Enforcement of the 2.5 rule should have been carried out as designed.
"Consolidation" is a chickenpoop cop-out.
Enforcement of the 2.5 rule should have been carried out as designed.
"Consolidation" is a chickenpoop cop-out.
ditto
The suggestion is not really to combine them, although that makes sense too. However, it's funny you suggest that "experienced" racers know it couldn't work. NASA, BMWCCA, PCA, F1600, FRCCA, etc. must all have it wrong. Maybe that explains the phenomenal growth the SCCA has been experiencing over the past few decades.Originally Posted by Wren
Matt King
FV19 Citation XTC-41
CenDiv-Milwaukee
KEEP THE KINK!
Interesting, and clearly a lot of thought went into that.
Bob Stack, Hartland, WI
CenDiv - Milwaukee region
Very interesting slide show.
But, who says the "semi-pro" series want to join up with SCCA Club's bureaucracy?
Also, realize SCCA is no longer the big dog that can easily schedule track time. Many other groups are willing to pay more for the same dates.
One critical point to consider. 12 entries in a class will not pay the bill for the track time you wish to deliver. Think in terms of at least 20-24 entries in a given class to pay the bills. (knowledge gained from 6 years of experience)
I think the recent explosion of all the "pro" formula series really speaks to the undesirability of racing nationals in their current state. I know this year the nationals were a chore for us to run, and were considered boring, meaningless races to get out of the way so we could attend the runoffs.
Your idea of interlacing these pro series with the SCCA "club" racing scene makes a lot of sense to me. The SCCA gives sanctions to these series, and then sends them off to run all by themselves, basically with zero involvement from the club. One reservation I have with combining all the pro races into one weekend (like a more serious national event) is the fact that many people enter the pro races so that they get exposure to larger sanctioning bodies, like Grand-AM and IMSA. I'm not sure you can get that same level of exposure if you combine all the pro series together into one big weekend. Now granted, not every pro racing event is combined with a big time series like Grand-AM, but it's something to think about.
I also very much enjoy the idea of having the pro series tied to the runoffs. When the national series and the pro series are separate and distinct, you have a vulturing problem where they eat into each other. Very few people will make the effort to do both a full national season and a full pro series season, it's just a lot of money and a lot of time. There has to be a way for club racing and pro racing to integrate and help each other out, and I think you are on the right track. Plus, if there are two multiple series (east/west) for a given class, it makes sense to have them meet up at the runoffs to run head to head.
Anyway, I'm not sure much of what I said made too much sense - but I suppose the gist of my rambling was that I agree with you in that the club should be more integrated with the numerous emerging pro series.
SCCA still has something the pro series needs: trained and quality emergency workers.
But, who says the "semi-pro" series want to join up with SCCA Club's bureaucracy?
Having spoken to a few series leaders in the past 2 years they all agree hope is not an emergency response plan. But that is all they have had to go on with some of the partners they have bought track time from, which is the perspective they shared with me.
The semi-pro series are going to kill national racing anyway so lets just be done with. But until the pro series have a level of scale they are going to do so in a much riskier environment, for themselves and the competitors. Everyone can benefit from a little cooperation and not be territorial, IMO.
Tim
------------------
'Stay Hungry'
JK 1964-1996 #25
Reality is listed above. Tell me how many classes will have 20-24 average entries per weekend? The SCCA can't even enforce the 2.5 rule as they are too worried about hurting feelings & losing racers. These other series are run as a business, not as a club & most classes would be eliminated so I don't see that as working. The benefits of the organizations working together as listed are not near great enough for the semi-pro series to even consider it.Very interesting slide show.
But, who says the "semi-pro" series want to join up with SCCA Club's bureaucracy?
Also, realize SCCA is no longer the big dog that can easily schedule track time. Many other groups are willing to pay more for the same dates.
One critical point to consider. 12 entries in a class will not pay the bill for the track time you wish to deliver. Think in terms of at least 20-24 entries in a given class to pay the bills. (knowledge gained from 6 years of experience)
Steve Bamford
Interestingly, at least in the East, many of the good SCCA workers have gotten to retirement age. So now they are supplementing their retirement by working for $ as corner workers for the tracks.
Many times i see the same workers if it's a SCCA club event, or a pro rental weekend.
Not always though.
Is there really a need to run Nationals and Regionals? To me, it doesn't make sense, besides the skill factor of having a National License vs a Regional, but I think that can be dealt with. Have "divisional" standings that dictate who goes to the runoffs and do away with Regional and National. Then we would be able to get respectable car counts for each class on a consistent basis. Entry fees would be able to go down and it would be more fun racing for everyone. Hopefully would eliminate running by yourself of with very few cars in your class.
