Alternative Majors Race Class Groupings - Letter #30422

[BeerBudgetRacing]

Frequently at regional and divisional events, classes are re-arranged in run groups to provide a better distribution and a better/safer experience for the racers.

As I understand it this is currently not an option for Majors races as the run groups are defined by the national office.

I'd like to propose that the Race Director be given some flexibility in moving 1 or 2 classes between run groups to provide both a better and safer race experience.

I propose the BoD and Majors program come up with a pre-define method of moving classes between run groups to improve allocation.

Here's my example:

I attended the SuperTour at ButtonWillow 2/19 to 2/21/2021 and ran in Group 6.

Group 6 Big Bore Open Wheel (FA,FC,FE2,FM,FX,P1,P2) 41 ENTRIES
Class Totals: Formula Atlantic: 3, Formula Continental: 10, FE2: 9, FX: 5, P1: 7, P2: 7

This was truly what is referred to as "alphabet soup". (FX had FM and F4 cars - no F1000)

The other open wheel group:
Group 1 Small Bore Open Wheel (FV,FF,F5) 11 ENTRIES
Class Totals: Formula F: 5, Formula Vee: 6

In Race 1 we had 5 cars that technically finished but DNS Race 2.
In Race 2 we had an additional 6 cars DNF.

That's 11 cars or 25% of the field not finishing both races.

Several racers, anticipating the outcome, petitioned for a change. Move FC and FX to Group 1. Many regional events group that way. That would have put 26 cars in Group 1 and 26 cars in Group 6.

Class participation is obviously geographical.

While I am using the OpenWheel groups as an example, different events will have different grouping problems.

So, dig up the old notes about how these groupings came to be and what the alternative options were considered and consider making them a choice for the Race Director.

Thank you for your consideration.

[B Farnham]

The trouble is that the closing speed between an FC and FV is dangerous. If you're in an FC it doesn't seem like much of an issue but for an FV most of the time you don't even see the FC coming before they're on you.

The Majors program is like McDonald's, if you go to a McDonald's in California it should be a similar experience to going to one in New York.

The Majors program follows a similar approach. FV/F5/FF might not be strong in CA but in other parts of the country they make up the majority of the formula cars on a given weekend.

Brian

[BeerBudgetRacing]

The Majors program is like McDonald's, if you go to a McDonald's in California it should be a similar experience to going to one in New York.

The Majors program follows a similar approach. FV/F5/FF might not be strong in CA but in other parts of the country they make up the majority of the formula cars on a given weekend.

Brian

That's why they should have alternatives.

Part of the experience is traffic. Numbers. So in this event the FF/FV guys had an open track. The FC and FX guys all got lapped. Some twice. And you spent more time driving your mirrors.

The McDonalds in Beverly Hills is not the same experience as the one in Watts. Surroundings matter.

[lowside67]

The trouble is that the closing speed between an FC and FV is dangerous. If you're in an FC it doesn't seem like much of an issue but for an FV most of the time you don't even see the FC coming before they're on you.

I imagine the difference in closing speed between an FV and an FC is not much different than an FA and a FC.

-Mark

[Peter Olivola]

The Race Director already does have the authority to move classes among race groups. Overly defining how to do that is problematic because different tracks favor different combinations. That's why the Race Director needs discretion in how to make the moves. As an example, combinations that work at Blackhawk Farms aren't appropriate for Road America and vice versa. It's not just a question of what works for formula/prototype cars. It's a bigger issue with production based classes, especially the Touring classes where competitors my run two or more cars in different T-classes. Modifying groups to accommodate the extra entries is a high priority for regions.

[LarryWinkelman]

I imagine the difference in closing speed between an FV and an FC is not much different than an FA and a FC.
-Mark

I imagine not... So I looked. HST Buttonwillow Sunday results, winner's fastest trap speed:
FA Merritt 123
FC Swanbeck 121
FF Renfrow 115
FV Andrade 98

I also looked back at two tracks nearer home, Mid-Ohio and Road America from last year:
2020 June Sprints
FA Zober 150
FC Miller 140
FF Sikes 138
FV Phelps-Barron 116

2020 Mid-Ohio
FA Yelkin 144
FC Lesueur 130
FF Ruedisueli 130
FV Whitson 111


The shocking thing (to me, anyway) is how fast an FF is, compared to an FC!

