IT National? Anyone else have this experience at a driver's meeting this year?

[Knestis]

...I have just as large an issue with an ITAC person pushing this IT to National issue as I do or would with a CRB person pushing his/her personal agenda.

So you can all hear it again, we have board members on the ITAC conference calls and we have not been asked to make this question an agenda item.

Further, when I joined the ITAC, I didn't give up my right to have personal opinions about issues affecting my class, category, and most pertinent to this conversation - the Club. Anything I type here is just that - my individual opinion - unless I explicitly state otherwise. (And frankly, this board isn't an official source of SCCA information, so that's unlikely to happen in any substantial way.)

I'm guilty of being Socratic - trying to encourage dialog in order to get ideas considered and clarified, and by doing so have probably confused some of you who are expect that everyone in the discussion WILL pound their personal agenda. So, here's my very own opinion on the subject, as it currently stands - I voted "yes" but not because it will change what I do. I believe IT should have National status for three reasons:

1. There are members (approx. 1/3 of those responding here) who appear interested in having the option to run National events, or to try to go to the RubOffs. I don't believe that my racing goals and plans, WHICH WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGE, would be compromised by giving them that option, so it's unfair of me to tell them they can't aspire to their goals.

2. The Club Racing program would be healthier, top to bottom, if IT were a National class. EVEN IF the other issues affecting the National program (e.g., issues with the RubOffs venue choice) weren't addressed. I am not foolish enough to believe that IT could survive in a vacuum of money-losing club racing events. We ain't that important, that we can stand all by ourselves on our own current success.

3. I'm kind of proud of my involvement in the category and for purely emotional reasons, I'd like to see IT get the respect it deserves. It's gotten where it is largely by organizational accident but the same can be said for all kinds of successful endeavors. It would be vindication for a philosophy and approach that has been ignored in other categories, and I'd like to see it play out to its logical end - a semi-pro series based on the IT rules, for cars too new to be club racing eligible.

I asked myself yesterday evening, what would I actually have done differently THIS season, if IT had already been a National class. Hmm. I would have done the Double Nat'l at VIR, in addition to my current calendar.

That's it.

I don't think that my Regional program would have been affected in any significant way, and (this MIGHT BE in my official ITAC voice) many of the positions I've supported in that committee since January have increased the competition in my own class, to the detriment of my relative position (e.g., get the 924 and Fiero to their lower process weights, classify the MkIV Golf, and probably a few you haven't heard about yet). I'm totally good with that, so don't feel the need to address the National issue as an exercise in protecting my personal interests.

FWIW.

K

 

[dickita15]

I am kind of amazed at some of the folks that don’t want this considered because they assume that making IT a national class would mean that some other change would also happen, such as different safety specs or other rule changes.
This debate has also spread to the Gt and Prod site. There are some fascinating assumptions over there as well.
I really have no idea what this would mean from a master plan point of view. The only insight I have from someone highly place is the comment a few year back that is a concern that if IT was a national class rules enforcement would be difficult due to the obscure nature of some of the cars in the class. This person’s solution was to only let IT cars of a model year later than XX run nationals. The older cars could only run regionals. My reaction to that was negative. Other than that I have no idea what other changes might be included in IT going national.

 

[924Guy]

(Edit: Where are all the "why is IT always a second class citizen" people? )

Still here. Maybe I haven't made my personal position clear enough; my reasons for voting no are that it is not clearly stated anywhere in here that the goal (of taking IT National) is to address this. So, since we have always been Regional-class citizens, the natural assumption (for me and presumably many others, though not all) is one of distrust, that this is not the intent, but to band-aid a bigger problem. Leaving us with the same basic status, in a different pond.

I'm glad to hear that this is just one component of a much bigger pile of issues the CRB is dealing with. And when dealing with such a complex set of problems, it is appropriate to know all the options available for solutions. Therefore it is completely appropriate for the CRB to solicit this feedback, even unofficially.

However I can't, in good conscience for my own status, agree with a proposal to make IT a National class, all else being the same.

If there is a larger proposal that IT going National is a part of, then that is a different question with a different set of assumptions or boundary criteria. I will say that I would likely support some such proposals, because I do prefer the idea of a "true" IT National Champion, as well as "legitimate" status as a class and as a racer. I guess I'm just a little picky about achieving that goal with little or no disturbance to the existing very good racing environment.

 

[Ron Earp]

A quick look at the Prod Racing site shows those guys think National IT would be bad for IT too.......

 

[Knestis]

Your point on the spherical bearings issue is well made, David. That was a decision (good, bad, or something in between) made in the wrong way for the wrong reasons, I believe. It's not that I don't understand WHY that happened, I just don't support the process applied.

However, by taking our ball and going home, we don't do anything to fix the sickness of which that is a symptom. And I still contend - that excellent non-example accepted - that drivers get the category that they want, as they steer it with requested changes over time. Of course, I also believe in evolution.

And if you want to see a stink, just WAIT until something like Triple-J's Studebaker example (I think he meant to type "Solstice?") comes up. I think I know the current ITAC members well enough to believe that there will be a furor over something like that. Now, by what process we might redress it, I'm not sure - and I really hope it never comes to that - but we're trying to be proactive about issues like that. For example, we've instituted a process whereby the actual math behind every new classification and adjustment to the process is recorded. If we can codify our practices, assumptions, etc. we decrease the chance that the ITAC can be misappropriated.

K

 

[jjjanos]

...so it's unfair of me to tell them they can't aspire to their goals.

Kirk, you are trying to have your cake and eat it too. When a driver asks for an allowance to run a substitute part on his car to make it more competitive/race more - say for example the rear hubs having a tendency to break quickly - your (The ITAC's) answer is Not Consistent With Class Philosophy. Yet, when the request is to change the Regional nature of IT, the same alarm bells don't go off? I'm sorry, but I'd like to put fenders of alternate material on my first gen CRX because the plastic ones are so brittle that they crack when a fly lands on them, but I know what the answer is going to be - NCWCP.

2. The Club Racing program would be healthier, top to bottom, if IT were a National class. EVEN IF the other issues affecting the National program (e.g., issues with the RubOffs venue choice) weren't addressed. I am not foolish enough to believe that IT could survive in a vacuum of money-losing club racing events. We ain't that important, that we can stand all by ourselves on our own current success.

Assertion without any supporting evidence. I've got X entries in a National and Y entries in a Regional. Total entries equals X+Y. IT goes National. I move Z entries from the Regional to the National. National entries are X+Z. Regional entries are Y-Z. Total entries equals X+Z+Y-Z or X+Y, cetaris paribus. Congratulations, you didn't put more water in the ballon, you just squeezed it.

One could make the argument that the move would attract some drivers and raise entries, but one could just as equally make a case that the move will lose drivers and lower entries - the running for points thing.

The cost of travelling to an away race is more than two times the cost of my home race. If I'm running Nationals, my travel budget increases and that leaves less money for entering races. My total participation goes down.

 

[Knestis]

Well, of course we don't have any evidence of what will happen if IT gets National status. It hasn't happened yet. Every point of view under discussion here is an assertion without supporting evidence...

...most particularly here, your suggestion that National status will result in the same outcomes as would catering to individual make/model/driver requests for allowances like alternate material fenders or different rear hubs. Re: cake, I think I'm being exactly the opposite of what you suggest - that I'm being completely consistent in trying to stem the tide of creep in Improved Touring, regardless of the title attached to the races one can enter with an IT car.

I simply believe that including what is arguably the second most successful category in Club Racing into a broader set of opportunities would be good for the entire program. The ENTIRE program - not Regionals, not Nationals, not the RubOffs - the whole tamale.

K

 

[Dave Gomberg]

Three of the six CRB members have been to the Runoffs in the last two years; another was an entrant; one has not been eligible (IT driver). Five of the six primarily run Nationals.

The "bigger look" is being done by the Task Force announced by the BoD a few months ago. Many members chose to comment to the BoD. The idea of IT as national classes is only one of many things that were proposed to the Task Force. The Task Force will be making its recommendations to the BoD soon and the BoD will make its decisions on the Club Racing program in the near future (at least that was the plan when the Task Force was announced).

As for the regional entries, see the attached file for the 2007 numbers. (BTW, if you think we have too many National classes, just look at the proliferation of Regional classes. There are some regions that recognize over 50 classes - Regional and National combined.)

Dave

 

[Knestis]

A quick look at the Prod Racing site shows those guys think National IT would be bad for IT too.......

And I have little doubt as to the motivation there. The opportunity to run for a National Championship is a big factor in choosing to complicate one's life with a Prod or GT car, so they (quite correctly, I think) fear that they'll lose entries to IT, should that option become a viable route to the RubOffs.

K

(PS - sorry, Earl. You knew it was going to come to this. Move 'em or whatever but you won't stem the tide for long.)

 

[JeffYoung]

This one is really simple to me. IT is a regional class. It's been "run" by the racers themselves for years. If the majority of IT racers want to go National, while I see it as a bad move, I will respect that. If the majority do not, it should not be forced on them.

So to the me the real question is, how do w run the vote to make sure everyone has a chance to express an opinion?

 

[IPRESS]

BINGO
We have a winner!
Jeff there you go making sense. If you keep that up around here, by the end of the year you can advance to the P board and take on a real challenge!

 

[erlrich]

This one is really simple to me. IT is a regional class. It's been "run" by the racers themselves for years. If the majority of IT racers want to go National, while I see it as a bad move, I will respect that. If the majority do not, it should not be forced on them.

So to the me the real question is, how do w run the vote to make sure everyone has a chance to express an opinion?

Isn't the traditional process to post a request for member input? Although, based on other recent requests I'm not sure the CRB would get half as many letters as we have votes in the poll. Maybe we could survey the drivers at upcoming events? Start a petition? I'm not sure what would be the most effective method.

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

It's been "run" by the racers themselves for years.

Help me understand this statement. IT is no different than any other class in terms of it's operational functionality. It has an Ad Hoc, has CRB reps, etc. The only difference is that it won't entertain comp adjustments and has a classification process, no?

 

[gran racing]

We really don’t have enough information to make a well informed decision, but if we’re just going with keep IT regional or make it all a national class, then:

NO.
ITB driver

I vote yes and race IT7 for the fun of it and that coveted last place in my group.

Interesting. Would you lobby for IT7 to be recognized as a National class within IT? Should those region by region classes be allowed to participate in the Runoffs too especially since they’re not in the GCR? These are actual questions and not meant to be argumentative.

So you guys that are voting no are saying that the Club should continue to forbid IT cars to run Nationals? That a guy who wants to run Nationals has to buy or build a different car to do so?

So we’re not able to race at the Runoffs, but we knew that prior to deciding to race in IT. I personally don’t care if I ever get to participate in the Runoffs or not. What percentage of current IT racers is believed who’d truly want to race at the Runoffs? 5%, 10%?

Now from a club’s overall perspective, and it sure would be interesting to see how regions would handle scheduling, it might make sense to eliminate the distinction between regional and national categories. Heck, it’s almost impossible to explain or understand what the differences even are.

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

Dave,

Here is how I would do it:

National races are Divisional qualifing races for a Runoffs birth. They are longer races with guaranteed amounts of track time.

Regional races are local series' that include all the Nationally recognized categories / classes plus a few more.

IMHO, if it ain't in the GCR, it can't be recognized for a NC. If IT7 were so prolific and popular, it could certainly get added (see SM).

 

[Ron Earp]

This one is really simple to me. IT is a regional class. It's been "run" by the racers themselves for years. If the majority of IT racers want to go National, while I see it as a bad move, I will respect that. If the majority do not, it should not be forced on them.

So to the me the real question is, how do w run the vote to make sure everyone has a chance to express an opinion?

+1 on that one.

My estimation is the majority of IT drivers won't vote for IT to "go National".

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

+1 on that one.

My estimation is the majority of IT drivers won't vote for IT to "go National".

Won't vote it to go National becasue they don't want it to go National or because they may never attend the RO's?

Heck - like Dick said earlier - the questions that are coming up about what IT cars would have to 'modify' to go National shows a real lack of understanding. It's this that scares me about the vote. Fear, uncertanty and doubt driven by the problems of other classes. And that central problem? UNSTABLE rules and COMP ADJUSTMENTS.

Just asking.

 

[jjjanos]

Won't vote it to go National becasue they don't want it to go National or because they may never attend the RO's?

It doesn't matter. If they vote no, they vote no and the outcome of the vote needs to be acted upon. Anything else and you might as well not have had a vote.

Fear, uncertanty and doubt driven by the problems of other classes. And that central problem? UNSTABLE rules and COMP ADJUSTMENTS.

Two words - TRUNK KITS.

Those fears are perfectly justifiable given the history of the National Series. Rather than recognize that classifying the ACR Neon in showroom stock was either

1. A mistake, a violation of the class philosophy and, so sorry, your car no longer is legal in Showroom Stock or
2. Perfectly legal, kosher and too bad Studebaker, you want to compete, build a better car

We got COMP ADJUSTMENTS, lobbying for what to include in the kits, etc.

 

[Ron Earp]

It's this that scares me about the vote. Fear, uncertanty and doubt driven by the problems of other classes. And that central problem? UNSTABLE rules and COMP ADJUSTMENTS.

Just asking.

And your concern will in turn scare the masses. Certainly there are members of the IT group that don't have the level of understanding that you and others possess. But their reality is driven by what they understand. If "you" (meaning Topeka) decide they (us) don't understand enough and that the decision should be made by a committee, well, then don't put the item out for member input.

I was scared of what I saw on the other board - the SCCA President asking someone at a National Race "Hey, what do you think about IT being National?"

To my paranoid way of thinking I feel that Topeka has decided IT is going to be National. Now they are trying to figure out how the IT herd can be convinced to keep their heads down and to keep eating the grass while we move to a new pasture.

 

[jjjanos]

Moo.