FA/FB Consolidation

[Lee Stohr]

Phil, Good luck at the meeting - only mad dogs and Englishmen,
as the saying goes

[GT1Vette]

Seems like a handful of people pushing buttons and pulling strings that are really not paying attention to what the mass of the club members really want.

And, pray tell, what DO the mass of the club members (not just open-wheeled race drivers) really want? As we've seen on many discussions here (can you say "Zetec/Pinto equivalency" or "Runoffs location", for example?), we can't even agree on the best answer to the relatively simple questions. I'm currently in the midst of a great debate on the 2009 GTA rules (which is not even a Nationally-recognized regional class) and the disagreements among a relatively small number of people participating in the process (less than ten) is frustrating. I'm CONSTANTLY tempted to chuck the whole thing and run SPO where there are essentially no rules. If you can't please ten people (or even 100 in the Pinto/Zetec situation), how can you POSSIBLY expect to satisfy 50,000?

Anybody here that is a member of a neighborhood tennis team? I'm SURE there's no b*tching and complaining about who's playing with whom and on what line, right? How about your kid's Little League team? Lawsuits against coaches because refusing to let Little Johnny pitch curtailed his chances for a college scholarship and a professional career? Puh-leeze! If the answers were easy, we wouldn't need to ask the question!

I applaud Phil Creighton and Mike Sauce for their willingness to come on these forums and explain the thought processes as much as they do. There's a reason few others do, and it has to do with opening oneself up to the constant badgering and second-guessing that is SO prevalent on these venues. Discarding Eric Prill's thoughts because of the name of his blog ("The Rumor Mill")? THAT was a mature statement!

And yes, I did run for the Area 12 Director position back in 2005. Losing that election probably ranks among the top ten best things that ever happened to me...

Butch Kummer
Atlanta Region

[rickb99]

Seems like a handful of people pushing buttons and pulling strings that are really not paying attention to what the mass of the club members really want.

Doug,

If you read that blog, it becomes perfectly clear that the core people on that "Task Force" have NO CLUE what it's all about (remember, NONE of the CRB inputs were acted on).

Quote:

1. If it doesn’t have fenders, has wings and runs the same lap times and often mixes overall grids across the country, why are there different classes in National competition? Would we be better to have a field of 27 cars in the same class rather than three fields of nine?

That way of thinking says, If it has open wheels and has wings, it's all the same thing. Run um together as one class.

Quote:
2. If it has fenders, was built a long time ago and can run in two or three different
classes (admittedly with varying levels of success—but its legal!) by just changing the
sticker on the side of the car, are we serving any purpose other than diluting the overall
program?

3. If it has fenders, was purpose-built and the perceived “slower” class is now faster than
the “faster” class, do we need two classes?

Using that logic it makes perfect sense to them (as suggested above) to combine CSR/DSR and GT1 into a single class.

Phil and a hand full of others are obviously trying to fight the good fight for us all against a 'group' of some sort that doesn't have a clue what they are talking about.

[Mike B]

If you can't please ten people (or even 100 in the Pinto/Zetec situation), how can you POSSIBLY expect to satisfy 50,000?

Butch Kummer
Atlanta Region

Our club already has a process in place where proposals or rule changes are published for public comment. Members can then submit letters either for or against the proposal. This is how those affected by it can vote. To my knowledge, this has been working relatively well. It's when the BOD takes it upon themselves to dictate how things will change that everything falls apart. Sort of like that last 7-10 days.
Follow the process that has been accepted for years and do what you say you'll do and most people will be happy. At the least, they won't get taken by surprise!

[Charles Warner]

Do I have a dog in this fight? Yes and No.

First of all - to reiterate - at least Phil has put his time and effort into this Club for many years. He may not have always done as we all would have liked but I have never known Phil to be anything less than honest and forthright - like it or not. He understands the ways of the Club like no one I know. I personally give him my trust. And he has never been lacking in his willingness to help racers at all levels.

Doug, No, it is not a Club run by the membership - any more than the USA is a country run by the people. Democracy? No. Republic? Yes. The BOD were voted in by the membership at large. That's about as far as it goes with one's ability to control what happens.

I understand many members' feelings of betrayal and that many, many racers feel less than inclined to trust the BOD in the future. One only has to look at the promise made to the FB/F1000 guys and the apparent acceptance of the renegging on that promise.

The lagging economy and other social pressures are putting the overall racing scene in dire straits. Sorry, but that's a fact, Jack! I see a return to what many of us grew up with: a grouping of formula cars, a grouping of sports racers, and the others in their own groups. Much of this is a financial issue. Look at the posts and the apparent rancor between people that only a year ago were cohensive in their desire to create the F1000 class. Now we see sniping at each other.