[B Farnham]

That's why they should have alternatives.

Part of the experience is traffic. Numbers. So in this event the FF/FV guys had an open track. The FC and FX guys all got lapped. Some twice. And you spent more time driving your mirrors.

The McDonalds in Beverly Hills is not the same experience as the one in Watts. Surroundings matter.

I imagine the difference in closing speed between an FV and an FC is not much different than an FA and a FC.

-Mark

The honest truth is FC is on the verge of losing its national status (hopefully that doesn't happen) and FV is still one of the largest classes in SCCA.

And the delta between an FC and FV vs an FC and FA is almost twice as much. FV is in the neighborhood of 9-11 seconds slower per lap than an FC and FC is around 3-5 seconds slower than an FA.

Again the Majors has a business model, it's the same product across the country. Changing up the groups goes against that

[BeerBudgetRacing]

The Race Director already does have the authority to move classes among race groups. Overly defining how to do that is problematic because different tracks favor different combinations. That's why the Race Director needs discretion in how to make the moves. As an example, combinations that work at Blackhawk Farms aren't appropriate for Road America and vice versa. It's not just a question of what works for formula/prototype cars. It's a bigger issue with production based classes, especially the Touring classes where competitors my run two or more cars in different T-classes. Modifying groups to accommodate the extra entries is a high priority for regions.

Hmm. They never seem to exercise it.

I only used OW as an example because I was there, a change was requested and ignored and we've always been told they never change the Majors format.

I agree - should be considered across all classes.

So why do guys running 2 or more cars in T classes get consideration and guys that might want to run in 2 OW classes don't?
Is their money better than others?
There are guys with FCs and FEs and P2s.

[Peter Olivola]

Hmm. They never seem to exercise it.

I only used OW as an example because I was there, a change was requested and ignored and we've always been told they never change the Majors format.

I agree - should be considered across all classes.

So why do guys running 2 or more cars in T classes get consideration and guys that might want to run in 2 OW classes don't?
Is their money better than others?
There are guys with FCs and FEs and P2s.

In my experience, it's rare that someone runs two or more formula/prototype cars, (compared with Touring,) but I'm not aware of anyone not being able to get consideration when they do.

[Todd Butler]

Hmm. They never seem to exercise it.


So why do guys running 2 or more cars in T classes get consideration and guys that might want to run in 2 OW classes don't?
Is their money better than others?
There are guys with FCs and FEs and P2s.

T classes tend to have a lot of variables, weight, tires, restrictors etc that they can easily change to run in different classes and they often do. And the cars can "take" multiple P/Q/R sessions per weekend. Over the years I've seen very few formula cars that either can or want to run in multiple classes in a weekend.

On your class groupings from Buttonwillow, Race Directors typically group non-winged OW (FF, FV, F5) separate from winged/downforce cars. If there's enough P1/P2 cars (and time in the day for more run groups) they can even be separated from winged OW cars. Part of the rationale for splitting out FF/FV/F5 is speeds. Not just closing and straightaway speeds but cornering. Downforce cars can typically corner faster than non-downforce.

The ugly truth with mixed class racing is somebody will always be looking in their mirrors.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

I imagine not... So I looked. HST Buttonwillow Sunday results, winner's fastest trap speed:
FA Merritt 123
FC Swanbeck 121
FF Renfrow 115
FV Andrade 98

I also looked back at two tracks nearer home, Mid-Ohio and Road America from last year:
2020 June Sprints
FA Zober 150
FC Miller 140
FF Sikes 138
FV Phelps-Barron 116

2020 Mid-Ohio
FA Yelkin 144
FC Lesueur 130
FF Ruedisueli 130
FV Whitson 111


The shocking thing (to me, anyway) is how fast an FF is, compared to an FC!

Add P1, P2 and FE2 (which is a much faster car than the old FE)
(where did you find the trap speeds?)

