ITAC and CRB and the Process

[Peter Olivola]

From Bob Dowie, CRB Chairman:

http://www.sccabb.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=8861&PN=1

[RacerBill]

Interesting, very very interesting!

[Ron Earp]

So in summary:

1. Competition style weight adjustments in IT will not be performed.
2. Having an open and repeatable classification process is too difficult and is not something members should expect to see.
3. The IT classification process based on stock hp is not desirable because it is error prone.
4. Internet discussions of IT issues are not considered relevant.
5. The CRB still plans to use judgment to adjust IT car weights. If the ITAC can identify a car that is incorrectly classed, per the GCR parameters, then the CRB might adjust it.

Did I get the basic jist?

[Andy Bettencourt]

I can tell you that Bob put a ton of time into that, so for that I am thankful.

I can also tell you that there are a few facts that I will dispute and are key to where we are. I am not going to pull them out and pick them apart out of respect for the big picture and a hope that the current committee can move forward. It's water under the bridge. Good luck to all.

[Ron Earp]

Much appreciated for sure and it is nice to read some feedback. If I am reading that right it is good to see competition adjustments aren't in the cards. However, I don't agree with a few of his points and I think his closing paragraph pretty much says it all.

[Andy Bettencourt]

If I am reading that right it is good to see competition adjustments aren't in the cards.

Sort of. Proactive competition adjustments no. But a refusal to adjust a car based on it's physical attributes (the way all new cars are classed) under the guise of 'it's competitive as is'....to me is a defacto-CA using on-track data.

[JeffYoung]

I agree.

[Greg Amy]

Me, three.

All that's missing now is the cigars, some single-malt Scotch in crystal drinking glasses, and that room with a locked door.

What's old is new again..."Secret"CCA, indeed.

GA

[Jeremy Billiel]

OK so why don't we create a conversation over on SCCA Forums to prove him wrong?

[Ron Earp]

Sort of. Proactive competition adjustments no. But a refusal to adjust a car based on it's physical attributes (the way all new cars are classed) under the guise of 'it's competitive as is'....to me is a defacto-CA using on-track data.

I was being facetious. I don't buy much of the post myself due to the numerous contradictions contained therein. About the only thing I'm sure of is that the status quo will continue.

OK so why don't we create a conversation over on SCCA Forums to prove him wrong?

He already told you he didn't think the internet was a proper place to express views and discuss. Besides, that board is dead for IT. The IT action is here and on Roadraceautox.com.

[Jeremy Billiel]

I was being facetious. I don't buy much of the post myself due to the numerous contradictions contained therein. About the only thing I'm sure of is that the status quo will continue.



He already told you he didn't think the internet was a proper place to express views and discuss. Besides, that board is dead for IT. The IT action is here and on Roadraceautox.com.

exactly my point. bring the fight to him and make him and scca listen.