Originally posted by Bill Miller:
Since there are really no new ITC and ITB cars, you're stuck w/ trying to drop everything into two classes, rather than four. You can't reshuffle things w/o dumping on the folks at the bottom, as they have nowhere to go.
Aren't we essentially "dooming" at least ITC to an eventual demise with this thinking? Surely there are cars in ITB that, with the addition of 100lbs or ??? would fit fine in ITC without disrupting the "competition" there. If that proves to be true, then wouldn't it also be true for ITB, ITA, etc...???
I see your logic here, and am not saying it's not valid, but I need to understand this whole "dumping on ITC/ITB" thing. If cars are dropped down and adjusted accordingly (ok, Kirk... we AREN'T discussing the details of that, so don't get all riled up!
), would we not be doing those classes some good by adding more cars?
Perhaps a good exercise here would be to map out a possible scenario of this option, so we can see what things would look like? What would IT look like if a shuffling were to take place that took the bottom-feeders from each class (except ITC, of course), and did some redistribution of cars? Then, I suppose we could discuss what would have to be done to make this work, and whether or not is was feasible and would solve the issues. There was a time, after all, when everything was just fine with ITA and ITS and the "granularity" was fine... Was the change in this sudden? Did it involve a couple of select classifications? Is it industry driven? Was it due to technology changing and people not fully understanding the ramifications and actual performance, driving cars to be inappropriately placed into ITS that perhaps truely belonged in ITA? ("fear of the 4-valve" is what I like to call that...) What happened?
It would be my view that these kinds of questions need to be appropriately explored before essentially dooming ITC to an eventual demise by not adjusting all the classes to meet the supply... Perhaps that's bound to happen anyhow? Great responses... Let's keep talking...
------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Auburn, WA
ITS '97 240SX
[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited October 16, 2003).]
. If you just re-shuffle the existing 4 classes, you'd be achieving the same thing as adding a class. But only at the top. The way I envision a reshuffle (w/o any PCA's or anything else), the slow S cars go to A, and the slow A cars go to B. Maybe the slow B cars go to C. What you've done is essentially shifted the problem from the top of the category to the bottom.