SCCA Phasing out Nationals

[Purple Frog]

Keith Carter has it right. My esteemed friend from Beaver Creek doesn't seem to understand the economics/reality of the situation.

There are racers that race at their local tracks, they don't tow far unless they saved up enough and got enough leave from their employer to go to the Runoffs. They obviously have decreased in numbers recently (especially at the Runoffs).

Then.... there are racers that will tow 1/2 way across the country to race against a strong field in a quality event. (See "Rand Series" for more details.) Usually they have more desrectionary income. That's life, get used to it.

Some folks don't mind racing with two other cars in their class in an alphabet soup run group. With this plan that option is still available. Some folks want to run against a big field in a run group that is tailored for speed without scaryass passing. With this plan they now have events for them.

This plan allows for both groups to have their way. Both groups can earn their way to the Runoffs. But, i suspect there will be more Runoffs participation from Majors entries, than the regional level.

Of course, YMMV

I suspect that as Rand and staff reads this news release they see it as a compliment/acknowledgement to a 7 year record of happy folks.

Butch now has to get "customer service" up to Rand's standard. If anyone can do it, he can. Don't leave people locked out of gates at 1 in the afternoon after traveling 1200 miles because it says something in the Supps, etc. etc. That, my friends is the challenge.

[Keith Carter]

I think it's a good move. As TimW said, something needs to be done because our current course is getting us less attendance and higher costs for SCCA events and it's only getting worse. I also believe what LaRue stated that this is the perfect solution for relegating lower attendance classes without coming out and stating it as such is 100% correct. If the SCCA can pull this off without charging astronomical entry fees for the Majors events (and if our class makes the cut), the local Major's events may be the only ones we do. The alphabet soup run groups makes me want to steer clear of all Great Lakes events altogether, but introduce an Invitational at Mid-Ohio, and I would plan on going.

[Tiago Santos]

I still don't see the big deal. Are you worried about it in the sense that regional guys will now not be able to compete? I could see that happening, but personally, I don't mind.

edit: this was meant for Wren..

[jim morgan]

Good move,

Florida Nationals used to be large quality fields now resemble old regional fields. Concentrate competition for those who want to put out the effort. Funnel the lower budget guys back into regionals better for both ends.

[Purple Frog]

Jim,

James says he is confused. Does that mean you run regionals, and JR2 runs Majors?
Or, you run Majors, and JR2 runs regionals?
Based on budget, you shouldn't be allowed to run anywhere but in the Lighthouse Point 5k Heart Run.

[protoform]

It seems the scca wants to have a regional series for folks that want to stay close to home . The reason they need to stay close to home Is because they can't afford to run all over the country to race a car on the weekends for FUN. The SCCA really isn't a grassroots orginazation anymore. I love the SCCA started racing In 1972 with a dodge colt Now have a Vee I own my own 1 man business and the fees and gas just are putting it out of my money range to race. This is not gonna make it easier for folks to race. The little guy is not what the scca wants. I believe they are pushing for a series that you will have to leave on wed or thurs drive to the track for friday practice and leave sun night and get home on mon or tues That sounds like a full time Job to me. Not club racing .I hope it works out well, but I just don't think so Peter Cheney fv #06

[Purple Frog]

No... your prep shop leaves on wednesday, you fly in friday night after work. You fly out sunday, prep team gets back to shop on Monday night or tuesday.

Geez, it is so simple.

[Amon]

Purple Frog:


I have three members on my prep team.....Me, Myself, and I... they all look
similiar and seem to have a Three Stooges Mentality... especially when given
the 3rd call and we can't find the driver!!


Mark


Protoform P-1

[Wren]

So it sounds like the "Customer" is the guy who wants / is willing to make ridiculously long tows to race and the heck with the rest of us.

Don't forget that guy is going to have to have enough money to get rid of a car that is now worth less and buy something that made the cut.

I still don't see the big deal. Are you worried about it in the sense that regional guys will now not be able to compete? I could see that happening, but personally, I don't mind.

edit: this was meant for Wren..

No, I am not worried about the regional guys being competitive. There is no question that there are fast and talented guys running regionals, but there are some guys who are in over their head.

For the guys that are in over their head, regionals were the perfect place to develop enough "bandwidth" to be more aware of what is going on around them. Now they get to develop that with fast guys passing them in places that they would never imagine being passed. It isn't going to be fun for anybody when a regional guy in an FC is holding up the front of the FF field because a few FF guys couldn't afford or didn't have time to make the tow to New England from Florida and still wanted to go race.

Let's call this what it is. The majors program was not particularly successful this year. In typical SCCA fashion, the solution is to make them mandatory.

[Tiago Santos]

I get what you're saying, but that happens currently in National racing anyway. I keep hearing stories of slow FFs holding up the national vees, slow FCs holding up the fast FFs, etc.. It will always happen in whichever series - what was the lap time spread in FB at the runoffs? Or at the latest F2kcs race?

As for people over their heads - hopefully with more and better attendance in less events, that'll open up more and better schools and other learning opportunities.. I guess I'm a half full kinda guy!

[Bill Bonow]

Agree with Tiago, the current program: (4) Regionals and pretty much anyone gets a National ticket.

With the current status/quality of Regional racing (especially around the center of the country), this new deal won't change anything (driver quality factor). It may even help to spot questionable drivers easier.

Besides, just how would you propose that SCCA (or anyone) grade drivers to eliminate the "boob factor" on the race track? Dumb driving mistakes happen at all levels of racing.

[Jim Christian]

Bob,
One way to at least manage the "boob" factor would be to stop grading on attendance and start grading on performance. i.e. you don't get a license just for showing up at 4 races, you actually have to race and beat some number of other competitors!
Jim

[KAMcDonald]

on the bright side, it means more money in the tow fund.... if regionals provide a path to the run offs, the tow fund surcharge should be applied to all entries the same way it does for nationals now.

for run offs qualification, does a class win in a majors event count for more points than a class win in a regional?

[Matt King]

Bob,
One way to at least manage the "boob" factor would be to stop grading on attendance and start grading on performance. i.e. you don't get a license just for showing up at 4 races, you actually have to race and beat some number of other competitors!
Jim

You mean like bicycle and motorcycle racing, where you actually have to earn a license upgrade?

[kea]

For the GLC Championship for F/C and CFC, this can do nothing but help. Some of our events that have been run with National races over the years, were missing a small number of driver's, who for whatever reason, never applied for the National ticket.

[lancer360]

As with everything, the devil is in the details, but I think this is a good step in the right direction. Have your select high profile Majors for those who want and can afford it and let the rest of us run the events in our division. Both sets of drivers still have a path to qualify for the runoffs.

If you want to get rid of the slower drivers then start enforcing the 120% rule for each class. If that isn't enough try 115% or even 110%. Heck F1 uses 107% but that is probably too extreme for club racing.

Take a F600 at Roebling for example. Fast time is a 1:12.

120% = 1:26.4 or 14.4 secs off the pace
115% = 1:22.8 or 10.8 secs off the pace
110% = 1:19.2 or 7.2 secs off the pace
107% = 1:17.0 or 5.0 secs off the pace

120% is very easy to meet yet 14.4 secs off the pace makes you a rolling chicane and gets you lapped in only 6 laps. 115% is a little better but not much, you will still get lapped in only 7-8 laps. 110% seems like it would be reasonably effective with it taking about 11 laps to get caught by the leaders. I think regional races are around 13 laps and national races are around 20 laps so even in a 20 lap race you would only get lapped once. If you can't run a lap under 110% by race time then you don't race. If you are running that slow anyway you really aren't "racing" anyone, your just out running laps and watching your mirros. If that is the case then you can always go run SCCA Time Trial events instead until you get can improve your times.

You will still have slower drivers from one class interfering with faster drivers in another class, but hopefully this would reduce the speed disparity a bit.

[reidhazelton]

I just listened to an awful and excruciating web based radio interview with Terry Ozmet (she was good, interviewer was not---and no I dont know how to spell her name and am to lazy to look it up). My take, as it has been said here, is for a double national (now Major) you will have to tow farther to get. The theory is that the majors program will condense competition, not by combining classes, but by combining events and racers spread over geographic areas. Hence, longer tow.

I got the impression they are trying to make the Majors program into what the Rand series offers (better tracks, better competition). Problem with that, is that SCCA guys (like myself) can't afford to travel like that and the majority of club guys fit that. The big bitch about the Runoffs was time away from home and work. Majors creates that problem again, but on a monthly basis.

So the trade for better competition at nicer tracks is at the expense of more time away, longer tows, and likely higher entry fees.

I applaud the effort to make club racing better, but making it into something that it is not is not the solution if you ask me. I can't see a whole lot of prod guys or "less expensive" classes having real high participation numbers.

Terry also said that the path to the Runoffs through the Regional program is yet to be defined but will mostly be up to the region to decide criteria for who gets "invited".

[Stan Clayton]

Terry also said that the path to the Runoffs through the Regional program is yet to be defined but will mostly be up to the region to decide criteria for who gets "invited".

So, support your local Regional racing program and get invited!

[reidhazelton]

So, support your local Regional racing program and get invited!

Likely what I would have to do. And I am not sure how many people will be able to take time off for Majors and incur the added expense....which was the main complaints against the Runoffs format.

Also...like Wren said, why does the fact that the Majors program this year was a bust not raise a red flag?

[Stan Clayton]

Likely what I would have to do. And I am not sure how many people will be able to take time off for Majors and incur the added expense....which was the main complaints against the Runoffs format.

Yep, me too, and I'm pleased as punch the option to qualify thru Regionals survived the cut! For the whole time I was on the FSRAC and CRB I argued for a "complete 6 Regionals and get invited". To deaf ears, it seemed at the time, but it seemed a no-brainer to me. I could never understand why the Club was running two separate business models in parallel (Regionals and Nationals), when one could do the whole job at lower cost to the members and a better return to Corporate and the Regions.

Also...like Wren said, why does the fact that the Majors program this year was a bust not raise a red flag?

IMO, the main reason Majors were a bust this year is that the Majors and Nationals were each competing for the same drivers. If Corporate wants to try Majors without Nationals, go for it. The worst that can happen is that the Major still won't work and Corporate will drop the idea after a year or two. In the meantime, Regions that put on high profile races (I'm looking at you, Chicago and the Sprints) will continue to thrive, as well as those Regions that simply put on great Regional series that meet their members' needs.

[reidhazelton]

Yep, me too, and I'm pleased as punch the option to qualify thru Regionals survived the cut! For the whole time I was on the FSRAC and CRB I argued for a "complete 6 Regionals and get invited". To deaf ears, it seemed at the time, but it seemed a no-brainer to me. I could never understand why the Club was running two separate business models in parallel (Regionals and Nationals), when one could do the whole job at lower cost to the members and a better return to Corporate and the Regions.

IMO, the main reason Majors were a bust this year is that the Majors and Nationals were each competing for the same drivers. If Corporate wants to try Majors without Nationals, go for it. The worst that can happen is that the Major still won't work and Corporate will drop the idea after a year or two. In the meantime, Regions that put on high profile races (I'm looking at you, Chicago and the Sprints) will continue to thrive, as well as those Regions that simply put on great Regional series that meet their members' needs.

Well said.

[Wren]

As for people over their heads - hopefully with more and better attendance in less events, that'll open up more and better schools and other learning opportunities.. I guess I'm a half full kinda guy!

Nothing in this proposal that I have seen is fewer events or more learning opportunities. We had learning opportunities at regional races. That seems to be going away.

. you don't get a license just for showing up at 4 races, you actually have to race and beat some number of other competitors!

You mean like bicycle and motorcycle racing, where you actually have to earn a license upgrade?

Those sound like good ideas, that's probably why the SCCA is going in the opposite direction. Now they are just throwing everyone in a group together.

If you want to get rid of the slower drivers then start enforcing the 120% rule for each class. If that isn't enough try 115% or even 110%.

...

If you can't run a lap under 110% by race time then you don't race. If you are running that slow anyway you really aren't "racing" anyone,

So you are proposing that we take away the races where driver's could go to develop at their own pace, send them out to run with everyone and then send them home early?

your just out running laps and watching your mirros. If that is the case then you can always go run SCCA Time Trial events instead until you get can improve your times.

Those laps that people are out "just running" can still be meaningful laps for them to improve or have fun. Regionals were the perfect venue for that.

I don't know what races you are going too, but no one watches their mirrors, especially the guys who are task saturated. I'm not sure why we are even required to have them anymore.

Also...like Wren said, why does the fact that the Majors program this year was a bust not raise a red flag?

It did raise a red flag. No one really cared about them or participated, so it raised a red flag that there was an issue with the members. This was clearly a good idea, the members just needed some more beating to accept it.

[protoform]

My opinion has always been no qualifying for the runoffs at all. Yet 4 or 5 races prob should be the norm. When you get to the runnoffs You have to be within 110% or you don't race. END OF STORY. If the leaders come up on you ,Your black flagged and your done . Too bad you spun, your out of contention. If the leaders come up GET OUT OF THE WAY. then pull in. I know a guy that holds the track record at njmp Lightning and He doesn't have the money to run enough races to qualify for the runoffs , and another in Massachusetts almost the same situation. Very fast Regional driver. Just doesn't have the time or money . They would all run in the top 10 and make the runoffs a little more exciting. If you think you can be competitive then go. If you know your too slow then you will not go. I am too old and slow to go. I was happy with a 4th in the NARRC this year in formula vee Peter Cheney fv#06

[Tiago Santos]

So you are proposing that we take away the races where driver's could go to develop at their own pace, send them out to run with everyone and then send them home early?

Those laps that people are out "just running" can still be meaningful laps for them to improve or have fun. Regionals were the perfect venue for that.

I wholeheartedly disagree. Regional races are still races, the people that run them still care as much about competing and racing and whatever else. Why should it be ok to have someone putzing around the track trying to figure out where the shifter is on a regional? The distinction between the two tiers should be (and I believe it is) about the goals and budgets, not the skills. If there aren't, there should be other opportunities for learning how to drive. That's what the schools, time trials, HPDEs are, or should be for.

As slow as I've been in my first few seasons with learning how to drive, figuring out how to setup my car, with leaking intake manifolds and other stupid mistakes, I've never been 10% off the pace anywhere. I think you have to try reeeeally hard to be that far off at most tracks, or like you said, be way in over your head. In which case, you shouldn't be figuring out in Regionals, you should be taking a step back and maybe trying something else for a while.

[Jerry Kehoe]

Again another step from the group that still has the "let them eat cake" mentality. Who the hell will travel all over the country for a few " magnificent" races and with more control from HQ probably less return for any Regions pocketbook. Does Bernie have a relative that took over the SCCA? Thank God for VARA, HSR, CSRG,etc!

[Steve Demeter]

Your Purpleness

I do understand the economics. I simply wish I had the economic resources to run the Pro Series. I owuld do it in a heartbeat, albeit would need to step up my game a tin to not be a rolling roadblock.

There are about 50 or 60 racers who do have the resources to run it.

What Concerns me is that there are not hundreds to do that and there will be many undersubscribed classes at Majors.

Then the current National guys without said resources will run lots of regionals, the average regional guy will be pushed aside by not having a prayer of a decent finish because of that and hence one has turned off a large portion of the customer base.

I have chased national points ( a long long time ago) to the point of being flat broke, so I understand what it takes and simply do not have that option anymore, hence my concentration on regionals the last 20 years or so. I choose to stay more or less local and run mainly regionals because of the cost, relaxed atmosphere and the lack of 18 wheelers in the paddock with full paid crews.

[rickb99]

This all sounds very, very bogus to me.

The majors will be run on FOUR geographic areas of the country. That inheritly means MORE DRIVING to reach the majors because the geographic area is larger then any single or two regions.

There will only be FOUR majors weekends in any one of these geographic regions which means you may have to drive a LONG ways if you miss one in your home geographic area.

What if your area has all Invitationals or Festivals? YOU may not get to race at all in your home area if your car doesn't fit.

Terrible idea. And who came up with the name "Majors" ??? Sounds like we're going to the ball park..... duhhhh

This just opens to the door for another club to come in and take over amatuer road racing in the U.S. with some kind of sensible program becaues, this AIN'T IT.

[Daryl DeArman]

There will only be FOUR majors weekends in any one of these geographic regions which means you may have to drive a LONG ways if you miss one in your home geographic area.

I think it sounds more appealing to race at 4 different tracks than the same one or two year after year after year. You can also get exposed to some different higher level competition without having to go to the RunOffs. It also means you wont have those folks in your Division running the bare essential number of races/laps to qualify and saving their money for the RunOffs. I think MAJORS would increase the quality of what was your typical National by attracting fewer, more serious efforts concentrated into fewer classes.

What if your area has all Invitationals or Festivals? YOU may not get to race at all in your home area if your car doesn't fit.

If I understand correctly, you would have the option of racing locally at Regionals against other people in your class (Those you are currently racing against anyways, so no real change)

This just opens to the door for another club to come in and take over amatuer road racing in the U.S. with some kind of sensible program becaues, this AIN'T IT.

That door's been open for awhile and in some areas SCCA is getting their butts handed to them....you don't keep doing things the same way unless you want the same results.

I don't know if it'll work...but I applaud them for the effort...and I can't remember the last time I applauded something the SCCA has done.

[Jerry Kehoe]

Maybe there is a reason NASA keeps on growing....just saying.....

[Purple Frog]

SPDHAFC

[Rick Kirchner]

????? Help me out here Froggie - Brain's too fried from work and whisky to do the scrabble.

[Bill Bonow]

S = Stop
P = Posting
D = Dumb
H = Half

You should be able to figure out the rest.

[Keith Carter]

I'm pretty tired of all of the "The SCCA is evil and out to screw us" talk. It amazes me that people constantly think that the national office is always trying to pull one over on the membership. Do I think I should have my ass kissed at every race we go to because I paid my annual dues to be an SCCA member and want to play with race cars? No. I expect to be treated with respect in exchange for treating all of the workers with respect. The workers and staff who donate lots of time and money for us to drive around for fun during the season don't get a whole lot of thanks or compensation as it is except for being a part of the event. They are a rare breed for sure and I'm thankful they exist. Those who can afford to pay to travel to and enter the pro series events expect to be treated like stars and they should for what it costs to enter. Nobody is forcing anyone to race anywhere. If you don't like it, find somewhere else to play. Some already have and there will be more who do so.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course, but when nothing was done in the past they were to blame for not listening to the membership. Lots of people have stated that they needed to do "something" without providing a suggestion of their own. Now they have come up with something modeled after what seems to work in the Solo world in an attempt to change club racing for the better and they get sniped by people because it doesn't fit their own personal agenda or they flat out don't understand the big picture of what they are trying to do because terminology is being changed. This new proposed change gives you two avenues to pursue and will most likely allow you to do a little of both. If you don't have the budget to hang with the big boys, you can do the local thing. Who cares what it's called? Regional, National, Econo-racing... It doesn't matter. It's local to you and if it's all you can afford (in time or money), you should be happy to be racing at all. As long as they run those local events with some logic and knowledge of how to put on a safe (no overly combined race groups with 8 classes per group) and fun event, I don't give a crap what it's called. I, personally, am not concerned with the speculation that regional racers are more hazardous than the current national guys. I've raced both for a good number of years and have seen drivers at both kinds of events who shouldn't belong in a race car. The type of event they choose to go to doesn't really matter.

The same thing is going on with the Runoffs. They are obviously trying to make changes for the better by listening to the community.. They have solicited feedback through surveys and have made changes to the schedule in order to accommodate what the majority wants and they get blamed when the turnout is crap. I'm happy to see the effort. Unfortunately, the use of forums like this has enabled anyone, whether they are right or wrong, to turn anything into a bitch-fest and broadcast it for the world to see. Monday morning quarterbacking is easy... providing solutions that work that everyone will be happy with isn't so easy..

[Stan Clayton]

I'm pretty tired of all of the "The SCCA is evil and out to screw us" talk...

Well said, Keith.

[DaveW]

Another kudo for injecting logic into this discussion.

Thanks, again,

[924RACR]

+1 Keith.

Just 'cause it's different, and isn't the way we've run for 30+ years, doesn't mean it's evil.

Half the complaints/questions brought up here were already answered on the Majors website - who here has actually read all the info???

Let's not get out the torches and pitchforks just yet, villagers...

[reidhazelton]

Anyone know if this will affect licensing? I just got my renewal in the mail and it still says "National" license.

Any impact on the pro/nat (now Majors?) license separation?

[DaveW]

IIRC, this will start in 2014. Corrected below - actually 2013.

[reidhazelton]

That is what I thought, but on the web based radio interview I listened to said next year, 2013.

Maybe that was incorrect.

[GT1Vette]

Still a short post, but just to hopefully clear some things up:

• All Runoffs-eligible classes (currently 28 for 2013) will be invited to run at the vast majority of the Majors events. The only exception will be the Invitational events that will be for the "Top Ten" classes. Although I've been directed to schedule one of those in each conference, to-date I've been unsuccessful in doing so.
• The target is six double-race Majors weekends per conference, but there may be some singles on the calendar as well. You'll count your best 67% of the races (8 if there are 12 races, 7 if 10, etc.) in the conference toward the Conference Class Championship, so it's not like you MUST run all six weekends to contend.
• The Majors program in 2013 and beyond is vastly different than the 2012 pilot program. There certainly were some successes in 2012, but we also learned a lot about what NOT to do (which is why all classes are invited to the Super Tour and Showcase events). The BoD (who makes policy, while the National Staff implements it) recognizes that Invitational events are a tough sell to the regions, but the drivers who participated generally had very positive comments about the clustered competition (1-3 classes per run group vs. "alphabet soup") aspect of the weekends. The BoD would like us to do at least one Invitational per conference to prove or disprove the concept before giving up on it.
• As many have said (and thank you for your comments), we can keep on doing what's not been working or we can try something different. Is this the absolute best answer to what's ailing SCCA Club Racing? Maybe not, but it's a pretty damn good one and at least "we" (your club and mine) are trying something new.

I had planned to add other comments about the program, but Eric Prill did a nice job of summarizing what I would say here:

http://sccaofficial.blogspot.com/201...s-it-mean.html

See y'all at the track...