IT rules make it a little easier than the "crapton of spare parts" method that is forced upon the SS/T/SM based rulesets, but you have the issue entirely correct in my eyes.
IT National? Anyone else have this experience at a driver's meeting this year?
- Thread starter shwah
- Start date
IT rules make it a little easier than the "crapton of spare parts" method that is forced upon the SS/T/SM based rulesets, but you have the issue entirely correct in my eyes.
JoshS
New member
I think it's gotten the whole club racing program in some hot water. A lack of a cohesive plan across the whole classification landscape means that there are some major holes, some overlaps, and a lot of confusion.
i can't imagine a guy i watched get lapped 3times in the HP race and showed zero track awareness is "in the know."
Why don't more folks protest? Is it because nobody thinks anybody is cheating or is it because most guys really don't care that much? (I'm not silly enough to think it's that simple but...) If IT going national did have the effect of causing more protests, where would the additional scrutineers come from? Where would the time to do the scrutineering come from? More staffing could mean higher entry fees. Maybe track time could be cut into. Low buck guys being sent home with partially disassembled moters doesn't sound like a great way to build membership.
Before shooting holes in my arguement, consider that many guys might have picked IT because it is fun, and simple, and cheap. (and popular) Race with your buddies then have a beer. Travel a little if you can afford to. Build the car up as you go. Leave the big time stuff to the big guys and leave us alone. (not directed at you personaly Kirk)
If the 'process' is what makes IT so great then go and use it to fix prodution and GT and then the club won't need us to save it.
JoshS
New member
Those people will continue to do regional racing, not national racing. These protests are not likely to occur at regional races, just as they don't right now. The point is that even if we were to see more mechanical protests in IT, they won't directly affect the sort of people that you are describing.
Theose impacted the most should carry the most weight in the debate. How's that for a fudge answer?
I disagree that the BoD are guardians of the SCCA. While racing is a religion, it isn't ruled by a priestly class who protect the ignorant serfs from themselves. The most divisive decisions of the Club have been these "we know better" decisions. Like it or not, we're a club with folks elected to represent us, not to represent what is best for us. If we decide to disband the club tomorrow, then that's what they are suppose to do because we are the Club. If they do know better, then they are suppose to convince us of that.
The committees and boards setup by the BoD responsibility is to serve the mission defined by the BoD. For example, the ITAC should recommend what it thinks is best for IT and it doesn't matter what that does to GT. The CRB should recommend what it thinks is best for Club Racing and to heck what that does to Solo. Etc. It's the job of the BoD to weight/balance the competing interests of the membership.
That's why they are suppose to solicite member input - to gauge what we want and to convince us that doing it is really stupid. Anything less than that is just NASA with a facade.
Spherical bearings anyone?
The Runoffs bring greater interest and influence from outside the Club than a regional program. Someday, the ARRC or the ITSpectacular might generate that sort of interest, but that's down the road and by that time, it'll be clear that we'll need the extra oversight that a high profile requires.
Give me the alternate. It's hard to judge the possible outcomes of the scenario w/o seeing the scenario. I think some of the comments indicate that people would be less opposed to promoting IT, depending on the proposal.
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
This is an interesting comment. If the ARRC and the ITFest get as popular as the Runoffs, then I submit that any reasoning for not going 'National' is 100% moot.
Popularity breeds competition. Competition breeds money. Those who fear going National for so many of the reasons having been used, ought to be hoping highly desirable and prolific IT-specific events don't gain momentum. Right?
Last edited:
I couldn't agree more.
How would higher entry fees not effect everyone? How would less track time or more hassles not effect everyone?
Don't get me wrong Josh, when I think about IT going national, my feeling is... why not. I really don't think it's a bad thing. I never understood why it was a regional only class in the first place. (although a while back someone explained it to me in a historical context) And it sure would be cool someday to say 'I'm national champ'.
