Can the F1000 run in nationals next year?

[IDSRacing]

I'm confused! On the Stohr site it says "ELIGIBLE TO RACE SCCA NATIONAL EVENTS IN 2007"

Surely F1000 will start as a regional only class like everything else (ProFM, SpecMiata, Etc.)?

Ian

[RussMcB]

Yes, that was a bir of a shock when I heard it, too, but it's true. F1000 is a national class for 2007. I've heard that we can expect that direction in the future, because new classes would always have a tough time making the numbers to become a national class. Unless you're talking about Spec Miata.

[Purple Frog]

I'm against any class becoming a national class without qualifying as per the rules that have been laid out in the past 8 GCRs.

Something like 6 known cars exist and they up and make it a national class...

So why do we have spelled out procedures for inclusion of classes? (rhetorical question)

Follow the money.

[Stan Clayton]

Mike (Purple Frog),

The BoD recently changed the rules defining how classes become National back to essentially the form they had from the inception of the club until the hitherto present system was put in place back in the mid to late 80's (I don't recall the exact year). Up until then the BoD simply designated new classes as National if they looked like they had legs, without any qualifying time as Regional classes. That's how FV, FF, S2 and your own FC class came into being. Those classes thrived, but numerous others fell by the wayside, such as F Jr, the original FA (5 liter engines!), ASR and others.

In any case, analysis shows that NOT ONE of the original National classes ever would have qualified under the 'qualifying rules', and the BoD came to recognise that the system was not serving the interests of the Club very well. In fact, the only class in the entire history of the Club that ever truly qualified was SM, and it took registering nearly 1500 cars to make that happen.

So now we are back where we began, with the BoD approving classes that appear to have substantial interest, and we'll use the '24 classes at the Runoffs' rule as a check on the creation of new classes.

If the new classes don't catch on they won't go to the Runoffs, and I for one suspect that the members will petition to join another class when it becomes clear that they will not get an invite to the Big Dance. In the event, we should indeed 'follow the money', since entrants will 'vote with their entries' to establish where their real interests lie.

FWIW, F-1000 isn't going to get any special deals to get into the Runoffs. If it does qualify, the class will do so on the strength of its entries, pure and simple.

Stan

[RussMcB]

Hmm. I thought FM became national that way, but my memory is pretty pathetic.

I'll bet you're getting a lot of flack from the FSCCA guys. Just bad luck/timing for them?

[John LaRue]

It seems to me whatever the course followed the focus from the powers that be should be upon reducing the number of classes versus increasing them. We are already in a battle for track time and competitors. Do we need to keep dividing the pie? Look at what a mess the split qualifying groups at Runoffs were. That is not fair to anyone. If some corrective action is not taken to pair down the classes so as to afford the competiors more track time and better grid numbers I think the alternatives to SCCA will find better footing for growth.

[Stan Clayton]

No, FM qualified one year, but then fell short the next (remember that the rules required qualifying two years in a row). The BoD granted them National status anyway, and they are now a solid National class.

[Chas Shaffer]

I don't know what is more disturbing, that this actually happened or that there is a perception by the BoD that we need more national classes and therefore they are now making it easier to create them. WE DO NOT NEED MORE CLASSES WE NEED FEWER! Classes like FC, FM and FA grew because there was a strong pro series providing cars and entrants, F1000 does not have a pro series to support a new class.

As for the Runoffs 24 class rule, the BoD has just demonstrated a complete disregard for the rules by simply changing the national class rule on the fly so why should anyone believe they won't just change the 24 class rule if they feel like it. What's the point in having rules if they can change them on the fly.

[Michael Rand]

Correct Chas, and at the regional level anyone wanting to run a F1000 can already, it is called FS. The conspiracy theorist might think the powers that be want to dilute all the formula car classes to the point where they can just do away with them entirely.....

[Jim Garry]

I sent an email to my director (John Sheridan) a month ago to object to the concept all of the additional classes. I never got a reply. I suppose it's time for a call, not that it will accomplish anything.