Will Velkoff
Van Diemen RF00 / Honda FF
Thread drift, but I agree - the regional/national split makes no sense to me. They'd do well to eliminate it in my view. Why continue to split up a pool that's only getting smaller?
-J
Remember!
Lots of interesting ideas expressed, but this forum is not part of the CRB deliberative process.
Share your thoughts with the CRB. Go to the CRB letter submission page (www.crbscca.com) and make your argument. The interface may be a little clunky, but it gets the job done. This is the only way to be sure that your voice is heard.
John Nesbitt
ex-Swift DB-1
I'm all for eliminating the regional / national split....if you can take the 46+ regional classes and reduce it to 24. Good luck with that. We can't even get rid of 4-5 national classes.
There is no way I want to be part of a race weekend with 46 classes. I race a FV, so I'd be grouped with FV, FST, FF, CFF, F5, F6 and who the hell knows what else. No thank you. My fun factor would be reduced to the point I'm not sure it would be worth it anymore.
Keep the regionals for the guys who don't mind racing with other classes or in a class with 1-2 cars. Nationals should be the pristine events within the SCCA. Less classes, less mixed groups, more cars within the classes. Thus the point of this thread.
I worked a corner at a regional event a couple of years back. It sucked. I had no idea what car was where in what class....it was like an alphabet soup driving around. I even saw the same cars in different groups. No fun watching a group of 30 cars driving around when there were only 3 cars actually racing each other in the group.
Out of the 46 Regional classes, how many are Open Wheel/Sports Racers and how many are Tin tops?
Will Velkoff
Van Diemen RF00 / Honda FF
In the running for post of the year on Jan 4. Well done.
Just counted and I came up with 74 regional classes...thats absurd! For example: There is CFF, NCF, and CF which all could be combined into one Club Ford class.
http://scca.cdn.racersites.com/prod/...0Count-NOV.pdf
My crazy idea goes something like this. Break up SCCA into Formula/Sports Racers and then all the Tin tops. From there, go "Divisional" rather than National/Regional, and have separate events between Formula/Sports Racers and Tin Tops. Each side operates on their own per say as far as setting up events and all that. Then go and start consolidating Regional classes like mentioned above to significantly cut down the Regional classes that can be stuck somewhere else. Consolidate it to a reasonable number of classes per side that can be run together in a weekend. Given 8 or so run groups during a "Divisional" weekend, I bet better pairings and car counts could be achieved.
Thoughts, opinions?
Will Velkoff
Van Diemen RF00 / Honda FF
Mike,
Don't want to be separating fly poop from pepper but......
At Nationals, FV is already in the same race group as FF (inclusive of CFF) and F5. So the "I'm not sure it would be worth it anymore" statement is based on the potential for FST and F6 (a class that does not yet exist in this area, let alone any cars) to join that race grouping ?
Is that really a "final straw" issue ?
Bill Bonow
"Wait, which one is the gas pedal again?"
I think he was referring to the "who the hell knows what else" classes. In the Northwest, it is not uncommon at a regional to have FA and FV in the same group. Yikes.
At least at a national you don't get that.
I would support the combining of nat/reg racing if there was a GCR rule that said what classes are in what groups. In other words, it should be against the rules for an FV to be racing at the same time as anything with wings or a SRF.
How would you have the 'premier' events that bring all the national guys together though? That's what I'm afraid you would miss. With 13 chances to make a race, you're more likely to sit one out then definitely attend the 4 weekends you have now.
Right now most of our national events do not have the FF's - so it's FV and F5. But even with the FF's, what we don't have at nationals are CFF and FST, both of which can be a major problem. CFF and FST are much more similar in lap times to a FV, meaning they are more likely to be in the mix. Throw in some less experienced drivers and yeah, it's no longer fun. My most frustrating moments in a race car have been ALWAYS due to a car from a different class interfering with my race.
I don't know if it's enough to be the "final straw", but I already know that my desire to run the FF or F2 series is based strongly on being on the track without all the other classes. The class issue will be my number 1 reason for racing someplace else.
Im a firm believer that improve the quality of the national racing and there will be a resurgance in it. It will take a few years of pain by dropping the classes with the low numbers though first. Give the strong groups better quality racing with less intermixing, better quality track time at the runoffs, and used the improved quailty to attract new people into existing classes.
Mike,
Had to check some results and you are correct. In CenDiv, most Nationals are groupped FV and F5. My bad.
I must agree that as of recent, running events other than the typical SCCA program is very inviting. The prospect of a well run series (Rand-A-Palooza) would certainly edge me closer to a "final straw" situation. Now if I can only find a few spare bucks.
Bill Bonow
"Wait, which one is the gas pedal again?"
You guys are talking about run groups. My understanding is that the above list is an idea to consoldate CLASSes. i.e. make F5/6, FV, FF a single national class, right? Call it FSmall, run for a single trophy at a National and a single championship at the RunOffs.
Maybe I'm missing somthing...
George Bugg
-----------------------------
NovaKar
F600
George, there isn't a legal FV in the country that can out run Clint in a F6. So your plan makes all FVs non-competitive.
I feel for the FV guys. They are the oldest formula class in SCCA, and have the highest participation numbers year after year. Yet they get to drive around with both eyes constantly on their mirrors hoping not to get run over.Unfortunately they also run on the lowest budgets, so they are the least likely to travel long distances and have enough numbers to go semi-pro.
Not my plan, sir Frog. Just looking at the list posted earlier with proposed consolodation of classes. As you point out, significant "adjustments" would be required to make anything like that work out. And then we're back to pi$$ing off everbody.
George Bugg
-----------------------------
NovaKar
F600
Here are some numbers, assuming my math is correct. (There is some ambiguity because there was apparently a "bonus" national in the Northeast Division, I've tried to include that.)
Total National entries: 8712
Entries per National: 120
F/SR per National: 54
Other per National: 66
SM: 17.8
SRF: 15.0
FV: 6.5
STU: 6.4
EP: 5.7
FF: 5.1
FP: 4.3
GT1: 4.0
FM: 4.0
F5: 3.7
FC: 3.7
FE: 3.7
T2: 3.5
HP: 3.1
FA: 3.1
AS: 2.8
STO: 2.8
GT3: 2.7
DSR: 2.6
T1: 2.5
FB: 2.5
GTL: 2.3
S2: 2.3
SSB: 2.2
CSR: 2.2
GT2: 2.1
T3: 1.9
SSC: 1.9
Interesting FF had 5.1 & FC had 3.7 average. If you look at the semi-pro series F1600 had 23.2 average & F2000 had 26.5 average cars.
My numbers only include cars that started the races. Numbers would have been slightly higher if I included cars that were not able to make it out of race 1 on the weekends into race 2.
Sure seems like someone is doing a good job of attracting cars even in a bad economy as everyone seems to keep blaming why their is poor turn outs at SCCA races.
Steve Bamford
The economy effects SCCA more than it does Rand-opalooza I'd think. I know a lot of guys who would rather run something like F1600 than SCCA, but just can not afford it. If they already can not afford the better product, when times get tough they will be the first to cut back on discretionary spending on the product they can afford.
That is to take nothing away from the environment they have created to attract cars, which clearly has done the trick.
My point on the economy was that there is cars willing to run even in tough times, they are just choosing other places to race.
Steve Bamford
10-4.
My point isn't to tell people to race in other series, just that there are cars & people still willing to race. SCCA needs to change for people to have a place to race, that was my point.
Steve Bamford
Ironically, if you just enforce the 2.5 rule, wham! You're down to 21 classes.
True enough, but the question remains...what do you do with the classes getting cut? The Club doesn't want them to just leave, so in practice they'd be folded into healthier classes.Ironically, if you just enforce the 2.5 rule, wham! You're down to 21 classes.
GTL: 2.3 -> gets folded into GT3 and for those that can...Prod
S2: 2.3 -> gets folded into DSR
SSB: 2.2 -> gets folded into STU/L
CSR: 2.2 -> gets folded into DSR (been a BoD hard-on for years...)
GT2: 2.1 -> gets folded into GT3/STU
T3: 1.9 -> gets folded into STU/L
SSC: 1.9 -> folded into STL
Only this time it's called "active management" instead of "failed to qualify for National Status".
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
Just looking at the Sebring National schedule, and it reminded me of something. It doesn't much matter how classes are shuffled around, you will still only have six or seven run groups.
One of the biggest complaints I hear from Club competitors is mixed run groups. Unless you reduce the number of classes to six or seven, you will always have mixed run groups.
How do you solve that problem?
Nathan
Maybe now tyou can get to 5 run groups and give more track time. You also eliminate the need to share track time at the runoffs.
