2008 ARRC by GRM Tentative Schedule

[Butch Kummer]

Any guesses why that made me - literally - gasp and cringe...?

That, right there, will be a group to watch, just for the carnage potential...

Obviously we have carnage potential in any run group, but in this case the SPU cars should leave the ITS/ITR cars pretty handily while all of them outdistance the SSM cars. And since they are faster on both the straights and in the corners, the faster cars should clear the slower cars fairly easily when they come up to lap them. This is a better option than pairing SSM with ITB/ITC (see comments above).

As always, I'm open to suggestions...

[Greg Amy]

As always, I'm open to suggestions...

I don't envy your responsibilities, Butch. And, I'm not going to offer any suggestions, because I don't have any objective ones that I can offer without personal conflict.

But, nobody wants to say it out loud, so I will: the bottom line is nobody wants to race with Spec Miata.

There, I said it.

Well, maybe other Spec Miatas want to race with Spec Miata (maybe), but obviously ITB doesn't. And, I can say with some confidence ITS and ITR don't. I'm pretty sure ITA would be reasonably unhappy with it, too.

Purely selfish commentary: Sure, the straight-line speed should allow ITS/R/SPU cars to out-distance the SSM cars. Hell, even the mid-packer ITx cars should remain clear of the SSM'ers. But, what about all the mid- and back-ender SSMs playing their own little reindeer games as ITx cars are trying to get by (and it will happen quickly, and often)? So, instead of front-pack ITB cars having problems with front-packer SSM cars, you'll have most-packer ITS and ITR (and SPU) cars having problems with, possibly, the entire field of SSMs.

I envision, several laps in, a serious contre-temps between front-end battling ITS/R cars coming up on their first gaggle of tail-ender SSMs,battling it out on their own, probably out of T2 going through the T3/4/5/6/7 complex. Call it six ITS/R cars coming up on, oh, six SSMs...

Did you just cringe?

Butch, again: this is purely an empathetic, yet selfish, commentary, not a request for action. I understand the region wanting to cater, for business reasons, to a large group of potential customers who, should they choose, could run - what? - four race groups? But the problem is that in catering to such a contingent, it very well may detrimentally affect other groups, your other customers.

Honestly, seeing the Spec Miatas lumped into the group that I would potentially enter has given me significant pause...just sayin'...

[Butch Kummer]

Duly noted.

I spend a fair amount of time monitoring the SM board as well, and I can tell you the majority of those folks are concerned about the reputation their class/group has gotten over the years. In reality, it appears there are a small number of "cowboys" that have made poor choices regarding their right to maintain momentum (like Spec Miata has a lock on that being important - ALL cars need to maintain momentum in order to be really quick) that have given the entire class a bad name.

I fight the same battle with the Big Noise group. The past two years at the ARRC we've had our race cut short by the Operating Steward - one lap short in 2006, NINE laps short in 2007 - because the "race had gotten out of control". I've reviewed the Tower logs both years and in each case it's 2-3 drivers that drive off the track, run into each other, pass under yellow, and otherwise act like jackasses to ruin the show for the rest of us. We've identified those "repeat offenders" and I've gotten agreement from the Stewards that those people don't get the benefit of the doubt on the first transgression. i.e. - no furled black flag. Punishing the entire group for the stupidity / lack-of-good-judgement of a few is wrong.

The Stewards are willing to take action to clean up the racing, but they need our help. Corner workers are often too busy responding to an incident to monitor other actions on the track, so don't always see passes under yellow or other infractions. If we as drivers are willing to fill out a protest form (particularly if we have in-car evidence to back it up), that goes a long way toward getting the other driver's attention.

From a business standpoint (which affects the entry fees you pay), I need to replace 37 FE cars that were here last year but are not invited to the 2008 ARRC. I'm guessing (hoping) that splitting SSM and ASM will generate 20 of those entries.

Nobody wants to race with other classes (hell, nobody wants to race with cars faster than theirs, but that's a whole different story). As the "premiere" IT class ITS had it's own run group for a number of years and the counts were gradually declining even before we started combining them with other classes. We combined them with TCC in 2006 and that was a fiasco, last year was better but I still heard grumblings that "their" race was shortened a lap because Fletcher lapped the field with his SPU car. Short of giving every class their own race (and dropping the Enduro on Sunday afternoon), I cannot accomodate those wishes.

As far as Group 4, I expect the SPU cars to stretch out fairly quickly - generally they do NOT run in packs like SM does. By lap 12 (which is when the fast ITx cars should be catching the bulk of the SSM cars) we may also have groups of 2-3 ITx cars running together, but history has shown there are not a lot of position changes among the leaders there. At Friday's drivers' meeting I will speak about the "ethics" of class racing in a multi-class group, and urge people to be aware of what's going on around them (and being patient) when lapping and being lapped by cars in another class. Such comments may well fall on deaf ears, but it's the best option I have available to me at this time.

See y'all at the track...