[BeerBudgetRacing]

Hmm. They never seem to exercise it.

In my experience, it's rare that someone runs two or more formula/prototype cars, (compared with Touring,) but I'm not aware of anyone not being able to get consideration when they do.

I agree. Most OW guys add SRF or SM as a second class.

While I am using the OpenWheel groups as an example, different events will have different grouping problems.

I do acknowledge the issue (or non-issue) will be different at each event.

But back to my question about Race Directors making changes. Drivers have asked, CalClub staff has asked. We've always been told it can't be done. So, what rulebook do Race Directors get? And can we read it too so we know what's what?

There is some miscommunication or misunderstanding. I thought the grouping was set in stone. That's why I wrote the letter.

We're all just trying to help the club deliver a better product.

[problemchild]

I imagine not... So I looked. HST Buttonwillow Sunday results, winner's fastest trap speed:
FA Merritt 123
FC Swanbeck 121
FF Renfrow 115
FV Andrade 98

I also looked back at two tracks nearer home, Mid-Ohio and Road America from last year:
2020 June Sprints
FA Zober 150
FC Miller 140
FF Sikes 138
FV Phelps-Barron 116

2020 Mid-Ohio
FA Yelkin 144
FC Lesueur 130
FF Ruedisueli 130
FV Whitson 111


The shocking thing (to me, anyway) is how fast an FF is, compared to an FC!

Not disrespecting the input in any way, but the straights are generally manageable. It is in the corners, that the highest danger time occurs. Under braking, all parties have to recognize which cars are going to complete the pass in the corner and which cars will wait until corner exit. The Vees seem like pylons as the faster cars get faster, and the faster cars don't leave room that the Vees need to make the corner. Having been in both FVs and FCs on track together, it is a horrific mix. As frustrating and unsafe as the Formula Alphabet mix is for FC drivers is, running with FV is a huge jump in the unsafe dynamic. That FVs run in packs complicates the situation more. Even with the current mix, the highest danger time is when the lead FF pack laps the lead FV pack.

[Peter Olivola]

The shocking thing (to me, anyway) is how fast an FF is, compared to an FC!

Take the wings off an FC and you'll see a bigger difference. What aerodynamics giveth in the corners it taketh away on the straights.

[Daryl DeArman]

I imagine the difference in closing speed between an FV and an FC is not much different than an FA and a FC.

If all cars are being driven close to their full potential the difference between an FC and an FV is much more than a FA to FC, at least at the tracks I raced at.

Fastest trap speeds at recent RunOffs shows a difference of 15mph between the fastest FA and fastest FC, and a 26mph difference between the fastest FC and fastest FV.

At the Daytona RunOffs the difference between S/F fastest trap speeds between a FA and FC was 5mph (165 vs 160), the FC to FV was 34 mph.

The straights aren't the scary part (to me at least). I don't care if you pass me going 40+ mph faster, that just means we are sharing real estate for a shorter time period. It's when the pass is made in a braking zone and the proper race car pulls right back on line as soon as possible and proceeds to decelerate much quicker than a FV is capable. If that FV doesn't have other line options available, it can get pretty harry. We can concede the corner much sooner and not have an issue, but if we are in a pack that's not always an attractive option.

[rally460]

I was grouped with FF's and FV's at a Majors race last year in my FM (FX). The Race Director made the decision a few days before the event and it was not a problem.

[BrianT1]

Hmm. They never seem to exercise it.

I only used OW as an example because I was there, a change was requested and ignored and we've always been told they never change the Majors format.

I agree - should be considered across all classes.

So why do guys running 2 or more cars in T classes get consideration and guys that might want to run in 2 OW classes don't?
Is their money better than others?
There are guys with FCs and FEs and P2s.

As Peter said the Race Director has the authority to change race groups. You have to understand that if you want to make a change it takes you and your collective to get together and request it. They have a lot of other things going on to worry about you and your class.
I'm not saying that is all it takes but for the most part if you have consensus and have a good relationship with the Race Director he will more than likely make that change. In FC at the June Sprints we asked to be pulled from being grouped with FA, P1, FX etc. and placed with the FE2 and P2 guys.

