ITAC News.

[gran racing]

and we feel that a static process and mostly unchanging rules are "the rock" of IT.

I've often felt like at least some members of the CRB really hurt ITB and other IT classes. I thought multiple rounds of ITAC members have done a great job but somehow back room politics got in the way. Or at least that is the perception that I and many others had.

I will admit the whole multi-valve and Accord debacle still leaves a sour taste in my mouth even though I sold the Prelude and am in ITA. Still appreciate the efforts of the current and past ITACs.

 

[JeffYoung]

I've often felt like at least some members of the CRB really hurt ITB and other IT classes. I thought multiple rounds of ITAC members have done a great job but somehow back room politics got in the way. Or at least that is the perception that I and many others had.

I will admit the whole multi-valve and Accord debacle still leaves a sour taste in my mouth even though I sold the Prelude and am in ITA. Still appreciate the efforts of the current and past ITACs.

Reasonable reaction to that situation in my view.

HOwever, I'd say this. The vast majority of classifications get done objectively using the process with no fuss. Those are the ones you guys don't "see" - not that you should. The Process WORKS.

We go through classifications so much faster now than we did 4 years ago it isn't even funny. Bing, bang, boom, done. Why? We have an organized Process for doing so.

The problem cars -- and there have only be a few, the RX8, the Miata, the Accord, the Audi, the MR2 -- are the ones that seem to get all the attention, while 100 others go through and get classed and race with no issue.

 

[shwah]

Yea, remember way back when and we were discussing whether IT should be National or not? ANd some thought it could help the club, and that regional IT would be fine after the big guns went national, while others said it would ruin IT?

it's not exactly the same, but we will see how a version of that plays out.

Yeah that was quite a discussion. I believe that IT would be in a better place for this current changing landscape if it were the popular national class that it would have quickly become had that transition taken place.

 

[JeffYoung]

That's very clear now. I wish it had been clearer back "then".

 

[Knestis]

It was pretty clear to me.

I'm not proud of the fact that I was right but to be fair, it wasn't until LP Prod got its rudder pointed in the right direction and STL came along that it became truly apparent what they would do to IT participation.

It would be interesting to go back to some of those discussions now and see how many of those people who hollered that "going National will KILL Improved Touring" are still even racing in the category.

Oh, well.

And there is exactly NO lack of clarity in my mind about the individuals on the CRB who were to blame for ITB being plugged up, process-wise, for so long. And the system went more generally pear-shaped only on the heels of those ITB-specific personal objections. It was an embarrassing period for the Club in my view - or would have been if the membership were paying attention and knew what was going on.

K

EDIT - Grab a beer or six. www.improvedtouring.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23946

 

[JeffYoung]

Interesting thread.

In looking back at it, it sure seemed like a lot of the IT guys opposed to National status would have changed their minds if we had gotten rid of national/regional distinctions and just sent the top 24 to the Boreoffs.

We got part of that (no more distinction) and didn't get the other (IT as one of the 24 going to the Boreoffs).

 

[Gregg]

It would be interesting to go back to some of those discussions now and see how many of those people who hollered that "going National will KILL Improved Touring" are still even racing in the category.

Yes it would, but it would also be interesting to see how many drivers have left the category and run exclusively in LP prod or STL at Nationals / Majors.

I can name a few east of the Mississippi (and sometimes the circumstances, such as a destroyed IT car, influenced the decision), but I'd be surprised if the nationwide total was any more than just a blip on the radar.

 

[gran racing]

I'm with ya Gregg. I still think that not going National was the right thing for IT. Higher perceived status would have brought even more bucks into the category. Still amazes me when I hear about a $50,000 Spec Miata build and am not surprised. There's also a reason why SM2 and SSM in some parts of the country (WDR for one) have become more popular.

IT is still strong. Racing overall took a hit, not just IT.

 

[dickita15]

That proposal to make IT national classes and send the top 24 top classes in participation to the runoffs was part of a proposal from the national racing task force maybe 8 years ago. They laid out a plan with 25 or so points. Only one item from the proposal was adopted. I will buy a beer if anyone knows what that was.
The resistance to change is strong in the SCCA. In the last three years or so we have seen some progress on that front. There is much still to do but I am hopeful.
SCCA is the best amateur motorsports organization in the country and it is about time we started acting like it.

 

[Knestis]

Yes it would, but it would also be interesting to see how many drivers have left the category and run exclusively in LP prod or STL at Nationals / Majors.

I can name a few east of the Mississippi (and sometimes the circumstances, such as a destroyed IT car, influenced the decision), but I'd be surprised if the nationwide total was any more than just a blip on the radar.

Indeed.

Some people who had strong opinions didn't stick around anyway - massive turnover is a large part of the reason I don't put a lot of stock in the "what I want" lobbying that drives our decisions.

Some of us - yes, us, me included - decided to not come back to IT when it became necessary to make a decision. National status was only part of my immediate decision but it was a factor. More influential is my understanding that STL and LP prod are still relatively weak but the will grow. IT won't at this point because OTHER people are being influenced by IT being relegated to Regional-only forever, among other factors of course.

