Qualifying Rule for Runoffs

[Purple Frog]

Just got back from the Runoffs...

In a lot of classes (thank goodness not FC) there were a lot of cars getting lapped easily in many of the races. You would think this is the national championship and the field should be competitive, and that tight races for the lead shouldn't have to fight through backmarkers. Or is fighting through backmarkers part of the racecraft being tested?

We are just brainstorming now... but what if...
You divide the average of the best qualifying times of the top two qualifiers by 20 (for number of laps). Add that result to that average of the best two qualifying times, and anybody slower than that total doesn't come to grid for the race.

Obviously, in a lot of classes, if that rule was posted, entries to the runoffs would fall off a bunch. Is that bad or good?

Or, do we want guys that found (or fell) into a non-competitive class in their Division, to run four races during the year and get paid travel money to go to the Runoffs and ugly it up. This year I saw cars running in the races that did not even represent good regional cars.

I believe in a few of the cases some of the entries spent less than their travel money to run the event... 30 year old cars that haven't been painted in 29 years, used tires, etc., etc...

For example, you could buy a clapped out S2 or CSR, barely finish 4 races in the SouthEast (run over half the laps in each race)... and lo and behold you could go to the Runoffs and be on the track with Fergus or Beasley. And probably get paid travel money. So is that fair?

Or, is that OK?

I remember when only the top 3 in each division got invites. [img]smile.gif[/img]

OBTW, I haven't decided how I feel about this. Since I stood on the fence at the Runoffs in 1970 I have always dreamed of racing in one. So maybe I'll start shopping for an old S2, or whatever....

Any thoughts? Opinions?

[Scott Gesford]

I don't know frog. The last thing SCCA is concerned about is good racing.... If someone wants to go to the runoffs in a less than competitive car in a class like CSR or FA I say go for it. Some people just want to be part of the event. The number of people who can compete for a win is very limited.

[JR Scott]

Originally posted by Purple Frog:
Just got back from the Runoffs...

Any thoughts? Opinions?

One of the most hotly debated rules in Super Karts USA was a black flag for about to be lapped karts in national races. The idea was to remove an obstacle that might take out the leaders.

Side one - Lap cars are one real opportunity to pass an otherwise impossible to pass car - and we all know how hard it is to get by even when you may have a second a lap advantage.

Side two - If you are that slow you probably are not aware enough to let the leaders through cleanly and it is safer to get you off the track and let the leaders race.

The SCCA could adopt a similar rule - gosh knows they have enough now so another few paragraphs to debate would not hurt.

As to qualifying to attend, its about revenue so they dont want to raise the entry bar.

Good topic Mr. Frog - I expect you will get a lot of interesting points of view.

[Zonker]

Originally posted by Purple Frog:
We are just brainstorming now... but what if...
You divide the average of the best qualifying times of the top two qualifiers by 20 (for number of laps). Add that result to that average of the best two qualifying times, and anybody slower than that total doesn't come to grid for the race.

Seems to me the 120% rule works just fine.

[Daniel]

Well, how much money do they pay?

Seriously though, if there is a problem with really slow cars at the runoffs then a one hundred and something percent rule might be needed. We're not talking about a regional here. Forget the money (yeah right), most of those guys spend large chunks of their lives and sacrifice alot of family time trying to get to the Runoffs, it would suck to have your race ruined by some shmoe doing laps. As long as the rule was in place at the begining of the season no one should complain.

[size="1"][ September 25, 2002, 02:24 AM: Message edited by: Daniel ][/size]

[Dano]

I was looking at the lap chart of one class http://www.scca.org/amateur/club_rac.../fa-chart.html and saw that less than half of the cars finished the race, so I went immediately to the race notes http://www.scca.org/amateur/club_rac.../fa-chart.html to read about the "crash".... guess what... there was none! Over half of the field was lapped.

Back markers are something you need to deal with all season but, if you go the Runoffs without a new set of tires (Froggy is that true?) I can't see how you could bitch about being sat down.