Let's face it: racing, as paid for by discretionary funds, is changing in this economic downturn, as we know it and the organization of that system either changes or it dies. The consolidation of FB & FA is, IMO, much less onerous than the consolidation of the sports racers (S2, CSR, DSR.) Again, IMO, stop the pissing and moaning - realize the times they are a-changin' - and figure out the best course of action for the group as a whole. Nationals? RunOffs? Regionals? All the options are open.

Where do you want to go?

P.S. Anyone taking up Sean Maisey on his offer of $100 per race is a wanker! It's a gallant offer but you either pay to play or piss off.

[Rick Ross]

Phil --

Thanks for venturing into the cross-fire here. Although I am not an advocate of any class consolidations, I am curious......how did the BOD select FA/FB for combination? In other words, why not FF/F5, or FM/FE, or FC/FA, or some other choice? Was the decision based soley upon participation numbers? The technical challenges of an FA/FB "equalization" would seem to be greater than almost any other option. Thanks for any insight you can provide into this process.

[Charles Warner]

The technical challenges of an FA/FB "equalization" would seem to be greater than almost any other option.

Rick,

IMO, FB and FA are the closest in lap times, speeds, and, most importantly, potential. There is a lot of room for FB improvement for this new class as racers get to grips with it. FC & FB would be too great a disparity in performance. Aero means a lot. Go back and read Steve Lathop's posts on this subject.

Besides, no one is talking about "equalization" AFAIK. That is an ugly concept (much akin to the idea of "parity" in engines.) In my understanding, we are talking about combining the two classes in one run group. They will still be different entities.

[dc]

And, pray tell, what DO the mass of the club members (not just open-wheeled race drivers) really want?

Is that not the BoD's responsibility to actually find that out before making a dictate?

[Charles Warner]

Is that not the BoD's responsibility to actually find that out before making a dictate?

Doug,

You, and I, may feel this way but to determine accurately what "the membership wants" is like herding cats: it would take eons to do this properly. Their decisions, I suppose, are made based on the prardigms they have developed. What we do not know is the focus of their decision making processes. In comparison, our focuses are probably quite narrow.

[Lee Stohr]

Charles, I'm not sure we are on the same page - the BOD said there will be 18 classes, not 19. FB was to go into FA. That makes 18 classes. If FB was to be in a run group with FA, then that would make 19 classes. The BOD said there will be 18 classes.

Or maybe it's 21 classes, I'm confused. Phil said 18 above.

So the BOD proposal was that the Comp Board find an equalization.
Now they are rethinking - but they still want 18 classes. So I'm not sure what will happen.
I also respect Phil, and your wanker comment is right on !

[Charles Warner]

Thanks Lee. I've been concentrating more on the SR brouhaha and missed that part. IMO that is definitely counter to the position taken and the opportunities promised the FB racers and constructors and should not be a player. To put them in the same run group as a separate class doesn't seem too onerous but to equalize them is wrong.

[Mike B]

I've been informed that there will be a press release on Friday and that "we will be happy" with it.
Regardless of the outcome, I want to thank Phil Creighton, Mike Sauce, and RJ Gordy for their communication.
Stay tuned!

[Rick Ross]

Hi, Charles. It was my understanding that the original BOD directive was to combine FA and FB into one class, hence my use of the term "equalization". I agree that running together in the same group would not be a problem....we do that already. I am sure that the FB lap times will approach or even surpass the FA's at some point (unless a new FA design comes along), because as you and others have pointed out the current FB designs have not yet reached their full aero potential, and the hp will continue to increase each year.

Yet I am still curious how the BOD selected FA/FB for combination versus other options? Why was this consolidation considered to be more logical than FF/F5, FE/FM, or various other possibilities? If the BOD has some type of long-term vision that requires less overall classes, I would still think that FB should be left alone, as it is somewhat unique among the formula classes.

[dc]

Regardless of the outcome, I want to thank Phil Creighton, Mike Sauce, and RJ Gordy for their communication.
Stay tuned!

And we all thank them for actively participating on ApexSpeed. Even if it is like herding cats, they can at least get a feel for what a general population is thinking before and after making important decisions for the club's sake.

[Dauntless]

So when the announcement comes out, maybe it's time to ditch this long, complex, hard to follow thread and have some breakout discussions. There could be a thread about new information in the announcement, one about the class consolidation, etc., right here.

And the F500 section could take over the discussion of them merging with Formula Ford, and the FF guys can go there if they want a good laugh.

