Proposed 2009 MARRS

[spnkzss]

As for classing, again I said it wont effect me so I could care less since the SS guys don't care and the IT7 cars are just a couple of ITA cars with their own playground. ITR being with ITS and ITA is just the same as ITS being grouped with ITB, so I sympathize with the ITA folks wishing ITR out of the group.

I told myself that I was not going to get into this, but there one thing I will say. I'm pretty sure MOST of the ITA cars are not complaining about ITR. We didn't care. Some of us getting lapped sucked, but ITR was not the problem and we worked well with most of them. What we had problems with was ITS. The mid-pack ITS cars were in teh middle of the ITA battles. I was going to say leaders, but AJ was fighting for the ITS lead.

Personally I would have liked to see ITR and ITA together and ITS and ITB together, but that is apparently another $&it storm.

[JamesB]

Groupings are impossible, personally not being in the top of the field I hated it when my race was over while battline for a possition and loosing the lap. But thats me and as a driver I would like the chance to have every lap.

I have no problem with the ITB grouping, but I am sure the pointy end might not have as much fun with the handfull of IT7 cars...but it could be a moot point.

I just dont like the qual, race, race format, which jeff says may not happen, but even Gregg's e-mail said radical change in the format. So I take it he is that sure it will change Jeff, so that is why I am pissed because I have more then once before open comp, and after open comp made it aware to all of ITB and other drivers I don't care for the format and it was why I have never gone to VIR during a 2 day double...its the same format just a little relaxed. It means less entries possible which may be true for 2009 anyway and will gaurentee higher entry fees since you cannot take in more cars even if you wanted to.

[jjjanos]

Interesting you call me a peanut.

A peanut gallery is an audience that heckles the performer.

It will likely get implimented since I hear more of the drivers reps like SM, SSM, ITA are all in favor of it.

You listed 3 reps. The vote was 13-4.

I have no problem with the ITB grouping, but I am sure the pointy end might not have as much fun with the handfull of IT7 cars...but it could be a moot point.

The handful of IT7 cars outnumbers most of the classes we have. With the exception of 1 or 2 cars, they also turn lap times faster than ITB. An IT7/SS grid with a second ITB/ITC gets the two groups apart and, for the most part, keeps them apart. If there's no split grid in the supps, there's no point in doing this as it WILL reduce the quality of track time.

I just dont like the qual, race, race format, which jeff says may not happen, but even Gregg's e-mail said radical change in the format.

Exactly what is the problem with having two races? More carnage? That's why finishing position shouldn't be considered for Sunday's grid, but your best lap time - plus it gets those who don't want to race out of the herd.

If we don't condense, we CAN'T change the format. Fewer cars over the same number of groups equals the same schedule as last year. It isn't the number of cars that determines the amount of track time, but the number of groups.

The ONLY reason to condense is to add more track time for each group. We could increase the length of the meaningless Saturday qualifying PM session, but why do that when we can set up a system where those who want to race can and those who don't still get access to the track?

If Sunday grid is set by best time from Saturday, either qualifying or race, then those who don't want to race, just have to start from the pit lane and it'll be nothing more than a qualifying session and it will be longer.

[mlytle]

Exactly what is the problem with having two races? More carnage? That's why finishing position shouldn't be considered for Sunday's grid, but your best lap time - plus it gets those who don't want to race out of the herd.


If Sunday grid is set by best time from Saturday, either qualifying or race, then those who don't want to race, just have to start from the pit lane and it'll be nothing more than a qualifying session and it will be longer.

bingo! this is the way to have a saturday race, without increasing the qualify-during-the-race carnage that caused marrs to stop using the saturday race format years ago. must detach the saturday race results from the qualifying grid for sunday. take the fastest lap time from either sat morn or afternoon session....just like we have done in recent years. this makes the sat race optional. driver not want to risk car? no problem..just stand on morning qual time for sundays grid. want to go our for fun race? have a ball sat afternoon. think you can better your morning time? start from the pits for the afternoon race and enjoy a couple clear laps. break your car in morning qual? not a big deal, you can work on it all day saturday and your morning time will set you for sunday.

if the sat race is forced to be the qual for the sunday race, all flexibility is taken away. wrong answer!

[jjjanos]

bingo! this is the way to have a saturday race, without increasing the qualify-during-the-race carnage that caused marrs to stop using the saturday race format years ago.

This is what I'm suggesting:

Saturday races:
1. No MARRS points awarded for finishing position.
2. If we want a championship, let it be a Saturday Cup and we can make it open to everyone running, i.e. no decal.
3. Combined starts for Saturday since the race is "optional." I'm not firm about that.
4. Best time from Saturday sets grid for Sunday aka the MARRS race. Let's see how it works before trying it in the real race.