As an FC runner I am not a huge fan of running with FV but I would be glad to run with FF.

Brian

[BeerBudgetRacing]

As Peter said the Race Director has the authority to change race groups. You have to understand that if you want to make a change it takes you and your collective to get together and request it. They have a lot of other things going on to worry about you and your class.
I'm not saying that is all it takes but for the most part if you have consensus and have a good relationship with the Race Director he will more than likely make that change. In FC at the June Sprints we asked to be pulled from being grouped with FA, P1, FX etc. and placed with the FE2 and P2 guys.

As an FC runner I am not a huge fan of running with FV but I would be glad to run with FF.

Brian

Normally we do this for regional/divisional events. But being a Majors many were under the misconception that Majors grouping can't be changed.

I really don't understand why they can't be proactive so this doesn't happen as the event starts. That's what the regions do. Sometimes we get a notice a week ahead saying the groupings have been changed to improve balance.

It should be automatic. They never got a 'consensus' for grouping us the way they did to start. They should see the field and look at the options. If it's not automatic then shouldn't we get the consensus of the group we're invading?
And giving one class what they want at the expense of another gets to be political.
I understand why the RD wouldn't consider it. Politically messy.

As I've been saying, the grouping for 1 event may not work for another.
With some rules and pre-defined alternate grouping you could probably get MotorSportReg to set the groupings as people register. No politics, no thinking, no bothering the RD.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

I was grouped with FF's and FV's at a Majors race last year in my FM (FX). The Race Director made the decision a few days before the event and it was not a problem.

Was that instigated by petitioning or did the RD just make the decision?

[Speed Sport Engineering]

A couple thoughts:

1) I think having different classes with matched speeds is actually worse then having some speed variation. Speed variation allows separation and therefore classes are only mixed during passing events.

2) Right now I think the biggest mess on the open wheel side is the FC / FE2 mix due to the similar lap times yet different methods of making the lap time. I've been in situations where as an FC I've out qualified FE2's, only to be passed by a group of them at the start, them proceeded to be helpless at getting back around them due to the straight line speed difference. I've wasted entire races in that scenario. I'd be willing to bet the total number of incidents between FVs and FF's is substantially less then those between FC's and FE2's, further proving the point that some speed difference is desirable.

3) Having run FV's for so long, I hated it when they added the FF's to the group, yet the amount if incidents with FF's was pretty minor.

4) Maybe it's time we start pushing to have SRF's and SM's carry some of the weight of mixed groups. Around here they always have their own group, 2 of 7 typical run groups just for those two classes even though the field size isn't much bigger then the combined group sizes.

5) I know I'm in the minority, but I really wish we would go back to focusing on quality track time and not quantity. 1 race a weekend was enough for me. I enjoyed the intensity of only having one race a weekend. The whole weekend just felt more intense due to the anticipation of the race. Plus sometimes we were early on Sunday and would finish up, other times were were late and had all day to spectate other races. Make majors events 3 day events, 1 race, 10 groups. The vintage guys do it with great success, why can't we? 3 days x 8 hours = 24 available track hours. 10 groups could still get nearly 2 1/4 hours of track time on a race weekend including time between sessions, if we could accept a 3 day / 1 race format. I'd gladly pay a higher entry fee for the extra track day rental for the better quality product.

[Peter Olivola]

As I've been saying, the grouping for 1 event may not work for another.
With some rules and pre-defined alternate grouping you could probably get MotorSportReg to set the groupings as people register. No politics, no thinking, no bothering the RD.