Jim

[Chas Shaffer]

I can't believe there is actually discussion about adding two more national formula car classes (see the FSCCA thread as well). All this is going to do is force more FC's to run in the east and west pro series. If the intention is to push away existing entrants then mission accomplished. I can't imagine what a mess the nationals will be next year with FA, FC, FM, F1000, FSCCA and FF all in the same race group. It'll have to be this way because there is no way they'll add another race group to a national race weekend. They can barely get through all the groups in a weekend as it is.

Mike,
You Bob and Al must be loving this!

[Michael Rand]

It gets worse Chas, it is not at all unusual for the CSR/DSR/S2 guys to lumped in with all open wheelers except FV/500 is it ? No one gets a decent race. Not even those FM guys, must really rankle them, all the other Mazda runners are treated ever so much better than them.......

[RobLav]

Mike,

Your comment about "dilution" is like "calling the kettle black". Your pro series significantly diluted the National and Regional numbers up here in the NorthEast. Depending on one's perspective, justification for that dilution, whether it be caused by a pro series or additional classes, can easily be found. From my perspective, I am glad you guys have created that series for many reasons. We now have fairly competitive cars being sold by people who were running it last year, which might trickle down again to those Regional and National races over the next year or two. And there is no doubt about the quality of the series and the track time. But I'm also glad we have F1000 as well.

Sooooo.... how about letting F1000 cars run with you guys next season in a separate class? I'll run one.

Rob

[Lee Shumosic]

Making FSCCA a national class won't impact the FA, FC, FM groupings in the NE as they been classified as FA's since their inception. The only class that might get their on run group are FF and FC especially with the equalized Zetec.

What is does is present the oportunity for a single run group at the Runoffs, if the participation numbers warrent it.

Lee

[IDSRacing]

Stan,

could you elaborate on the details of the new process for deciding on how a class becomes national? . Please tell me there are objective measures that drive the decision rather than the BODs discretion

Ian

[Michael Rand]

Answer to Rob Laverty regarding dilution and the F2000 series. In fact the F2000 series was created in large part due to the participants dissatisfaction with the status quo within SCCA National Racing. If the club had any realistic understanding of open wheel racing the F2000 series most likely wouldn't exist. As discussed ad nauseum on another thread currently active--under FF1600-NARRC Runoffs, a thread you have posted on-- the proliferation and race groupings are doing nothing for the future of open wheel racing. I understand you are building an F1000 car so obviously you are in favor , but to accuse me/us/F2000 of being part of the problem is simply not accurate. The series exists to be a platform for the growth of a class of racing, FC, which had fallen on extremely hard times years before it , the series, existed. It was not all that long ago that FC warrented it's own race group at Nationals with 20-25 cars regularly entering at LRP. That is ancient history now, but the F2000 Series gives any and all 2 liter cars a forum to race with only other 2 liter cars.
As far as F1000 being allowed, I don't know if that is a serious question or not. I suspect you are simply baiting me/us.
I am also jealous of the series I manage as a similar situation for FF1600 doesn't exist and I can't figure out a way it makes sense so I can go play away from the alphabet soup of SCCA race groupings. I guess I am going to need to get comfortable with heading North and border crossings as the Canadians have a thriving -- 30 car fields is the norm-- FF1600 series in Ontario mosty.

[S Lathrop]

Mike (Purple Frog),

The BoD recently changed the rules defining how classes become National back to essentially the form they had from the inception of the club until the hitherto present system was put in place back in the mid to late 80's (I don't recall the exact year). Up until then the BoD simply designated new classes as National if they looked like they had legs, without any qualifying time as Regional classes. That's how FV, FF, S2 and your own FC class came into being.
Stan

I will add a little bit to Stan's explanation of FC becoming a national class. FC was a class going back to the beginning. We use to have FA, FB, and FC (FB close F@ and FC close to F3). Aircooled FSV was a national class in the late '70's. In the early eighties, FC included F3, FSV air cooled, FSV watercooled and F4 (motorcycle powered). When there was an interest in F2000, the BoD allowed F2000 to run as FC. Interest in the class grew to the point that F2000 was within 0.3 entries per national race of meeting the minimum for becoming a new national class. For 2 years FC was the fastest growing class because of the influx of F2000. We who were promoting the class raised enough money for a F2000 prize fund that the best finishing F2000 took home more cash than almost any other SCCA Class. The BoD decided not to increase the number of classes but reclassified water cooled FSV to FB, leaving FC to be dominated by F2000.

In essence F2000 grew to the point where they took over an existing class. I think that is not the same as a new class. Infact the BoD eliminated a national class.

[Stan Clayton]

Stan,

could you elaborate on the details of the new process for deciding on how a class becomes national? . Please tell me there are objective measures that drive the decision rather than the BODs discretion

Ian

Ian,

The new process is outlined in the Oct Fastrack, beginning near the bottom of page F-38. The process both provides for the "BODs discretion" as well as changed numerical criteria.

Stan

[Stan Clayton]

Thanks for the expanded history of FC, Steve. I guess it just goes to show that today's "shuffling of the deck" is nothing new. The BoD has always searched for the right mix of cars and classes, and the present era is no different in that regard.

Unfortunately for FC, the class has declined from a peak of 981 National entries in 1999 to 454 in 2006 -- a 54% decline in seven years. That number leaves FC solidly in the National ranks, but also highlights a growth oppotunity in the Formula Category.

Stan

[Rick Silver]

Stan, I could be wrong but I think one of the main points of Lathrops post is that the BoD eliminated classes in the act of F2000 growth. The alphabet soup of the SCCA and its proliferation is the BIGGEST problem in SCCA open wheeled racing. Of course the SECOND biggest problem is encapsulated by what happened at the Runoffs.

FSCCA could have been fairly combined with FM. F1000 could have been fairly combined with FC once there were enough cars, at least enough to count on two hands. Just dont allow the Canadian rocket ship and maybe most competitors would rather have a new engine gearbox combo than another new national class. ANYTHING but another new national class.

58 cars from 6 classes at the September national at Topeka absolutely ruined that race and qualifying. And the stewards could care less if slow drivers or drivers in slower classes point others by or simply hit them in the rear as a faster car goes by.

-Rick

[Michael Rand]

A growth opportunity ?
As FC has shrunk have other open wheel classes grown or shrunk ? What are the numbers in total for all open wheel classes from, say, 1996, 2000, 2004 ?
FA, FC, FF, FV, F500 at the National level is only part of the story, right ?
Hard to imagine there is a "growth opportunity" in open wheel racing. It certainly seems every formula class is down. Correct me with actual numbers.
The impact of "pro" series like Cooper, Pacific, F2000 can't be ignored, I expect you'll agree.
I am really stuggling with the idea of a growth opportunity in open wheel, Stan.

[Chas Shaffer]

Rob,
I believe history shows that a vibrant pro series actually helps club racing in the long run. No question FC numbers were hurt in the inaugural year of the Hankook series however in the long run I believe it will help. I've already heard of several drivers who are selling their older FC cars to get new ones for the Hankook series which provides lower cost cars for new guys. There are also several manufacturers talking about rolling out new F2000 cars due to the interest created by the Hankook series. I've personally been contacted by two builders about new cars as well as VD rolling out new updates for their existing cars. What the SCCA needs to see by the Hankook F2000 series is that given an option drivers will leave SCCA to race elsewhere. This is a statement about the state of SCCA not Formula Continental.

I can't wait to see how much of a market there will be for new F1000 cars. At $55k plus vs $35k for a good used Zetec car that can run in a great National class or two different pro series and get 8k to 10k miles per rebuild I fail to see why anyone would buy an F1000 car. Actually, I don't see why anyone would buy a new f1000 car vs a new Zetec with the costs being about the same but there will be. I'm really looking forward to seeing how SCCA handles parity among all the different makes of MC engines espcially as new engines come out each year. It's going to be tough to prevent "engine of the week" and sandbagging issues. Let the complaining begin!!

[SStadel]

At least in FSCCA. Like I wrote in the thread on FSCCA, my team was responsible for 32 entries this year. For us four drivers, that's probably greater than the last 5 years combined. Most of those entries would have been Nationals with our own class. I personally ran more races this year (9, with the ARRC being my 10th) than any year since at least 1989. Part of that is the "economy" of running a spec car.