If I'm going to spend bucks to build a new car (and I had no interest in rebuilding around a chassis approaching vintage eligibility within its anticipated lifespan) I'm going to do it in a category with more of a future.

It compounds. And one blip on the radar can be the first of a whole squadron.

K

 

[Chip42]

They laid out a plan with 25 or so points. Only one item from the proposal was adopted. I will buy a beer if anyone knows what that was.

participation floor for runoffs eligibility?

I don't think there's any anti IT sentiment rampant in the CRB or higher, though I do think that IT is liked better when it's quiet then when there's a controversy. there are at least 2 BoD that race IT, and a few ex IT guys in the CRB - the category is not scoffed at. It's pretty obvious that STL was largely a way to give it cars a path to the ruboffs. Not just the "IT cars may compete" clause, but the evolutionary path solves what many saw as a problem of regional status. LP prod was always sold as a way to "move up" from IT too, though the intention was to save prod (worked) the "draw from that bunch of farm league guys (IT)" mentality is not unique to our club.

it's important to the "path" established by those classes that IT STAY as a "the minors." Gotta have good minor leagues to make this work. so the PTB is most likely NOT wishing to see IT going anywhere. that's a good thing, IMHO.

what does the future of IT look like? I can't say farther than a few months down the line, but I certainly don't want to change anything from the core of the rules. that's up to the people who choose to stay there more than those who choose to leave. there is an interesting contrast between the goals of "farm league" and "category worth winning in its own right." only key I know to success is that the participation has to be bottom heavy in order to make it attractive to join and to have a population to pull from. assuming IT is "the bottom," SCCA risks loosing that.

 

[lateapex911]

That proposal to make IT national classes and send the top 24 top classes in participation to the runoffs was part of a proposal from the national racing task force maybe 8 years ago. They laid out a plan with 25 or so points. Only one item from the proposal was adopted. I will buy a beer if anyone knows what that was.
The resistance to change is strong in the SCCA. In the last three years or so we have seen some progress on that front. There is much still to do but I am hopeful.
SCCA is the best amateur motorsports organization in the country and it is about time we started acting like it.

So, shall we alert your local liquor store?? Cuz you didn't say you'd buy the person who guessed right a beer....

As a guy who was in the trenches, I can certainly attest to the resistance of change. maddening.

 

[lateapex911]

participation floor for runoffs eligibility?

. It's pretty obvious that STL was largely a way to give IT cars a path to the ruboffs. Not just the "IT cars may compete" clause, but the evolutionary path solves what many saw as a problem of regional status. LP prod was always sold as a way to "move up" from IT too, though the intention was to save prod (worked) the "draw from that bunch of farm league guys (IT)" mentality is not unique to our club.

Well, I think that STL was created so that CERTAIN TYPES of "IT like" cars (A very narrow window, actually) could see the "big time", but the category (class actually) is managed completely differently, and due to the weight setting method, will always be a class for a couple elite hp to specific output machines.

Its not IT. It's ONE class, not 5.
It is having it's numbers propped up by double dipping SMs.
IF the top 24* had been the path chosen and IT was eligible, the numbers would have had a couple of IT classes qualify, and not due to SM numbers.

And, STL going to be pretty pricy to build a top dog. Engine allowances are pretty open, so that means you will likely pay. Yes, certain swaps can be cheap, but others not so much. Brakes, the restrictions might keep uber expensive parts at bay, but it's an allowance that must be taken, so most will want to 'get the most', and spend some time doing it. Chassis allowances are more liberal than IT, and the cage rules will support super stiff springs, which need bucks up dampers. Yes, you can spend a fortune on dampers for IT, but the payback just isn't there, if the chassis is undamped and bending. It will be reasonable to build a solid car, but when more people decide to go after the big prize, the costs WILL ramp up, and there WILL be a tangible benefit to the high costs..

IT would have had this happen (more than it has seen in the past or currently) too. It's the nature of the beast. Popularity breeds cost increases. But at some point there are diminishing returns, and I think IT has that point (for most cars,- car choice is of course, key) at a lower level.

I'm not sure I buy the "farm league/move up" aspect. LOTs of people want to race a prep level, and race it seriously. Lots of people aren't of the mind to swap cars and classes "moving up the ladder". They'd rather move up the ladder in one car.

IT is a popular prep level. If you want proof, look at LP prod. Suddenly, Prod is hot. I bet a full prep prod car hasn't been built in yeeears. LP builds are pretty close to IT builds.
IF IT had been a National category, had the same perks and contingencies as Prod, I suggest we'd see a whole different landscape. Prod was in a world of hurt 5 or so years ago, and somebody woke up and came up with a way to stuff the genie back in the bottle.

*The 24 thing was for Speed TV...but that ship has sailed.