The GCR already covers this:

1.4.2 Combining Classes into Race Groups
A. The speed and performance differences among the cars may not be extreme.
B. Any Formula classes may be combined with Sports Racing classes.
C. It is more preferable to combine Sports Racing classes with appropriate Formula classes than with
Production or GT classes.
D. It is preferable not to combine FA, FB, FC, FE, and FM with FV and/or F500. FV may be combined with
F500.
E. SRF may be combined with F and H Production and GTL.
F. Formula classes shall not be combined with cars from any other category except Sports Racing. The
only exception is in race groups con-sisting solely of Vintage/Historic cars.
G. It is preferable not to combine GT1, AS, T1, T2, T3, and STU with P1, P2, SRF, FP, HP, or GTL.
H. Vintage cars may not be grouped with any other type of cars at SCCA Regional or U.S. Majors Tour
events but may be combined at Drivers’ Schools.
I. Vintage/Historic sanctioned race groups may include non-vintage classes.
J. The PX class shall be grouped with large bore GT- and sedan-type cars (GT1/GT2/AS/T1) in all U.S.
Majors Tour and Super Tour events. (effective 01 March 2021)

[problemchild]

I also think it is worth noting that a Race Director who does not want to act on a request, will cite rules and regulations as the reason, rather than tell the requestor that their idea stinks. I don't mean that with malice. That is the real world.

As a FV racer I would avoid entering events where I was going to be stuck in a Formula Alphabet group, just for self preservation. If a group of FCs and FXs were added to my group after I had already travelled to the event, I would be very upset. At the very least, such a change should be made days before the event, based on the entry numbers.

[douglap1]

I think the reality is that FV needs to always have their on class, even if that makes for a longer day for all of us. They are a rolling and sometimes unpredictable chicane to all the rest of us.

I did have a Race Director tell me one time that he thought the FV's were about as fast as the FC cars in the turns. So, there are obviously some misconceptions out there, even among our experienced officials.

[Dee]

This is just like what I ran into in Yacht racing in the 80s and 90s Performance Handicap rating its all political and it NEVER works good luck
Dee

[sccadsr31]

That's why they should have alternatives.


The McDonalds in Beverly Hills is not the same experience as the one in Watts. Surroundings matter.

That is an offensive remark,

[lowside67]

The McDonalds in Beverly Hills is not the same experience as the one in Watts. Surroundings matter.

That is an offensive remark,

I know I am going to regret asking this... but why is that offensive? It would be equally as correct to say the McDonalds in Beverly Hills is not the same experience as the one in Tokyo or Frankfurt.

-Mark

[BeerBudgetRacing]

That is an offensive remark,

You could be right. I fibbed. Never been to a McDonalds in Beverly Hills and I don't believe there is one in Watts proper anymore, so I have no real basis for comparison. So you made some assumptions. Those are yours. Infer what you want.

All I know is places are different. That means your experience will be different.

[rally460]

Was that instigated by petitioning or did the RD just make the decision?

No petitions, just an unfortunate situation where the two other FM's that were signed up and the 2-3 FA's all wound up withdrawing from the event, leaving me as the only car in the run group. RD let me know via email prior to showing up. Closing speed on the FV's was silly, but I had a fun time with the faster FF's, while not trying to be a part of their race.

[Daryl DeArman]

I know I am going to regret asking this... but why is that offensive?

It's not offensive. If there were a McDonald's in Beverly Hills (there isn't) and one in Watts (there isn't) the experience would be very different. When I go through the drive thru TacoBell near Willowbrook I have to put my money through a bullet resistant window tray like you do at banks with drive up tellers. When I go through a drive thru in the Upland Colonies they have a 16 year old girl with the cash register standing outside under a fancy, shmancy umbrella.

Some folks just look for reasons to be offended. Speaking of which, I read just this morning that we should no longer refer to those gearboxes that transmit engine power to the wheels as a trans or tranny.

[E1pix]

I am personally **extremely offended** by anything coming off as racism.

But if someone says, “I’m more nervous being in some places than others,” that’s safety.

[John Nesbitt]

Coming back to the topic at hand for a moment ..

The Race Director for a Majors or Super Tour, in conjunction with the organizers, clearly has the authority to modify the schedule or race groups. If a Race Director believes/says that he cannot change these things, he is displaying a basic lack of understanding about his assignment. In the moment, the best thing to do is to lobby the Race Chair, who represents the business interest of the organizing Region. Post-event, contact the relevant Executive Steward to complain.

That said, there is a strong desire to provide a consistent Majors experience across events. It will take a convincing argument to change the groupings.