Nathan's point remains, though. In nearly all parts of the country you end up with:
Big Bore
Small Bore
SM
SRF
Small Formula
Wings & Things
Even in those parts of the country where SM and SFR can be combined into one race group, you still end up with multiple classes in each group.
Stan Clayton
Stohr Cars
Or, you can have 10+ weekends throughout the year like many divisions do now but you rotate the classes weekend by weekend so that each class has 5 quality weekends a season and thus fewer classes per weekend...with higher quality track time you have more entries per class so the breakeven for the region can still be viable. I think I see a Jerry McGuire exit fast approaching for me.
------------------
'Stay Hungry'
JK 1964-1996 #25
Very mixed run groups are here to stay. There is simply no research that can deminstrate that few classes and thus less mixed run groups are going to represent a net gain in participation numbers. Why change the business model if you don't have confidence that you are improving the situation.
There is also the issue that the local regions are the ones financially responsible for these participation numbers. One wrong move and many regions lose the capability to put on future races. You are talking about a lot of regional boards that you have to convince a change will improve things. The National office can try and change things, but the Regional boards can switch to all Regional races over which they have complete control through supp regs.
SCCA is a club! Just too many people involved to expect much change on this subject.
Brian
Class management
One of the reasons the 2.5 rule was suspended (not abandoned) related to trying to manage the classes that failed to meet the number. Its better to have an overall class structure plan in place rather than just dump a class to regionals or consolidate it - neither of these solutions may give you a rational structure afterwards. The BOD is tasking the CRB to keep the total number of classes at National level in check to avoid dilution - a recent example: there are only so many members that want to drive an F5 type car so sending a bunch of them out to play with 600 engined F5's will inevitably dilute that pool.
There is a plan in place for Touring and Showroom stock and ST and there will be some serious looking at other areas. CSR/DSR for example gets harder to justify as seperate entities when D is as quick or quicker than C - its not a BOD target Stan, but its an example of where the combination may result in a better racing class. The problem is that combining classes will inevitably lose some members (it did with GTL after the GT4/5 merge). The sedan guys constantly ask why there are 5-6 small wings and things classes splitting the same member pool
It really does not make a difference to race groups at normal Nationals but the pressure for the Runoffs groups and races will intensify if we move from a track like Road America that can accommodate a high car count.
I think the planning committee has spent hours trying to come up with a plan(s) to improve National Racing rather than just reduce everything to a lowest common denominator of 'just' events as other groups do. I think most members want better quality racing with structure that is fun and fair. Thats why the Rand series has succeeded and garnered good entries. Semi Pro series are not for everyone however and there are geographical, level of competition, experience levels, cost factors, big fish in small pond and other reasons why Club racing is still an option for many members. You will see some idea for bigger events tried next year as we did with the 'Rational' concept.
Everyone has an opinion on direction and this type of thread that stays positive tends to get read by a few of us on the BOD. I think with a new CRB chair and a fairly receptive BOD you will see some changes
Phil
TC & SSC
I don't understand how SCCA can justify keeping two classed that can't even seem to get 2 cars to show up to race. Don't you need at least 2 cars to call it a race? How many people would they be pi$$ing off in the bottom two classes if almost no one runs them? Should we add classed that have no cars also just in case someone builds one and wants a place to race?
2.5 rule
SCCA will never begin rebuilding its racing program until it does the at least the following and even more will be necessary to decrease the number of classes to accomodate the 6 or 7 run groups possible for the time available.(use data based on National participation)Create ways for the like classes to be combined so that the least amount of competitors are disfranchised.(There will be winners and losers in that.)Decrease the number of Stewards necessary to hold an event.The bureacracy of the clubs officials ultimately adds to the weekend costs as well as National costs so the events are run leaner and more efficiently.(ask the Regions what the costs are for those officials that we have little oversight over as competitors.)Decide that the end user(the competitors) should have oversight(real oversight) as to how the events,rules and general competition program is implimented.Start there and the market effects will be less of an issue.SCCA had a monopoly on road racing events for years and all it did was get fatter and more lethargic running it's business.I have seen it first hand and been a part of the decision making process.Never have I seen a more disfunctional group that was more concerned about their postion and their peer group than the future of this club.Sorry but I call it they way I see it.
http://www.apexspeed.com/forums/show...8&postcount=13
Probably it was regarded as a joke, but not really.
Matt King
FV19 Citation XTC-41
CenDiv-Milwaukee
KEEP THE KINK!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote