Let's get this out of the way: I'm one of the guys that those manufacturers would have to lobby for influence in IT.
And that's the view of the current ITAC consisting of people who picked the category as it now stands. Are you certain that the influx of people you project will feel the same way? People who are accustomed to and expect such "improvements"? People from classes that created the mess that is prod and gt and ss and touring? Are you prepared to deny these people a voice on the ITAC? Are you prepared to deny these people a voice on the ITAC when it was the very changes you propose that brought them to ITAC? Ask Chief Powhaten about the unintended consequences of an open-door immigration policy.
1. Interesting you seem to be equally worried that a sudden influx of big-buck teams will poach the little guys' success at Regionals.
I haven't and I just did a quick review of this thread.
2. Who cares? I'd predict that offering IT as a National category is going to be one more nail in the coffin for the weakling current classes. IT is very popular (rule set, consistency, good fields, etc.) without the chance of running for a US championship. It will only be more so by adding that option. If the Production folks want that category to stay sick, that's their business. I'd REALLY prefer that it get fixed but there's too high a price to be paid in political capital for the national office, BoD, or CRB to take the entrants on head to head, and I still contend that the racers got the category to where it is.
Who cares? [cynicism on] Aren't we all in this together?[/cynicism off]
Spec Pinata rock-em, sock-em behaviors ... We would all share the responsibility to make sure that we come down on IT bullies hard and fast, should the category get bigger and more competitive for whatever reason.
There is nothing that a driver can do to come down on IT bullies hard and fast - we don't enforce the rules. Stewards don't want to be the bad cop, will actively discourage a driver from filing paper, and will, more likely than not, issue a slap on the wrist when lethal injection is required. There are good stewards out there. There are divisions where the majority of stewards are good. The opposite also is very true.
That said, I have to admit that, while I think what you suggest is unlikely and that the ITAC can run interference on that kind of stretch, I'm not particularly scared of it. It's to the point now that with the update/backdate rule and the VIN requirement on its way out, a person can in many cases build an essentially new car anyway.
Your faith in your ability to prevent the BoD from doing what it wants is admirable. I have no such faith when financial incentives are involved.
The VIN rule doesn't matter if the change in standard equipment was done within the last 5 years. I can't put equipment that comes on a 2007 Nash Rambler that wasn't part of my 2002 Nash Rambler because the 2007 Rambler isn't classified. Heck, the 2007 might not even be in the same class.
2. The dynamic you describe does happen, but only because the rules allow it. There is no option for that kind of silliness in IT. It's codified out.
Trunk kits.
Did not the SS rules also codify out such adjustments at one time? Did they not change at the behest of manufacturers lobbying through drivers or directly?
3/4. Fewer entries in Regionals! More entries in Regionals! You don't know, but you know we should be scared. Not a compelling argument.
I
repeat before you go mucking around with a category where a large number of drivers are very happy and which is the financial life blood of Club Racing, I suggest your foundation for a change rest on something other than some worthless stamp of approval from Topeka. You don't have a single clue as what might be in this Pandora's box and I and others have raised potential contents and it is entirely inappropriate for you to dismiss them with a simple wave of a hand. I suggest you look up the oath medical doctors take.
Do some freaking market studies before you blindly rush down this path. Ask your target audience whether they will run the Runoffs other than to be able to say they did it, once. Ask the drivers of categories you are going to drive out of the Runoffs what they are going to do. Ask the pool of untapped non-SCCA drivers you claim this will attract whether it will make one damn difference because if the benefits don't happen and the costs do, you'll have FUBARed the one thing keeping this club's racing program afloat.
The Problem - Small weak National classes, poorly subscribed National championship events, shallow fields with huge discrepancies in performance between the front and back of class grids. Our best club racing is not showcased at our "premier" club racing events.
....Transplanting the best multi-marque category into the National structure would help fix that problem, frankly by hastening the death of the weakest current classes with good old-fashioned competition for entries.
IT adds 5 classes to the National program. Please explain what that is going to do about the 15 or so that don't draw?
Car counts: Have not these Regions found a solution through the use of restricted regionals?
Shallow fields/discrepancy: It adds 5 classes to the National program. please explain how this would address these issues for the other classes.
Showcasing: Let's see... Runoffs, June Sprints, Rose Cup.... MARRS Labor Day Double, NARRC Runoffs, SARRC Championship, ARRC, ITFest, MARRS/SARRC at VIR if it returns... Cannot really think of any other premier club racing events and by my count two-thirds of those events do allow IT cars to compete, as IT cars.
We, the SCCA, don't market to spectators, do not have a spectator-friendly format and put on our races for the benefit of our participants, not spectators. While I think we should actively seek spectators, 35 classes over eight to ten run groups just won't make that dog hunt. Putting our "best club racing" into the big show won't do squat unless we prune like Paul Bunyon uses an axe.
Classes
won't go away, they are The Andromeda Strain. They will continue for decades. Let me present - Club Ford, a class who's entire existence is based upon the inability to compete with a modern Formula Ford. ASR, a class which, if the GCR were actually applied, consists almost entirely of old Can-Am cars and which, most likely, has not had a legal and valid ASR entry in 15 years. IT7 - a class whose existence is based upon the perceived inability to compete with newer ITA cars.
So, I would suggest that before we talk about having a premier event at which to showcase our club, it might actually be better to have a program that the average Joe can understand.
That's been talked about and, by my recollection, wasn't popular at all with current Prod entrants who had opinions on the subject. Yeah, you can be upset that they aren't willing to help themselves but why let their reluctance prevent IT from taking the next step?
Which would be legalizing current IT cars, as they sit, in Production which will fill out their declining fields at Nationals, allow those IT drivers that want a medal to compete as they sit, and which leaves IT
alone. It's their problem. If you are asking that we fix it, then we fix the problem with their rules. We don't muck around with ours.
And what is being proposed would allow you to do precisely what you describe WITHOUT having to invest in expensive changes to the car....And if YOU don't want to do that, maybe some of your IT buddies DO want to....
My proposal is less invasive then IT as national. That makes it the preferred solution unless you can demonstrate that the treatment is less effective than the more invasive treatment. Amputation saves a patient with an arm wound, but you don't chop off the limb when a couple of stitches is just as good.
Any of my IT buddies that want to run Nationals with their IT cars can do it with what I'm proposing. Asking that they get a shiny medal for IT when the majority says no is being piggy.
Your position distills to "I want the chance to win a gold medal in IT and nothing else." Well sir, I have given you potential outcomes of why that would be a bad thing. I again suggest that before you go mucking around with a category where a large number of drivers are very happy and which is the financial life blood of Club Racing, your foundation for a change should rest on something other than some worthless stamp of approval from Topeka. Do some research as to whether it works.
Or how about a pilot program? Since there no longer is any need to qualify for the Runoffs, put ITA on the schedule as a bona-fida medal getting class and let anyone who ran finished 4 or more races in an ITA sprint race attend. Let's see how many people show up.
Spec Pinata rock-em, sock-em behaviors should have been dealt with swiftly and painfully by the drivers and stewards. It was let slide and became a cultural norm. I'm NO SM fan but even I agree that there's been a real shift in the last couple years, in terms of tolerance for bone-headedness. We would all share the responsibility to make sure that we come down on IT bullies hard and fast, should the category get bigger and more competitive for whatever reason.