[Dano]

Race notes... sorry about that.
http://www.scca.org/amateur/club_rac.../fa-notes.html

[Purple Frog]

Zonker,

The 120% rule means that the leaders could be lapping backmarkers every 6 laps. I think the 120% rule is great all year in race groups with mixed classes. I doubt that it would effectively improve the Runoffs.

You had to be there and watch some of the races to understand.

As I said before, I personally don't have a fixed opinion. Hey, I may decide to play the game too. Then advertise my car as having been to the 2003 Runoffs...

But I'm leaning towards saying it is a travesty to junk up the Runoffs.

[BrooksHall]

The real problem is the cost. My buddy just got back from Mid-O, he was crew chief for a Gt3 driver. This driver spent over 25k to do this race. That is unbelievable!!!! Amateur racing my a@%! What some of you call junk is the pride and joy of an SCCA member who gave up a lot of time and money, followed the rules, and EARNED an invite to this event.

On another note this buddy of mine got pulled over by one of Ohio's finest for speeding. He was asked for his social security number and he refused.
This lead to a near arrest for his refusal. What kind of fascist regime do people run out there! Geez in most states your driver's license is all
that is needed does Ohio have to run a credit check along with issuing a speeding ticket?!

[Tim Reed]

Hmmm... well, if the Runoff's need to worry about revenue, maybe they could just increase their late entry fees....



Brookshall - Welcome to the Buckeye state! If you are really interested in how things work here, let me know and I can work on a list of all the stupid "laws" in this state... not sure if there is enough room in this web site for that, though... [img]redface.gif[/img]

Did I mention that we have e-check here?

As far as slow cars in the Runoff's go, it's a tough call... I agree, if you truely "qualify" for the Runoff's in your class, you should qualify within a second or so of the pole... provided you aren't having car problems. Even if it's your first time at the track, a good driver should be close...

On the other hand, in any series in motorsports, back markers are always an issue... and, I would have to say from the casual fan's perspective, SCCA needs to make sure the fields are full. What's fun would it be to watch a championship race with 10 cars in it?

TDR

[BCBackwoods]

How about a different twist on a similar subject? I think it's pitiful to have half full fields at the Runoffs. What do you guys think about this?

Keep the top ten from each division, but allow backfilling in the event another division doesn't use their 10 spots. For example, what if Cendiv has 15 drivers that qualify for the Runoffs, but the Northern Pacific only qualifies OR sends 5 drivers. What if the SCCA allowed a late entry period based on points/finishes to allow the next highest qualified driver into the show to get a minimum of say 40 cars? If the field has 40 (or whatever magic number) then no backfilling is allowed.

Here's that F500 junk again, but I KNOW there was a handfull of 500 driver's in Cendiv (11th and back) that would have whooped all over some of the slower cars from other divisions. Yet, the F500 field only had 23 cars. I was sitting in the stands with a Nascar fan that couldn't believe how small a couple of the fields were. It just wasn't good watching and couldn't have been fun to race in once "the race" spread out. If we're trying to increase intrest in the SCCA, why not make the one show that we do have, a top notch show.

Sorry Frog, I like the bigger fields. F5's had some ugly cars there also, but they earned the right to be there. I didn't. I also like the idea of having to get around traffic while maintaining/fighting for position.

Bob

[Purple Frog]

I never argue with the guy that keeps my wife's hauler running. [img]smile.gif[/img] [img]smile.gif[/img]

Seriously, those are good points.

I especially like the part about me going and representing the SEDIV next year because the guys in 3rd through 24th decided not to go....

[BCBackwoods]

Now Frog,

You could allways call me for info on the mighty Expedition. It doesn't really matter anyway. The last time I suggested something, you stole known good parts off the neighbor's Police Car. Yes folks, the Frog apparently lives next to the cops.

I'd still love to hear that story!

Bob

[EYERACE]

Seems that i read in the GCR long ago a time/qualifying rule and then was worried as a newbie that i would be sent home; never seen that happen to anyone at any SCCA event - Nat or Div or regional. Would someone look that up? I currently lack a GCR

[rickb99]

This is truly an age old discussion on these forums. And I'm not sure why.