Sorry to hijack this thread...the two current threads have much in common.

[Stan Clayton]

A growth opportunity ?
As FC has shrunk have other open wheel classes grown or shrunk ? What are the numbers in total for all open wheel classes from, say, 1996, 2000, 2004 ?
FA, FC, FF, FV, F500 at the National level is only part of the story, right ?
Hard to imagine there is a "growth opportunity" in open wheel racing. It certainly seems every formula class is down. Correct me with actual numbers.
The impact of "pro" series like Cooper, Pacific, F2000 can't be ignored, I expect you'll agree.
I am really stuggling with the idea of a growth opportunity in open wheel, Stan.

Yes, certainly...a growth opportunity. Just as the lack of a Pro FF2000 entity in the NE created an opportunity for your series, the decline of FC in Club racing is creating an opening in the category for the Club. After all, the 500+ entries lost from FC over the past 7 years, if transfered to another class, would put that class into the top quarter of classes in the Club.

Here are the data you asked for, Mike.

Class 1996 2000 2004
FA 438 277 404
FM 0 535 383 (ran as FA in Nationals thru the 1997 season)
FC 788 922 575
FF 726 693 412
FV 886 878 709
F500 370 278 311

Stan

[Chas Shaffer]

Very intersting that the FC numbers decreased significantly when Pro F2000 went to the Zetec. Give it time and they'll come back. Mike and crew are doing a very good thing.

[Stan Clayton]

Stan, I could be wrong but I think one of the main points of Lathrops post is that the BoD eliminated classes in the act of F2000 growth. The alphabet soup of the SCCA and its proliferation is the BIGGEST problem in SCCA open wheeled racing. Of course the SECOND biggest problem is encapsulated by what happened at the Runoffs.

Yes, the BoD cut classes in the past, but those classes had demonstrated that they were no longer viable by the time they were cut. Heck, I'm told that the last time the original FAs showed up at the Runoffs there were only 5 cars, and 3 of them DNF'd. That's not a viable class IMO. OTOH, today's 'weakest' formula class had 240+ entries during the year and started 27 at the Runoffs. Is anyone seriously proposing that we cut the class from the roster?

FSCCA could have been fairly combined with FM. F1000 could have been fairly combined with FC once there were enough cars, at least enough to count on two hands. Just dont allow the Canadian rocket ship and maybe most competitors would rather have a new engine gearbox combo than another new national class. ANYTHING but another new national class.

This is a pipe dream, and you know it, Rick. FMs and F-SCCAs make the same power, but FMs weigh 100 lbs more than an F-SCCA and are saddled with an archaic suspension. You of all folks should know the complexities of this idea. After all, FC-Pinto vigorously resisted adding virtually identical Zetec cars with dyno traces you could hardly tell apart. And add m/c engines back into the FC fold? How? When we tested an SIR on an F-1000 engine and got it down to 140 hp, you could hear the howling from across the pond...

58 cars from 6 classes at the September national at Topeka absolutely ruined that race and qualifying. And the stewards could care less if slow drivers or drivers in slower classes point others by or simply hit them in the rear as a faster car goes by.

I submit to you that 58 identical cars would have the same experience...just ask the SM guys at HPT.

Stan

[RobLav]

If my previous post sounded at all like I was negative about the Pro F2000 series, then I wrote it wrong. There are a lot of cars already trickling down, and the venue is superior to the club racing - especially Regionals.

Stan - what would the National FC numbers look like if you added all the SCCA Pro sanctioned FC entries? Would the numbers trend be reasonably flat? So why not add SCCA Pro entries to the National entry list / numbers? That would be a more realistic representation of "reality".

We earlier had discussed the possibility of combining classes - a la FA, FB, FC, FD, etc. The Zetecs could reasonably be powered up to run in FB with F1000. The FC Pintos, early FM's, and FSCCA cars could run in FC with some relatively minor changes... etc...

I guess that idea didn't float?

Also, I have no problem with the current SCCA BOD philosophy about adding new National classes and limiting the Runoffs to 24 classes. It allows us to run National races and provides an incentive for those classes that want to attend the Runoffs to make the numbers, one way or the other (either get more people to attend the National events or combine).

