Runoffs Invitations - 3.7.4.A.1

[Bob Wright]

Now that is a fascinating link. It’s marginally accurate (nothing is cheaper, but only some are more expensive). Add to track rental: ALS/BLS support @ up to $1000/day each and you need minimum 2, possibly 3. Wreckers @ $500-700/ day each and you need more than 2. Insurance/sanction fees per event... the list goes on. Oh, and if it’s a spectator event, start adding everything from port-o-lets to security guards 24/hrs a day.
Its an interesting business model to say the least.

[problemchild]

The March Majors race had much better participation numbers as well, I'm assuming the track rental fee was the same or similar, where did the money go? 287 entries x $650 = $186,550 Please don't tell me the track rental was $62,000/day. I'm guessing someone profited almost $100,000 after all the expenses from this race.

The argument would be that the expenses were much higher because so much staff was brought in to do online commentary, eligibility checks (like Fv exhaust pipes), give out special facecloths on podiums, and all those extras that put the "SUPER" in Super Tour.

[Steve Bamford]

Would you be okay running with Novice Permit drivers?

Why is this always the fallback? Peter do you really think the Majors attracts only the elite drivers?

[BrianT1]

Would you be okay running with Novice Permit drivers?

Peter,

I would be ok with it.

The way I look at it is at a Divisional there are maybe 1 or 2 FC's, 1 or 2 FE's and 1 or 2 FF etc. If you combine those with the car counts we have at Majors at an Open Wheel weekend all while keeping entry fees in check (say $600) a weekend but doubling track time then I think you have a winner.

Brian

[Peter Olivola]

Why is this always the fallback? Peter do you really think the Majors attracts only the elite drivers?

It's a question, Steve, not a fall back. If the competitor community overall is okay with having drivers on novice permits then it should be requested. I don't need to point out the unintended consequences. That's already been done in this thread.

[BrianT1]

I love these discussions however they never ever seem to go anywhere. As much as I enjoy being part of the SCCA and racing I think the club is going to fail because they try to stick to the same model they had from the beginning, just putting lipstick on it every few years. They never really make any big changes.

Does anyone know what is happening with that secret survey they sent out about the runoffs schedule? This is a perfect example as It seems like these surveys get sent out and then they compile all the information in a back room and then do nothing with it.

Brian

[Peter Olivola]

Peter,

I would be ok with it.

The way I look at it is at a Divisional there are maybe 1 or 2 FC's, 1 or 2 FE's and 1 or 2 FF etc. If you combine those with the car counts we have at Majors at an Open Wheel weekend all while keeping entry fees in check (say $600) a weekend but doubling track time then I think you have a winner.

Brian

Among the factors that contributes to the determination of a safe group situation is the size of the group, number of cars in each class and where they fall speedwise relative to each other. It isn't just a couple here and there that would congregate at a split type event, but everyone in those classes who would otherwise run Majors, etc.

It should be possible to reduce the number of classes in a run group and we experienced that at the 2009 June sprints with no more than two open wheel classes in any run group. That works at Road America because it takes a very large lap time delta before different class cars begin to intermix. At the other end of the spectrum is a track like Lime Rock with very short lap times. That produces more laps per race over the same time period resulting in more and more frequent mixing.

I think the idea is worth pursuing to at least a pilot, and to John's point, possibly combining with the appropriate pro series to defray costs and build volunteer interest.

On the other side of the fence, doors and fenders, that would require including regional only classes and in the case of some divisions, very large numbers of IT cars within the closed wheel weekend. I think that's where you'll find the strongest resistance to this idea. They already have a dislike of mixing slicks and DOTs and figuring out class groupings with that added factor further complicates safe group determination. There are also many more double dippers in that community. I don't know of any region that wants to discourage that and that, too, is a complicating factor.

[Steve Bamford]

It's a question, Steve, not a fall back. If the competitor community overall is okay with having drivers on novice permits then it should be requested. I don't need to point out the unintended consequences. That's already been done in this thread.

