IT National Racing

Yes, there are folks who think jeez...I don't want to race "National"...those drivers are soooo competitive and will protest you at the drop of a hat, and they are all direct descendents of Nouvolari, Moss, Fangio, Clark, Donahue, Gurney, Andretti, Stuck, ... sorry, just like anywhere in life there are nice guys and not, good and bad,...quick and...not so much.

Really ? ...I can only assume those folks have not driven Nationals. I am in full agreement with Jeff on this topic and maybe this is deeper engrained in folks than I had ever thought.

Which is harder on the newbie or "reluctant" first time "National"(even though there would't be this distinction) racer. A 16 car ITB field or a 3 car XX field...even mixed in with 4 other classes, just like they would be at a "Regional" ???? It is far harder in ITB and for the most part the drivers are not "Better", I just went to the Glen National and saw a former/still part time "REGIONAL" driver clean up in small bore......I have run plenty of both events and can say there are Regional drivers who are every bit as good as National...especially in the IT ranks. Furthermore, 3 of the drivers that I raced with in the NE in ITC in the late 90's are either now Pro Driving Instructors or ran Pro races, in my days of GT4 and GTL Nationally....none.

Also, If you are not quite up to speed or reluctant, there is nothing stopping you from giving up your qualifying position and starting at the back of the pack so that you can ease into things..when the pack comes, get off line and stay there...then resume your training.

Nationals..won't be...they will be "Club Races"...the "special" race event idea may be an option, and I believe it already is...."The BFG Super Tour ", but it still could seem like National vs. Regionals, and I wonder if "National" guys would still just run those events to qualify for RO's? Maybe ? However, I suppose if IT was a part of the program it may still work and help the club overall? I think maybe only 2 of these Marque events are needed per Div. so that they could be promoted as such.

JZ
 
Last edited:
Maybe I don't get the picture, but I don't see any difference between Regional and National races. The fast guys are still fast, and the slow guys are still slow.

At our last Rational race, the overall winner and fastest car in our run group was a Regional driver driving an EP Caterham with a 1:56 fast lap. The slowest was a regional SRX7, running a 2:44 fast lap. FORTY EIGHT seconds per lap slower!

But wait.. there's more!

Look at the STU National results. Fast lap was a 2:00 and the slowest guy ran a 2:28. And that's JUST the National drivers.

Combine the Regional and National cars and the top 15 of the 34 were within 10 sec. 8 out of 34 cars were more than 20 seconds off the pace. Four were 30 sec off the pace.

My point? Within our region, there's really no telltale difference between Reg and Nat drivers.
 
A trend I've noticed with IT guys is that the closer you get to the front, the more you want IT to "go National." Natural progression I guess, and some of it is driven by the belief that the guys that race up front with me in ITS in the SEDiv are some of the best there are (just like with IT in the NEDiv, or at Summit).

When I was a solid mid packer, I had less interest in it and was worried about how it might affect my class. Valid viewpoint at the time, but at least now I see some of the attractiveness of being a Runoffs class.

Always something more to achieve I guess.
 
To me it's not so much that there is a huge difference in competitiveness between regional-only v. national-only drivers; we've had (still have) some drivers racing in the MARRS (and SARRC, NARRC, etc.) series who are every bit as talented/fast as any driver to have been to the Runoffs. I think it's more about the atmosphere at a regional event v. a national; national events (at least the ones I've worked) just seem to be so much more...serious, for lack of a better word.

At the regional level you're racing with a lot of the same guys at almost every event, so there develops a sense of camaradarie that I don't believe you get at the national level. That carries onto the track too; I think most of us are more cordial(courteous?) to drivers we know personally than we are with total strangers, even if we don't realize it, or do it intentionally. And yeah, you are still going to have your share of dickheads at the regional level, but even then at least they're known, and people quickly learn who they are and how to deal with them.

I know for some guys that doesn't mean much, and I'm sure those are the ones who would be just fine with dropping the distinction between national and regional. But I think for a lot of guys a race weekend is as much a social event as a competition, and those are the ones who I think would just as soon let the "serious" racers have their own events.
 
Well, Earl, that might be the way it is for you, but it's not like that for every Regional guy. I've raced with you, the guys in Ohio, Atlanta, Virginia, Upper New York, and of course, New England.
There wasn't a single race that I didn't know somebody, and have a good time socially as well as on the track.
 
Sorry,
The perception that national guys aren't nice..is wrong and are not social...is wrong. The runoffs at mid Ohio were like the Woodstock of roadracing.

Actually, this brings forth an even more important reason to combine....to
end this class system.

Jz
 
Butch Kummer said:
I fully realize there are parts of the country where regional races/classes are more hotly contested than many national classes. Of course there are also parts of the country where regional racing is dying.

All I'm saying is we need to have a place for the newbie driver to get her/his feet wet and gain experience without having to deal with a pack of "serious" drivers passing her/him on the inside at Turn One. I get calls after just about every event from drivers wanting me to move their class to a slower run group because they're driving in their mirrors all the time. Sometimes, however, it's because of people in their own class. Yes we can tell them to cinch down their belts and deal with it, but they can also tell us they'd rather spend their money elsewhere.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the point you're making in regard to the slower drivers and market choices ... Maybe the solution would be to bring back ( or enforce ) with no exceptions the 105% rule.

With the number of DE's out there , it should be EZ for a driver to get to within 105% ( or whatever ) of the class pole time before he/she goes racing. That way the beginning guys/gals know what they need to be able to run x time before they go racing . Maybe we should give the folks that don't meet the 105% time a credit for the next event ?????

In Texas ( granted , not the hotbed of regional racing ) we're running Rationals. I think I've run them all and from my perspective we've had few problems ... Not even close to as bad as " Wings & Things " national races in the mid 90's

I think all of us agree that it's a complex issue with few simple solutions.
 
Face it, it's about immortality. Win the Runoffs and your name in inscribed in a book somewhere that years from now, some people will ask, "Remember old so-and-so. Boy, could he drive." This community holds Paul Newman in much higher esteem for his national championships than his Oscars. For one, I'd love to be remembered as a National Champion.

Russ
 
I see a lot of discussion of how there is little difference in talent between national and regional drivers and I agree. Talent is one thing, but dollars is another. The one thing I haven't seen in this discussion is that fact that the cost of being competitive in nearly all cases is substantially higher in National races. The differences between top level cars in regional vs. national races isn't the drivers, it's (primarily) the money spent on them.

I ran Nationals for a few years in a mid-level FP car. I got a few decent finishes, but I didn't have a prayer of winning a race (unless none of the fast guys showed up or they all broke). It was entertaining to do, but when the best I could hope for was a third or fourth, I decided to go back to IT. There, I can run and have a reasonable chance of winning, for less money than I was spending on a National program.

At this point, I'm sure some of you are going to say, "You just don't like the competition" or "That's just the cost of being competitive." Well, my view is, I don't care to spend $50,000 a year to go racing if that's what it takes to be competitive (and many people couldn't afford it even if they wanted to). Yes, I recognize that someone could decide they want to spend $50,000 on an IT7 program and I'd have a harder time. But the chances of that are pretty small. And since I'm in what is effectively a spec class, spending a lot of extra money isn't going to get nearly as much benefit as in most classes. But except for spec classes (SM, SRF and FE) or sort-of-spec classes like FV and FF (and IT7), spending lots more money generally equates to lots more speed. And I don't buy the contention that if IT went National, the price of being competitive wouldn't go up, at least for running in Nationals. Nor do I buy the idea that regional racers are just as fast as national racers. If you have a regional racer who is faster than your national racers, it almost certainly means that you have a 10/10ths regional car beating an 8/10ths national car in that class.

My point is, National races provide a playground for people who are willing to spend whatever it takes to be competitive, or are willing to run around at mid-pack or further back. Regional races provide a playground for serious racers who would like to be reasonably competitive, but can't, or don't want to, spend the money it takes to run a National level program. Eliminate the National/Regional split and you give most of those racers the choice of: a) spend more money (and possibly a bunch more money) to stay competitive, b) be satisfied with running midpack or c) leave. Racing competitively is already too expensive as it is, so I don't think that eliminating a lower cost venue is a good idea. Let the really serious racers who are willing to spend serious money run Nationals. Let the serious racers who don't, run Regionals. If someone is willing to spend a National budget to win regional races, you can't stop them, but I'll take that chance.

Let IT run Nationals? Sounds like a good idea to me. But eliminating Regionals, particularly on divisions where both Regional and National programs are reasonably healthy, no way. For the divisions who have problems filling fields for either or both, running Rationals may make sense. But forcing everyone to play in the National sandbox seems a bad idea to me.
 
Lots of great ideas here. My vote would be to keep it simple, treat IT like a "National" class. Don't eliminate National and Regional races. New drivers would have a safe place to learn at the regional level and those of us who want to move up would have the opportunity to compete at the National level. Done!:023:

Runoffs: National top 10% ITR, ITS, ITA, ITB, IT7, ITC. Group accordingly (2 Run groups?).
 
Last edited:
Here are my quick & random thoughts/experiences, as I'm now quite familiar with both.

- The talent of the absolute best drivers, out front and always winning, between regional and national racing is almost nothing.
- In national racing, a larger percentage of the field is made up of damn good drivers in damn good cars.
- The terrible-ness of the lappers, both in lap times and inability to get out of the damn way, is actually worse in national racing.
- The personality and attitude of national racers is the exact same thing as regional racers. We're all the same - just "racer guys" racing.
- In national racing, yes, there is more at stake. The unbelievably generous support I now get from Honda Performance Development, Hoosier, and others companies, I never would've received had I stayed in regional racing. And yes, when dealing with potential sponsors or opportunities, saying that you're a Runoffs Champion carries with it about 1000x more power than saying you're an ARRC Champion.
- If you're mind, nerves, and skills are "ARRC tough", they're already "Runoffs tough".
- Over the past three years that I've been national racing, on average national racers seem to do less complaining about their classes/rules/changes than regional racers do.
 
R2 Racing said:
Here are my quick & random thoughts/experiences, as I'm now quite familiar with both.

- The talent of the absolute best drivers, out front and always winning, between regional and national racing is almost nothing.
- In national racing, a larger percentage of the field is made up of damn good drivers in damn good cars.
- The terrible-ness of the lappers, both in lap times and inability to get out of the damn way, is actually worse in national racing.
- The personality and attitude of national racers is the exact same thing as regional racers. We're all the same - just "racer guys" racing.
- In national racing, yes, there is more at stake. The unbelievably generous support I now get from Honda Performance Development, Hoosier, and others companies, I never would've received had I stayed in regional racing. And yes, when dealing with potential sponsors or opportunities, saying that you're a Runoffs Champion carries with it about 1000x more power than saying you're an ARRC Champion.
- If you're mind, nerves, and skills are "ARRC tough", they're already "Runoffs tough".
- Over the past three years that I've been national racing, on average national racers seem to do less complaining about their classes/rules/changes than regional racers do.
Click to expand...


they always taught us in drivers school that we were to hold our line and the fast cars were suppose to pass us backmarkers safely. so I hold the line and a ssm miata puts me in the wall at VIR. it ain't that the backmarkers won't get out of the way, it's the feeling by the fast guys that it's their God given right to the whole track and that if I ain't fast, I just shouldn't be out there interfering with there race.

Russ
 
What is wrong with this idea:

All GCR classes at 'Runoff Qualifier' races (formerly Nationals)
All GCR classes + Regional only classes at 'Regional' races

Top 20 CGR classes in average participation get their own run group at the Runoffs (calculated from RQR's) , bottom X get combined run groups with split starts proveided they meet the GCR mandated minumums.

It seems so simple to me but I must be missing something huge.
 
Weighing in on the regional vs. national driver debate, I've always assumed that national drivers were better, and ONLY because they have more $$$ to pay for things like extra track time and private instruction.
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
What is wrong with this idea:

All GCR classes at 'Runoff Qualifier' races (formerly Nationals)
All GCR classes + Regional only classes at 'Regional' races

Top 20 CGR classes in average participation get their own run group at the Runoffs (calculated from RQR's) , bottom X get combined run groups with split starts proveided they meet the GCR mandated minumums.

It seems so simple to me but I must be missing something huge.
Click to expand...

You know I like it.
The ONLY issue I see is what you mentioned earlier: logistics of fitting the 100 pound race schedule into the 90 pound Lime Rock (etc) sack.
 
RedMisted said:
Weighing in on the regional vs. national driver debate, I've always assumed that national drivers were better, and ONLY because they have more $$$ to pay for things like extra track time and private instruction.
Click to expand...

...and you know what they say about assumptions.

My wife's made similar assumptions about SCCA-licensed Regional drivers vs. locally-licensed (Waterford etc) drivers...:blink: Fortunately, she still watches her mirrors!

Trust in Allah, but tie up yer camel... ;)
 
Andy Bettencourt said:
What is wrong with this idea:

All GCR classes at 'Runoff Qualifier' races (formerly Nationals)
All GCR classes + Regional only classes at 'Regional' races

Top 20 CGR classes in average participation get their own run group at the Runoffs (calculated from RQR's) , bottom X get combined run groups with split starts proveided they meet the GCR mandated minumums.

It seems so simple to me but I must be missing something huge.
Click to expand...

It's perfect but it doesn't have enough "gimmes" in it for the entitled among the membership.

K
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top