Concerning the SIR on F1000 cars - yes - I was one of those howling from across the pond - lol.

[Stan Clayton]

Stan - what would the National FC numbers look like if you added all the SCCA Pro sanctioned FC entries? Would the numbers trend be reasonably flat? So why not add SCCA Pro entries to the National entry list / numbers? That would be a more realistic representation of "reality".

Heck, I don't know. Has Pro FF2K even been part of SCCA Pro Racing in recent years? I think that a more pertinent question is ask is where did all those missing FC guys go? Some went to Pro racing, but a surprising number bought F-SCCA cars. IIRC, I was once told that better than 60 of the 110 cars sold were bought by FC guys, and I think the Club needs them back in National racing.

We earlier had discussed the possibility of combining classes - a la FA, FB, FC, FD, etc. The Zetecs could reasonably be powered up to run in FB with F1000. The FC Pintos, early FM's, and FSCCA cars could run in FC with some relatively minor changes... etc...

I guess that idea didn't float?

It is no secret that I have supported this idea for years, but in reality I doubt there is the broad support needed to force the mergers this plan would involve. In any csae, the plan was briefed to the BoD this past summer, but they opted to expand National opportunities instead (a plan I support, BTW).

Also, I have no problem with the current SCCA BOD philosophy about adding new National classes and limiting the Runoffs to 24 classes. It allows us to run National races and provides an incentive for those classes that want to attend the Runoffs to make the numbers, one way or the other (either get more people to attend the National events or combine).

Even though many will disagree with me, I think the new plan is brilliant, as it uses both the carrot and the stick to give us as a Club both the means to react quickly to shifts in member interest as well as the threat of losing a slot at the Runoffs if a class gets too complacent. Consider the 5 bottom National classes and their 2006 entry totals...

CSR 229
S2 226
GT-3 218
GTL 197
T-3 176

We are going to lose a slot at the 2008 Runoffs, and logic suggests it will be one of these classes, even ignoring F-1000, B- and D-Prepared and the new T-1. If F-SCCA gains National status, then they will be real players for a Runoffs slot, as they banged out 425 entries (375 Regional + 50-ish National) last year, and two of those classes will lose their date at the Big Dance.

The threat of losing their Runoffs slot is going to put a great deal of pressure on the losing class(es) to compromise to merge with a similar class. Some obvious candidates are T3 and SSB; GTL and GT3, and CSR and DSR. Merged classes achieves the goal many here say they want to see...fewer National classes.

Concerning the SIR on F1000 cars - yes - I was one of those howling from across the pond - lol.

What...you don't want to be in FC at 1000 lbs and 130 hp?

Stan

[Michael Rand]

Stan, if you do the basic research you will find that the F2000 Championship Series was in fact sanctioned by SCCA Pro in 2006.
But thanks for the opening to let everyone know.....
Mike Rand
Managing Director, F2000 Championship Series

[Stan Clayton]

Stan, if you do the basic research you will find that the F2000 Championship Series was in fact sanctioned by SCCA Pro in 2006.
But thanks for the opening to let everyone know.....
Mike Rand
Managing Director, F2000 Championship Series

Just in case anyone is wondering, as a Club racer and member of the CLUB Racing Board, I could really give a hoot about Pro Racing. To me, Pro Racing is just another financial drain on Club Racers...to the tune of another $150,000+ last year, that we Club Racers ponied up to cover your good times.

So please don't get me started on Pro Racing, Mike. Nothing personal, mind you. All the best ion your business, but I am not going to apologize for not caring one iota about Pro Racing.

Stan

[Bob Wright]

Stan, a small correction- the F2000 Series PAID SCCA a sactioning fee for the privilege of using the name and the insurance (something we did not need to exercise). I don't think it cost the club a dime, rather they made money. We weren't even listed in Sports Car's calender.

However- I'm on your side re SCCA Pro Racing in general and how it relates to the club.