What strikes me is, am I the only one who thinks it ironic that the regional only class is one of the most popular? And isn't it odd that IT cars of today look so much like prodution cars of the seventies? I see spherical bearings and open ECUs (and I like both and agree with there inclusion) as sure signs that IT will someday become production. Will national status speed that transition? I don't know. But I also feel that as IT gets more expensive and complex (productionized?) some other grassroots style class will spring up to take it's place. I sort of feel this is the natural progression of racing. My attitude is enjoy it now while it's cool and find something else when it get f'ed up. I also feel production and GT will eventualy wilt on the vine. What I don't understand is why WE can't fix it. It would take some intestinal fortitude and a few folks would feel the pain the greatest but, it needs done.
JoshS
New member
I guess I just disagree that it would lead to higher regional entry fees (because that's not where the protests will be happening), nor do I agree that there would be any less track time.
There's a big difference between the spherical bearings and open ECUs and what has happened in Production. In IT, these things aren't being added for a single car. They are being added across the entire category, basically to keep up with modern technology and to keep the category more realistic for modern vehicles. In Production, the real issues, as I understand them, are competition adjustments, where one car gets an allowance but the rest do not. Then everyone else says, "He gets it, I want it too!" and it just all snowballs.
But I think we generally agree.
shwah
New member
I wouldn't say I want to change IT, I just want IT to be able to run nationally. Actually, I specifically don't want to change IT, or it's rule set, or the reputation for stability.
I know that there are arguments stating that forces we cannot control will force changes on the category, but I guess I just don't buy them.
shwah
New member
Good point.
I actually beleive that we as the IT racing community have an opportunity to provide a case study on how to create a true, desireable national championship in the IT Triple Crown. Regardless of whether IT becomes a national class, the ITTC has provided a foundation for crowning a champion that requires both regular participation locally and running against the stiffest field possible twice in a year, all at different tracks. I eliminatest the car du jour, accentuates the importance of local series (and should improve local participation), provides more equal opportunity to West Coasters than they have had in 3-4 decades with the runoffs.
Of course if this is the case - the same conditions would exist that chicken little claims would make the IT sky fall if it gained national status. Would it be more acceptable because it was home grown?
One way or the other, the level of competition level is increasing, and that is something that I think is great
For some of the reasons, yes. For the ones involving management of the National program by Topeka and what involvement with the National system - as it now sits and w/o a major overhaul - might do to the category, no.
My biggest beef is with greater involvement from Topeka w/o some demonstration that they have the will and ability to fix the deep problems with the National system.
lateapex911
Super Moderator
I ain't making a call on Jake he is holding his cards close to the vest (although I suspect his say National on them when exposed. (i'll get called on the carpet for that bit of opinion!)
On the carpet Mister!
Kidding!
I'm holding my cards close because....I don't know the question. So I won't answer.
Really. I will however, debate points that I think are moot, or based in rhetoric or chicken little fear.
And i read with interest, and I've learned a bit about peoples thoughts. And, honestly, I'm pleased with the bottom line, which seems to indicate that the ITAC has done good.
And that's a heck of a lot different than where we were 4 or 5 years ago....
One thing to consider.
Is IT the best place for most new racers to start in SCCA? I think it is for the most part. Not as much riding on the outcome and a newb can fit in. Now up in the NE there may be more high pressure in their race program then another area, but even up there I have to think it has a different culture then most of the National Classes. five or six years ago SM was a great place to start racing. I don't think it is any more, IT is much better. SCCA needs an IT like class always. When IT goes to The RunOffs there won't be a class like that. Maybe in the NE the Reg. programs will still be viable, but in other parts of the country I don't see it. The class participants will strive to attain as high a bar as allowed almost across the board. If the RunOffs is the high point I would suggest most all will go for that or go home (to other race bodies.) My opinion, but one I am pretty dang confident of. (and this ain't Chicken Little stuff. IT would still be around it would just be another Tin Top trophy chasing place to race.)
