Should IT be Regional???

I might be wrong but I think Raymond is arguing against a proposition that hasn't been put forward here - a true age cutoff for IT cars.

The Amy/Mushnick proposal suggested an drop-out age for NATIONAL competition, with cars remaining eligible for Regional events. I think there's some merit there. That could be handled within the ITCS if a broader initiative was put into place, to select classes for the RubOffs based on participation.

On the numbers question, I tried to explain to a NASCAR "touring" series competitor once that an SCCA road racing class can maintain national eligibility with an average of something like 4 cars per race, nationwide. He laughed so hard he cried. Step back and think about that fact, and what acceptance of that standard suggests for the health of our game.

K
 
Step back and think about that fact, and what acceptance of that standard suggests for the health of our game.

K
[/b]
Click to expand...

Yup...were a dying breed, LOL.

It is a bit alarming, when you stop and think about it, how long guys like John W, and Miller and others (me) have been beating the "This is crazy! 3.5 cars?? come ON!!!" drum ...to deaf...errr...covered ears.

One interesting thing I have noted in the responses here is that it seems the reponders who I know are Prod racers are universally against the idea. I'm sure that this sampling isn't truly indicative of the larger picture, nor that every Prod racer feels the same as those who have posted, but that single point does strike me.

To me, the bottom line for the health of the club as a whole is that they need to have classes that are well subscribed. A Top 24 system will bring that to fruition. Wasting the clubs resources on classes that nobody runs is inefficient, and in the long run, dangerous for the club.
 
as long as we all have a place to race is what i really think is important here.
I am part of the problem..low budget racer..i can only afford to race in about 5 events a year, not including Daytona,my "home" track.Yes ITC are small fields now,compared to when i was first racing in it 15 yrs ago.

the point i'm trying to make i guess is i don't care if its a national class or a regional class as long as i can still race my car as is.I can still only afford to race as often as i do.

But i do think there are some cars that run in ITC that could be able to go into say ITB whith out to much problrms.the rabitt,civic are the only 2 that i can think of that could probly go into ITB and still be compettive with little work.

Don"t flame me...it's only my opion,everyone has them.


I just want a place to race!!


Tim
 
I think I've decided I like Bill's idea of no more National/Regional races, but I don't like the idea of qualifying/non-qualifying races either. So my idea is let's just have races. No national/regional race weekends or qualifying/non-qualifying race weekends. There's just race weekends and you show up on the weekends your class is slated to race. Points can be awarded in races for both regional series, like the SARRC, as well as National standings. You declare when you enter a race whether you want National points, regional points, or both. Why you wouldn't do both I don't know, so it may just be a matter of getting both regional and national points for a race. How points are awarded could be done lots of different ways, but that's just a matter of coming up with something. This allows people to accumulate points for going to the run-offs as well as compete in regional series without having to go to different races. It seems like it would simplify the overall operation of race weekends as well if they're all run the same, just different classes.

I guess there's the perceived issue of National points guys who are spending lots of money running with the "non-national" guys who aren't spending lots of money, but, as has already been mentioned, I don't think that's much different from now. There's already guys spending tons of money on IT cars and it'll always be that way. [Note: The disparity between the people with money and those without seems to be greater in other classes so that could be an issue.] I'd rather race with the best and finish mid-pack than not have the fast guys (cause they're racing on the national/qualifying weekend) and finish on the podium. Maybe other guys feel differently, but it seems like a hollow victory to me if you win a race, but the best guys aren't there.

The run-offs become fairly straight forward. You take the top 24 (or ever how many) subscribed classes and they get to go. People in all classes have been earning National points so there's no issue of trying to figure which people in the classes get to the dance.

I like things simple and I don't think it gets much simpler. I'm sure there's lots of holes, but you get the idea.

David
 
Lets say also that to be eligible for the runoffs a class needs to make a 6 car average. With the Nat./Reg. distinction gone nobody gets told that they can't race with all their budies next year. They just don't get to go to KA. (good :wacko: bad??? :( ) We should be able to have a good show at the RO's with lage fields and say 12-15 races in a reasonable amount of time. The guys that don't make it to the big show, well try harder next year and get your class healthy. Or consolodate and come out fighting for your right to be a part. We, the classes that are well subscribed, are sick and tired of paying the bills for the same two or three cars to have thier one hooraa at the runoffs.
 