[Stan Clayton]

I understand that your business pays sanctioning fees to Pro Racing, Bob, but the situation is that for every $90 Pro Racing earns in sanctioning fees it spends something like $100...a sum that must be made up for by club racers. As I told Mike, I don't hold it against you guys, but I also don't like seeing club racers underwriting your efforts. Stan

[Michael Rand]

Stan certainly brings up a valid point. A close look at SCCA Pro Racing's books would surely be interesting.
As Bob stated, we, F2000, paid a substantial per race fee for basically Participant Accident Insurance. We choose to go with SCCA Pro to make it easier for the great majority of potential competitors who are SCCA Members and have at least National Licenses already.
F2000 also chose to retain our own Chief Steward so Pro had no expense there, just as we did T&S, Registration and Tech.
I would love to know exactly how SCCA Pro loses the amount of money it does each year, I suspect their own series, ie World Challenge GT and Touring, pay no sanction fee per se, but the organization certainly staffs those events to the hilt and of course pays substantial insurance premiums.
But back to the question we are debating right now, the car counts. A close look at our, F2000's, results shows the great majority of our entrants also entered one or more SCCA Amateur event [National or Regional, we instituted a Classic Continental class for older cars if not tosay drivers] or who during 2005 ran only SCCA Amateur events. So is that not relevant to the debate ? The simple fact that those who can run this series choose to do so speaks volumes.
Let's be honest, the F2000 Championship Series is "Pro" in that we do not run under an SCCA Amateur Sanction and we do pay a small purse. I think if one were to compare running costs between a 12 race National season and our 6 double race weekends format our series is actually more cost effective to say nothing of the increased track time and reduction of hassle factor.
What is the point ? I think it is that this lucky group of competitors got the opportunity to race in single class races on weekends with substantially more track time than any SCCA Amateur event could ever offer in an environment quite different from the usual SCCA event.
What is the point of that statement ? Not to indict SCCA Amateur Racing, simply there is a growing desire by certain groups of competitors to experience something different. If we, SCCA, and I say that as a 40 year member and competitor, did a better job of accomodating our constituents these alternate programs, including F2000, BMWCCA Club Racing, PCA Club Racing, and who knows what else, would not exist.
"Our" clubs desire to be all things to all people, to be PC beyond any reasonable point, to create new classes due to what, manufacturer pressure ? to maintain classes essentially catering to vintage/historic cars, has led us to the situation where many are looking for alternate arenas to enjoy their motorsport.
So Stan, let's get the books on SCCA Pro Racing and investigate closely. Good luck on that task....

[P.W. LeCain]

I've probably talked to more than 75% of the Hankook F2000 participants throughout this year. Almost every single reason I was given for their attraction to this series relates to how Club racing does things ineffectively.

1. Track time - Why does the SCCA not hold more double Nationals? If you want to provide the most bang for the buck (which is what everyone wants), run doubles. I can't think of a reason not to run double nationals at most tracks. The drivers love them and you get more track time. The only reason not to run them is scheduling problems which I relate directly to the fact that we have too many classes and groups.

2. Competition - Every single FC driver that you talk to is sick of having their race ruined by other groups. How many of you have ever met an FC driver that didn't make mention of slow FA's and CSR's ruining their race? How about slow FC's ruining races for FF? How about running FA's with FF....thats always a crowd pleaser. Not to mention the fact that the FF guys just love having their races shortened by 3 laps. Which reduces their track time (see #1). I haven't even mentioned the other members that usually get thrown into these groups such as S2000, DSR, FM, and wait...now we get to throw F1000 and potentially FSCCA in for good measure. I don't see anything attractive about 9 classes in a group. Viewers AND drivers don't like it. Again, too many classes and too many groups.

3. Decision making - Look at how the F2000 series made changes throughout the year. They were consistent in sticking to creating parity through on the fly rule changes.(ie tire size, engines, etc.) Some of these changes were made after the Saturday race for the Sunday race. Now try to get the SCCA to ever make a decision within a reasonable amount of time. And when they do, everyone is scratching their heads because its usually contrary to what the members want. People want consistency and quick decison making, whether its right or wrong. Not the hem and haw method of beareaucratic waiting and trying to please 350 different people. Indirectly, this relates to too many classes because the SCCA has too much going on to effectively govern all of them.

4. Safety- Too many groups...too much speed differential...too wide a gap between 800 lb sport racers and 1300 - 1400 lb sport racers and formula cars.

