Runoffs 2016 survey

[jhenn4716]

Has anyone else gotten the survey regarding the format for the runoffs? Any thoughts on the three options?

For those of you who haven't gotten it yet, it asks a question regarding how you would want the qualifying format to be.

Option A: 24 qualifying groups.

• Four groups have multiple classes.
• Three (3) 20-minute qualifying sessions over four (4) days Monday - Thursday.
• Each class has 1 day off. Could be Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday.
• 60 minutes of qualifying time.

Option B: 18 qualifying groups.

• 10 groups have multiple classes.
• Many of the groups will have car counts in the 50s.
• Four (4) 20-minute qualifying sessions total - one per day Monday - Thursday.
• 80 minutes of qualifying time.

Option C: 24 qualifying groups.

• Four groups have multiple classes.
• Four (4) 15-minute qualifying sessions total - one per day Monday through Thursday.
• 60 minutes of qualifying time.

So what does everyone think?

[budawe]

My experience with MO is that it's very hard to get a good lap with lapped traffic playing a huge roll in where you end up on the grid. Several years there were many cars within one second. You could be off .5 second and be sitting 20th on the grid.

I say keep the sessions short so there won't be too many yellows and give us a many sessions as possible. Just my opinion.

[Keith Carter]

I voted 1)C 2)A and 3)B. No mixed goups!!! If you're not getting it done in 15 minutes with a light fuel load at the end of the session, another 5 minutes isn't going to help for that session and having a qualifier each day maximizes the opportunity for a dry session. For non-spec classes, tire management/expense would be the only factor between choosing A or C.

[jaltaman]

I voted the same way ( C - A - B ) for exactly the same reasons.

I like the fact that they are asking for our input.

[Diamond Level Motorsports]

I find it hard to accurately answer the questions not knowing if my group (FV) will be one of the mixed groups.

[problemchild]

I find it hard to accurately answer the questions not knowing if my group (FV) will be one of the mixed groups.

Yes, with no mixed groups, you will have 10-12 groups with a dozen or fewer cars, and some groups with 25-30, and some with 50. It will be tricky to get a good lap with 25 or 30 FVs or FFs on track at M-O, even with their own group, but imagine what it will be like with 40 SRFs or 50 SMs. Of course the guys in FB and FE will vote for their own groups instead of mixed groups with more time, but it would probably be fairer for everyone, and better value for everyone, to mix some groups and give everyone more track time.

Unfortunately, that is the leadership style of this club. When everybody gets a vote, you just get a mess. The club needs to let the leadership (still have to giggle at that one) make some tough but good decisions and build some appropriate groups. If someone in a 10 car field gets ticked off and stays home because they get grouped with another 10 car class, then so be it.

The most appropriate survey question would have been:
At what field size does a class earn the right to have their own race group.
25 cars, 20 cars, or 15 cars.

My post from November about bringing in regional clases:

My primary goal in all this stuff is to actually find solutions, so that puts be in conflict with any SCCA politician ..... but I try anyway. In this particular case, FF and FV are still reasonably subscribed and deserve to remain single class. FB is doing reasonably well. F500, FC, FE, FM, and FA all are struggling to field proper sized Runoff fields. The obvious solution would be to bring FST, CF, and F600 into a group with F500 ...... and combine FC, FE, FM, and FA together. Going forward, have 5 Formula car groups .... let the best supported 3 have their own race and combine the rest into 2 groups.

This approach is probably the key to making the whole Runoff adventure viable. 14 race groups. Half are stand alone classes and half are mixed. One day practice. One day qualifying. Two days of racing. Save the single class features for Sunday afternoon as the showcase events. We might even be able to sell tickets to spectators if we ran, for example, FF, SRF, FV, SM back to back to close the event.

[Chris Robson]

I can't see FV not having it's own group. I would imagine, just from the chatter on this site, that we are looking at a 40+ Vee run group as it stands. Spec Miata, SRF, FV, should all be safe from being combined. The easiest solution to this issue is for everyone who is invited, to go...

[Diamond Level Motorsports]

I can't see FV not having it's own group. I would imagine, just from the chatter on this site, that we are looking at a 40+ Vee run group as it stands. Spec Miata, SRF, FV, should all be safe from being combined. The easiest solution to this issue is for everyone who is invited, to go...

I agree that it is "likely" that FV will get it's own group but that wasn't spelled out in the questions. I have seen this club do some pretty strange things over the last 35 years so I make no assumptions. My decision to spend the time and $$$ to attend the Runoffs this year will be made when I see the schedule.

[Keith Carter]

Of course the guys in FB and FE will vote for their own groups instead of mixed groups with more time, but it would probably be fairer for everyone, and better value for everyone, to mix some groups and give everyone more track time.

It's the same amount of track time with the A and B options. You just don't have a "day off" if you get the extra session. Give me more sessions that are shorter than longer sessions of chaos any day. Same amount of track time for everyone. In any case, FM and FC had pretty pathetic showings at the Runoffs (10 car fields) while FE had 16 cars and FB had 20 cars. Maybe your suggestion would be better suited aimed towards those classes.

[jhenn4716]

Some of the other formula classes have had low turnouts the last few years (continental and atlantic) I can't imagine they would get their own run groups. The same goes for some of the touring classes.

Historically we've always had large run groups. Trying to combine us with 500/600's would put to many cars on track.

With all the debacles of yellow flag laps during qualifying the last few years, opting for more sessions might be the best option to guarantee at least some track time.

[Keith Carter]

Yes, especially at Mid Ohio. One oops where someone gets stuck in the kitty litter and the session is blown.

[problemchild]

It's the same amount of track time with the A and B options. You just don't have a "day off" if you get the extra session. Give me more sessions that are shorter than longer sessions of chaos any day. Same amount of track time for everyone. In any case, FM and FC had pretty pathetic showings at the Runoffs (10 car fields) while FE had 16 cars and FB had 20 cars. Maybe your suggestion would be better suited aimed towards those classes.

I am a fan of both classes. My reference to FB and FE was only because drivers from those classes offered comments in a FV topic area. There is nothing wrong with that, nore that they don't want to be combined, with other classes. Since they are two of the easiest and most likely classes to get combined, I fully understand why they would cast survey responses against mixing classes. On the other hand, if you are a FV or FF driver, your track value will be increased by responding in favor of combining as many classes as possible. My comment was not meant to be an attack on any class, but a comment that polling drivers with these questions was a poor way to make decisions like this. The results will be predictable. The only reason I see to do it, is to avoid the responsibility of making some hard but necessary decisions.

If I were making the decision, I would open entries on a specific date. Any class that had 20 entries after 30 days was guaranteed their own race group. At that point, you build a schedule with the best supported groups in the primetime slots. You would need some rules to keep out artificial entries, but no big deal. If that number drops lower than 15 by an entry cutoff date, for instance, you lose your single class group status. It is survival of the fittest, leadership from a big picture perspective, and building a real event.

[Keith Carter]

I would get on board with that. I agree that a 10 car field should not get their own run group, but I don't agree with grouping for the sake of consolidation based on what cars should get grouped with because most think it's a good idea to group similar speed cars together. IMO It's the biggest reason NOT to group those classes together.