At every race I attend, the qual. sheets show that the 120% rule is in effect as stated in the rule book. Cars not cutting it are identified with a mark. SOM can waive rule on a hardship or "other" basis. I would assume one of the "other" items would be an evaluation of the competitors potential as a hazard. Skilled driver, good car control and small field, he shouldn't be a big problem.

At Mid-O the 120% rule WAS in effect. Look at the qualification sheets. At 120%, the slowest qualifier would indeed have to be passed 4 times during the race.

Okay, lets change it. Lets make it 110%. Now the back marker gets passed twice during the race. Maybe 15% to 20% of the entrants pack up early. Well, isn't that just a big improvement? Only have to pass that car twice.

Okay, lets change it. Lets make it 105%. Oops! Gosh, there aren't any cars on the track! Not only that, just the top 5 cars in the nation entered the event and two of them didn't post at the 105% level. So they went home. The top three drivers (who happen to be at their home track) fliped coins for the gold, silver and bronze. Wasn't that exciting?

Come on guys, this is ROAD RACING. Remember our European roots here. How'd you like to drive an LMP car at Le Mans and lap the back markers 100 times or more in 24 hours with 60 MPH or more speed diffs? At least they don't have the 120 MPH differentials they used too. Porsche's and Ferrari's and Ford's at 215 MPH with Fiat's flat out at 95 MPH on the Mulsanne straight.

Maybe you all are too young to remember the joy of watching someone like Bob Bondurant, Jim Hall, Lance Reventlow, Sterling Moss, Graham Hill, Jacky Ickx, Dan Gurney, Juan Fangio, Tazio Nuvolari, Jim Clark, Jackie Stewart, Nicki Lauda, Bruce McClaren, Denny Hulme, et al. weaving and dodging their way through traffic to shake off the competition. Intentionally timing their passes to take advantage of a slower car in opening up a lead on a competitor. It's one of the marvelous skills top drivers work to develop.

But no, SCCA drivers don't want slower cars on the track. Lets just take a high speed drive on a clear road. Don't want to be bothered testing your car handling skills in traffic. Lets not learn how to use that traffic to our advantage. If someone else does it right and shakes me off his tail, that darn back marker blocked me ( I'm gonna protest ). Heaven forbid someone should come alongside and challenge us for the racing line ( I'm gonna protest ) ! Or maybe I'll just blame my lack of concentration and skill on that darn back marker. If he wasn't there I could'a done better.

Yes you hear comments from the prototype guys on occasion when dealing the GT's or LMP600's. They "comment" about back markers but they don't go around yelling for rules changes. They accept it as a part of racing. They understand that a Hans Stuck in a BMW sedan is just as good a driver as Pirro in a prototype Audi. But Pirro may have to get around Stuck 5, 6 times or more in a two hours and 45 minute race.

What I've described above is indeed almost gone from F1. Controlling the pace, timing/finesse passes are a vanishing art form in F1. Now, it's pedal down, get out of my way. Get through or crash the car. The heck with it, I still made my $1,000,000 driver fee for the weekend and they'll have a new car for me next weekend. But in prototype racing the finesse passes using back markers still exists.

Even the NASCAR fan understands the beauty of watching a front runner work (yes it's work) his way through slower traffic to get back to the front.

Now, the next arguement is, this is 'club racing' and that LMP/Formula 1 stuff doesn't apply.

Admit it.... Right there for the world to see in your public persona or deep down in a secret place; A little voice speaks to every SCCA club racer, soloist and rally person. I could be driving the Monaco Gran Prix, running Le Mans or World Rally Champion like Mika Hakinen was.

Everyone has those thoughts at some point in their life, admit it. That's why you're testing your skills on the track. At this point you realize a ride with Ferrari or Williams isn't in your future. But you still want to play the game.

So, rather then complaining about back markers, work on developing the skills to deal with and use them like the pros do. Yes, even the 'pros' mentioned above who got their start in SCCA club racing could do that during an SCCA national race.

Point being - Back markers are a valuable part of the sport of road racing. Next time you're through making the front of the grid, go help a back marker find another second a lap. Who knows, it will probably be me !

[size="1"][ October 12, 2002, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: rickb99 ][/size]