It looks like sombody get it!

Turfer

Well-known member
[/B]http://www.oregonscca.com/media-lib...012 sept triple regl schedule 8-7-12 rev2.pdf

Money well spent!!!

No more wasting time dinking around with practice and multiple "qualifying's". Lets just get on with it and race. If you want practice, bed in bed brakes or just stroke it for multiple sessions prior to racing, enter the test and tune day. Then lets race multiple times per weekend.

Any ITA eliglble racers would be encouraged to enter to race against our current ICSCC Steward who is not allowed to race during ICSCC weekends. Colin K. has guarenteed me that he has a front of the field running car for Michael.(supposedly has more whp than his "nitrous boosted" crx). Jason, ask to borrow Tucker"s ITA motor.

R
 
Last edited:
Now there's a race schedule that keeps you in the car and racing for two full days! I hope Conference looks at this format seriously this winter because we are way behind other organizations in this regard.
Thanks for posting this Rick.
 
If you look at the schedule you'll see they've combined open wheelers and sports racers into one group, with the exception of SRFs. That's something that the open wheel community in Conference has not been in favour of.

Combine groups 3 & 6, do away with practice and have a race on Saturday and a race on Sunday?
 
I see one problem with that schedule straight off: They only have 6 run groups. I don't think any of us would miss a "special" race with that much racing time, but we'd have to roll NCW in with their respective classes (as SCCA does) to make that schedule work as-is, and I can think of a bunch of reasons why we wouldn't want to do that.

(These comments should in no way be taken as critical of a schedule that has more racing and less sitting around waiting.)
 
I'd like to see a format like this (just throwing it out there for discussion)

Saturday: AM qualifying PM race1
Sunday: AM qualifying PM race2

Seems easy enough right? Your points for the weekend are either an average of the two OR the best of the two.
 
I really like this format. Another benefit would be that this would encourage those who can only make it to either Sat or Sunday (not both) to show up and race.
 
I'd like to see a format like this (just throwing it out there for discussion)

Saturday: AM qualifying PM race1
Sunday: AM qualifying PM race2

Seems easy enough right? Your points for the weekend are either an average of the two OR the best of the two.

+1

Why not have both races count for full points? SCCBC did the double race, 2 day weekend in 2010. I thought it was great.
 
My 2 cents--

Sorry, Rick--I think having at least a short practice first thing in the weekend is a good thing. I just can't justify the time and money to come out on Friday just to bed pads or make sure any changes to the car are working. It also gives people a chance to get their brains in gear if they are new to the track or haven't been out in a while.
When SCCBC did the "double in 2 days", we all whined about the 10 minute practice but it has the above-mentioned value, and a shorter practice gives more time to the sessions that really count.

At the SCCA Ridge opener recently, they did a 20 practice and 10 minute qualify, which was horrible. I wouldn't recommend that--ever.
 
Fully on board with 2 race weekends - Saturday Q1/R1 and Sunday Q2/R2. At most a very short practice session early Saturday. If it is a NEW track to someone, that short Saturday practice is dubious anyway... you need the full T&T on Friday. Some of my SCCA compatriots state the schedule is one reason they don't run Conference events, particularly single races that require a multi-hour tow to attend.

That said, the run groups in SCCA are compressed such that many cars can't run two groups easily. So that is a potential drawback, but I tend not to do that anyway.
 
Conundrum. I see the pro side of the argument Karen makes regarding the extra non-racing track time, I just think it's inconsequential. For the things mentioned I think people should be doing the T&T and we should be looking at more racing during the weekend and less playing with our equipment. I don't see why we should give up on adding value because a few folks don't want to use the T&T for what it's supposed to be used for. If we went to a multi-race, 2-day format like the one above then that might also A) bring over more folks from SCCA and B) increase entries at the T&T. Both of which are good for the clubs!

Then there's the cost/benefit of it all and just like Schwank said, multi-hour tow. I don't do the single at ORP because of the cost/benefit; I do the double because I can justify it. If Spokane was a single, it would not make it on my schedule. I don't want track time, I want race time and more of it for less money. If this means that I have to bed brakes during qualifying... so what, so will others. Heck, last weekend I had to bed new pads (and a compound I've never used before) during my out lap on the Group 5 race...AND I WON! Plato may have said, "know thyself" but Colin says, "Know ThyCar" too.

I think a discussion similar to this took place late last year and I was pretty clear where I stand then as well so I'll stop beating the dead horse.


So a new horse to beat on makes this whole discussion a moot point. The Rules. Clubs are only allowed to host a certain number races and then there's the Novice group to consider and then there the truncated track time we have to endure at certain tracks etc etc. That's the hurdle.
 
One more thing to consider is the average age of the volunteers. We are not spring chickens any more. Long days like we had at the Ridge last weekend will discourage some folks from showing up. Saturday was a 12 hour day for the volunteers starting with the morning meeting at 7:30 am and finishing the last session after 7:00 pm. Pack up and get down to the paddock at the end of a 12 hour day left a bunch of folks very tired and sore.
 
I'd like to see a format like this (just throwing it out there for discussion)

Saturday: AM qualifying PM race1
Sunday: AM qualifying PM race2

Seems easy enough right? Your points for the weekend are either an average of the two OR the best of the two.



I would prefer one of the old SCCA format with a twist. (they used to do Sat - Practice | Qually, Sun Sprint Race - 15 min | Race - 30 min)



Saturday: AM qualifying PM race1 (points)
Sunday: AM 15-20 min Sprint Race PM race2 (points)

Race 1 standings determine sprint race starting order
Sprint race determines starting order for race2 (non points)
Race 2



When I started several weekends were like this and it really helped me get comfortable with race starts. In addition the pressure to start strong and stay clean was really a huge advantage.


Qualifying times are fun to set a new personal best and/or work on a particular corner or segment of the track to find time.
 
When we've had these conversations in the past, the subject of shortening the races to compact the schedule always comes up. The prevailing opinion is that the drivers do not want to shorten the races, or thats what we always seem to hear.

With the AMB timing system we use now, does anyone know if it is possible to compare the finishing order after 30 minutes to what it would have been after 20 or 25 minutes? I'd be interested to see how many times the finishing order changes in the last 5 or 10 minutes of a race. If there is not a significant change in the results accross a large sample, would there be interest in shorter races, but races on Saturday and Sunday?

db
 
I would be highly opposed to shortening the races (just my personal opinion). How abou this format:

Saturday: AM Practice : PM Qualifying
Sunday: AM Race 1 : PM Race 2

Saturday qualifying sets the grid for the first race (which counts for points), and the finishing position of race 1 sets the grid for race 2 (which also counts for points).
 
The Conference weekend practice/qualifying/racing schedule has remained largely unchanged for the 20 years that I have raced with the club. I began running 2 race groups early on to get more track time and have more fun. (that is why we do this, right? to have fun?)

And in looking over race announcements from seasons before I became a Conference member it looks like the format has changed little over the more than 50 years the Conference has been in existence.

When I started running SCCA weekends I found the format that the NWR used to be odd and gave reduced track time, even running 2 race groups.

And like has been pointed out, running the Friday test and tune is not always an option, both financially and timewise. If I spent the money for the test and tune (including operational costs) I would not have the budget for running 2 race groups. Again, I come out to race, not to spend excessive time lapping on Friday. The Saturday morning practice sessions always provided enough time for me to shake the car down, bed brakes, etc. even after they were shortened (I think they used to be 25 minutes, and now they are 10 right?)

So why are we discussing changing something that has been working for longer than I have been a Conference member?

My vote is to keep what works.
 
Without taking either side in this debate, it's NEVER bad to discuss options. Any system that we use has to be judged on it's merits and potential service to the members of the club NOW, regardless of whether it has been in place one year or a hundred.

Respectfully - a strong and well thought out statement of the reasons to keep or change format is something that I will gladly listen to. The automatic denial of any idea simply because "that's the way we have always done it" is contrary to the fair and orderly process that we use to decide such things as a group. We may very well have stuck with the same format for so long because it best fits the needs of the majority of the participants and if so it will stand on it's own merits, not on it's age. We owe it to ourselves to take a look at the options and assess them based on their merits (or lack thereof) as well.
 
I personally think every weekend should be at least a double race weekend. It would make the expense of traveling to remote places more worth while for me. If I have to pay 400-500 to tow my racer somewhere, it would be nice to get more race time then qualifying and practice time. And I personally have never understood the second qualifying for a single race weekend. Take Portland for example in June, Saturday Group 4 Qualifying only a handful of guys actually that went out in the rain to qualify and most waited until Sunday morning to set their time. Why even have qualifying twice if qualifying sessions mean nothing? Seems like a waste of time to me (not that track time is ever a waste) and could be spent for special races, etc.

I propose something like this to eliminate a second race qualifying and shorten the weekends in general for workers, drivers, etc.

Saturday
AM - 10 Minute practices followed up by 10 minutes qualifying. It would take somewhere around 200 Minutes to complete the AM session or 3.3 hours if things went to plan. Call it 9AM-1PM.
PM - 30 Minute Points Races that determines Race 2 (Sunday) grid positions in some fashion (BTCC reverse top 10 style possibly or use top times from the race?). It should take around 240 minutes or 4 hours to complete. 1PM-5PM.

Sunday
AM - 30 Minute Races again should take 240 minutes with a 5 minute break in between run groups. 9AM-1PM.
PM - Special races or call it a weekend early for the workers and drivers.

Regardless of the outcome of this thread, I will still be racing conference when financially it is viable, it would just be nice to see more race time instead of qualifying and practice time.
 
Last edited:
I Had a chance to see how the SCCA schedule worked at the ridge, I thought the schedule was great. Saturday there was an A.M practice followed by a quick 10min qualify session, then the race. Sunday had no practice just the qualifying and race.
 
Why the opposition to 20 minute races? Do you want to qualify and then sit for 4 hours waiting to race, or do 2 20 minute races each day? If Sovren can do a practice and then 4 or 5 races over 2 days then why can't we. People will say they don't have the car counts we do, but that same schedule works for them at the Historics every July when they have 250+ cars, so that excuse doesn't fly.
The Ridge was a blast, but sitting on that hot asphalt for almost 5 hours after qualifying was hot, boring and a huge waste of time.
Sorry to disagree Bob, but why change what works? Well, simply because it doesn't work anymore. For 275 bucks we need more track time, and that means racing, not practicing or qualifying, and hours of sitting around.
Rob, many workers have asked for fewer venues, so which would you prefer? 12 week-ends per year, or 9? 8 hour days or 10? We will all save big $$ and have more quality race time if we alter our outdated thinking. Karen, I do understand your concern over practice, but I'd say less than 5% of our drivers make any changes to their cars after a 10 or 15 minute practice, and as I mentioned before it's been many years since I've seen anyone actually use the hot pits for set up changes or tweaks of any kind during qualifying. There just isn't time for that with our current schedules. Bedding brakes is a 2 lap process, and any other adjustments should be done before you get to the track in my view.
My car is now legal for Sovren, and I look forward to running their format and having much more track time than Conference affords me, but after 39 years as a Conference member I'm not about to give up as a participant, and I won't stop lobbying for more racin and less paddock time...
 
Back
Top