce and harvest IT (and regional racing) as its a declining business. The biggest favor the ITAC committee can do for our class and SCCA is figure out a plan that increases car counts. There are many ways to do it, I've made my suggestions.

bob

[spawpoet]

Bob, maybe I'm wrong because I haven't been out to the track much this year, but as a whole IT car counts have been excellent in the Southeast over the last few years. Maybe there are issues in your region, but I "think" nationally IT counts are very healthy. Maybe somebody else with a more thorough grasp on IT participation nationwide will chime in. Are IT car counts really down significantly across the country??

[gran racing]

Race participation in all areas of racing (SCCA, other clubs, Pro) are in a decline due to the economy. It's not improved touring specific.

Even if the present formula is perfect, if it doesn't stem the reduction of participation, its irrelivant.

If the product is better and more attractive, you better believe it goes towards attracting and retaining active membership.

My utter frustration in this duscussion is that SCCA shares no facts on who runs, who wins, etc. Until somebody gets the numbers, any big picture input is subject to the next responder who dismisses it as "centric". Get data, not opinions and do everybody a favor.

I have to admit that some of your posts confuse me a bit because they contradict themselves a bit. Could be just the way they're written and/or read. You can find facts on who runs and wins, but that shouldn't tie into classification requests.

If based on results - why are these cars winning more than others? Is it because someone built a particular car, proved it was a race winning chasis so others followed in his or her footsteps? That doesn't mean other cars don't have the capability to win. How talented was the driver(s)? I've seen first hand a car being driven by a capable racer who turned some decent lap times, then have his son get in the same exact car the next session out and kick some serious ass. If based on the father's results, one could argue some lead needs to come off the car. If based on the son's, a bunch of lead might be warrented. You can't base it off this type of stuff.

If I were working for the CEO of SCCA, My guidance is based on how you are presently running the class, I'd look to cost reduce and harvest IT (and regional racing) as its a declining business. The biggest favor the ITAC committee can do for our class and SCCA is figure out a plan that increases car counts. There are many ways to do it, I've made my suggestions.

Would you really look at such a short term view? When I look at IT over the past several years, it continues to grow in popularity and participation.

SCCA needs to figure out ways to increase active participation, membership retention (which has been a HUGE issue in the past), help regions as much as possible - not the ITAC. The club also needs people's active participation in ways one might be able to help or they believe the club could use assistance.

[Knestis]

Bob, maybe I'm wrong because I haven't been out to the track much this year, but as a whole IT car counts have been excellent in the Southeast over the last few years. Maybe there are issues in your region, but I "think" nationally IT counts are very healthy. Maybe somebody else with a more thorough grasp on IT participation nationwide will chime in. Are IT car counts really down significantly across the country??

The take-away from Bob's message is that we just don't know. The Club doesn't know, or maybe doesn't disseminate the information internally. The ITAC has to use it's collective judgment which is just the sum of all of our individual perceptions - or misperceptions.

K

[lateapex911]

Back in the day, Sportscar used to list race results that included some regionals. It wasn't ideal- far from it- but it was a window to see some info. Now you have to dig around to see what's happening out of your own backyard. They said that regional people didn't care about things beyonsd their own region, and the regionals publication was a better place for regional results. Space in the national publication was just too valuable.

I miss the results in Fastrack, even limited as they were.

[JoshS]

Until earlier this season, all race results were posted to the SCCA website: http://www.sccabb.com/forum_topics.asp?FID=82

However, I don't see anything since late May.

But even if we had those results for the whole season, without a lot of analysis we wouldn't know the trends year-to-year.

[Andy Bettencourt]

The Club has the numbers. It's not hidden information. I am 99% sure you can request participation numbers for any and all classes. I will look into the trends and report back.

[Dave Gomberg]

The reason you haven't seen the numbers is that until recently, they haven't been tracked. At the end of 2007, an attempt was made to capture as much of this information as possible (I caution you not to draw too many conclusions about trends because this information is known to be incomplete). In 2008, a more concerted effort was made. Although not updated recently, the early 2009 numbers are on the SCCA web site. (Go to http://www.scca.com/contentpage.aspx?content=40 and click on the link above the event listings.)

Here is what we have for the IT classes:

            2007      2008      2009 (through 7/1/2009)
ITR        193        304        158
ITS       1093      1358        543
ITA       1817      1920        936
ITB        920        873         352
ITC        418       454          171

Dave

[Knestis]

I was unclear earlier. I thought that Bob was talking about "competitiveness" - what cars do or don't run up front - but I did a lousy job of translating that into words. Car counts are easy but I didn't think that was the issue. Sorry for not being more specific.

K

[ddewhurst]

The information given in 2007 on the Production site by a CRB member is that ALL Regional class cars & ALL National classes cars are tracked.

[JeffYoung]

This has been a good thread -- much appreciated on all of the input, thanks for the effort guys.

[benspeed]

Nice job and a shout out to Dave G for locating the IT numbers - those get posted in Sportscar almost annually if I recall. Those counts look healthy - would you be able to show Prod and GT so we can see if those classes are down?