I don't know what it's like in your neck of the woods, but around here nearly every Regional is a double - qualify in the morning and race in the afternoon, both Saturday and Sunday. OTOH every National I've seen is a single - practice and qualify Saturday, practice and race Sunday.

1) Why is that?
2) How does that affect this discussion?
 
As mentioned before, National schedules are dictated pretty strictly as I understand it. Double Regionals, if one is a cynic, are a way to generate maximum revenues in a minimum time. I don't know for sure but I'd bet that they tend to be the best moneymakers in a region's road racing program.

K
 
I don't know for sure but I'd bet that they tend to be the best moneymakers in a region's road racing program.
K
[/b]
Click to expand...

And some of the most efficient use of the racer's time too. Whew, racing single weekends is really tough to justify with the tow, fees, lodging, and tow back. All of those are constant, for the most part, with the variable being time on track.

Combine a double SAARC with something like the Monster Memorial at CMP with the ECR and Carolina Cup and one can get in a lot of track time in a weekend with one tow. Everybody wins.
 
Not to get off topic, but I'm inclined to agree w/ Kirk re: doubles being money makers for the Region. Maybe a two-day dbl works better when you have lower car counts / fewer run groups, but after running several three-day Labor Day dbls at Summit Point and two-day dbls at Pocono, I'll take a regular two-day single over a two-day dbl any day. IMHO, a two-day dbl costs you more money for essentially the same amount of track time, all while making for a more hectic weekend.
 
Bill, really? We usually agree, but definitely diverge here.

For me, a Double SARRC weekend is perfect. Qualify in the morning, race in the afternoon -- two points races in a weekend. While "Practices" certainly are valuable track time, they eat up tires and brakes without tangential return of a qualifying spot or points from a finished race.

I'm still for IT staying regional, but am intrigued by your idea of doing away with teh National/Regional distinction. If we did that, though, I hope the double sprint race weekend concept wins out over qualify Sat./race Sun.
 
That's one part of the "National" deal I don't like. The 30 minute races. Too looong, LOL.

I'd rather a break at 15 minutes...1 or 2 laps to bunch the field, then form up, two by two, and do it all over agian. ;)

I know, that's silly...this is serious stuff were talking about.

Well, then "Qualifying races (National points paying) are the minimum that the CRB would allow, and non qualifying races can be at the discretion of the region..a double or triple or whatever....
 
That's one part of the "National" deal I don't like. The 30 minute races. Too looong, LOL.

I'd rather a break at 15 minutes...1 or 2 laps to bunch the field, then form up, two by two, and do it all over agian. ;)

I know, that's silly...this is serious stuff were talking about.

Well, then "Qualifying races (National points paying) are the minimum that the CRB would allow, and non qualifying races can be at the discretion of the region..a double or triple or whatever....
[/b]
Click to expand...

Jake,

The MARRS races at Summit Point are 16 laps. That's about 25 min. for an IT race (+/- a couple of min, depending on class). To me, that's about a perfect sprint race. The Nationals there are another 6 laps or ~35 min. Also not a problem. Back in 2000, the MARRS races were 20 laps!!

Anyway, enough thread highjacking! :D
 
If you are a cynic you could look at doubles as a way for the region to make a profit, but the reality is the without the restriction on the format that is part of nationals the regionals can format the races the way the racers want. Memorial Day we had one practice and 3 races in two days. Most loved it.

The money we pay to us for entry fees is the money we need to pay to put on events. If you are paying money to them, then you need to be more involved the club so you see where that money goes
 
I am with Jeff 100% on this one. I am all about value. A traditional Double up here is a P/Q in the AM and a race in the afternoon. Same for the following day. 2 different sanction numbers (more expense to your Region) gets you 2 races to keep your liscence active to boot - a llt of people rely on this to minimize expenses.

Two day singles are more expensive to me because 'practice' time is a freakin waste. I can practice and test in WAY more cost-effective ways than at a Regional. RACE time is what I want.

Take the race Dick talked about. 20 minute qualifyier Sat morning, then three 25 min races in 2 days (qualifying race instead of traditional Q).

I can't see at all how anyone could think that doubles weren't the best bang for your buck - and if your Region makes some money - hell that just allows you to keep doing this stupid-insane sport. Our entry fees are never double that of a single and you get to save on all the associated costs (tow, hotel, food, etc). Maybe the reason the Regions make more is because more people show up BECAUSE the value is there for them.

I do think that the R/N designation has to stay. Just all the classes would be invited. This way, the 'big dogs" can stay home when it means nothing to them and the Regional racers can stay home when the (real or perceived) uber-prep comes to town.

AB
 
Andy,

I totally agree about keeping a distinction between races (Regional/National, Qualifying/non-Qualifying, whatever). I think it's important for everyone, and it's a key component of my proposal. We'll just have to agree to disagree about what's a better value, a 2-day single or a 2-day double. I've been to too many of those Mother's Day Pocono dbls to know that they're a royal Charlie Foxtrot. Maybe I'm letting that color my view on other 2-day dbls. They've obviously doing something right in the MARRS series though, given how well subscribed it is.

Anyway, I said that I wouldn't hijack this thread anymore.
 
Note I said, "If one is a cynic..." :)

Like Bill, my perceptions of the value of double regionals has been tainted by recent experience. The SARRC/MARRS double at VIR is a huge non-value, both in terms of track time and days sucked out of everyone's lives. It's become a THREE day double, that pretty much banks on entrants doing the extra-charge "open practice" on freakin' Thursday. Friday was two Practice/Qualifying sessions (20 minutes each, i think), and all we had each day of the weekend was a race. One track session per day. NCR leaves HUGE dead spots in this schedule which I know from specific comments by friends has chased them out of this event.

This is really an interesting conversation because it illustrates really well how complex a policy decision like this can be, as all kinds of issues are interlocked - rightly or wrongly.

K
 
I must agree that National race weekends are quite long and boring. Double weekends offer 2 races but at the expense of a practice (just qual/race each day). The recent sebring Short Course race was about as good as it gets...saturday practice/qual/race (12 laps @1:21:xxx) then sunday practice then 2 races (16 laps!) granted there was not a giant turn out but the format was great...even if we had the races cut to 8 and 12 laps it would have been plenty. I did the Jan Nationals down here, had the best time in Sebring, Homestead was way boring...too much waiting. I also noted that there was not a huge turn out of Nat cars. At Sebring we had a restricted regional added to the Nat and there was a HUGE turnout...I really dont want IT to go National, but it would seem to make sense for business...
 
I do think that the R/N designation has to stay. Just all the classes would be invited. This way, the 'big dogs" can stay home when it means nothing to them and the Regional racers can stay home when the (real or perceived) uber-prep comes to town.
[/b]
Click to expand...

So what is the reasoning for keeping national/regional (or whatever you call them) designations? One reason I keep seeing is so that the "regional racers" (read - those with less money) don't have to compete with the "national racers" (read - those with more money). I personally question whether or not this is a valid reason and certainly don't think it's reason enough by itself. So what other reasons are there for this separation?

David
 
So what is the reasoning for keeping national/regional (or whatever you call them) designations? One reason I keep seeing is so that the "regional racers" (read - those with less money) don't have to compete with the "national racers" (read - those with more money). I personally question whether or not this is a valid reason and certainly don't think it's reason enough by itself. So what other reasons are there for this separation?

David [/b]
Click to expand...

There are a few. One, you don't want to have too many National races. You want them to be true qualifers so that the best of teh best in each Region actually QUALIFY (novel concept) for the runoffs. You want racers from all over competing for the PRIVLEDGE to go and run for the National Championship. Right now in NeDiv (what, the second largest Div in the Country?) we have 8 Nationals weekends at 7 different tracks - not bad. NeDiv has at least 22 weekends of Regional racing.

Another is that the track time at a National is mandated. You don't want 400 cars at a National or else it won't run. You need the separation in the larger Regions.

Also, the Championship series we are all used to would go away. The NARRC, SARRC, MARRS, insert your series here is now gone. You COULD run them piggy-back with the National stuff (and that may work) but it just makes sense to have them seperate. Nationals guys aren't going to run more than they have to.

During these weekends you also can't run any fun stuff like enduro's or have Regional only classes like ITE, SPO, SPU - there just isn't time.



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