5. Cost - This brings me back to doubles. Travel, food, and lodging is greatly reduced by doubles. Also, contingencies. The F2000 paid a small purse but the SCCA could do more to get better contingency programs.

I'm leaving a lot out and there may be reasons why some can't be done. But I truly believe that many of these problems are directly related to too many classes, too many rules, and trying to please too many people.

[Stan Clayton]

Mike, the proper term is "Club" racing, and as a 40 year member of SCCA I strongly suspect you know it. Or is your use of "Amateur" a deliberate insult to the Club and your own customers? Please do set the record straight.

I agree that there is not a snowball's chance in hades that we are going to see detailed financials for SCCA Pro Racing. That said, the law forces the Club to release the bottom line for subsidiaries, and from that we know that last year they once again were underwritten by Club racers...to the tune of $150,000+ in FY2005, in spite of all the magic that accountants can pull off. Accounting subterfuge aside, I'm confident the actual cash flow situation is much worse...

Let me get to some of your points.

I think if one were to compare running costs between a 12 race National season and our 6 double race weekends format our series is actually more cost effective...

Ya think? Let's see...do 6 weekends with your organization costs less than 12 weekends with SCCA? Given that entry fees are probably only slightly different, and that travels costs are probably a wash "per weekend", I'd say it's axiomatic that 12 weekends cost more than 6 weekends. Come on, Mike, try apples to apples...

What is the point ? I think it is that this lucky group of competitors got the opportunity to race in single class races on weekends with substantially more track time than any SCCA Amateur event could ever offer in an environment quite different from the usual SCCA event.

Is that your point? My view is that they're lucky all right. Your organization cherry-picked a bunch of FC racers from NEDiv. You showed up without any responsibility to schedule, organize or run the event; simply write a check and have a good time. BTW, good business plan to retain SCCA Club car and driver licensing rules! Nice of SCCA to be so generous as to allow that to happen, eh?

Did they get more track time and less "hassle" than at SCCA event? Probably, but at what cost to the Club that forms the basis of your success? Answer: a drop from 128 NEDiv FC National entries in 2005 to 55 in 2006, and further erosion of FC as a class.

If we, SCCA, and I say that as a 40 year member and competitor, did a better job of accomodating our constituents these alternate programs, including F2000, BMWCCA Club Racing, PCA Club Racing, and who knows what else, would not exist.

You're a 40-year member, Mike, so your membership number is what, about 10,000? Well, guess what? In the intervening decades SCCA has added more than a third of a million members. There are currently more than 50,000 active members owning some 20,000 race cars and holding about 10,000 active competition licenses. You have what...30-ish cars and drivers? All SCCA homologated and licensed, and running to SCCA rules. The truth is that without SCCA your organization wouldn't even exist, Mike.

For anyone still reading this thread, here are a few cogent reminders. SCCA is a member driven participation based club, dedicated to providing opportunities for a variety of production-based and purpose-built race cars to be exercised in as safe and as fair a setting as we can reasonably manage. It takes a lot of organization to do that, and often folks have to compromise their personal preferences, conveniences and priorities to accommodate "the other guy" on an equal footing. That means that those driving 40 year old British econoboxes get to participate on the same basis as those with the newest and flashiest T-1 or Atlantic go-fast machines...or Zetec-powered Continentals. That is the nature of Club racing with SCCA.

Does that mean the process can't be improved? No, heck no! And lots of folks are constantly working to do just that. I myself signed up last December for a 5 year hitch on the CRB to do my part...sort'a like paying back for all the years of good times I've had. Have I "drank the kool-aid"? Sure! Am I a bit jelous of Mike and Bob? Sure...it must be nice to cherry-pick a few dozen racers to go off and have a good time on the undercard of a big-time race with lots of paying fans, with no more responsibility than showing up to pre-grid on time. Oh, and don't forget to show up for chilled upstate white wine and canapes at the series transport after the race!

Yeah, it must be nice...

But in the meantime, don't expect the Club to hold your spot at the table.

[Michael Rand]

Wow, guess some nerves have been tweaked...
However, apologies to any offended by the term Amateur versus Club. Some thin skin out there I guess.
Should we call time on this thread ? Seems to me we are dangerously close to name calling and being censured by the Carters.
Agree to disagree maybe is the best course now.
Remember the old internet adage, arguing on the internet is like winning a race in Special Olympics, [and right here before anyone gets all bent out of shape, I not only contibute cash but volunteer for them] you might win but you are still , I can't even type it, but you all know how it ends.
Stan, with all due respect, I am returning to my corner.

[Bob Wright]

Stan- I want to mention a couple of things, then I also will stop.

Aside from 'cherry picking' a few NEDIV FC drivers- our series may breath some life into FC club racing with a little publicity and by providing a few trickle-down late model cars at good prices for new blood in the class. Oh, and then there are the benefits of regional-national-Pro vertical integration, which has been proven time and again. We also are, by almost default, the proving ground for the zetec-pinto equalization formula which will benefit the Club class because we will give it to Topeka, free. Some of us spent a great deal of our own time and money bringing the zetec to Club FC because we believe in the class.

You mention club numbers...mine is 47526 ... and there are 50,000 active members...what happened to the 250,000 people who joined between me in 1974 and today? The club has been steady (or stagnant) at about 50,000 membership for a lot of years now. Just a thought.

If it really costs the club racer money to support our series, maybe we should change our sanctioning body.

[Steve Demeter]

Perhaps moving the Runoffs from very close to the geographic center of our driver population to 1000+ miles away had something to do with the drop in FC entries and the success of Mike Rand's series.

I know of at least 3 guys that used to hit about every Cen Div National that were not wseen this year, and at least 2 of them ran the pro series pretty regularly.

Given the fact that many guys chose the pro series, would make one think that it had more to offer in their opinions.

[Michael Rand]

I wasn't going to post on this thread, but Steve, I just need to make sure you, and anyone reading, understand, the F2000 Championship Series IS NOT Mike Rands ! I am the Managing Director with two very active and involved partners, Robert Wright and Al Guibord Jr. I am the public face of the series but believe me when I say it would not exist without the substantial contributions, both financial and operational,of Robert and Al. Let's just call it the F2000 series, ok ?

[Stan Clayton]

If the Carters think I've strayed into name calling, Mike, they know how to get ahold of me.

In the meantime, I do want to thank you for showing me your true colors. Your lack of a reply to issues of substance, and the backhanded way you counterbalanced your apology show me and all assembled exactly how you regard club racing...the source of both your customers and your accreditation. If I were your business partner I'd be cringing right now.

Thanks for the offer, Mike, but I decline to 'agree to disagree'. I want readers to understand, especially the FC folks, that there is a cost when one decides to take one's racing budget elsewhere. In NEDiv last year, FC National entries were off 73 from the year before...down 57%. Nationally, FC entries dropped from 501 to 454...47 entries, or nearly 10%. In other words, FC is actually on the grow nationally, but is being undermined as a class by NEDiv defections. Sure, some of those losses are for reasons aside from Mike and Bob's series, but if those 73 entries were counted in National races, your class would be up 5% instead of down nearly twice that. Maybe if you organized yourselves as the EWC guys or the Sports Racers out on the Left Coast do, targeting specific races, you could put together enough cars to have your own run group. In any case, your fate as a class is up to you.

Since 1999, when FC National entries peaked at 981, your numbers have declined by 54%. Now, before anybody points a finger at F-SCCA, let's put that 54% in perspective. From 1999 through 2003, FC lost 36%, or an average of 9% a year. Since the introduction of F-SCCA FC has lost an additional 18% of national entries, or 6% a year. Hmm, so in spite of FC being the single largest source of buyers of F-SCCA cars, the introduction of those cars has been accompanied by an improvement to FC's picture. Interesting.

I did get one chuckle from Mike's reply, though. Up above he accuses SCCA of excessive "PC"-ness, yet here he gets all squishy and can't write 'retarded', as if it were some dirty word. I got news for you, Mike. Just as there are mentally gifted persons out there, there are also mentally retarded persons. It is all part of the spectrum of life, and I'm amused that you get all squeamish about it. Whatever...

Stan