Big Picture of IT - Share Your Opinions

[PSherm]

Well Travis,

The only thing (and I've already stated this) that concerns me about having IT become RO-eligible, is the increased possibility that the PtB may want to dork w/ the rules based on results. And honestly, the only reason that they (Pt don't give IT a second thought now, is because they don't see it as 'real' racing. Get the right (or wrong, as the case may be) person in a position of power and infulence that wants things changed, and watch how hard it is to stop.

^ THIS ^

Is what I fear most if IT goes National. And I have been on the side of removing the Nat/Reg distinctions and letting the top 24 classes go to the Runoffs. After seeing how the CRB adds/removes allowances in the T/SS ranks seemingly at will, it gives me NO confidence in their ability to balance a class. And if they are giving our ITAC group resistance to the changes that will keep IT healthy and competitive, it doesn't bode well.

I am of the opinion that the ITAC should focus on fixing cars that have been left out of tGR, run requested cars thru tP2.0, and call it a year (or 2) and let the rules settle in for awhile...

[IPRESS]

Bill,
Why is SM not a good thing to bring up? It is a very close example of what changing to a national class does as far as makeup of the class and where the numbers change.
IT is not exactly like SM, but they are closer than anything else to IT.
Lots of cars, somewhat close in track performance and originally based on low budget racing. Sounds like they are kin. In fact they are as I ran ITA in my first SM before there was an SM to run in.
Here is the deal. Many SM drivers like SM fine as a National Class. Many would rather it be closer to it's original IT like roots. Because of this split you see many different SM tagged regional classes. It has become very fragmented. Shannon McMasters who invented the class warned that once SM became a national class this type stuff would crop up. (He was involved with SRX7 and saw where a class that had many rule sets almost died out.)
IT is too good a racing class as it is to let national stuff screw it up.
The best thing that IT could see would be: no Nat / no Reg designation and No ROs.
You have what you have now and get on all race cards. (except the ROs...but the RO eligible cars can't go to ARRC.)

[shwah]

And if they are giving our ITAC group resistance to the changes that will keep IT healthy and competitive, it doesn't bode well.

Of course that is the unknown. The ITAC over the past few years have done an excellent job of keeping IT healthy and competitive. That is not a guarantee that whatever new process, excuse me 'codification' of the old process that appears to produce different results, we may have now is in fact what will keep IT healthy and competitive.

I actually think it can, but that remains to be seen.

Beating the dead horse, it will have a lot to do with how non-standard factors are identified, recognized and accounted for, or not (with danger lurking in either direction). This is precisely why we NEED the ITAC, and need it to be diverse, but the individuals that make up that entity must be empowered to rely on their subjective instincts as well. Otherwise we just have a spreadsheet and will be right where we were in the old days of smoke and mirrors, and the famous 'back room dealings', with overdogs and weaklings throughout the ITCS, but with a crystal clear view of how they came to be. Of course with every single dyno sheet submitted as data showing a 14% or 21% or - gasp - 27% gain, we will all wonder how those cars are so darn fast, but won't have any hard data to adjust them.

Or at least that would be a worst case scenario.

The people on the ITAC are smart, know the class, and want to protect it. I just hope you realize that you are part of that protection - not just a formula that you transcribe for future members to plug into.

[tnord]

Many people have talked about IT as a destination. I think that's a good thing. To tell them (IT racers) that if they want to really measure themselves against the cream of the crop, that they need to go elsewhere, is in my mind, truly selfish and me-centric.

it says right there in the rules that IT is a REGIONAL ONLY class. and it seems to me that a significant majority of competitors want it to stay that way. to change it for a minority who knew what they were getting into in the first place is the truly selfish act.

[Bill Miller]

Mac,

I think the reason that SM is not a valid example of what could happen to IT, were it to go National, is all in the name. It's a 'Spec' class. That's a significant dynamic that doesn't exist in IT. And while I know Shannon M. was the guy that really got the ball rolling w/ SM, it was my understanding that the concept was born of the fact that, at the time, SSB was essentially Spec Miata. Pretty easy reach to get to a spec class. You've already got a bunch of the cars out there, and drivers that are racing them.

[tnord]

2 different generations of car
4 different engines
5 different ECUs
2 different gear ratios
2 different LSD types
4 different brake packages
4 different min weights
2 different suspension geometries
2 different steering geometries
3 different restrictor plate sizes

it is not a spec class, and practically nobody that actually runs in the class will tell you that it is. the concept was born because there were a lot of old SSB cars that had nowhere race as they were not competitively classed in IT.

what does go on in SM is something that doesn't explicitly happen in IT....yet. they do make an effort to balance all the different cars "on the tip of a pin." the ITAC and the process isn't designed to do that, but when it becomes clear that there are two or three different favorable cars to run at the RO track, i'd bet money all the other guys will be crying foul and looking for an adjustment. or i guess you could just let national IT become a 3 car class if you want.

[IPRESS]

Bill,
I know it is called a "Spec" class. And the leaders of it try to make it a "Spec" class. But in reality it is a "Hybrid". With that in mind, it is a close cousin of IT with the two different generations of SMs classed in two different IT classes.
Some of the warts that came to SM when it became a national class should be a concern when broaching the subject of IT being a ROs class. No I can't tell you without a doubt that those negatives will happen, but the money escalation has happened with both SM and AS when they moved to racing at the ROs. That is a fact.
The idea that the regional races would get "easier" or cheaper to win is probably false in most cases. In SM we have seen some national hotshoes use the regionals for testing. But most still race the regionals. Lots of former SM racers got frustrated with the price of poker and are doing something else. Yes some of the drop out is just natural flow of numbers, but the ROs war fueled the numbers going down.
The NE is such a hotbed of racing that I am sure (without my SM experience) that if I was racing up there my viewpoint on the subject would be somewhat different. The SE is IT heavy and might not suffer from a National IT, although I think it would. The rest of the country might struggle ITwise. Try to look at it this way.......If IT went National and became RunOffs eligible it would be no different than the other 20 something classes. SCCA needs a class division that IS different and IT is the answer.
You almost never hear someone say "You know ITX is really screwed up." But you do hear that about most of the other classes from time to time. It is something to keep in mind.