NARRC 07 Poll...

[RSTPerformance]

Feel free to type in some comments, I would hope that word would get back to the members of the NARRC comittee and they will review the comments posted below.

What is my motivation of this poll: Give feedback to the members whom I feel have made bad decisions, either becuase of political influences and/or because they have recieved poor feedback from other people influencing what I feel are bad decisions.

Raymond

 

[TimM ITB]

Well, you can probably guess where my comments will be going on this. I was going to run for the NARRC series this year, not having read the rules first! Now, with family, business and ONE OTHER EVENT that I wanted to run this year outside of the region (the Cincy IT fest), I simply won't be able to make enough races to have a shot at it this year. The major problem with the 2007 rules IMHO is that you are mandated to run SPECIFIC events at LRP in order to have a shot at the double points. I can NOT make the August race, so because I potentially miss ONE race I lose a chance of the double points. And the double points are significant if, like me, you were only planning on running in the minimum number of NARRC races (8) AND running at least 3 tracks (for me this year LRP, NHIS, and WGI). The other problem is the simple budget versus seat time that LRP has versus all of the other tracks. I took a quick look tonight and the double regional at Pocono in May is $300; historically the doubles at NHIS are approx $275; and the SINGLE day events at LRP are approx $285?

I haven't thought this all the way through yet, but I normally try not to complain about a situation (RE: Andy's comments about trying to increase participation numbers at LRP for specific Regions) without having a positive, constructive idea as to how to fix it. I don't have that at this time, but I will say that rather than creating a dis-incentive (as I believe that we have now with requirements to run specific races or else lose a SIGNIFICANT opportunity to win the NARRC championship), I hope that the future will bring INCENTIVES to run races at all the tracks, regardless of the dates. Why not something simple like not being able to count more than 3 races from any one of the 4 tracks? As an example, I could run 3 races at NHIS, 2 races at Pocono, 2 races at WGI, 2 races at LRP, and then the NARRC at LRP? 9 races and the NARRC's. All 4 tracks. Or, I could skip Pocono or WGI and run just 8 total including the NARRC's??

Anyway, just rambling now.

Thanks, Tim M

PS: And Dave G - the Cincy fest is on my schedule. I am going to run WGI late July, truck my "stuff" out to OH, and then fly back and forth to Boston. Bought my tickets the other day..$135 round trip!! Cheaper than driving!!

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

Tim,

With all due respect, you really shouldn't be in contention to win a NARRC Championship without attending Pocono. That 12 point bonus is no different than any of this. AND it's on Mother's Day weekend. That is a tough one.

What we need is a group of people to sit and listen to our NARRC Reps. 1st off, NER guys are new this year. Both a new RE and a new Comp Chair. If there are enough people interested enough in this topic, we should request an open forum at NHIS. Then you can all understand the factors and issues weighing on the decision. Let's make sure we are educated before we go sh!t-house.

 

[TimM ITB]

Andy, you're right about being educated before "going sh!thouse", and I probably shouldn't have made such a stink about this - after all, it is OUR club and if there is something - anything - that I don't like about it, it's my responsibility to get in touch with those that are VOLUNTEERING their time to help run our club and our activities and get the facts, then offer opinions, ideas, etc. Personally, it's my frustration showing through as I had prepared my schedule, made my committments, spent some money, etc based on 2006 NARRC schedule and rules. "Not reading the instructions" gets me again!!!

As to your other comment about "not being in contention" for a NARRC championship without running Pocono, my premise there was that if you used the idea of not counting more than 3 races from any ONE track, then you could still run 8 events - the most events accounted for under NARRC rules (3 at NHIS, 2 at WGI, 2 regionals at LRP and the NARRC Runoffs) and pick up the 12 points bonus for running at multiple tracks. You CAN run either WGI or Pocono to pick up the extra points, yes?

Anyway, the die is cast for 2007, and I will run the schedule that I have put in place. And, in the meantime, find the NARRC committee members and see if I can understand the situation better before I try to influence 2008's schedule and/or format.

If you're running at NHIS this weekend - looks like it's going to be a perfect Spring weekend - good luck!

