Small Formula car HST elimination...

[FVRacer21]

.....
Maybe an alternative to the current system of ranked racing events where we awarded points based on the number of entrants in a class and the position you finished.

......

I proposed a seed system which I now realize should have been a ranking system (not a tennis player). Or Handicap or some other system. That way we end up with a nationwide ranking and the top 30 drivers in the country get an invitation.

You would have a minimum number of starts etc., but like baseball's hitting leaders, you could have drivers from all over the country competing against each other. Then the Runoffs would be like the World Series or Superbowl that would determine who would be best.

Who wants to set up the criteria? - Steve started - I would add pole position and fastest race lap. What else could we put in there?

ChrisZ

Edit - even if the SCCA would not adopt this - it would be a neat way to analyze drivers.

[BLS]

I don't know when it ended, but when I was younger (a lot!) a runoffs invite had to be earned by points within each region:
National races in each region counted 9 points for 1st place, 6 for 2nd, 4 for 3rd, 3 for 4th, 2 for 5th, and one point for 6th place. The top 4 in points were invited to the runoffs, 7 regions x 4 = 28 drivers invited per class. Somewhere along the line FV was changed to invite 6 per region. That was it, no other way to qualify. I recall that you could include 2 national races outside your region.

[Steve Davis]

I don't know when it ended, but when I was younger (a lot!) a runoffs invite had to be earned by points within each region:
National races in each region counted 9 points for 1st place, 6 for 2nd, 4 for 3rd, 3 for 4th, 2 for 5th, and one point for 6th place. The top 4 in points were invited to the runoffs, 7 regions x 4 = 28 drivers invited per class. Somewhere along the line FV was changed to invite 6 per region. That was it, no other way to qualify. I recall that you could include 2 national races outside your region.

Both FV and FF were allowed 6. All other classes got just 4.

[pacratt]

I don't know when it ended, but when I was younger (a lot!) a runoffs invite had to be earned by points within each region:
National races in each region counted 9 points for 1st place, 6 for 2nd, 4 for 3rd, 3 for 4th, 2 for 5th, and one point for 6th place. The top 4 in points were invited to the runoffs, 7 regions x 4 = 28 drivers invited per class. Somewhere along the line FV was changed to invite 6 per region. That was it, no other way to qualify. I recall that you could include 2 national races outside your region.

Minuscule point of order...in your post, change the word "region" to "division".
Glenn (I trim my lawn with nail-clippers...lol)

[John LaRue]

If I was king of the SCCA I would get rid of the CRB and FSRAC and the accompanying conflicts of interest (real or perceived). Each class would need to create a committee that decides the rules and direction of their own class and need to have near-unanimous agreement among the participants on any change that would then be presented to the BoD. Similar to what Tony is doing with FF and the recent tire rule change. It makes no sense that the CRB and FSRAC make decisions for all classes but most of the classes have no representation on either. Give the power back to the people that are most affected by it.

For all intents and purposes that is what you are currently experiencing but for your failure to reference SCCA Staff and their role. The CRB is now being chaired by a member of the BOD, Dayle Frame.

[EYERACE]

Other than John LaRue - and thank you John, I know you do care - does anyone here believe those other "powers-that-be" in the SCCA actually read what all of us post here? .......simply because this section of ApexSpeed is titled SCCA Board of Directors it doesn't mean most anyone else from SCCA reads what's here or cares

.and because there's maybe a couple (to give 'em the benefit of the doubt - out of I'm not sure how many) of them that do read what we post here..........shall we who post here believe those couple actually care what we say ???

crickets by too many other than John LaRue it seems to me

[Mmbeau]

and because there's maybe a couple (to give 'em the benefit of the doubt - out of I'm not sure how many) of them that do read what we post here..........

Well considering one of them is permanently IP banned here, that cuts the F/SR representation on the CRB who might read this in half.

[Peter Olivola]

Other than John LaRue - and thank you John, I know you do care - does anyone here believe those other "powers-that-be" in the SCCA actually read what all of us post here? .......simply because this section of ApexSpeed is titled SCCA Board of Directors it doesn't mean most anyone else from SCCA reads what's here or cares

.and because there's maybe a couple (to give 'em the benefit of the doubt - out of I'm not sure how many) of them that do read what we post here..........shall we who post here believe those couple actually care what we say ???

crickets by too many other than John LaRue it seems to me

Do you talk with your BoD member? I realize that's become something of an ancient concept, but it's still the best way to communicate exactly what you want them to hear.

[Rick Kirchner]

Well considering one of them is permanently IP banned here, that cuts the F/SR representation on the CRB who might read this in half.

Who is that? I don't recall whatever drama led to it. Who's on the FSRAC? Can't find it on the website.

[John Nesbitt]

Who is that? I don't recall whatever drama led to it. Who's on the FSRAC? Can't find it on the website.

It is behind two logins. (Why, oh why, does the SCCA website have such a goofy, convoluted member access procedure?)

Go to scca.com, click on member profile (upper right). Login.

Then click on Boards and Committees. Another login.

Then, under Road Racing, click on Formula/Sports Racing Committee.

Caveat: The club is not real good at keeping these committee etc. lists up-to-date.

[Rick Kirchner]

It is behind two logins. (Why, oh why, does the SCCA website have such a goofy, convoluted member access procedure?)

Not a member at present, so that excludes me. Wonder why they think this should be member-only info?

Hopefully someone will post...

[Jim Garry]

It is behind two logins. (Why, oh why, does the SCCA website have such a goofy, convoluted member access procedure?)

Go to scca.com, click on member profile (upper right). Login.

Then click on Boards and Committees. Another login.

Then, under Road Racing, click on Formula/Sports Racing Committee.

Caveat: The club is not real good at keeping these committee etc. lists up-to-date.

There's most likely a shorter URL than this one but this gets me straight to the member portal and requires no extra log ins.

https://my.scca.com/eweb/DynamicPage...=yes&Site=SCCA

[Mike B]

Who's on the FSRAC? Can't find it on the website.

[Rick Kirchner]

So I searched for all these guys on here. I might be mistaken, but I believe the last post by one of them was at least 3 years ago.

So if these guys are the class reps, and this site represents a virtual "town hall", imagine if your representative never showed up - or at best, just hid backstage and never came out to discuss things with his constituents so that although he was appraised of peoples opinions on the matter, you don't know his or the vote.

[Peter Olivola]

So I searched for all these guys on here. I might be mistaken, but I believe the last post by one of them was at least 3 years ago.

So if these guys are the class reps, and this site represents a virtual "town hall", imagine if your representative never showed up - or at best, just hid backstage and never came out to discuss things with his constituents so that although he was appraised of peoples opinions on the matter, you don't know his or the vote.

They, the CRB and the BoD seem to have done a decent job with the FF tire change. I wonder what the difference is?

[Steve Davis]

There is no 'requirement' for members of the FSRAC to 'seek input from public forums'. They take their guidance from SCCA, but pretty sure that SCCA does NOT tell them HOW to get the input they (think they) need to address SCCA issues.... if there are any. I THINK the FSRAC takes it's guidance more or less from the CRB.. and maybe the BOD if either of them thinks they NEED more input.

Since there is an email address for each of them as well as an automatic 'send to fsrac' email on the SCCA site (somewhere). You can feel free to send any specific thread(s) that you think they need to see to them via email. Lead a horse, etc...but if you haven't done that, it's unlikely that any of them visit this forum (or any other) on a regular basis.

I also don't THINK the FSRAC is tasked with INITIATING anything on their own. I could be wrong. Perhaps John L knows more about how they are supposed to decide what they should be working on?

Steve, FV80

[Ed Womer]

seems unfortunate that the only thing they seem to be good at is terrible decisions and lightening my wallet.

So they wonder why we aren't interested in contributing? IT IS YOUR JOB TO KEEP ME INFORMED, not mine to endlessly chase after what you are doing while you hide everything from us!

If you choose to want to lead ( I am using that lightly) it should be YOUR responsibility to keep those you choose to lead informed.

Ed

[Peter Olivola]

seems unfortunate that the only thing they seem to be good at is terrible decisions and lightening my wallet.

So they wonder why we aren't interested in contributing? IT IS YOUR JOB TO KEEP ME INFORMED, not mine to endlessly chase after what you are doing while you hide everything from us!

If you choose to want to lead ( I am using that lightly) it should be YOUR responsibility to keep those you choose to lead informed.

Ed

I'll ask again: What was different about the approval of the new FF tire rule?

[DanW]

I'll ask again: What was different about the approval of the new FF tire rule?

I think the difference was the 50+ FF driver letters submitted to the board.

The challenge for the competitors and tech compliance folk in Impound was the proposed wording was mangled when it got to the final Fastrack/GCR text. The wording caused some confusion. I got called to impound to "OK, 'splain it to me, Lucy!" The way the text read, it appeared the treaded Hoosier VFF tires were for use in the rain.