[Phil Creighton]

There is a press release coming sometime today but basically no consolidations happening.
Member input worked - details later
Phil

[Stan Clayton]

Official Press Release

[VehDyn]

Good job by the BOD. I think they did the right thing. Let the classes sink or swim on their own participation.

Looks like the 2.5 per race criteria has 21 classes going to the 2009 Runoffs based on participation so far. Some are close on either side of the 2.5 so this summer should be interesting.

It will also be interesting to see how the classes that have been established for a while react to missing the cut for the Runoffs. Will they increase the particiaption the next year or will they move on? Especially the classes that seem to build new cars from year to year like some of the Touring classes. We'll see.

[Mike Devins]

I have just sent my letter to thank the BOD for listening to our input...

My personal thanks to Phil and Mike..

[Brandon Dixon]

I sent my thank you letter this morning as well.

I'm glad (and frankly suprised) that the BoD was able to act this quickly.

Thanks for listening.

[kma4444]

It was a shame that the whole situation happened the way it did. We need more folks like Phil on the BOD. When it's time to elect an area director, please elect someone who is racer friendly. It seems there are too many folks up there who are not aligned with us, the folks who pay the bills.

We are damn lucky that Phil had a weak moment and ran for the seat here in the SE. His voice likely was instrumental in hacking the legs out from under an ill-concieved plan.

Thanks to the good guys on the BOD and CRB, we need more of them.

[Tom Valet]

Even with the rescinding of the consolidation, there is still one aspect of the rules changes that the BoD hasnt thought completely through. Under the new 2009 rules, the top ten classes lock in stand alone races meaning they cant be combined with any other class. As of right now, all the formula classes are in the top ten, except for F5 which is 21st (and FB which is 26). What would they combine F5 with? A tin top class?

[TimW]

Even with the rescinding of the consolidation, there is still one aspect of the rules changes that the BoD hasnt thought completely through. Under the new 2009 rules, the top ten classes lock in stand alone races meaning they cant be combined with any other class. As of right now, all the formula classes are in the top ten, except for F5 which is 21st (and FB which is 26). What would they combine F5 with? A tin top class?

They are only guaranteeing top 10 a stand alone race/sessions. This does not say that classes 11-24 will be combined but are subject to it. With 13 remaining classes and 11 remaining groups, some of the 13 will not get combined, no?

[Tom Valet]

That's true Tim. So how ARE they going to decide which classes wind up getting combined? I had just assumed that those at the bottom of the list would automatically get combined with something else. If F5 winds up as the last class to qualify could they still get their own race?

[Dave Gomberg]

The short answer is: we don't know yet.

The longer answer is that we will probably have to make a judgment call based on which classes would make sense to combine.

There is the possibility we won't have to make that decision at all. As of the end of May, only 21 classes had the required 2.5 cars/event average. That could change (there are still 25 National races to be run in 2008), but if the numbers don't come up in those classes that are under 2.5, we won't even have 24 races.

Dave

[Marshall Mauney]

[deleted]

[Blacksport350]

Sounds like a bad deal for S2's as it makes them uncompetitive but in our class at the the Sprints, the DSR and CSR's were very competitive with each other. The top 10 cars were split about 50/50 between the two classes.

FE was also ran in the same ground and accounted for 24 of the 55 cars so in my book that warrants a separate class. Not to mention the fact that it is an SCCA conceived spec class so combining it would render the class pointless. (not that I am biased or anything)

A quick look at the FA/FB results from the Sprints put the FB's well behind the FA's so that doesn't make a lot of sense but maybe an FC/FB consolidation would.

The problem is that there are too many classes in general so it seems to result in some pretty questionable decisions.

Case in point, mixing CSR/DSR/S2000/FE as a run group for the Sprints. The faster sports racers were pretty much running the FE's over within laps (split start). To me, it would make more sense to get FM/FE/FC grouped (not combined) and put CSR/DSR/FA together. In any event, I wouldn't want to be involved in making any of these decisions as no matter what the outcome, someone will always be unhappy.

Wow!

CSR/DSR/S2 all in the same class? FE remains as it's own? Sounds fishy to me.

FA and FB are so different from one another. Nonsense.

It makes much more sense to unrestrict the Zetec FC and join with FB.

If this is being forced upon us without member input, my first impression is to leave the club. There's others out there.

Another thought - this will probably cause more segregation between National and Regional racing. Is that what is needed / wanted? If/when this is forced upon us, I'll never run a National unless it's in my back yard. We in NER lost money again on our NHMS National earlier this month. Why should we continue to put on races that we lose money for our Region?

So yeah - I'm in agreement with keeping FB as a Regional class only and doing the ARRC as KMA suggests.