Runoffs to be kept at Road America for another three years

[M.Sauce]

Butch- I guess as far as the SCCA Sanction goes The Sprints is just another National race.It does have a 50 year history and all you said is true from the history perspective.What I think changes the picture is that the two most prestigous races SCCA sanctions are at the same track.You could realistically not run anywhere else if you are from Central Division.If you only run 4 Nationals to qualify for the Runoffs are there 4 Nationals scheduled at Road America this year?There have been in the past since the Runoffs has been held at RA.In my opinion that is very unfair to the rest of the competitors that want to go to the Runoffs.I just think the Runoffs should move around.

[Tom Valet]

@Stan: From someone that ran HP and FF last year (FF on 8 psi in the right rear after the turn 5 fiasco), I can tell you that RA only has 5 turns. 1 is flat in both cars. 7 is flat in both cars 9-11 is flat in both cars and 13 is flat in both cars. ;-) I have to brake for 5, 6 (sort of), 8, 12 and 14. I'm still not fast enough in either car and admit it but neither car is the "hot" setup.


James Rogerson
FF 92 & HP 66

The kink taken flat at RA in an FF is not a turn? James, by your definition Eau Rouge taken flat in an F1 car is not a turn either.

On a more serious note, you are never going to find a single location for the Runoffs that will be ideal for everyone. Moving it around to different tracks has its appeal, but you lose one of the most important aspects of the Runoffs as a Championship and that is tradition which is built up over many years. The June Sprints has added importance as a National because it has been held at the same track for so many years and has come to be regarded as an important race. If you moved the June Sprints around every year, would it have the same appeal and importance? I doubt it. I think that all the years that the Runoffs were held at Road Atlanta went a long way toward developing the tradition and importance of the Runoffs as a Championship.

In my mind the single most important criteria for the Runoffs is that it is held at a track that is highly regarded by both competitors and the public. Hold the Runoffs in a parking lot and it loses all of its glamour. This is why so many people throw Indy out as the ideal location.

Since it is doubtful that Indy will ever host the Runoffs, we are left with other tracks that have a similar if not quite the same reputation, and that list is very short: Road Atlanta, Road America, Watkins Glen, Mid-Ohio perhaps, Daytona, Laguna Seca. The new track in Austin will have immediate recognition if it is actually built and hosts an F1 race, who knows.

So, is RA ideal? Not to everyone but when put up against most other possibilities it is a pretty good place to hold the Runoffs.

Last thing, and this goes completely against everything I just said, but if one were to consider moving the Runoffs around, IMO the best way to do that would be on an annual rotating basis--west coast, mid-America and east coast, alternating every year. This is what they do with the National Karting Championships and I think it works pretty well, gives everyone a chance to attend when it is in their neighborhood.

Take care.

Tom

[Matt King]

As nice as Miller may be, it's biggest problem is simply that it's convenient to very few people. It's 2,000 miles from the east coast and still 1,000 miles from California. When NASA moved its Nationals there after three years at Mid-Ohio, the overall attendance dropped. Yes, they picked up some west coast people, but it didn't make up for the easterns and midwesterners who stayed home. Although many people would like to see the runoffs at one of the premier California tracks, I think you'd see the same thing.

[Bill Valet]

1 is definitely NOT flat in my FF. I'm haaard on the brakes going into 1, but then again, this could explain why I was down 8 tenths to Tim during the runoffs....hmmmm ...how much for me to take 1 flat?

[larry svaton]

Peter, What was the debacle at HPT? I worked the first year ,raced FP the second and EP & T3 the last year. The debacle needs to be explained as i would like to know what the problem was. That way i can make sure we never do something like that in our region and do the best to keep our races and workers very happy so they will look forward to coming to our races.
Larry Svaton
Houston Region Board Member

[M.Sauce]

Tom- I am with you there.I think the kink is one of the great corners in American road racing.To me it is comparable to the old turn 11 at Road Atlanta under the bridge or the old sweeper at Montreal.The down hill at Limerock I am sure is the same way.The bridge turn at Road Atlanta was amazing because of the drop off over the hill.Any corner that is flat in top gear and you have to get pretty darn right to make it through is a great corner in my opinion.

[tiga57]

Well said Tom. Nothing less than a one off IMS type venue would be better. Furthermore, RA provides mega out braking, drafting opportunities per lap. Boring to me is having to watch a race waiting half a lap before getting to one of two or three real passing opportunities.

Mark D
vintage scum/runoffs spectator

[thunderracing91]

I kind of like the idea of it going back to either Mid-Ohio or Road Atlanta..........hell even HPT

[James Michael]

Maybe I'm biased but I still like the idea of a brand new Formula 1 track in Austin designed and built by one of the world's greatest. Also since it's brand new, I think you'd get a pretty even playing field.

Sebastian Vettel, here we come!!

[cooleyjb]

Regarding Texas. I'll reserve judgement until it's done. More than half of the F1 tracks just don't look like fun racing tracks. Great places to do a track day and drive but lots of sweepers and minimal big braking zones. There's a reason that a place like Road America has great races and a place like Miller is a snoozefest on TV.

[budawe]

Having attended 27 runoffs, 25 as a competitor, and all from Ca., I find it hilarious how subjective everyone is about track choice. If it's close to home, it's a perfect facility. If I have to tow anywhere, it's a lousy track. I feel that track choice is really dependent on the class you run. Steve Oseth's right and I agree that RA is not a good choice for low hp classes like our vees. Heartland was a lot more challenging for us but the big cars hated the place.

I've grown to accept the fact that the West coast is never going to see a Runoffs. Not because of poor facilities, but because most members are closer to the East and would not support a race that requires the kind of towing we West coasters have grown used to.

I have run virtually every major track in the country and know that while Sears and Laguna simply could not support such a large event, Miller could be a fantastic place. It's 28 miles to an international airport, there are 16,000 rooms within a 40 mile radius and the prices are not that high. Don't forget Salt Lake hosted the Olympics. I would just once to be able to attend the Runoffs and not freeze my Cali butt off.

I have bought fuel all across the country and no, California is not almost double! Maybe a nickle, but not double. Same with rooms, prices in Sheboygan are just as high as some in Cal.

Of all the recent tracks we've run, I prefer Mid Ohio. Not perfect, but a combination of a technical track, decent surrounding area and accessible to many members. Yea, the staff could be a challenge but it is a great facility.

I would support a mid year runoffs to allow more tracks to participate and it would be nice to attend in a t-shirt, but I think the idea is a bit too radical. So is the concept of breaking up the runoffs to two places. I'd hate to miss some of the great races that take place in other classes.

I support moving the race every 3 years. It'll mean that a new batch of locals will win.

[Allen_W]

RA is probably my favorite track, even in a FF, and it is a "home" track for me making it close by and really convenient except for the paddock fees . . . and so on. BUT I don't think the Run-Offs should stay there. It would be good to reduce the hometown advantage for one thing (not that it helps me much); the second aspect, for me, is the weather. Racing in bone-chilling wind is fine (I think I remember racing on snowy days at some point in Cen Div), I guess, but not for our prime event.

That leaves me favoring Indy or Austin, as everyone would be a visitor there - or having the event move around. VIR, Road Atlanta, MO, Laguna Seca . . . something like that, a "southern" circuit.

As to Austin, the music might be country, it might be western, it is just as likely to be indie rock or blues or hard rock or . . . any kind of music at all. You cannot beat Continental Club, Antone's, Saxon Pub, Momo's . . . unless maybe it's an oompah band in a chilly tent at Elkhart Lake.

Come to think of it, I vote Austin.

[cprevenas]

So, I realize I am a bit late with this post, but thought I would share a Flagging and Communications perspective to the topic. First of all, I realize that all of you drivers are what makes this club tick, and without you, I would have nothing to do every weekend of the summer. For that, I am forever grateful!

Based in the Midwest, I have had the chance to work a few Runoffs at different tracks, along with other events across the country. I have been involved in F&C for 16 years, so I feel like I have a decent base to draw from. I have worked at Road America, Blackhawk Farms, Road Atlanta, Mid-Ohio, Indy, Topeka, St. Petersburg (street course), Belle Isle (street race) and the old Minneapolis street race.

The worst Runoffs I have ever been to are the two at Topeka. No offense to those that call it home, but from a workers perspective it's brutal. The stations are terrible and the weather no better. If I wanted to get my whites blown off me regardless of cold temps or warm temps, I would stand in a wind tunnel. Most tracks that are set up for multi-config do not have great worker stations. Topeka as a city was great, the track was ordinary.

Indy would be great from a nuetral site and facilities perspective, but it's so boring. F1 cars couldn't make that place cool, so think of some of the slower SCCA classes. Granted, the config has changed since I worked my last F1 race, but it's flat and slow...other than the straight away.

Personally, Mid-O was the best. Road America is home, and it makes my life easier, but I think it's too long. Some of the slower classes have a pretty long lap and from a spectator view, that would be tough to watch. Austin would be cool, if it's built.

Road America has drawn some of the highest F&C counts in Runoffs history. Mostly, because it's a track that is known around the globe and has some of the best worker stations in the world.

This is long winded and I apologize, but I agree that it should be moved around, but it has to be someplace that means something. Mid-O, Road Atlanta, Road America, Laguna...someplace that resonates. You guys are the best amatuers in the world, the championship should be at the best tracks in the world.

Just my two cents. Thanks for listening.

[Northwind]

Chris,

It's good to get a workers view point on this issue. Corner workers are also a vital part of the race weekends. I certainly would not to crest any brows or enter corners at those speeds with out you people in your positions. I know this is predominately a drivers website but input from people from people such as yourself is welcome and brings clarity to all involved. Not all drivers know what it is like to work a station for a day or days on end. I have worked enough stations as a marshall in pro rally to know that I appreciate what corner workers do. Thank you for your input. It is welcomed to my ears (or eyes in this case).

[Peter Horvath]

So, I realize I am a bit late with this post, but thought I would share a Flagging and Communications perspective to the topic. First of all, I realize that all of you drivers are what makes this club tick, and without you, I would have nothing to do every weekend of the summer. For that, I am forever grateful!

Based in the Midwest, I have had the chance to work a few Runoffs at different tracks, along with other events across the country. I have been involved in F&C for 16 years, so I feel like I have a decent base to draw from. I have worked at Road America, Blackhawk Farms, Road Atlanta, Mid-Ohio, Indy, Topeka, St. Petersburg (street course), Belle Isle (street race) and the old Minneapolis street race.

The worst Runoffs I have ever been to are the two at Topeka. No offense to those that call it home, but from a workers perspective it's brutal. The stations are terrible and the weather no better. If I wanted to get my whites blown off me regardless of cold temps or warm temps, I would stand in a wind tunnel. Most tracks that are set up for multi-config do not have great worker stations. Topeka as a city was great, the track was ordinary.

Indy would be great from a nuetral site and facilities perspective, but it's so boring. F1 cars couldn't make that place cool, so think of some of the slower SCCA classes. Granted, the config has changed since I worked my last F1 race, but it's flat and slow...other than the straight away.

Personally, Mid-O was the best. Road America is home, and it makes my life easier, but I think it's too long. Some of the slower classes have a pretty long lap and from a spectator view, that would be tough to watch. Austin would be cool, if it's built.

Road America has drawn some of the highest F&C counts in Runoffs history. Mostly, because it's a track that is known around the globe and has some of the best worker stations in the world.

This is long winded and I apologize, but I agree that it should be moved around, but it has to be someplace that means something. Mid-O, Road Atlanta, Road America, Laguna...someplace that resonates. You guys are the best amatuers in the world, the championship should be at the best tracks in the world.

Just my two cents. Thanks for listening.

A brilliant and articulate post, and your first one.
Please jump in more often.

[Ed Erlandson]

I enjoy reading this thread as this subject has been on my mind often as i begin the new race season.
Mike Sauce knows that I bought a DB-6 for National races a few years ago, but after a few years of thinking that i would make it to RA, I have just given up. To far, too much time, and many other places to race. I just do not need to sacrifice a huge chunk of racing funds to go there.
I await another venue, IMS would be great, a new possibility in Austin? That would be good also. A change is good, because after a few years, all the guys that have done RA every year have the advantage. I want to go somewhere with the "level playing field", I would prefer a couple of years back to mid-ohio or Road Atlanta.

[Steve Demeter]

[ but it has to be someplace that means something. Mid-O, Road Atlanta, Road America, Laguna...someplace that resonates. You guys are the best amatuers in the world, the championship should be at the best tracks in the world.

Just my two cents. Thanks for listening.[/quote]

That is exactly what I told one of our erstwhile directors in 2006 when the Runoffs moving to Topeka was announced.

He did not get it.

[budawe]

Besides the weather, the biggest hurdle for tracks to overcome are the extensive requirements the club places on being able to host the event. Dozens of golf carts, tents and additional facilities just make the event too expensive for tracks to consider.

Rumor has it that the event did not move as planned because very few, if any, tracks responded to the requests for quotes. Tracks like Road Atlanta who have very strong financials just don't see the sense of bidding for the event.

I think it may be time to consider returning to local regions hosting the event and scale back on all the costs.

[mmi16]

Besides the weather, the biggest hurdle for tracks to overcome are the extensive requirements the club places on being able to host the event. Dozens of golf carts, tents and additional facilities just make the event too expensive for tracks to consider.

Rumor has it that the event did not move as planned because very few, if any, tracks responded to the requests for quotes. Tracks like Road Atlanta who have very strong financials just don't see the sense of bidding for the event.

I think it may be time to consider returning to local regions hosting the event and scale back on all the costs.

Considering what these same tracks provide for their Pro events, what is provided for the Runoff's is a drop in the proverbial bucket.

[M.Sauce]

[ but it has to be someplace that means something. Mid-O, Road Atlanta, Road America, Laguna...someplace that resonates. You guys are the best amatuers in the world, the championship should be at the best tracks in the world.

Just my two cents. Thanks for listening.

That is exactly what I told one of our erstwhile directors in 2006 when the Runoffs moving to Topeka was announced.

He did not get it.[/quote]
Steve- I suppose you were referring to a conversation I had with you about the Runoffs.At that time Mid Ohio and HTP were the only two tracks with any interest in hosting the Runoffs.There was a laundry list of reasons to consider a new venue after 12 years at Mid Ohio.I agree with you the Runoffs should be at a track with some history and notariety.HTP was our option.The racing in my opinion was better at HTP than at Road America.The numbers were better the first two years at HTP than Road America.Can HTP compete with Road America not in my opinion but that does not make the HTP Runoffs a debacle as some have said.From a competitor perspective RA costs considerably more.I am not sure I see the value at RA.I spent $7500 and got 12 laps on the track all week before the race.It is however one the best facilities we have been to for the Runoffs.I just think it needs to move around.

[Marshall Mauney]

From a competitor perspective RA costs considerably more.I am not sure I see the value at RA.I spent $7500 and got 12 laps on the track all week before the race.

This is a crucial point that should not be ignored by club management.

[budawe]

Considering what these same tracks provide for their Pro events, what is provided for the Runoff's is a drop in the proverbial bucket.

difference is that the pro events make money for the track and the tracks rely on vendors to put up a lot of the spectator benefits.

[Dennis McCarthy]

The racers are the show.

The track is or should be the promoter not the racer.

Most tracks don't spend much time or effort in the way of promotion.

[Matt King]

This is a crucial point that should not be ignored by club management.

How much of that cost was directly attributable to the Runoffs being at RA? Travel expenses, test days, and tires cost money no matter where you are. And the short session times were set by SCCA, not the track. I only ran 18 laps all week myself (including the race!), but I would hardly blame the track for that. OK, if it was 2 miles long, I might have gotten 36 laps, but that doesn't change anything about the underlying causes of the Runoffs having a poor track time/$ spent ratio.

[Steve Demeter]

Actually Mike it was not you to whom I was referring.

We did talk about why in the world move to HTP, but you never said anything that silly to me.

Steve

[Marshall Mauney]

How much of that cost was directly attributable to the Runoffs being at RA? Travel expenses, test days, and tires cost money no matter where you are. And the short session times were set by SCCA, not the track. I only ran 18 laps all week myself (including the race!), but I would hardly blame the track for that. OK, if it was 2 miles long, I might have gotten 36 laps, but that doesn't change anything about the underlying causes of the Runoffs having a poor track time/$ spent ratio.

We can start with paddock spot rental fees, "sponsorships", and the cost of the test days. Then look at what it costs to park a motorhome on-site - even without anything remotely resembling proper RV facilities. Compare that to the cost of parking the same RV at Brainerd - with full hookups (not suggesting Brainerd as a Runoffs location - just pointing out the massive discrepancy).

[Matt King]

I'm not saying there weren't some higher costs attributable to RA compared to previous venues, but I really don't think they added up to the $7500 he spent. I would be more interested to know what the apples to apples difference in cost was for someone at RA compared to the last location, not their total budget.

[budawe]

Matt, you make a good point about most of the complaints not having to do with the track it self. At Topeka, motels and meals were a lot more reasonable. Motels for me, were twice as much at RA, there were a lot more choices for meals and town was not so far away. I used at least one tank of fuel just commuting at RA. I thought the weather sucked at both tracks and the facilities at either track had their advantages but spectating at Topeka was more interesting.

[Jnovak]

I think that Topeka is a really nice facility. The biggest problem for me was the weather. Constant 40mph winds & cold was miserable. Last year at RA was not any better.

Move the Runoffs up a few weeks & rotate it among 2 or 3 different tracks.

Thanks ... Jay Novak