Did we make history this weekend?

Ken Killam said:
..... We have already seen the OW Novices be sucked up into Grp 6, and now particular relief given to the schedule, really......
Click to expand...

Ken,
I'm not sure what you said.

But, the 'sucking' of open wheel Novices in to Group 6 was a 'logical' and non-hazardous move. Jeff ran all of his Novice races with this new format. Group 6 was 'small' (12 to 18 cars) with just a few sports racers, Legends and FL cars ALL driven by racers who were extra cautious when the Novice open wheelers joined them. It proved to be a better experience (with that group of senior drivers) then having a NOW race with 2 to 4 cars taking laps.

If Group 6 had 30 sports racers and 20 Legends showing up every weekend I'd probably have a different opinion. Just as I would not agree now to throwing 10 or 12 closed wheel Novices in to a regular run group with 30 to 50 Senior drivers. That's what the other club does after drivers school and it isn't 'healthy'.

My MAIN POINT was, going to 2 race 2 day format THEN ADDING race days to the schedule JUST for Novices defeats the entire purpose of having 2 day 2 race weekends.

My SECOND POINT was, do not screw up the Novice Program. It is what keeps ICSCC alive and well compared to the other options for potential racers.

Sure, I'm open to new ideas. As you may recall, Wes and I proposed numerous possible formats to do 2 day 2 race weekends almost 2 years ago. But in all those cases, we DID NOT mess up the Novice Program. It's that important to the health and well being of the club.
 
Last edited:
If each club were to host a double week-end and single each season, we could cut down on the travelling and thereby keep more workers and drivers involved. The clubs could lose a degree of income with this format if they were to offer a reduced entry fee as SCCBC did this past week-end, but that would have to be penciled out and discussed with each club board.
There are naturally a bevy of possibilities to consider, but the bottom line is to reduce the travelling for both drivers and workers, while offering a format that is much busier and I feel more exciting than what we have currently. We saved time by absorbing novice OW into G6 recently, and if we were to drop races from 30 minutes to 25, or even 20, we would save even more time. I know many drivers object to that, but if we're talking two races in one week-end, and far greater seat time, then it should be easier to give that idea a serious look at this point. I personally would gladly accept 2 shorter races in lieu of one 30 minute race.
 
I'm all for cramming more action into a given week-end, but shortening the races (which, after all, are the reason we're there) would definitely be a non-starter for me. (I'd rather see 50-minute races, too, so maybe I'm just an oddball.)

As for Ken's suggestion about separating the Novice events from the race week-ends, to free up the schedule, I think it would definitely be a bad idea: part of the benefit to our program, vs. SCCA's separate "novicing training and racing events," is that they occur during the normal week-end. You're in the environment and around the other drivers/cars the whole time you're there. You're able to check out other people's cars and paddock setups. See how they prep. Get a chance to meet with senior drivers and ask questions. I'd say including the Novices with "everyone else's" week-end is one of the biggest advantages our program has over SCCA's.
 
Steve Adams said:
I'm all for cramming more action into a given week-end, but shortening the races (which, after all, are the reason we're there) would definitely be a non-starter for me. (I'd rather see 50-minute races, too, so maybe I'm just an oddball.)

As for Ken's suggestion about separating the Novice events from the race week-ends, to free up the schedule, I think it would definitely be a bad idea: part of the benefit to our program, vs. SCCA's separate "novicing training and racing events," is that they occur during the normal week-end. You're in the environment and around the other drivers/cars the whole time you're there. You're able to check out other people's cars and paddock setups. See how they prep. Get a chance to meet with senior drivers and ask questions. I'd say including the Novices with "everyone else's" week-end is one of the biggest advantages our program has over SCCA's.
Click to expand...

+5 Steve.....I thought that was the best part of the novice program. The interaction and advice from senior drivers.
 
If it's a revenue issue that's a hurdle to more two day doubles, then charge the original race entry fee structure for each day and don't offer a combination discount. You'll hear no complaints from me, because I save 50% of the trips and associated travel expenses if I travel to a venue once vs. twice, and that's considerably more than whatever savings a discount constitutes.

As far as logisitics, can we maybe have a single weekend tech for cars entered both days, and freeze the rotation for the weekend?

Regarding the novice program, the integration of the novices into the senior race weekend in all ways except for run groups has a value that cannot be underestimated. Gotta train like you're gonna do.
 
westipton said:
..... and if we were to drop races from 30 minutes to 25, or even 20, we would save even more time. I know many drivers object to that, but if we're talking two races in one week-end....
Click to expand...

Wes, when we were looking at this back-in-the-day, I think what we came up with was a 20 minute race on Saturday (thus saving the time for Novice Closed Wheel) and a 30 minute race on Sunday.

That was the CATCH to this. Needed a 'rule modification' to allow 20 minute championship race on Saturday to accommodate the novice program.

P.S.
I KNOW the drivers really enjoy the 30 minute races but, lets face it, finishing order barring mechanical issues are pretty much sorted out after 20 minutes. And having a 20/30 per weekend isn't all that bad. The 'other club(s)' run 20 minute races as 'standard fair'.
 
Last edited:
I thought that the format of this past weekend went well, I liked the double race format, maximizes weekend, reduces travel. The novice program I think works very well as it is, there are a mix of drivers and cars, this give the novice a chance to experence all sorts of things out on the track. In NASA we had to go through 4 levels of HPDE (most ran street cars) and then you were put out on the track with the class with whom you were going to run (most folks it was the first time in a race prep car) with (as a rookie), so no specific novice class, just run 6 races with your class w/o incident. The ICSCC format seem better and would hate to see that change.
 
This format worked

I feel that this is a very workable format.
Certainly there are limitations of extending time at Pacific and probably Portland but it needs to be seriously looked at by the clubs and the e board for our future.

I agree with Mike B. that it is a thrash coming off of a long pull to another long pull and being ready.
Of course he is a pro at changing brakes on a BMW and at Mission you had better be.

JC...well you're a force to deal with in the dry and the rain...glad I watched the rain race from the fence...your dry spin in t-2 got me up on the wheel...and you are right about fenders ...this open wheel stuff is a blast and if you aren't doing it you should give it a try...I love it!

That salsa is great...and yes...he did give some away.

Thanks to everyone for a great time in Canada.
 
Rich, My statement was to exemplify that changes are already taking place in the Novice program. In this particular case, to create some relief in the weekend schedule.

I merely suggest to expand that to consider that each club has the ability to present a whole weekend of instruction without the many distractions, and I believe, still maintain a positive Senior driver/ Novice relationship within their own venues.

This, I suppose, for a different thread someday when we have more drivers than we do spots to put all their classes into a reasonable schedule, and the CW drivers are, again calling for the OW groups to move over.
 
I agree Randy, charge full price for each day and the clubs will bring in the same funds in fewer week-ends. That frees up a few week-ends for the volunteers and workers who have to run these events, and less travel saves us all money. If the clubs can offer a reasonable discount fine, but otherwise we'll pay the same as we do now. At least we'd be getting good seat time at PR for a change.
Rich, your idea of a 20 and 30 is a great idea, and I do agree that most races are decided well before the end. Not always of course, but being on track gives you the advantage of watching while working, so I will defer to you on that issue. The Saturday race in Mission was brutal with the high humidity and mugginess, and I can't imagine what it was like in the CW cars. SRP and PIR in August is the same scenario almost every year, and I personally would welcome shorter races in the heat of the summer.
Kenny, if G3 & 6 were combined for next season, then there is another 40+ minutes per day to be used to achieve this proposed new format. I naturally do not want to see that happen, but I understand the numbers just aren't there right now for many reasons. I also have heard that the proposal regarding that issue has already been written. OW and SR is healthy pretty much everywhere but up here, which is very disappointing and confusing to me, but it is a reality unfortunately.
 
westipton said:
I agree Kenny, if G3 & 6 were combined for next season, then there is another 40+ minutes per day to be used to achieve this proposed new format. I naturally do not want to see that happen, but I understand the numbers just aren't there right now for many reasons. I also have heard that the proposal regarding that issue has already been written. OW and SR is healthy pretty much everywhere but up here, which is very disappointing and confusing to me, but it is a reality unfortunately.
Click to expand...

Just a few years back, Wes, we had huge FF fields in Group 3 but that has dropped off too. Same is true for SR's in Group 6 in terms of a drop off in the numbers. Then you've got the issue of differential velocity to deal with.

We lost almost all the FV's when they got moved from Group 3 to Group 6 and had to run with the SR's and FL's versus just FF's and CF's. Combining Group 3/6 at this moment seems reasonable based upon the numbers. But that also means losing a race group that 'could' grow in the future. Once you give it up, somebody will be after it. Furthermore, Group 6 right now is a terrific home for the Legends. But, sadly they don't seem to be turning out in numbers like they did in past years either. They might not mix so nice with a LARGE field of FF's, FV's, SR's, FL's, etc if 3/6 is combined. Might not feel as comfortable there.
 
I know the temptation is there and I understand all the reasons why, but I think it's WAY too early to begin seriously talking about combining the OW groups into one. Yes, the numbers are pretty low, especially when compared to a couple of the CW groups, but that's a door that'll be really, really hard to reopen if we close it.

Also, I'd add my willingness to pay full price to get a double race in one week-end, but I'd be a LOT less willing to do that if the races were shortened. Seriously, I would LOVE to see us do 50-minute races (as a few other "sprint" series do) and I understand the logistical issues alone as to why we don't, but 30 minutes is about the minimum race time I'm willing to get in order to counter-balance all the hassle of racing in the first place. If you cut down on the raison d'être for coming to the track... I won't, simple as that.
 
bob_mearns said:
I'd vote for dropping Saturday morning practice and keeping the races at 30-minutes.
Click to expand...

Yup, that was the 'other option' to keep both days 30 minutes. No practice would save time for the Novices and could then make the Saturday Qual sessions longer for the Senior Run Groups.

There were some negative comments about doing that. You don't have a chance to 'check out' the car before qual. Therefore, there's a risk of something going wrong that could have been fixed before qual. (risk exists even with practice runs) and not getting a qual time.

This whole thing could lead to a lot of gnashing of teeth but can be done if 'most' agree it's a good idea. The idea of trying a few during 2011 sounds like a logical plan.
 
Last edited:
Well Steve, 50 minutes won't work for our cars, nor would pretty much anything over 30. I have absolutely no interest in running more than 20 or 30 tops unless I'm doing enduros. That would put a lot of additional stress on tires, fuel and car, and wear out a lot of guys who aren't in shape for long sprints, which is at least half of us if not more.
As I said, 2 races of 50 minutes is much more appealing than one 30 minute race and 2 Q sessions that count for nothing really. We need a morning warm-up for sure Rich, and whether we call it that or practice or qualifying makes no difference to me. I can't even imagine how you could run 5 or 6 groups for 50 minutes each with an organization as large as Conference.
I am not in favor of this combinig of 3 and 6 at all, and if we lose it it will take years to get it back. I have seen the classes ebb and flow in the last 35+ years, and I recall the 25 to 40 car OW grids we had less than 10 years ago. Doesn't matter what class, from CF to SM to Pro7 or Pro3, they all eventually suffer loss of cars and a decline in attendance.
 
westipton said:
Well Steve, 50 minutes won't work for our cars, nor would pretty much anything over 30. I have absolutely no interest in running more than 20 or 30 tops unless I'm doing enduros. That would put a lot of additional stress on tires, fuel and car, and wear out a lot of guys who aren't in shape for long sprints, which is at least half of us if not more.
Click to expand...
I know, I know. I didn't say it was a realistic "want," but it's mine and I'm keepin' it! :D
 
2 cents:

The double-race weekend at Mission wasn't as much of a scramble as I thought it might be--on the other hand, I only ran one group. Running two groups would definitely be intense--physically and mentally. Interesting to hear more from people who ran 2 groups.

I would seriously hesitate to eliminate the "practice" session before the qualifying. For those of us with limited funds and more limited time, we can't add a testing day in between races to check out the car/track. We need that practice session to check out the car AND/or check out the track if someone is new to that venue.

Yeah, it's almost pointless to go out for 10 minutes, but it did give a chance to make sure the brakes worked, check strut settings, engine jetting, etc. Don't do away with that.

My opinion is that it would be interesting to have some of these race weekends, but to NOT have them all be this way. The tighter, more intense schedule definitely limited some of the social aspects of our race weekends. Personally, I enjoy spending time with some of these people, that we don't see any other time. I enjoy the 3-day weekends for their more relaxed atmosphere and time to hang out with race people.

The tighter schedule would also be problematic if one had a major car issue--there just isn't alot of time to find a problem and make a fix.

That said, we basically had a great weekend. Had a great race on Sat. (Sunday afternoon's weather kind of stunk) and got to know some people better. Thanks Jeff for your offer to help the competition before Sunday's race--unfortunate that there wasn't time. We've got to use a different coin to choose our tires when it clouds up at Mission, but I managed to stay on the track.

Thanks again to all who made the Mission weekend work, and to our stewards who work long and hard to keep everybody behaving.
 
finally

Struggling to get my response in and my comments are pretty close to Karen's.

This format (double race in 2 days) was busy, hence I only entered one race group instead of two. I would like to know how many others made that choice as well. So for me I had less time on track than I normally do. The price is what made this acceptable for me, so if you charge double for half the track time, I am not going to think that was a bargin and consider that heavily when it comes to attending or not (it may save travel time compared to races, but not as compared to track time). I am really opposed to dropping the practice, this is terribly important for those just learning a track and it is where you can try new setups and techniques, especially critical if you only get one (short) qual session.

I can see the attraction for this format, especially for those that only do one race grp. Given price, this weekend was OK for me. There were some things I wanted to try that I didn't get time for and I have raced at this track 9 times previous. When I first started, I appreciated the additional qual session and extra session length to learn the track.

Mike
 
westipton said:
.......I am not in favor of this combinig of 3 and 6 at all, and if we lose it it will take years to get it back. I have seen the classes ebb and flow in the last 35+ years, and I recall the 25 to 40 car OW grids we had less than 10 years ago. Doesn't matter what class, from CF to SM to Pro7 or Pro3, they all eventually suffer loss of cars and a decline in attendance.
Click to expand...

VERY INTERESTING, WES.

I just read an E-mail from the Spokane people that states they are considering combining Groups 3 and 6 for the upcoming race weekend.... Hmmmm

Although not big in numbers that would eliminate possible double entry's from Group 3 having a 2nd run group to enter. Several of the FF's double enter to increase their track time. Although we never did it with the FC the possiblity to run FC/FL was always there... sigh.

BUT, we did run FL one weekend down in Portland instead of FC just to avoid getting home and unpacked so late with Jeff's work at 4:30AM on Monday.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top