Ultimately, events are run for the benefit of the actual entrants. If only one Vee shows up, or only one winged car, it is very likely that groupings will change. It will make for an uncomfortable experience, both on the track and in the tower. But what is the alternative - either run the Vee in the Wings and Things group, or suggest that he not enter.

[E1pix]

Guilty as charged John, sorry... edited to but a moment’s distraction.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

That said, there is a strong desire to provide a consistent Majors experience across events. It will take a convincing argument to change the groupings.

While I agree with the premise, it's impossible to do with a standard grouping structure because of the geographic differences in the participation of classes.

The 'standard' groupings are based on some assumptions - and things change.

But, I'd suggest consistency in 'race quality' is most important. Traffic (faster or slower) has a significant affect on your ability to race your 'class-mates'. And sharing the track with 10 v 25 v 40 cars affects race quality.

[Peter Olivola]

While I agree with the premise, it's impossible to do with a standard grouping structure because of the geographic differences in the participation of classes.

The 'standard' groupings are based on some assumptions - and things change.

But, I'd suggest consistency in 'race quality' is most important. Traffic (faster or slower) has a significant affect on your ability to race your 'class-mates'. And sharing the track with 10 v 25 v 40 cars affects race quality.

Having prepared schedules and groupings for many Majors events it was never my experience that anyone, Topeka, or Race Director, wasn't responsive to the realities of local situations.

I am curious though, did you hear this edict directly from the Race Director or someone else during the event?

[E1pix]

It’s been forever clear that the crux in this craw has been adding classes over a long and obvious period of declining participation.

In a perfect world, an immediate weaning or class-equalizing would start *before* it “needs to” — meaning when on inevitable life support. Perhaps that’s now recognized in recent combining, example, as much as I hated to see Formula Mazda blended in, supplies were dwindling and it was time.

There’s times I wonder if SCCA could split purpose-built road racing from the rest, on separate weekends. Formula and Prototype classes could stay as is, double the track time, and hopefully inspire more to play in specific races instead of the mixed bag it’s long been. It seems this is somewhat what FRP’s already done — and it seems to have some legs.

I say this as a longtime (lifetime) observer, and one who’d be way more likely to commit in such an environment. If my current option for, say FM is running around beating a car or two, Sorry, but to me that’s a crummy return of investment that karting still blows away.

Groups (combined as needed, split starts)
— FB
— FC
— FE2
— FF
— F5/6
— FV

— P1
— P2
-– P3 (TBD, similar to fendered F5, cheap as possible, dare I say “electric?”)
—SRF3

(with sad apologies to FA, all tin, and all street cars with numbers)


I realize classes like FB have current participation issues... but the excitement factor and bang for buck can’t be the primary reasons, it seems. For something so cool to be dying off is just wrong.

Whatever the solution, it best be found soon.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

I am curious though, did you hear this edict directly from the Race Director or someone else during the event?

Over the last 5 years whenever there has been an imbalance of car counts our FC group almost always asks for some sort of redistribution. It improves things for everyone. To the best of my knowledge it has NEVER been granted at a Majors event even when CalClub staff has asked. The response is always "can't".
So, not sure if I've ever seen it written but I don't think I've ever seen a grouping change at a Majors race in CalClub.
CalClub staff has always said they can't change things because it's a Majors race and national is in charge.

Ask Peter West. He usually spearheads the effort and the drivers appreciate it. It usually improves racing for several classes. He asked last weekend and received no response.

Like I've said, just trying to improve the product.
Suggested putting in place some go to alternatives to lighten the load on RDs .
Didn't think it was so offensive, controversial and critical of the club.

It used to be that thinking outside the box was welcomed and appreciated.
Now you're punished for thinking out of line. But hey, this is 2021.
"Write a letter. But not that letter."

Said my piece. Will wait for my 'thanks for the letter but' response and stop making suggestions.

[Peter Olivola]

Over the last 5 years whenever there has been an imbalance of car counts our FC group almost always asks for some sort of redistribution. It improves things for everyone. To the best of my knowledge it has NEVER been granted at a Majors event even when CalClub staff has asked. The response is always "can't".
So, not sure if I've ever seen it written but I don't think I've ever seen a grouping change at a Majors race in CalClub.
CalClub staff has always said they can't change things because it's a Majors race and national is in charge.