Sunday races:
1. Split grids written into the supps for those groups asking for it at the start of the season. This CANNOT be something the stewards can take away at a whim.

Only question is whether MARRS points should be awarded in each class for the following:
1. Fastest Sunday race lap?
2. Fastest Saturday morning time?
3. Fastest Saturday afternoon time?

[Charlie Broring]

Jeff, you keep talking about "split grids" like it's some kind of a solution to an awkward mix of classes. Your dreaming. Stewards will fight it and screw it up if allowed at all. History repeats itself.

[jjjanos]

However, My reason for starting this thread was that I feel that great racing is our best avenue to attract drivers to the MARRS series. I feel that the 8 group schedule is going to compromise the quality of racing for quite a few classes and cost us drivers. I don't think an extra couple laps on Sunday is going to attract a single new driver. I think Saturday afternoon racing can take place with a more comfortable 9 group format. This is certainly not the self serving motive that you imply

I think we made a mistake with our plans for next year and if others feel the same we have time to reconsider.

Then put together an alternate. Simply saying 8=bad, 9=good is no good. Tell me what the 9 will be. I've run the numbers for groups and out together schedules and, IMO, 9 is a useless contraction. We might as well stay with 10 or let SRF combine with Prod and give them double the track time.

That doesn't solve the ITR/ITS/ITA cluster though. Where are we going to put them?

Attached are the 2008 car counts with the 2008 groupings. Put together a 9-group format that makes sense. I've got a spreadsheet that will automatically do the totals for proposed groupings. Send me a PM with an email and I'll fire it off to any and all who want it. Now put together a 9-group weekend schedule with the following rules:
1. Add 2 minutes to every session for the cool off lap.
2. Leave 10 minutes between sessions for slack.
3. Leave 65 minutes for lunch.
4. Races = 1.5 minutes/lap plus 4 minutes.

Cutting one group gets us a hair over 5 minutes of racing for the 9 remaining groups on Saturday. On Sunday, we can pick up about 5 minutes of track time for the remaining groups.

Cut two run groups, we pick up 12.5 minutes on Saturday, or about an entire qualifying session. On Sunday, we pick up about 10 minutes/group, or about 1/3 of what we each get now.

Jeff, you keep talking about "split grids" like it's some kind of a solution to an awkward mix of classes. Your dreaming. Stewards will fight it and screw it up if allowed at all. History repeats itself.

If it's in the Supps they have to do it. We don't give them option of granting the split grid.

[EV]

If Sunday grid is set by best time from Saturday, either qualifying or race, then those who don't want to race, just have to start from the pit lane and it'll be nothing more than a qualifying session and it will be longer.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but what's the point of a "race" on Saturday, if it's nothing more than a qualifying session started with a pace car?

[erlrich]

Groupings are impossible, personally not being in the top of the field I hated it when my race was over while battline for a possition and loosing the lap. But thats me and as a driver I would like the chance to have every lap.

I agree, it sucks when you loose a lap because you're racing with a considerably faster class, but I think that is one of the realities of club racing that we just have to deal with. And even without getting lapped, how many times do you have one of those "if I only had one more lap I coulda got 'em" races?

I have no problem with the ITB grouping, but I am sure the pointy end might not have as much fun with the handfull of IT7 cars...but it could be a moot point.

I hope it does become a moot point, and we are able to work out the split starts for some of these groups. Of course, that is going to depend heavily on the drivers.

I just dont like the qual, race, race format, which jeff says may not happen, but even Gregg's e-mail said radical change in the format. So I take it he is that sure it will change Jeff, so that is why I am pissed because I have more then once before open comp, and after open comp made it aware to all of ITB and other drivers I don't care for the format and it was why I have never gone to VIR during a 2 day double...its the same format just a little relaxed. It means less entries possible which may be true for 2009 anyway and will gaurentee higher entry fees since you cannot take in more cars even if you wanted to.

I would really like to know how the majority of drivers feel about this one - someone brought up the question in the MARRS ITA group and I thought the overwhelming response was "more racing time", even if everyone couldn't agree on the details. But even then only a very few drivers bothered to respond - which seems to be the case until something happens that pisses them off. Not pointing at you James, because I know better, but it never fails to amaze me how few drivers want to get involved with the decision-making process, even when the decisions affect them directly. The open comp meeting was a great example; if I recall correctly the workers at the meeting outnumbered the drivers by a huge margin...