My point is you already have novice drivers showing up to Majors. So the unintended consequences you don’t need to point out are already happening because of novices showing up that you are asking if people would be ok with. Do you see where you have me confused?

I think most OW SCCA Club racing is past the point of being able to offer different events for different levels of drivers, there simply are not enough people showing up at race weekends to be able to do so.

As with most threads, this one sure has drifted off topic.

[Lotus7]

I think most OW SCCA Club racing is past the point of being able to offer different events for different levels of drivers,

yup, and since someone has to be the first to say it, there are numerous non-novice drivers out there causing accidents as well ...
I guess that's why we all sign waivers?

[Peter Olivola]

My point is you already have novice drivers showing up to Majors. So the unintended consequences you don’t need to point out are already happening because of novices showing up that you are asking if people would be ok with. Do you see where you have me confused?

I think most OW SCCA Club racing is past the point of being able to offer different events for different levels of drivers, there simply are not enough people showing up at race weekends to be able to do so.

As with most threads, this one sure has drifted off topic.

Withe the exception of a practice session, there shouldn't be anyone on a Novice Permit competing in a Majors run group. If that's happening, the rules are being bent.

[Steve Bamford]

Withe the exception of a practice session, there shouldn't be anyone on a Novice Permit competing in a Majors run group. If that's happening, the rules are being bent.

Please help me understand how a Novice competing at a regional is safer then at a Major for everyone involved?

[Peter Olivola]

Please help me understand how a Novice competing at a regional is safer then at a Major for everyone involved?

Generally, smaller race groups. There are exceptions, of course, but most Regionals have smaller race groups and the competition level is not as intense. Are you suggesting it's okay for someone fresh out of a drivers school run a Majors as their first race?

[Steve Bamford]

Generally, smaller race groups. There are exceptions, of course, but most Regionals have smaller race groups and the competition level is not as intense. Are you suggesting it's okay for someone fresh out of a drivers school run a Majors as their first race?

If they pass their drivers school & can qualify within the required times of the leader then yes. If you disagree I am ok with that but if they have passed driver school they have a license to race & should be qualified.

For me in Canada we had/have no regionals or Majors when I started. I had to be “on watch” & get signed off by Stewards for first few events.

[Peter Olivola]

If they pass their drivers school & can qualify within the required times of the leader then yes. If you disagree I am ok with that but if they have passed driver school they have a license to race & should be qualified.

For me in Canada we had/have no regionals or Majors when I started. I had to be “on watch” & get signed off by Stewards for first few events.

Once upon a time those going through the SCCA drivers school program were much more highly motivated to compete. We're not seeing that same level of commitment today. Those who are motivated tend to go the pro school route. The biggest issue, and this was the case with rookie driver's in the pro series I worked as well as rookie club racers, is situational awareness. Something that's gained with experience and when its lacking, as the example given earlier illustrates all too well, the results can be bad. I don't think throwing them in the deep end for their first weekends helps.

All that aside, and since my role is to apply the GCR, not rewrite it, there is a process to follow to initiate change. You may not get the answer you seek, but that's what's in place if you want to pursue it.

[Daryl DeArman]

Are you suggesting it's okay for someone fresh out of a drivers school run a Majors as their first race?

The biggest issue, and this was the case with rookie driver's in the pro series I worked as well as rookie club racers, is situational awareness. Something that's gained with experience and when its lacking, as the example given earlier illustrates all too well, the results can be bad

Opposed to the 75 year old who spends less than 3 hours a year under race conditions?

I'll take the wide-eyed rookie on sensory overload. At least I can predict he's going to be unpredictable.

[Steve Bamford]

Once upon a time those going through the SCCA drivers school program were much more highly motivated to compete. We're not seeing that same level of commitment today. Those who are motivated tend to go the pro school route. The biggest issue, and this was the case with rookie driver's in the pro series I worked as well as rookie club racers, is situational awareness. Something that's gained with experience and when its lacking, as the example given earlier illustrates all too well, the results can be bad. I don't think throwing them in the deep end for their first weekends helps.

All that aside, and since my role is to apply the GCR, not rewrite it, there is a process to follow to initiate change. You may not get the answer you seek, but that's what's in place if you want to pursue it.

As you clearly referenced “once upon a time”, I will add to that the time has passed. We have to deal with reality we have in front of us. Things change such as the points requirements to enter the Runoffs were dropped many years ago. Now to bring it this discussion back to reason the thread was started there is another option to get into the Runoffs. Times have changed, seems novices are already entering Majors & as reference this is not new. Whether in the rules or not has been happening since the 1st official Major took place back at Sebring (can’t recall the year 2014? Maybe?).

[John Nesbitt]

... since the 1st official Major took place back at Sebring (can’t recall the year 2014? Maybe?).

IIRC, the Majors started as a pilot in RMDiv, SWDiv , and (?) MIDDiv in 2012. So Club-wide in 2013.

The original Majors concept envisioned specialized events for similar classes (e.g. open wheel), as well as streaming ("clustering") popular and less popular classes into separate events. Of course, these concepts did not survive their first brush with reality.

[problemchild]

Opposed to the 75 year old who spends less than 3 hours a year under race conditions?

The level of driving at Road Atlanta was especially poor. On Saturday, there was 2 or 3 drivers falling off every lap of our race .... before the world's worst EV crew went to work, ending our race in only a few laps. The FVs even crashed on the in-lap after 8 laps of FC caution. Conditions were perfect for racing. As an aging driver, whose pace has fallen off dramatically in the past few years, I can say the level of driving is not "super". I see kids in their first half dozen races in a car, going 10 seconds per lap faster than veteran racers in better cars. At this point, I can accept Majors events and the Runoffs for what they are, but don't try and tell me the driving standards are "elite". As Judge Judy would say .... "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining."

[fatbillybob]

Some of you guys are complaining about money and where it is going. Just remember SCCA is one of the only groups who has ACLS on site during races. They have multiple ambulance on site and real extraction teams with real emergency equipment. The SCCA medical director signs off that Ems is in place before we race. Did you know places like indy with a track medical facility was staffed at SCCA expense for the runoffs? Did you know that 2 or 3 years ago at the majors out of Tuscon inde motorsports park a srf guy hit the wall only broke his arm. An ambulance leaving and one returning would delay races too long so SCCA flew him out by helicopter so we could get racing?

Do you know SCCA is one of the only groups who list you as an additional insured under their liability policy? That is the only liability coverage you have. Nothing else protects you not homeowners, not umbrella, not personal excess liability policy which all have racing as an exclusion. Stuff like that friends is what we pay for beyond the track rental and plastic trophy.

[fatbillybob]

Opposed to the 75 year old who spends less than 3 hours a year under race conditions?

I'll take the wide-eyed rookie on sensory overload. At least I can predict he's going to be unpredictable.

Anyone can have a bad day. My whole year on the east coast has been ruined by race weekend 3 from a club principal no less who was a bit overly excited as the green flag dropped.

I shocked they sent the rd atl newbie home. The guy who destroyed my racecar did not even have to come day I'm sorry. I hope the newbie will still come back and race. He is not the worst driver in SCCA. We got plenty of those.

[Steve Bamford]

Generally, smaller race groups. There are exceptions, of course, but most Regionals have smaller race groups and the competition level is not as intense. Are you suggesting it's okay for someone fresh out of a drivers school run a Majors as their first race?

Prior to the Majors there were Regionals, Nationals & Rationals...so running National competitors with Regional competitors is nothing new at all. I don't see the need for 2 (supposed) levels of racing in SCCA anymore.

[Peter Olivola]

Prior to the Majors there were Regionals, Nationals & Rationals...so running National competitors with Regional competitors is nothing new at all. I don't see the need for 2 (supposed) levels of racing in SCCA anymore.

I understand your position on this, Steve. When/as/if the GCR changes I will apply the updates.

[Farrout48]

You may also recall that in recent history, there were two levels of race licenses - a National and a Regional. It took a couple of weekends to gain some level of experience to qualify for the National license. Now, everybody gets the same license after the very minimal Novice period. Are we better off now or then?

It used to be that you went to a SCCA Road Race school to learn how to race. In the years I instructed at the SEDIV schools, there were many students who had never been in a race car/kart and/or never been on a race track. Forget about teaching them how to race, I had to start with the very basics and spent the weekend teaching them how to drive on the track. You know the drill, what's an apex, what's the line, when do I brake, when do I accelerate, etc. At the time, double schools got you three days on track with more track time then you could get in 3 race weekends. "Success" was seeing their lap times reduced by 20-30 seconds and them keeping their nose clean.

Most of the racers I know are careful with their equipment since they want to bring it home in one piece and not miss races by having to repair it. There are other racers to whom money is not a concern and can afford to wad it up by doing questionable passing or tactics, etc. Yet the fact is that we all are amateurs and the prize money we make is ZERO. Maybe the 13/13 Rule has merit?

At a Homestead Majors a couple years ago during Qual, I had a FA go past me on the straight going into T6. Instead of realizing that he did not leave himself enough room to return to the racing line and should have remained on the inside, he cut back over in front of me and slammed on the brakes reducing his speed to that of a FV. I had to lock the tires up to keep him hitting him and flatspotted all 4 new tires. Must have been my mistake to think that he would take the corner at racing speed. The fact is that he pulled this same stunt on 4 other drivers in the same turn as verified by another FA driver who was sitting in the stands at that turn. The shared question was "What the hell was this driver doing at a Majors?" That weekend, the Formula/Prototype group never did get a full session without a FCY or BFA due to drivers not having the ability to keep their cars on track or from impacting other cars.

[Steve Bamford]

So with what you said above Craig, some drivers coming into school could possibly leave with only basic information such as safety protocols to get on & off the track as well as understanding of flags?

Unfortunately the only way to get track experience then is track days.

Perhaps new drivers have to be observed on track days by clerk of the course or someone else SCCA specifies to be able to attend a race weekend. Then during the entire race weekend they would also need to be observed & get signatures from the stewards for a certain amount of race weekends? It really isn’t too hard to have a program in place like this. Perhaps there already is one.

[problemchild]

Below is the Runoffs invitation criteria effective 3-1-2019. Refer to the February FASTRACKS for official language. I was unable to cut and paste so this does not appear as a "red-line" version. The April on line GCR should have all updates.

Somehow, we got from an insignificant rule change which may directly effect a half dozen racers ..... to trying to solve the fundamental problems of SCCA ..... which no one in the SCCA hierarchy is actually trying to solve.

Perhaps we should just start with reforming the SCCA leadership process.

[Bob Wright]

Welcome to the internet. It’s not nesesarily a bad thing that this thread rotated a bit as there is some good stuff being discussed here. So...how does this discussion get delivered to the BoD in a form they can use to create policy? ‘Write a letter’ is still the proper form of communication (this forum is not even if members of the BoD read it) so....

[John LaRue]

Welcome to the internet. It’s not nesesarily a bad thing that this thread rotated a bit as there is some good stuff being discussed here. So...how does this discussion get delivered to the BoD in a form they can use to create policy? ‘Write a letter’ is still the proper form of communication (this forum is not even if members of the BoD read it) so....

Rotated a bit? Ya think? Haha

I apologize in advance, but I am not sure what to take back to the CRB from all of this.

My underlying concerns are with the health of the OW classes. Very simply, there is a similar proliferation of cars and classes on the sedan side. Cars such as the Miller Mustangs, the new TCR, etc... are all looking for places to run. The Club is working to find homes within existing classes, but as usual, there is a reluctance due to the "spec" car not fitting the rules as they should. SCCA does not want to lose these entries to NASA or other clubs. Because of the number of these cars coming on line more pressure is being put upon the existing classes to perform and rightfully so.

It is apparent that those OW cars that participate in FRP and some of the other "ancillary" series very much enjoy the experience. I am hopeful that eventually the Club will recognize these as viable alternatives to business as usual and allow those groups who best serve the needs of the OW community to do so and in the process give credit to the respective class for those entries.
The pro allowance for Runoffs is a good step towards this in my opinion.

John

[Daryl DeArman]

Seems to me that SCCA is trying to figure out how to prop up their premier event. They are continuing to lose "regular season" market share to competitors and are finally trying to determine what to do about it. If the RunOffs loses even more allure SCCA is going to become the next Sears/Kmart. The 800# gorilla that ignored what its competitors were doing and what their customers wanted for too long.

[John Nesbitt]

A couple of posts on rrax re: the April Super Tour at VIR (currently >500 entries):


"If I were the SCCA Czar, I would cancel formula cars."

and

"
Originally Posted by chois
There are two formula/p car groups sitting at 31 each.



And 25 of those are FV's. FA, FB, FC, & FM have a combined total of just 14 entries.

The FP/HP/GTL/BS group has been holding steady at 70 cars."



I am not saying that this is good or accurate, but it is a school of thought in non-OW land.

[scott fairchild]

Spec Car Club of America

[John LaRue]

Seems to me that SCCA is trying to figure out how to prop up their premier event. They are continuing to lose "regular season" market share to competitors and are finally trying to determine what to do about it. If the RunOffs loses even more allure SCCA is going to become the next Sears/Kmart. The 800# gorilla that ignored what its competitors were doing and what their customers wanted for too long.

I personally don't think that the SCCA needs to do anything to "prop up" Runoffs, it has been quite successful over the past few years so far as entries are concerned. 2019 looks to likewise be a winner. The question is whether SCCA will continue to "prop up" the existing OW classes and give them a place at the Runoffs and for that matter other events such as Majors.

Based upon my personal experiences and observations it seems that one of the primary reasons participation has declined in OW is due to the mixed class run groups. OW cars simply don't play well together. FRP and some of the other groups which have been able to offer single class run groups have realized better success, but suffer due to increased costs which have to be passed along to the competitors. I do not contend that such is the exclusive basis for better grids, but it is certainly one of the components. Again, if FRP and these other groups can serve the competitors by offering a product that the competitors want, and that the Club simply cannot, everyone wins. Formats such as we see at June Sprints and Runoffs allow the Club to more closely match these "pro" offerings and thus can and should serve as a place for all to compete.

The bottom line is that if the OW community continues to sit on the sidelines and complain there soon will not be a place in the SCCA sand box for them to play; that will be a significant loss for all. An SCCA recognized class brings value and stability. IMO the writing is on the wall. If you have a FF, FC, FA, FM then you need to have it on track in 2019 if you want to continue to have a class in which to race.

John

[Daryl DeArman]

I personally don't think that the SCCA needs to do anything to "prop up" Runoffs, it has been quite successful over the past few years so far as entries are concerned. 2019 looks to likewise be a winner.

You could be right. Time will tell.

The bottom line is that if the OW community continues to sit on the sidelines and complain there soon will not be a place in the SCCA sand box for them to play; that will be a significant loss for all. An SCCA recognized class brings value and stability. IMO the writing is on the wall. If you have a FF, FC, FA, FM then you need to have it on track in 2019 if you want to continue to have a class in which to race.

Value and stability don't come from the initials of the sanctioning body. Value comes from having a healthy class, with competitive fields and many quality places to race it. In my opinion, SCCA only delivers on 1 of those 3.

[Steve Bamford]

I am seriously considering racing again this year based on this rule change. While it would still be a limited schedule for me I think this change is a positive for OW racers & is likely to bring me back for a part season. Congrats SCCA.