2009 MARRS Format - speak up now or live with it

[Gregg]

Gregg, it is just a change from the last groupings proposed.

Not sure I understand what you're saying here. The groupings that Jeff listed are those that were voted on and agreed to in October. Perhaps the problem is that Jeff considers them to be "proposed" while the rest of us (except perhaps the ITB rep) consider them to be voted on, and approved for '09.

I know that Jeff is re-listing them simply because I know that your rep is going to ask at Saturday's meeting that we move back to 9 or ten run groups. I would be remiss to mention that after taking an informal poll of most of your class's drivers, the overwhelming sentiment is to move to eight groups and increase track time.

[JamesB]

I went back and checked, your right and my memory had me thinking spec7 was in another group. My bad for mixing that up, I guess having more going on then racing this winter, I thought that was a change. Either way, it won't fix the overall too many classes problem we already have and that is nothing WDCR can fix on its own. And agian it wont effect me until I can get away from the pointy end of ITC which is enough of a problem for me.

However, this is the real first of any confirmed written rules to be voted on about the saturday format change that I have seen. And again, I dont care as long as I can do my qualifying without the worry of getting stuck in a gravel trap for the rest of the session (has not happen to me but I know it can) or needing to pull off early because a belt decided to let go (has happend to me before) and ruining my position for the points race on Sunday. If Saturday is to be a points counted race, then just push the SARRC double format already since it will defintly change my plans to trying to push a full season through this year. I know money is tight all over, its not flowing out of my pockets this year and the more I think about the changes the more I am thinking about taking a wait and see approach since I really cannot afford to rebuild a car this year.

[jjjanos]

I just dont see the need to add sat afternoon of a 9 lap race (yes it will be 9 not 12 for all groups) which will just add more work to the cleanup crews and more work on the cars.

Because drivers wanted more track time? Because drivers wanted more racing?

As a driver who races in both the Small Bore Prod group and in ITC, I propose (no make that demand) that those groups have split starts or at least split grids.

As your ITC Rep, I will ask for a split start for the IT7/B/C/SS group. ITB/ITC on field and the newcomers a second. The decision, however, will need to be a group one. Small Bore/SRF is the responsibility of someone else. I will, however, let them know what you think.

I also think that the CRB should look very closely at combining the Wings n Things group and the Formula Vee group.

One thing to consider is that after last year's "issue," the open-wheel DRs worked very hard at raising their participation levels. Their numbers were up in 2008 and, IMO, it would be unfair to undercut that effort as long as they show progress.

In addition, I believe that decision is out of the CRC's hands. After last year's fiasco, it is unlikely the Region's BoD would allow it. We also need the Division Executive Steward to approve our supps and I do not know if he would allow us to combine them.

Otherwise I am ok with the rest of the proposal knowing full well that the Region leadership (whomever "they" are) will do what "they" want not what the racers want.

"WE/I" are trying to find out what the races want so that "we/I" can do what the racers want. When 2 drivers give their opinions out of 20 and 3 of those are indifferent, it pretty much guarantees that the DRs will do what "they" think is best or want.

Gregg, it is just a change from the last groupings proposed. Which interesting enough for me to wonder why to go through all this trouble again.

I believe that some DRs will ask that 8-groups be reconsidered. If it's to be reconsidered, the drivers should have some input.

Though I think split starts with 4 different classes will never happen so our group should just get used to it from the get go so we can avoid possible body damaging melees.

Well, I've seen NASA do 4 split starts with one of them standing, so I'm confident we could do it if we wanted. What I was thinking, however, was a maximum of 2 start groups per run group to seperate the newcomers from the oldtimers in the groups.

Not sure I understand what you're saying here. The groupings that Jeff listed are those that were voted on and agreed to in October. Perhaps the problem is that Jeff considers them to be "proposed" while the rest of us (except perhaps the ITB rep) consider them to be voted on, and approved for '09.

Until we get our supps approved, it can be undone. If people are happy with what the CRC decided, they should let their reps know that. If they want changes, there still is time to revise our plans. In addition, there was an understanding that we would get split starts for the new run groups and until that is in the supps, I'm not considering this a done deal. There are several layers to getting supps approved and some of those have a bias against split starts a/o split grids.