Tim M

 

[gran racing]

PS: And Dave G - the Cincy fest is on my schedule. I am going to run WGI late July [/b]

Very cool.

Increase LRP numbers? Is that really necessary? There is always a huge turn out for LRP events, why wouldn't the focus be on increasing numbers at other tracks where historically the numbers haven't been as high? Or will the entry fees to LRP be so much higher this year they are already fearing the impact it will have on turn out? Anyone know what the May double will be?

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

You CAN run either WGI or Pocono to pick up the extra points, yes?

[/b]

Nope. That's another piece of fine print. That event is a Glen Region sanctioned event. "(NOTE; Bonus points are only available at races sanctioned by the four Regions comprising NARRC.)"

The only 'extra' track other than LRP or NHIS is Pocono - and it's that one weekend.

Very cool.

Increase LRP numbers? Is that really necessary? There is always a huge turn out for LRP events, why wouldn't the focus be on increasing numbers at other tracks where historically the numbers haven't been as high? Or will the entry fees to LRP be so much higher this year they are already fearing the impact it will have on turn out? Anyone know what the May double will be? [/b]

This can be something that we 'learn' about but it is my understanding that the non-NARRC Championship events are much less populated. IT may be doing fine but other classes not so much. Remember, a swing of 20-30 drivers can make a big impact on profitability - and that is VERY important to the smaller Regions.

 

[Jeremy Billiel]

I do not know a lot on this topic, but what little I do know is that there is a LOT of politics in play. The LRP example is tough becasue the nationals draw very poorly at LRP if I recall correctly and the small regions are trying to not loose money. Couple this with LRP's rates going up big again and this is where we are.

I know Andy is being a little reserved on this topic, but the fact of the matter is we don't have enough places to play in New England, which is what is partly to blame for where we are.

This is another reason why the NER is trying like hell to make PMP a success.

 

[RSTPerformance]

I have not particuarly liked the "Pocono" requirement in the NARRC rules for several years, but at the same time thought that it was OK because it ment that someone who put in a 100% track effort was rewarded, and a true champion... My justiication was lost as soon as WGI was added to the schedule but NOT counted as a track where the 12 point bonus could be awarded. I don't think that a change in the rule would have had an effect on my points last year, however for others fighting for top 5 maybe it would have.

To be perfectly honest, I thought that WGI would be added as a track where you could recieve the bonus once it was part of the normal series on an ongoing year. I sorta got the impression that it was a last minute added race last year and sorta a trial basis.

I thought things would change this year to make the championship more interesting allowing opportunities for more people from different regions (other than NER) to have a fighting chance at winning the championship. With the cost to travel and race going up it certainly makes this series very welcoming to to people whom live in Massachusetts and/or southern NH (basically within 3 hour driver to NHIS and Lime Rock), but not so flattering to others that live closer to the NY/NJ area. From what I hear the regions strugling are those from that area, not NER. The efforts to increase attendance really are hurting attendance as the championship is getting harder and harder to win, and is more dependant not on winning individual races, but attending those races. This doesn't spark interest or repeat customers IMO. I certainly could be wrong. I do however want to say that I agree with the NARRC comittee in having a "Bonus" for certain races in an effort to "save" those races from going away (Pocono comes to mind), however when you start adding in multiple "bonus" options you really start to mess everything up and I hope for 08 we will see an entire re-write restructure of the series to bring it back to a true championship series that benefits those drivers who attend and WIN races at different tracks.

The argument that the few amount of tracks influences this series rules and the championship is bogus in my mind. This is the NORTH ATLANTIC ROAD RACING CHAMPIONSHIP. If it was 1 track or 50 we should still see the same rules.

Raymond

PS: To those Volunteers who may be reading... While the threads that may have been started recently are a bit negative, I still think that the NARRC series is among the best in the country, I just think that it is VERY important you get the feedback (thus the reason I started this thread). I also think that it is VERY important that someone on that comittee speeks up and says why certain decisions are made. The Rumors that have floated around for years are that the regions have political strugles especially over LRP. I would love to hear otherwise and/or hear that the series rules are not a result of those strugles.