Big Picture of IT - Share Your Opinions

[tnord]

really kirk? so you're saying you guys would be willing to class cars at a number other than what is output by the formula? that's news to me, and i bet many others.

[lateapex911]

really kirk? so you're saying you guys would be willing to class cars at a number other than what is output by the formula? that's news to me, and i bet many others.

How, on Gods green earth, could it be news?? (Assuming that this isn't semantics) If you mean "outside the formula" (blea, it's a process), to mean stuff just tossed on for the sake of feel good, then no, we don't do that. But, when the process spits out weights that are obviously wrong, as in the S2000, it isn't used. Research is done to determine what is reasonable, or real. Each case is different. In the S2000's case we modified the multiplier. In other cases, we use the data we have, and sidestep the presumptive first step. It's a procedure that uses inputs (which are open for debate) and repeatable blocks.

We've been over this a gazillion times and stated it a billion ways. I think that it's the structured method of imputing the data that trips up the CRB, as they feel it lacks 'wiggleroom".

[frnkhous]

Travis, your missing that no cars can be corrected if they are underweight, only if they are overdogs. Your also fool hardy because you assume that Mr Drago won't throw weight on a miata because it might be bad for crossover business. You may also realize that even if an arrc sweep occurs no weight may be added if they sandbag and don't turn fast laps. I mean if they start on row 2-3 and pass on the first lap or two before times drop then run consistently but not faster than other cars nothing is likely to happen. It doesn't change that things are still broken, and you'll be crying when someone finds a better car to do it with than the miata.

edit: The fact that two crb members are ITB guys that would have been making another car competitive in their backyard is highly suspect at best to me. About as transparent as a brick wall. And comments from mr Drago that had been brought up previously aren't much better. Personally, this makes me glad to see Gorrian run away from him in a "spec" car at the runoffs.. maybe sm will start giving drivers lead bricks. Wouldn't be much different than the "wiggle" room the ITAC guys are claiming CRB wanted for IT

[tnord]

Travis, your missing that no cars can be corrected if they are underweight, only if they are overdogs.

wrong. it works both ways.

if someone proves to have built a 100% effort (writes a big check to sunbelt, rebello, etc) and the dyno data doesn't show the car to make squat for power, they can adjust the weights down just the same as they can adjust them up.

*this is assuming that the current "freeze" on weights thaws after some time for everyone to get on the same page.

[frnkhous]

wrong. it works both ways.

if someone proves to have built a 100% effort (writes a big check to sunbelt, rebello, etc) and the dyno data doesn't show the car to make squat for power, they can adjust the weights down just the same as they can adjust them up.

*this is assuming that the current "freeze" on weights thaws after some time for everyone to get on the same page.

NO, because no matter what you can't prove that the ontrack evidence exists, and that is all they've said they care about. I can't prove that I don't just suck at driving. That is the only way they are going to use to trigger looking at something.

If your suggestion is true then why didn't they fix the 318 and the ITS mustang before closing the floodgates?

[lateapex911]

wrong. it works both ways.

if someone proves to have built a 100% effort (writes a big check to sunbelt, rebello, etc) and the dyno data doesn't show the car to make squat for power, they can adjust the weights down just the same as they can adjust them up.

*this is assuming that the current "freeze" on weights thaws after some time for everyone to get on the same page.

Where did that idea come from??

Nobody in the know has said anything close to that. Where are you getting your info??

Regarding the first part of your post, I'm not sure I see how that will play out. The rulebook has a clause which specifically points out that any car is subject to adjustments of weight ...or the addition of a restrictor,

which will be used solely to restore equity in a class

. You don't add restrictors to speed cars up. The rules state "initial classifications" are subject to tinkering with for 4 years, and that's it. The CRb approved any method the ITAC wishes to class new cars. They have directed us not to reprocess cars, per the rulebook. Therefore the only way older cars get reprocessed is through the above clause. And the CRB prohibited the use of V2.0 in any case where that arises.

What am I missing?

[tnord]

Where did that idea come from??

contrary to popular belief, i don't think the CRB aims to "ruin" IT. I think them taking the hard line of freezing every car currently listed is a relatively temporary policy. i bet if you present them with a good case backed by the same type of evidence you'd use in the process, you could get some things through....like this ITA 318 adjustment.

not right now....but later....after the dust settles. but that's me just being open minded about how this all will work out.

[StephenB]

contrary to popular belief, i don't think the CRB aims to "ruin" IT. I think them taking the hard line of freezing every car currently listed is a relatively temporary policy. i bet if you present them with a good case backed by the same type of evidence you'd use in the process, you could get some things through....like this ITA 318 adjustment.

not right now....but later....after the dust settles. but that's me just being open minded about how this all will work out.

This is the worst thought that I have heard in a LONG time. LEAVE IT ALONE so we can all move along! The CRB needs to make a decision and stick to it. Stop the swings and flip flops AKA INSTABILITY! The only thing we should fix is if the CRB/ITAC sees an overdog classified in Error and all changes should be made within the current rules of 4 years.

Stephen

[lateapex911]

. Wouldn't be much different than the "wiggle" room the ITAC guys are claiming they wanted for IT

??? Typo? The ITAC guys never asked for 'wiggleroom".

[frnkhous]

??? Typo? The ITAC guys never asked for 'wiggleroom".

. Wouldn't be much different than the "wiggle" room the ITAC guys are claiming they(CR wanted for IT.

Sorry they should have been CRB, I wasn't claiming the ITAC wants wiglge room.

[Bill Miller]

You know Travis, I put you on 'ignore', but w/ everyone quoting your posts, the 'ignore' thing didn't work out that well.

You really are a piece of work. You tell people to 'blow me' and 'lick my balls' and then you turn around and accuse someone of being 'a dick'. You're a punk POS, plain and simple. You are the quintessential internet douchebag. You're a spoiled little brat that only cares about themself. You're a crybaby. Now go swap spit w/ Mr. Drago and do us a favor and buy those new clubs you'be been bloviating about.

You SOOOOOO don't get it.

And while I think Kirk has way too much decorum to do this, I certainly don't.

GO FUCK YOURSELF!


To the guys on the ITAC, I am well and truly sorry to see all your hard worked flushed down the shitter. You guys deserved better than that. It's a shame too, as you guys (which includes several former members) had really laid the groundwork to make IT the best category in the SCCA. And maybe that was part of the problem, the CRB couldn't very well have a category that didn't get to run for a National Championship being the real top dog in the Club. The other problem is, they have no idea how to balance cars except based on the results of one race. Anybody want to take bets on how much lead the HP CRX gets for next year?

[tnord]

Anybody want to take bets on how much lead the HP CRX gets for next year?

I will.

$20 says it doesn't get a single pound.

Put your money where your mouth is.

[lateapex911]

Here's my take on it, from a personal point of view.

I don't think the CRB wants to slap weight Runoffs style. I really don't. Up until the latest backlog/issue, they have been very supportive of everything the ITAC has done. Like 98% supportive. As a matter of fact, not long ago, I think we were told by a member of the CRB, "You guys are the best ad hoc going if you ask us or the BoD".

So, I *think* we aren't at odds about the final product. We both want balanced classes with good racing.

But, we differ on how to get there.

They've told us that we can class new cars any way we want. "Just make it make sense". But we can't touch older listings. I have a hard time making things make sense that way.

Before Monday, I could answer anyones questions of how we operated, and had 'answers' for every question a member could come up with. I could explain the process, or suggest the member request a Process review for example. I work for the members. So being able to look them in the eyes, explain the system, and answer them honestly was a big thing to me. I'd worked hard to get to that point.

Now, I can still be honest. But the answers I give might rile people, and that sucks. I have no problems telling people that things aren't perfect, but, it's hard to defend some of the inequities and say, "Pound sand, my friend, nothing I can do about it".

I guess the thing that surprises me most is that I thought things were moving in a good direction and the methods and procedures we were utilizing were respected by the higher ups, like the BoD. But, I guess not?

[tnord]

How, on Gods green earth, could it be news?? (Assuming that this isn't semantics)

its totally semantics, but kirk apparantly feels like being a dick today.

[Knestis]

its totally semantics, but kirk apparantly feels like being a dick today.

In case you hadn't noticed there, Trav - I'M ROYALLY PISSED OFF THAT A HANDFUL OF PEOPLE ARE RUINING SOMETHING I'VE LITERALLY SPENT HALF MY LIFE TRYING TO MAKE BETTER.

But you know what? You've used up all of the bandwidth I'm going to waste trying to correct what you don't understand. I've consistently given you the benefit of the doubt but your reaction in this last chapter has proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that you're a disingenuous, selfish, petty, 'net child.

The idiot teacher in me keeps thinking there's hope but you're going to need to find a new backstop to bounce your misrepresentations off of.

K

[Andy Bettencourt]

really kirk? so you're saying you guys would be willing to class cars at a number other than what is output by the formula? that's news to me, and i bet many others.

You really need to pay attention.