Track access for some groups at Pacific Raceways
- Thread starter p_whitworth
- Start date
Steve Adams
Just this guy, ya know?
Amen to that. One of the things I like least about racing myself is that it doesn't afford much time to watch OTHER people racing. One of the best races I ever saw, in close to 30 years of watching, was a Club Ford race at Pacific in late 2002. Eight cars that swapped all 8 positions over the course of 30 minutes, never more than a few car-lengths apart and usually MUCH closer than that.
tobybasiliko
doofus
That's what I thought when I entered. I'm all for the special races, but when they come at the expense of on- track sessions that used to be included that's where I'm left underwhelmed.
I don't want to run 2 races next weekend- and yes, the hourlong race is a great deal- but getting on track twice, even if it's just for 7 minutes in the morning, has value for me.
However, this isn't a business, it's a club, (or a clique of clubs?) so I'm up for trying it at least once- let's see how it goes. And then I'll see y'all at the Sizzler to discuss it!
t
colin_koehler
Great SCOTT!
:Sit back, grab some cocoa.. this one is long:
And the larger point that it doesn't matter if this format is presented by NASA, SCCA or even Conference but...
1: That specific NASA format this weekend is only possible because they have so few entries and everything is condensed, there are only 2 race groups that weekend. ICSCC has 7 race groups, sometimes 8. NASA's format is sure to change as entries demand it and NASA is allowed to shorten race time to 25 minutes (or less because that 25min includes pace lap and cool down lap).
2: The two race/two day format (for $299) has great value appeal. Every weekend is a double race weekend.
The thing is, there isn't just "one right answer". If we try to please everybody, we please nobody.
So there's been a couple ways that the clubs have been able to incrementally increase revenue by doing a couple of things:
1) car being able to double enter by fitting into classes in another run group ITA/ITX/SM/EP, PRO3/EIP etc etc. Inherent problem: not everyone's car can do this, some are left out
2) Special races have proven to be effective but exclude some cars. The Mini enduro is actually far more inclusive than the GTCC or the JTCC special races but still, leaves out open wheels cars.
We've talked about options of doing "more class racing" per weekend but some of the Conference by-laws prevent this due to championship requirements, how many races a club can host etc etc. Some rules would have to change and I get that but I think a lot of folks would like to do more "racing" for their entry. I don't know how many share my opinion but I think the schedule for the upcoming ORP weekend should be the standard schedule for any basic weekend.
Sat:
AM Qual
PM Race
Sun:
AM Qual
PM Race
And to take a cue from our new competitors here in the NW, charge $299-$325 for that and someone wants to run 2 groups (aka 4 races) because they're hard core or sharing a car then charge them another $299.
Are you a club like NWMS or TC and need to offer more value to convince people to make the tow? Try this format:
For $350 (4 sessions, 3 races!) ORP, Mission?
Sat:
AM Qual
PM Race
Sun:
AM Race
PM Race
Or
For $450 (6 sessions, 4 races!) Spokane?
Friday:
AM Qual
PM Race
Sat:
AM Qual
PM Race
Sun:
AM Race
PM Race
Less pointless track time, more racing. Track time/shake down is for the TnT days and our TnT days are insanely cheap. I continue to support that decision. What I propose, I feel, would generate more revenue (via growth) while simultaneously sparking growth both in racing and TnT entries. The TnT should also be used as a marketing tool and appeal to more HPDE'ers where we can "sell them" on Conference racing.
I'm sticking my neck out saying these things but as I talk to others I know I'm not alone, I just feel like I'm the only one willing to sit down and type it out.
And the larger point that it doesn't matter if this format is presented by NASA, SCCA or even Conference but...
1: That specific NASA format this weekend is only possible because they have so few entries and everything is condensed, there are only 2 race groups that weekend. ICSCC has 7 race groups, sometimes 8. NASA's format is sure to change as entries demand it and NASA is allowed to shorten race time to 25 minutes (or less because that 25min includes pace lap and cool down lap).
2: The two race/two day format (for $299) has great value appeal. Every weekend is a double race weekend.
The thing is, there isn't just "one right answer". If we try to please everybody, we please nobody.
So there's been a couple ways that the clubs have been able to incrementally increase revenue by doing a couple of things:
1) car being able to double enter by fitting into classes in another run group ITA/ITX/SM/EP, PRO3/EIP etc etc. Inherent problem: not everyone's car can do this, some are left out
2) Special races have proven to be effective but exclude some cars. The Mini enduro is actually far more inclusive than the GTCC or the JTCC special races but still, leaves out open wheels cars.
We've talked about options of doing "more class racing" per weekend but some of the Conference by-laws prevent this due to championship requirements, how many races a club can host etc etc. Some rules would have to change and I get that but I think a lot of folks would like to do more "racing" for their entry. I don't know how many share my opinion but I think the schedule for the upcoming ORP weekend should be the standard schedule for any basic weekend.
Sat:
AM Qual
PM Race
Sun:
AM Qual
PM Race
And to take a cue from our new competitors here in the NW, charge $299-$325 for that and someone wants to run 2 groups (aka 4 races) because they're hard core or sharing a car then charge them another $299.
Are you a club like NWMS or TC and need to offer more value to convince people to make the tow? Try this format:
For $350 (4 sessions, 3 races!) ORP, Mission?
Sat:
AM Qual
PM Race
Sun:
AM Race
PM Race
Or
For $450 (6 sessions, 4 races!) Spokane?
Friday:
AM Qual
PM Race
Sat:
AM Qual
PM Race
Sun:
AM Race
PM Race
Less pointless track time, more racing. Track time/shake down is for the TnT days and our TnT days are insanely cheap. I continue to support that decision. What I propose, I feel, would generate more revenue (via growth) while simultaneously sparking growth both in racing and TnT entries. The TnT should also be used as a marketing tool and appeal to more HPDE'ers where we can "sell them" on Conference racing.
I'm sticking my neck out saying these things but as I talk to others I know I'm not alone, I just feel like I'm the only one willing to sit down and type it out.
Randy Blaylock
Highlander Motorsports
Colin,
Thanks for taking the time to ponder, and to share.
I'm with you and the qual/race per day concept. I believe many in Conference are or would be.
You're right on the money that it will take a major re-working of the rules to acommodate this, plus a lot of politicking (sp?), and a common direction amongst the clubs.
Because of this, and I'm not being negative or pessimistic, having been involved just a little bit in the admin and conceptualizing of these things, this is a very high hurdle.
It will take a change in perspective in how many races should be on the schedule, how many should count towards a championship, how many races to qualify for a championship, the points structure probably, and then mix in the subjectives of how these changes affect the likelihood that people will still visit all the tracks, and on and on. There are additional non-obvious factors, like the fact that at Pacific Raceways IRDC has a shut down time on Saturdays of 4 pm because of their conditional use permit and/or their real bread and butter, Saturday night drag racing. Obviously this is a huge challenge for scheduling.
IMHO the framers of the original rules package, and subsequent tweak over the years, have netted an incredibly good rule set and value proposition for all racers. It's also as fair as can be reasonably expected given practical considerations.
The seemingly small change eliminating the requirement for practice sessions for senior race groups was intended as a tool to create flexibility for the clubs to explore options to meet the desires of the racers. Hopefully we will get to a place where everybody feels like it is an improvement, or maybe we will discover that the original way is still best. The good news is, no reversal or further rules change is required for any club to schedule exactly as they have in the past, if it turns out this is what we all want after all.
What I'm hopeful for, is that we can all have a bit of patience and flexibility while we do try some things, and not simply fear change for it's own sake, or feel like any particular group is being singled out as being somehow less valuable.
Thanks for taking the time to ponder, and to share.
I'm with you and the qual/race per day concept. I believe many in Conference are or would be.
You're right on the money that it will take a major re-working of the rules to acommodate this, plus a lot of politicking (sp?), and a common direction amongst the clubs.
Because of this, and I'm not being negative or pessimistic, having been involved just a little bit in the admin and conceptualizing of these things, this is a very high hurdle.
It will take a change in perspective in how many races should be on the schedule, how many should count towards a championship, how many races to qualify for a championship, the points structure probably, and then mix in the subjectives of how these changes affect the likelihood that people will still visit all the tracks, and on and on. There are additional non-obvious factors, like the fact that at Pacific Raceways IRDC has a shut down time on Saturdays of 4 pm because of their conditional use permit and/or their real bread and butter, Saturday night drag racing. Obviously this is a huge challenge for scheduling.
IMHO the framers of the original rules package, and subsequent tweak over the years, have netted an incredibly good rule set and value proposition for all racers. It's also as fair as can be reasonably expected given practical considerations.
The seemingly small change eliminating the requirement for practice sessions for senior race groups was intended as a tool to create flexibility for the clubs to explore options to meet the desires of the racers. Hopefully we will get to a place where everybody feels like it is an improvement, or maybe we will discover that the original way is still best. The good news is, no reversal or further rules change is required for any club to schedule exactly as they have in the past, if it turns out this is what we all want after all.
What I'm hopeful for, is that we can all have a bit of patience and flexibility while we do try some things, and not simply fear change for it's own sake, or feel like any particular group is being singled out as being somehow less valuable.
Sherm Johnston
Active member
As someone that will make a 1000 mi (round trip) tow to attend this event, I thought I'd throw in my .02 I too was a bit put off by the situation and must admit that I considered not attending. However, Rick's explanation is well taken. Clubs must try different things and frankly some don't work well, but try they must. I take it that the club and its leadership might revise the plan next time. Unfortunately, I as most all of us do, must watch the budget but in this case based on the explanation given I will attend. If it is a trend then perhaps the entry dollar must be spent elsewhere. That said, the reason I race with ICSCC is the organization and the fact that there are more club fords here that anywhere else north of SF. I enjoy the events and will continue to support. Thanks to all who put in the hours to make the weekends successful.
rick_bostrom
Onda Kattan Racing
Thanks for your supprt Sherm and fear not - the Club Ford position (and all of open wheel for that matter) was very eloquently and passionately championed by Mark Keller at the IRDC General meeting last night.
I'm with Randy and Colin - it is essential that we try some things to make sure we are ready and in the right position to succeed in the face of rising costs, other options, and competition for venues. One of the reasons that this schedule has blown up on us a little is because we are tightly constrained as far as which things we can experiment with. The Conference rule book has some strict restrictions on which things we can tamper with. As much as I want to try other things, it is also important to remember that just pitching all those rules out in favor of popular new rules can have some serious unintended consequences and forgets that Conference has been remarkably successful over the years with the rules as they currently stand.
There are lots of potential race day schedule changes that bear some close examination and consideration for the future. Don't underestimate the task of changing them though - a VERY good and DETAILED proposal that addresses all rulebook conflicts and carries the overwhelming support of the membership will have to be presented at the E-Board meetings at the end of the year to have any chance at all. Poorly written and spur of the moment changes have ZERO chance of success (ask me how I know ....).
Don't think this has to come from somebody who is already in some kind of leadership position. If you are a Conference licensed driver you can sit down in your little cave and scribble away at something until you think you have it right. THen start showing it to your friends and they will start showing it to their friends. Get their input then get everybody together and drum up help and support and throw it out at rule change time. No matter who it comes from all our drivers have equal access to the rule change process so come up with something great and offer it to your fellow racers. Conference is a member driven organization, the clubs are yours, the races are yours, and the rules are yours - thats what makes it great.
I'm with Randy and Colin - it is essential that we try some things to make sure we are ready and in the right position to succeed in the face of rising costs, other options, and competition for venues. One of the reasons that this schedule has blown up on us a little is because we are tightly constrained as far as which things we can experiment with. The Conference rule book has some strict restrictions on which things we can tamper with. As much as I want to try other things, it is also important to remember that just pitching all those rules out in favor of popular new rules can have some serious unintended consequences and forgets that Conference has been remarkably successful over the years with the rules as they currently stand.
There are lots of potential race day schedule changes that bear some close examination and consideration for the future. Don't underestimate the task of changing them though - a VERY good and DETAILED proposal that addresses all rulebook conflicts and carries the overwhelming support of the membership will have to be presented at the E-Board meetings at the end of the year to have any chance at all. Poorly written and spur of the moment changes have ZERO chance of success (ask me how I know ....).
Don't think this has to come from somebody who is already in some kind of leadership position. If you are a Conference licensed driver you can sit down in your little cave and scribble away at something until you think you have it right. THen start showing it to your friends and they will start showing it to their friends. Get their input then get everybody together and drum up help and support and throw it out at rule change time. No matter who it comes from all our drivers have equal access to the rule change process so come up with something great and offer it to your fellow racers. Conference is a member driven organization, the clubs are yours, the races are yours, and the rules are yours - thats what makes it great.
Last edited:
Just want to say thanks to those that don't always chime in, that have shared thoughts and personally thanks for those willing to understand the schedule situation next weekend.
I happen to have brought a buddy up for the weekend from San Fran in hopes to hook him into either renting up here from time to time or at least getting more consistent with racing on the weekends.
I will be participating even though I know it's not a bang for the buck weekend (there's a reason I do Spokane every year and its because I'm frugal + love the atmosphere out there).
Conference continues to get stronger and better... 1 hour enduro series is really cool and glad to see it expanded this year. I too am concerned about less track time for same money... But we know things will get better.
I happen to have brought a buddy up for the weekend from San Fran in hopes to hook him into either renting up here from time to time or at least getting more consistent with racing on the weekends.
I will be participating even though I know it's not a bang for the buck weekend (there's a reason I do Spokane every year and its because I'm frugal + love the atmosphere out there).
Conference continues to get stronger and better... 1 hour enduro series is really cool and glad to see it expanded this year. I too am concerned about less track time for same money... But we know things will get better.
Steve Adams
Just this guy, ya know?
I understand the tendency of any minority group to view the actions of others in the light of "how poorly does this affect me?", but I would be... concerned, I guess, if the OW cars were to get "extra" track time on a week-end where EVERYONE is missing out on practice time to allow for a special race. Yes, obviously, ONLY closed-wheel cars can enter the special race, but very few of them (when compared to the total number of CW cars otherwise at the track) actually are. Taken in that light, drivers of all types of cars are making a sacrifice so that the club can try an experiment. While the drivers of OW cars are making a greater sacrifice in terms of opportunity, anyone not driving in the special race is making an equal sacrifice in terms of track time, so it would possibly be more unfair to the CW drivers if only the OW drivers got "their" track time back.
rick_bostrom
Onda Kattan Racing
I think the point that he is making is something that we are already looking at. One of the big time wasters is the time in between sessions that we need to clear the track and get the next session out. It was mentioned at the meeting that something along the lines of having a single practice for combined Groups 1 and 4, Groups 2 and 5, and Groups 3 and 6 would allow those sessions to be twice as long and still save us time by removing half of the breaks that would normally be between six practice sessions. Instead of six 15 minute sessions on Saturday morning you could have three combined that were a half hour long and still save time. You could do the same with the Saturday Qualifying session and make three that were 40 minutes long instead of six that are 20 minutes. THen having the regular six qualy's on Sunday morning and a regular race schedule Sunday afternoon would give a taste of both worlds.
Obviously it would take some tweaking because Pro3 for example runs in Group 1 as their main group and mostly EIP in Group 5 as their second entry if so desired. That would allow them to pretty much be on track for all but the combined open wheel group. It would probably take assigning individual classes to a Saturday group or at least telling everyone that they must choose ONE combined group on Saturday to run.
I can say that I see why OW guys might want to be able to run a combined Saturday group since they are the only ones excluded from entry into the Enduro. On the other hand, it was pretty clear from the meeting that most who attended weren't looking for a lot more practice or qualifying time - the majority felt pretty strongly that they would like to see more racing and less of everything else.
Obviously it would take some tweaking because Pro3 for example runs in Group 1 as their main group and mostly EIP in Group 5 as their second entry if so desired. That would allow them to pretty much be on track for all but the combined open wheel group. It would probably take assigning individual classes to a Saturday group or at least telling everyone that they must choose ONE combined group on Saturday to run.
I can say that I see why OW guys might want to be able to run a combined Saturday group since they are the only ones excluded from entry into the Enduro. On the other hand, it was pretty clear from the meeting that most who attended weren't looking for a lot more practice or qualifying time - the majority felt pretty strongly that they would like to see more racing and less of everything else.
colin_koehler
Great SCOTT!
I'm glad you posted this rick, I had the same thought but was reluctant to say anything but now I can say, "I 2nd that motion".
Part of my reluctancy is that I didn't have a "good" solution for folks who are double dipping or are sharing cars. In the case of double dipping (like me running ITA G5 and ITX G2) then my qualifying time could stand for both race groups, the problem here is that it creates some complexity. The larger issue is that if my Dad is in town (and we're sharing the car) and he's running G2 and me G5 then if you combine them... well, how's that gonna work? Since I didn't have an answer to that one I didn't feel like positing the question. Your thoughts?
It might work if we could combine non-complimentary groups, like 1/2, 4/5, 3/6. Another thought is that we have a 2-3 group "open" qualifying that's 40 minutes long each and drivers sharing cars or entered in 2 groups are allowed to set a time, come in, change drivers/tires/car #'s (for secondary class/group) and go out again. I'll admit again, this does add some complexity for timing/scoring. Qual 1: Open wheel cars, Qual 2: Closed wheel cars (fast), Qual 3: Closed wheel cars (slow-ish and NCW practice). If we have a weekend with short entries we could even combine the 2 CW qual groups. Now I'm addressing Pacific Raceways specifically due to the condensed schedule but Rick, did you have something like this in mind?:
Sat:
9:05-9:45: Open Wheel Qualifying
9:45-10:25: Closed Wheel Qual for slower CW cars (and Novice Practice)
10:25-11:05: Closed Wheel Qual for fastest CW cars
11:05-11:25: Novice Qual
11:25-12:25: Lunch & Driver's meeting
12:30-1:00: Group 1 race
1:05-1:35: Group 2 race
1:40-2:10: Group 3/6 race
2:15-2:45: Group 4 race
2:50-3:20: Group 5 race
3:25-3:55: Novice Race
I couldn't make it happen without the combination of 3 and 6 unfortunately. I thought about putting all the CW cars together in qual but there might be too many.
Edit: Maybe have the Novice race after lunch instead of last?
Last edited:
Steve Adams
Just this guy, ya know?
An added complexity to any "let's try something new" schedule is that you can't mess with Novice time. NOW are a little screwed by their inclusion in G6 because Novice track time is very specifically called out in the regs. You'll notice, for example, that NCW still has a practice session on the schedule for The Ridge.
Richard Broadhead
Flag & Com
FIVE years ago, Wes and I started a discussion on this topic that lead to about 4 or 5 different variations of schedules that lead to 2 races per weekend (one sat one sun) that gave everybody equal track time and included the Novice program. BUT because of all the mods required to the rules, the plan never gained any traction (no leader of the cause).
One thing that helped immensely was getting rid of 40 minute qual.. sessions. 30 or even 20 minute qual. sessions are more then enough.
But then we aren't racing any more. It's just a shame to see this topic keep coming up every year around the start of the season and nobody LOCK ON to take it seriously.
rick_bostrom
Onda Kattan Racing
I understand your frustration but it is a regular topic of conversation along with about a dozen other things that pop up nearly every meeting.
Our greatest strength is that we are a membership club led and operated on volunteerism. That can also be our biggest weakness - the people who make the club work mostly have full (plus!) time jobs and are sacrificing some of their racing effort in order to provide a service to their fellow racers. Even those who are retired are usually fully committed handling their own daily responsibilities while volunteering for the club. I found that to really do the Presidents job right I simply didn't have the time when my work grew to 60-70 hours a week. If my job were to run the IRDC the way I run my business, it would be the slickest operating race club on the planet and a majority of these problems would be solved by now. Same could be said of any of about a dozen of our volunteers - They could all make the CLub a well oiled machine if they weren't already buried in making a living and trying to prep a racecar on top of that.
That is why it is essential to build a GROUP so there are lots of people to spread the word and split up the heavy lifting. There are no easy answers to complex problems - we don't need "idea" people or "concept" guys. We need people prepared to dig in and do the hard work and present detailed proposals. Very few in the club feel like they have the time or energy to LOCK ON and grind out the details to develop a new idea, even if it is a good one. And make no mistakes - it will be a GRIND to get the required rule changes and clean up the Conference rulebook to make most of this stuff work.
Our greatest strength is that we are a membership club led and operated on volunteerism. That can also be our biggest weakness - the people who make the club work mostly have full (plus!) time jobs and are sacrificing some of their racing effort in order to provide a service to their fellow racers. Even those who are retired are usually fully committed handling their own daily responsibilities while volunteering for the club. I found that to really do the Presidents job right I simply didn't have the time when my work grew to 60-70 hours a week. If my job were to run the IRDC the way I run my business, it would be the slickest operating race club on the planet and a majority of these problems would be solved by now. Same could be said of any of about a dozen of our volunteers - They could all make the CLub a well oiled machine if they weren't already buried in making a living and trying to prep a racecar on top of that.
That is why it is essential to build a GROUP so there are lots of people to spread the word and split up the heavy lifting. There are no easy answers to complex problems - we don't need "idea" people or "concept" guys. We need people prepared to dig in and do the hard work and present detailed proposals. Very few in the club feel like they have the time or energy to LOCK ON and grind out the details to develop a new idea, even if it is a good one. And make no mistakes - it will be a GRIND to get the required rule changes and clean up the Conference rulebook to make most of this stuff work.
p_whitworth
Active member
Having let the thread run its course to see how everyone made their in-put onto the problem, I'd like to close with my "appreciation" of the situation. The real solution lies in the individual clubs and their directors making every effort to see each and every participant treated just a fairly as everyone else, or how they themselves would like to be treated. Saying that the larger groups deserve more track time than the smaller groups does not bring anything positive to the table. The Competition Regs. and the Policies already state that track time is to be divided up amongst the entrants as equally as possible. There are no cars left at the exit from pregrid becasue the track is already at or over its car limit.
I'm old enough to remember how it used to be. We used to have seven senior race groups and two complete novice race groups and we all had equal track time. At one of the year-end Executive Board meetings one of the club's came to the board and bemoaned the fact that the shut down time at their track did not allow for running nine full groups on Saturday and seven groups on Sunday. To that end Group 7 which had contained the dedicated Sports Racing cars was combined with Group 6 which contained F.V. and F 440. Each of the two groups had their own viable, if not overly large field of entries, but mathematically they could be combined and not overfill the track. The Sports Racing group was actually showing slow but steady growth. The combining was done with strong reluctance on the part of both groups but with the resignation that it was for the common good. The irony arose when when the following season commenced The same club which had been making the dire predictions unless they were allow to reduce the number of race groups now suddenly found there was time to run a "Special Race" To their credit the drivers who were eligible to run in the special race spoke loud and clear to the organizers that they could schedule all the "Special Races" they liked, no-one was entering them.
Since then the forced marriage has continued and Group 6 has fewer entries than what was the combined total when it first took place. In fact Group 6 has become the dumping ground for whatever other classes no-one has the resolve to place anywhere else. We are several years later and once again Group 6 is the reciptiant of schedule shaving and there is even the proposals to combine it with Group 3. If you beat on anything long enough, you're bound to kill it.
Its deja vu all over again.
Perhaps Conference should change its moto from "Championship Road Racing" to "Screw You Jack, I'm All right".
I'm old enough to remember how it used to be. We used to have seven senior race groups and two complete novice race groups and we all had equal track time. At one of the year-end Executive Board meetings one of the club's came to the board and bemoaned the fact that the shut down time at their track did not allow for running nine full groups on Saturday and seven groups on Sunday. To that end Group 7 which had contained the dedicated Sports Racing cars was combined with Group 6 which contained F.V. and F 440. Each of the two groups had their own viable, if not overly large field of entries, but mathematically they could be combined and not overfill the track. The Sports Racing group was actually showing slow but steady growth. The combining was done with strong reluctance on the part of both groups but with the resignation that it was for the common good. The irony arose when when the following season commenced The same club which had been making the dire predictions unless they were allow to reduce the number of race groups now suddenly found there was time to run a "Special Race" To their credit the drivers who were eligible to run in the special race spoke loud and clear to the organizers that they could schedule all the "Special Races" they liked, no-one was entering them.
Since then the forced marriage has continued and Group 6 has fewer entries than what was the combined total when it first took place. In fact Group 6 has become the dumping ground for whatever other classes no-one has the resolve to place anywhere else. We are several years later and once again Group 6 is the reciptiant of schedule shaving and there is even the proposals to combine it with Group 3. If you beat on anything long enough, you're bound to kill it.
Its deja vu all over again.
Perhaps Conference should change its moto from "Championship Road Racing" to "Screw You Jack, I'm All right".
Richard Broadhead
Flag & Com
P.Whitworth,
I must TOTALLY agree with your statement above. Although I flag and comm. when possible, my son started racing an FC about 5 years ago. He was in the first class of drivers to 'benefit' from the combining of OWN with Group 6. That actually worked out pretty good due to the small size of Group 6 and the very professional group of senior drivers running in that group. Now due to a lot of hard work by some Open Wheelers, the FC class has reached full championship status! With continued growth it could, within a few years reach the size where it could justify its own run group! Then what will the club do?
A few years ago, there was a MASS exodus of FV's from the club when FV's were moved to Group 6 from Group 3. They mostly went back to SCCA even though it required a lot of towing to California to race. They are missed by many of us but I doubt the closed wheel types even notice they are gone.... Sigh...
And sadly as you note, Group 3 and 6 will never have a special race to run... sigh again
I must TOTALLY agree with your statement above. Although I flag and comm. when possible, my son started racing an FC about 5 years ago. He was in the first class of drivers to 'benefit' from the combining of OWN with Group 6. That actually worked out pretty good due to the small size of Group 6 and the very professional group of senior drivers running in that group. Now due to a lot of hard work by some Open Wheelers, the FC class has reached full championship status! With continued growth it could, within a few years reach the size where it could justify its own run group! Then what will the club do?
A few years ago, there was a MASS exodus of FV's from the club when FV's were moved to Group 6 from Group 3. They mostly went back to SCCA even though it required a lot of towing to California to race. They are missed by many of us but I doubt the closed wheel types even notice they are gone.... Sigh...
And sadly as you note, Group 3 and 6 will never have a special race to run... sigh again
rick_bostrom
Onda Kattan Racing
Not a fair assessment!
When I was President of IRDC we offered the special race slot to the open wheel groups FIRST! The IRDC Board felt that it might be a good opportunity to do our part to help the Open Wheel group to rebuild their numbers. Contrary to popular belief you would have trouble finding a group that wants OW to rebuild any more than those who attend our board meetings. Dick Boggs, Lee Fjellanger, Bruce Boyd, and Dave Bennitt are all regular and respected voices who champion open wheel issues at our meetings. If anything, open wheel drivers are probably overrepresented in the leadership of both the IRDC and Conference compared to the percentages of drivers overall. That is probably the main reason that 3 and 6 haven't been combined at their present attendance levels - they have some very strong supporter/drivers in Club and E-board positions who have succesfully blocked that so far. Some of those same guys are trying to put their money where their mouth is to support those groups as well. I know that Boggs and Bennitt got SRX in with a rule change and are double entering to try to keep the numbers up - bravo to them for their efforts.
So, in the end this race dings single entered drivers 10 or 15 minutes on Saturday. Guilty as charged, we feel bad about it and we will use what we learned to try to put on better and better events in the future. Its not about OW drivers only - this isn't a CW vs OW issue at all. Anyone who is doing a single entry is affected.
Ok - now that we understand the problem, lets talk about how participants can make it better. Many of the OW drivers now have an opportunity to run in the opposite OW group by entering in SRX or Formula Libre. Its another 70 minutes of time for the price of a second entry - $150 bucks - but few take advantage of it. Anyone complaining about additional opportunities offered to CW in the form of a special race or mini enduro that isnt taking advantage of running the second entry that is actually available to them lacks credibility. There are some that dont have that opportunity, but a simple rule change proposal at any time in the last several years would have turned BOTH 3 and 6 into fully combined groups and allowed double entry possibilities for every single OW car. The main problem has been how well OW guys play with each other - it has NOTHING TO DO with CW drivers.
Last but not least - lets address some of the other misconceptions that are frequently used to foster disharmony and make OW drivers claim they are being victimized:
1) You are geting cause and effect backwards. The clubs aren't reducing opportunity which is chasing away OW drivers. The clubs are wondering what to do with the very expensive opportunities they are providing OW drivers that very few are showing up for. Racers show up to race - the track is there, the volunteers are there, the stewards are there, the ambulances and wreckers are there, the time is reserved, and OW drivers show up in tiny numbers. All of the same conditions apply and CW drivers show up in large numbers. As a result, they get treated like they are special. Show up in large numbers and we will be happy to treat you like you are special too.
2) Lots of classes get moved from group to group over time. If your desire to race is so weak that having your class moved from one group to another makes you quit its hard to figure out how we can fix that. Im not buying the whole "too big a disparity in lap times and passing speed" or "they break up our drafting packs" arguments either. Club racing is MIXED CLASS racing and frankly Group 1 has larger speed differentials that they seem to be able to handle with 50+ cars on track. Racecraft continues to be the deciding factor in the end.
3) It great that FC is growing to championship status! I hope it continues it's growth and gets huge. Speaking of huge, Pro3 now has the ability to put 50+ cars from ONE CLASS on track in Group 1. They havent even asked for their own Group. By all means build FC to 70 local cars (the number of currently constructed and available Pro3 cars) and we will GLADLY find a way to deal with the problem! As they say - that would be a good problem to have.
4) Absolutely ANY group of cars that can produce both a decent amount of entries and an entertaining race can make a proposal to the IRDC and be considered for a special race. I tried to get a FV race to happen and got nowhere. The Legends came through for me that time and even they didnt provide anywhere near the numbers they originally proposed. Fun race to watch though! Bring us any group that can pass our safety rules and we will consider it, OW and CW alike.
Sorry about the rant, but this is getting ridiculous. Seems like way to much heat to be blasting at a bunch of part time volunteers trying (pretty thanklessly) to put on amatuer club racing events. We dont want to piss anyone off, sometimes we try things and they are less pleasing than we hoped. Tell us what you want, we will try to give it to you, and then show up to race the events you asked for. If you dont like the way we do it, volunteer to do it yourself and we will let you. Pretty simple.
When I was President of IRDC we offered the special race slot to the open wheel groups FIRST! The IRDC Board felt that it might be a good opportunity to do our part to help the Open Wheel group to rebuild their numbers. Contrary to popular belief you would have trouble finding a group that wants OW to rebuild any more than those who attend our board meetings. Dick Boggs, Lee Fjellanger, Bruce Boyd, and Dave Bennitt are all regular and respected voices who champion open wheel issues at our meetings. If anything, open wheel drivers are probably overrepresented in the leadership of both the IRDC and Conference compared to the percentages of drivers overall. That is probably the main reason that 3 and 6 haven't been combined at their present attendance levels - they have some very strong supporter/drivers in Club and E-board positions who have succesfully blocked that so far. Some of those same guys are trying to put their money where their mouth is to support those groups as well. I know that Boggs and Bennitt got SRX in with a rule change and are double entering to try to keep the numbers up - bravo to them for their efforts.
So, in the end this race dings single entered drivers 10 or 15 minutes on Saturday. Guilty as charged, we feel bad about it and we will use what we learned to try to put on better and better events in the future. Its not about OW drivers only - this isn't a CW vs OW issue at all. Anyone who is doing a single entry is affected.
Ok - now that we understand the problem, lets talk about how participants can make it better. Many of the OW drivers now have an opportunity to run in the opposite OW group by entering in SRX or Formula Libre. Its another 70 minutes of time for the price of a second entry - $150 bucks - but few take advantage of it. Anyone complaining about additional opportunities offered to CW in the form of a special race or mini enduro that isnt taking advantage of running the second entry that is actually available to them lacks credibility. There are some that dont have that opportunity, but a simple rule change proposal at any time in the last several years would have turned BOTH 3 and 6 into fully combined groups and allowed double entry possibilities for every single OW car. The main problem has been how well OW guys play with each other - it has NOTHING TO DO with CW drivers.
Last but not least - lets address some of the other misconceptions that are frequently used to foster disharmony and make OW drivers claim they are being victimized:
1) You are geting cause and effect backwards. The clubs aren't reducing opportunity which is chasing away OW drivers. The clubs are wondering what to do with the very expensive opportunities they are providing OW drivers that very few are showing up for. Racers show up to race - the track is there, the volunteers are there, the stewards are there, the ambulances and wreckers are there, the time is reserved, and OW drivers show up in tiny numbers. All of the same conditions apply and CW drivers show up in large numbers. As a result, they get treated like they are special. Show up in large numbers and we will be happy to treat you like you are special too.
2) Lots of classes get moved from group to group over time. If your desire to race is so weak that having your class moved from one group to another makes you quit its hard to figure out how we can fix that. Im not buying the whole "too big a disparity in lap times and passing speed" or "they break up our drafting packs" arguments either. Club racing is MIXED CLASS racing and frankly Group 1 has larger speed differentials that they seem to be able to handle with 50+ cars on track. Racecraft continues to be the deciding factor in the end.
3) It great that FC is growing to championship status! I hope it continues it's growth and gets huge. Speaking of huge, Pro3 now has the ability to put 50+ cars from ONE CLASS on track in Group 1. They havent even asked for their own Group. By all means build FC to 70 local cars (the number of currently constructed and available Pro3 cars) and we will GLADLY find a way to deal with the problem! As they say - that would be a good problem to have.
4) Absolutely ANY group of cars that can produce both a decent amount of entries and an entertaining race can make a proposal to the IRDC and be considered for a special race. I tried to get a FV race to happen and got nowhere. The Legends came through for me that time and even they didnt provide anywhere near the numbers they originally proposed. Fun race to watch though! Bring us any group that can pass our safety rules and we will consider it, OW and CW alike.
Sorry about the rant, but this is getting ridiculous. Seems like way to much heat to be blasting at a bunch of part time volunteers trying (pretty thanklessly) to put on amatuer club racing events. We dont want to piss anyone off, sometimes we try things and they are less pleasing than we hoped. Tell us what you want, we will try to give it to you, and then show up to race the events you asked for. If you dont like the way we do it, volunteer to do it yourself and we will let you. Pretty simple.
jharvey
Well-known member
Rick is absolutely right. OW guys are complaining but not entering. Car count is still small. Back in the day "we" used to have our own special races. Anyone remember standing start CF races? CF used to be the largest class next to club rabbit. Both are dwindling and not getting any stonger.
Everyone is getting caught up in "open wheel vs closed wheel" and perhaps that is really what is going on, perhaps not. Racing is an expensive sport and requires capital to do it. Most who make a decent amount of capital got it for a reason, and it wasn't tripping over dollars to save dimes.
I am a passionate open wheel guy, have been since I was a kid in my cousin's car in 1981 at SIR. Groups 3 and 6 should be combined. There is absolutely no proof or evidence that either will grow in car count on a consistent basis. The cars are difficult to drive and even more difficult to build correctly.
Bill Bonsell
Well-known member
Well, I attended this weekends NASA event at Pacific and I would like to provide an accurate depiction of what transpired as I think it might be helpful as Conference strives to provide value for the cost to play. Especially given this thread and a reduced track time for all entries if one chooses to do just 1 class for the upcoming weekend.
The original NASA format was to be a 20-20-40 for race group 1 and 2 for both days. Please keep in mind they had originally scheduled 4 HPDE groups and a Time Trial group, so effectively basing their schedule on 7 groups for the day. The HPDE and TT'ers were getting 20 minute sessions. But this was at Pacific where essentially everything needs to be done a bit sooner than all the other venues.
There were over 50 cars total for the event. There ended up being only 10 race cars ranging from an older 993 Cup car to a Legends, with our 2 Miata's, a Pro3 Car, a H4 Honda, a 911 Spec and a few others. But before anyone laughs, we all agreed and NASA officials supported combining the 2 race groups and making two 25 minute races each day instead on one 40 minute race. So we all ended up with FOUR 25 minute races and total track time of over 180 minutes available. My son and I along with Honda, battled nose to tail pretty much all weekend. The Pro3 car had another car running close times and went at each other. For me personally, it was a great racing weekend. My son and I split our four races. Even brought home some $5.00 trophies.
What made all this work, and is good information for Conference, is that their was no wasted time. As one group was exiting, the next group was entering. Now, obviously with more cars there is the chance of more on track issues that have to be dealt with, but their were on track issues, but the response was swift and we only experienced one FCY the entire weekend. Now, did I miss many of my Conference friends. Absolutely. Am I being a traitor for running a NASA event. I don't think so. I wonder what the SCCA Oregon folks are thinking having some of their heavy hitters missing their weekend Portland race so they could head to Utah to run a NASA event to qualify for Nationals in Sept?
Anyone who know me understands that I just want to get the best value for the dollars. The most racing for the price of admission. Regardless of who sanctions the event. I will be out of town this weekend and therefore miss the IRDC Pacific event. I will be racing the remaining IRDC events, but I am also apt to be at The Ridge on June 1 with NASA. If NASA's entry to the Northwest helps drive Conference, and even SCCA, to offer more value, then isn't that a good thing for everyone? And one more thing, I keep hearing the mentioning of NASA being a "business". Well what the H does that actually mean. It implies that I am a customer and I would think the "business" would strive to provide me a very good product. And isn't that what being successful is all about.
For those racers not chasing championships and on a limited budget, it's all about track time and, more importantly, racing time and the cost of admission. The many under appreciated volunteers that make up the clubs which is Conference, need to have that at the forefront of thought. Just my opinions, of course. Have a successful upcoming weekend.
Last edited: