A Poll Regarding the IT Rules Set
- Thread starter Ron Earp
- Start date
spawpoet
New member
I keep meaning to add a signature, and can't figure out how to change my screen-name. Name is Chris Carey. We met briefly at Daytona last year, but you and Ron were pretty busy between sessions.
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Thanks! Tell our bosses, the CRB!
(I can't think of any Pro series that has 350 cars on the spec lines. THAT is really the crux of the issue in IT. If we had 3 or 5 models to attend to, we might take a different tact. We'd have a MUCH bigger matrix of data to look at, and the variabilities would be reduced in comparison. But we don't, so we have to take another approach. Your point about driver skill is well made. We have to take that into account when even discussing on track performance, and it is a HUGE factor. We've heard from members that they'd rather we are consistent than perfect.)
JeffYoung
New member
To bring the thread back on topic, and to focus on the results of the poll:
1. I've seen (in my view) decent arguments on both sides for and against removal of dual purpose vestiges.
2. I personally would be in favor of removal but also agree rules stability for the next few years is more important.
3. But the results of the poll were eye opening to me. I, wrongfully, assumed membership strongly supported removal of these items. 103 IT racers does not a majority make, but it is significant and the fact the vote was that close would leave me to believe the rules should be left alone.
Very interesting discussion, and poll.
1. I've seen (in my view) decent arguments on both sides for and against removal of dual purpose vestiges.
2. I personally would be in favor of removal but also agree rules stability for the next few years is more important.
3. But the results of the poll were eye opening to me. I, wrongfully, assumed membership strongly supported removal of these items. 103 IT racers does not a majority make, but it is significant and the fact the vote was that close would leave me to believe the rules should be left alone.
Very interesting discussion, and poll.
erlrich
Super Moderator
It's 107 now, so there
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if the SCCA keeps statistics on how many individual drivers compete in each class in a given year?
Dave Gomberg
New member
The simple answer is "no". Until the last couple of years, the participation numbers (entries) in regional races were not tracked. If you go to http://www.scca.com/contentpage.aspx?content=40 and go down to the link for "2009 Regional Class Participation", you can see this year's numbers through August. From those, you can make some guesses about how many drivers those entries represent. Remember, especially this year with the economic problems many have had, a lot of those entries will be for drivers who have done only two races to keep their licenses.
For the first time, because of the new points championship for National drivers, the number of drivers who have run at least one National race are being tracked. Go to http://www.scca.com/event.aspx?hub=1&event=13506 and click on the "2009 National Point Standings" link. There are a lot of drivers who have run only one or two Nationals. Some of that is attributable to the economy, but it is most likely that they are drivers who only run the one or two Nationals at their home track and their other races are regionals.
Dave
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
WOW! ITA is the 3rd largest class in Regional Club racing.
SM 2315
SRF 1431
ITA 1309
ITS 763
SSM (an East Coast SM class) 586
SM 2315
SRF 1431
ITA 1309
ITS 763
SSM (an East Coast SM class) 586
JoshS
New member
We also have an SSM class out here in SFR, so you're getting numbers from both coasts. I'm sure the rules are different. with regionally-defined classes, you're going to get inflated numbers when the only thing that is counted is the name.
erlrich
Super Moderator
Yeah, noticed that too - and we're the largest non-spec class.
Ron Earp
Administrator
Aren't you getting a fair number of SMs in ITA? Not that it matters much.
Get those IT7s and SRX7s with some lead on and put them in ITB and ITB will look healthy too!
Last edited:
JoshS
New member
Just looking at the 37 (!) nationally-defined classes, which are available in every regional race ...
The top of the chart looks like this -- full list attached:
The average turnout only goes down from there. Only the top 18 (less than half the classes) average more than 1 car per race.
EDIT: Updated attachment to include regionally-defined classes. In this case I determined the average by totalling the races in the divisions where the class was populated (so it ignores zeros), but it's also the case in many parts of the country that not all regions in a division offer these classes. So take with a grain of salt.
The top of the chart looks like this -- full list attached:
Code:
Class Count Average
SM 2315 13.9
SRF 1431 8.6
ITA 1309 7.9
ITS 763 4.6
ITB 523 3.2
FV 473 2.8
FF 354 2.1
ITR 349 2.1
EP 263 1.6
ITC 256 1.5EDIT: Updated attachment to include regionally-defined classes. In this case I determined the average by totalling the races in the divisions where the class was populated (so it ignores zeros), but it's also the case in many parts of the country that not all regions in a division offer these classes. So take with a grain of salt.
Last edited:
spawpoet
New member
As someone who also voted yes on this poll, I would also agree with you that at least the consensus here is nowhere near strong enough to warrant messing with the rules on these items.
Dave Gomberg
New member
Jeff:
You didn't look very hard: http://www.scca.com/event.aspx?hub=1&event=13506 and click on the "2009 National Class Participation" link.
Also, you all should note that cars in CF/CFF (Club Ford/Club Formula Ford) are legal FF cars. Likewise, GTP (GT Pinto) cars are legal GT3 cars. Depending on whose IT7 rules are being used, these may also be legal ITA cars. For that matter SSM/SMT are legal (if not competitive) SM cars. And, IIRC, GTA cars are legal GT1 cars.
One last comment: does it strike any of you that maybe, just maybe, there are too many regionally created classes? Yeah, I know that it caters to some real or perceived needs, but are all of those needed? Especially those with negligible entries that could, in almost every case, run in another class?
Dave
Dave
JoshS
New member
Good point Dave. I took the classes you mentioned and edited my spreadsheet to reflect these facts. It's attached.
Ron Earp
Administrator
While I know I'll be in the minority I've always thought that IT7, SRX7, SSM were unnecessary.
Dave Gomberg
New member
Sorry to be a pain Josh, but in looking at your update, I realize that NCF belongs with FF and CC and CFC belong with FC.
Dave
JoshS
New member
No problem.
+1.