Is IT the best place for most new racers to start in SCCA? I think it is for the most part. Not as much riding on the outcome and a newb can fit in. Now up in the NE there may be more high pressure in their race program then another area, but even up there I have to think it has a different culture then most of the National Classes. five or six years ago SM was a great place to start racing. I don't think it is any more, IT is much better. SCCA needs an IT like class always. When IT goes to The RunOffs there won't be a class like that. Maybe in the NE the Reg. programs will still be viable, but in other parts of the country I don't see it. The class participants will strive to attain as high a bar as allowed almost across the board. If the RunOffs is the high point I would suggest most all will go for that or go home (to other race bodies.) My opinion, but one I am pretty dang confident of. (and this ain't Chicken Little stuff. IT would still be around it would just be another Tin Top trophy chasing place to race.)
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
I don't think the 'National Program' is broken, I just think the classes that used to be popular, aren't any more. Let's agree for arguments sake that has to do with 2 things: 1. The year to year monkeying the CRB does with comp adjustments and 2. the aging of the cars in the class. Integrating IT won't solve anything with respect to that. They need more popular classes, not to keep old undersubscribed ones.
I am just not convinced the CRB would monkey with IT if it went National.
I think there is more than just those 2 issues that is wrong with the National Program, but this thread isn't about "fixing" it. Maybe we need a thread about that, especially since we might be part of it and because many of the issues about moving IT to National are not about IT, but about larger issues.
which ones and why not?
JoshS
New member
Yeah, I just disagree. It's not that IT is the best place for new racers -- it's that REGIONAL RACING is the best place for new racers. New racers will be drawn to showroom stock cars, IT cars, Formula cars, whatever floats their boat ... and they are all available at the regional level, where there is typically lower pressure and less on the line.
To try to pigeonhole one ruleset into being the best place for new racers just doesn't ring true for me.
Out here, SM is clearly where new racers start. First of all, there are LOTS of rentals available, it's much easier to put together a rental deal than it is in IT. Sounds like that's not the case elsewhere. Second of all, there is competition at all levels of driving skill, just due to the large fields. Probably the second best place for newbies to start in San Francisco Region is in Spec Racer Ford ... for the same reasons. Huge fields, easy rentals.
But again, the high pressure, high bucks is not in a ruleset, it's in the level of competition, and that tends to occur at National racers. The very same ruleset tends to have a lower level of those things at regional races.
The bummer is that there's no way to prove this principle by looking at IT, since IT isn't available for national races!
>> If we decide to disband the club tomorrow, then that's what they are suppose to do because we are the Club. If they do know better, then they are suppose to convince us of that. ...The committees and boards setup by the BoD responsibility is to serve the mission defined by the BoD. For example, the ITAC should recommend what it thinks is best for IT and it doesn't matter what that does to GT. The CRB should recommend what it thinks is best for Club Racing and to heck what that does to Solo. Etc. It's the job of the BoD to weight/balance the competing interests of the membership.
I wish I didn't have 25 years of watching drivers put their own personal competitive interests WAY ahead of the health of their category or the Club Racing program, so I could still believe that we can give people what they want AND do the best thing for the programs. I think you've got the committee/board responsibilities really well defined here but member input is, as often as not, biased toward what is good for the individual rather than what is good for the club.
I know that's going to get some people riled up at me: "Why isn't Knestis representing OUR views on the ITAC?"
Because "the ITAC should recommend what it thinks is best for IT."
K
I wish I didn't have 25 years of watching drivers put their own personal competitive interests WAY ahead of the health of their category or the Club Racing program, so I could still believe that we can give people what they want AND do the best thing for the programs. I think you've got the committee/board responsibilities really well defined here but member input is, as often as not, biased toward what is good for the individual rather than what is good for the club.
I know that's going to get some people riled up at me: "Why isn't Knestis representing OUR views on the ITAC?"
Because "the ITAC should recommend what it thinks is best for IT."
K
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
Can a good ITAC member represent what the membership wants within debate on a topic AND vote the other way because they think that is the way to vote for any number of reasons (good/bad for IT - good/bad for Club Racing, etc) or is the job of a good ITAC member to just throw his vote behind a pure local majority on a topic?