Also, people warned that if IT went National, it would die, (Or be ruined) because nobody would want to race if there were big money builds winning all the time. I think that looking at SM proves that wrong. Lots of guys race and they know they won't be winning races with their used up cheap cars. Why would IT be different?

It's water under the bridge now, but it would sure be interesting to see how things would look if IT went national, and reduced the 5 yr limit to 3....and classed interesting cars, and it happened before we lost the SPEED TV contract... I always thought newer IT level cars would attract new racers to SCCA better than any of the classes they televised.

 

[Knestis]

Sorry - "major league" vs. "minor league" isn't a very good analogy. I don't understand in the infield fly rule but last I checked, both AAA and the Bigs played to the same rules.

And if there's desire for a pathway or pipeline, there's no easier way to move than with a car in the SAME class.

Arguments based on "controlling costs" - certainly within a class - simply are NOT valid. The only thing that increases cost is the desire to be competitive, and popularity of a class increases competition. The only way to keep a lid on costs, absent a REAL claim rule, is to limit popularity. I think we've accomplished that in the past few years with IT. Sadly.

And I'm sorry if it looked like I was suggesting an anti-IT bias among CRB members. There wasn't. In fact, the problem was that they liked it too much, with an investment in the status quo.

K

 

[Ron Earp]

It's pretty obvious that STL was largely a way to give it cars a path to the ruboffs. Not just the "IT cars may compete" clause, but the evolutionary path solves what many saw as a problem of regional status.

What Jake said. STL gives a few select cars, a very narrow portion of IT, a path to the National SCCA scene. But the majority of IT is left to be regional. STL could have encompassed all of the IT cars with a heavy rules rewrite but that clearly wasn't the goal and would have created sweeping changes in the SCCA.

With my limited knowledge of the regional and national classes in the SCCA I think it would have been better had IT made a transition to the national program. That would have effectively ended the national/regional distinction and class system in the SCCA and produced a more cohesive club. It would have been a difficult transition for the club to make but I'm sure it could have been accomplished.

Of course I didn't feel that way back in 2008, but I was also only three years into my racing hobby at that point and knew very little about how the SCCA operated and even less about its long term goals. I know a bit more now, but not much. It is still unclear to me the logic behinds the SCCA's regional and national racing programs. Looks like to me there ought to be classes, regional championships, and a national championship. Largest subscribed classes get to go to the national championship, nice and easy.

 

[Greg Amy]

Yes it would, but it would also be interesting to see how many drivers have left the category and run exclusively in LP prod or STL at Nationals / Majors.

I can name a few east of the Mississippi (and sometimes the circumstances, such as a destroyed IT car, influenced the decision), but I'd be surprised if the nationwide total was any more than just a blip on the radar.

Ditto. From what I've seen, attending events and intently watching results, there are very few, if any, people that have left IT for STL. The class has allowed select IT competitors to also compete in STL, but I honestly can't think of any that made the swap*. Hell, SM has lost more competitors to STL than ITx...

- GA

* Gregg, feeling a finger pointing my way. Not so. I was done with ITx after my NX adventures, as I was unhappy with the outlook of classifications of the two cars I had a choice with at the time (ITA NX2000 and ITS Integra GSR). Good or bad, agree or disagree with that point of view, I had already made the conscious decision to discontinue any serious participation in the category. This "STL thing" just dropped in my lap at a most advantageous time...

 

[Chip42]

The farm league analogy was simply my attempt to point out that viewing IT as a stock of drivers / car to feed other classes hurts IT. assuming a limited number of drivers and the sort of obvious "evolutionary" system, the end result of a healthy ST and LP prod HAS to be, largely, the result of transition FROM other classes. I'm sure SS/T refugees have also moved in, and we know some entries have been added, so it's certainly not a perfect analogy. I also treat IT as a class that is itself the end goal.

to Greg's post - I see more SM cars moving to IT and ST than IT to SM. not counting double dippers. that's down here. up there it may and likely is different.

 

[gran racing]

Yes, popularity drives monies spent in a category but it goes a step further than that. A category can cater to different groups of people. Same reason why more people with much larger budgets in IT gravitate towards ITR than on the other side, ITB. Certainly ITC.

 

[mossaidis]

Looks like to me there ought to be classes, regional championships, and a national championship. Largest subscribed classes get to go to the national championship, nice and easy.

That's the magic sauce. "nice and easy". Lord knows that finishing at the top 5 in regional championships are partly dictated by just showing up.

 

[Gregg]

* Gregg, feeling a finger pointing my way. Not so. I was done with ITx after my NX adventures, as I was unhappy with the outlook of classifications of the two cars I had a choice with at the time (ITA NX2000 and ITS Integra GSR). Good or bad, agree or disagree with that point of view, I had already made the conscious decision to discontinue any serious participation in the category. This "STL thing" just dropped in my lap at a most advantageous time...

Actually, I was talking specifically about Kirk. I could be wrong but I venture that his decision to go exclusively to STL was made far easier knowing that getting back on track would require a new race car.