Ask Peter West. He usually spearheads the effort and the drivers appreciate it. It usually improves racing for several classes. He asked last weekend and received no response.

Like I've said, just trying to improve the product.
Suggested putting in place some go to alternatives to lighten the load on RDs .
Didn't think it was so offensive, controversial and critical of the club.

It used to be that thinking outside the box was welcomed and appreciated.
Now you're punished for thinking out of line. But hey, this is 2021.
"Write a letter. But not that letter."

Said my piece. Will wait for my 'thanks for the letter but' response and stop making suggestions.

I'm sorry you're reading "offensive, controversial and critical of the club," into anything I've posted. My immediately previous post asked a question after stating that my experience indicates Race Directors and Topeka have done exactly as you requested. It isn't a burden on the Race Director. It's part and parcel of their assigned responsibility to ensure a safe, fair and fun event.

From your answer to the question I would surmise you don't know if anyone actually approached the Race Director. Not saying they didn't, just that you don't know. The suggestion I would make is for your class as a whole to ask to meet with the Race Director at the first opportunity to discuss the situation. Does the Race Director conduct a driver's meeting in impound following an early practice or qualifying session? If so, that would be an easy opportunity to have the discussion.

If it is the Race Director refusing to budge, I would come prepared to quote the appropriate section of the GCR that gives him/her the authority and responsibility to do so when appropriate.

[AlecksonRacing]

Having prepared schedules and groupings for many Majors events it was never my experience that anyone, Topeka, or Race Director, wasn't responsive to the realities of local situations.

I am curious though, did you hear this edict directly from the Race Director or someone else during the event?

I can answer this because I did email the race director prior to the event to address the groupings with Formula cars. I was told that they “cannot make changes to groupings this close to event because it would effect travel plans for other racers.” Then I asked how moving some classes to a group racing earlier in the day would have any bearing on travel plans and was then told “It needed be brought up with national prior to the season when the schedules are being made” and that he has no control over groupings at the event.

Funny thing is, right in the middle of the printed weekend schedule it says “ Chief Steward can make changes to class groupings as they see fit” or something to that effect.

[Peter Olivola]

I can answer this because I did email the race director prior to the event to address the groupings with Formula cars. I was told that they “cannot make changes to groupings this close to event because it would effect travel plans for other racers.” Then I asked how moving some classes to a group racing earlier in the day would have any bearing on travel plans and was then told “It needed be brought up with national prior to the season when the schedules are being made” and that he has no control over groupings at the event.

Funny thing is, right in the middle of the printed weekend schedule it says “ Chief Steward can make changes to class groupings as they see fit” or something to that effect.

I would suggest taking this up with the Executive Steward Barb Knox and Chairman of the Steward's Program Jim Rogaski.

[Todd Butler]

I can answer this because I did email the race director prior to the event to address the groupings with Formula cars. I was told that they “cannot make changes to groupings this close to event because it would effect travel plans for other racers.”

With all due respect, "effecting travel plans at this late date" is a stock BS answer from somebody who is not doing or can't be bothered with doing their job. As Peter has noted the region has a vested interest in happy racers and full/fun run groups and can press the RD for a change. The Race Director does have the authority to make changes, even on the fly at the event.

I second Peter's advice. Bring your documentation and politely engage Barb Knox (for Cal Club events, other Exec Stewards as appropriate) and Jim Rogaski. They can discuss with the appropriate folks running the Majors program and in the future, as soon as you see run groups on the schedule and entries lfor Majors on MSR and want to request run group changes, be proactive and get your requests in early.

While the Majors does strive to present a consistent experience, in my (past) experience the folks setting the Majors schedules and run groups were more than willing to take regional and divisional experience and participation history into scheduling and run group design for the weekend.

One final note, there may be circumstances that prevent getting your desired run groups. But at least you asked and they certainly owe you a better answer than "effecting travel plans at this late date"!!!