It looks like sombody get it!

One of the main reasons I do not run much ICSCC events is as stated above, long tow for one race. SCCA lately has been doing the qualify-race format and that's been a big hit for me, being able to race twice a weekend per class. If I want to test and tune my car, I go to a test day, not a race event.

I do have to say I absolutely love the 1-hour special races, it's been my favorite part of ICSCC race weekends!
 
The bigger picture problem isn't that we are or are not adopting the schedule. That discussion is but a symptom. A symptom of an existing regulation that's been in place (from my understanding) for decades, keeping us doing the same thing for years and years and years.

I don't think we should change formats, I think we should change only what we need to in order to "try it before we buy it". I think we should revisit some rules/regulations that provides the clubs allowance to experiment with an alternate format while maintaining a level of uniformity of Conference as a whole.

Since the existing "special races" are not points races they are pretty easy to create/approve and use to generate revenue, spice things up and increase overall "value". The trick is if a club wanted to modify a points race to mirror something like the SCCA schedule posted by Rick D which involves 3 races in 2 days with only 1 qual and the adjustment from 30min to 25 min.

So first, before anyone on either side of this conversation gets too involved on which type of schedule they like let's consider the fact that nobody has suggested that a format like this would be sweeping or permanent; we are not changing religions.

What I recommend:

Is that we first start with a discussion about how we would go about allowing a club to trial this type of format. What needs to be considered?

1: If TC wanted to do this on their 2nd race weekend at ORP, how would this affect other clubs? Or if IRDC wants to try 3 races in 2 days at The Ridge (cuz lack of time limits @PR) how does this affect others?
2: Can a club host more than 3 races per season?
3: What happens if we run more than the 15 race season that is alotted and can it/should it be done with the same number or fewer number of weekends (in consideration of workers).
4: What does a cost/benefit analysis look like in which a format like this replaces a weekend that would normally include a "Special race", could this possibly be even more financially lucrative then the advent of the Special Race has been.
5: Can we really do more racing/dollar and simultaneously put more money in the pockets of the clubs....aaaaannnnnddddd... is this the right way to do that?


OK, back to making videos...
 
Last edited:
Fewer weekends is fine by me. I would prefer days that are no longer then 10 hours which includes the morning meeting one hour prior to cars on course. With an hour lunch, that would leave 8 hours of track time. Or we could go with the schedule for the Bahamas GP many years ago. They started cars at 10 am and shut down for the party at 3 pm. <grin>
 
The single race weekend at Mission earlier this year was not well attended. This follows a trend over the last few years, I'm guessing primarily because of the economic conditions in both our countries. But also because there wasn't enough RACING! (some of our locals didn't attend!).
A few driver's from south of the border have run the CACC format at Mission (all double race weekends) and they like it.
I have not raced much other than Mission the the last few years (once at Portland two years ago) but hearing all the good fun being had at Spokane and The Ridge this year I am planning for next year, but it will ONLY be for two (or three) race weekends.
Wes, there are many things that you have written that I disagree with but I agree completely with what you've post above.
There is a reason they are called RACE weekends, I go to race!
 
How could you possibly disagree with anything I say Keith? No one else ever does!!!!!!!!!!!!
We've both been around forever and as I'm always for Conference that suprises me, but each to their own dude.:frown:
 
Been thinking about proposing a rule change that stipulates each Conference member club is limited to two race "events" or "weekends". Run two triples if you want, or two doubles, a single and a double, whatever. just get it done over the course of two weekends. That's ten weekends total of racing.
 
Randy,
I would suggest giving each Conference Member Club two championship races.
The club then has the option of a double race weekend or two single race weekends that is up to them. 10 Championship races total.
 
So if there are 10 Championship Races what (besides the expence and chance of losing money) would be the gain for "Club" races (much like SCCA Regional events)?
 
How does reducing the number of races per Club benefit them? Example, talking to people I know who do other types of racing they go local every weekend, pay less, have a good amount of time on track, don't have the long hauls. They ask me why would they want to drive so far and pay so much?

I realize that each Club can not afford to hold a race based on only their members. The track costs are too high for that. But there is little attraction to local folks who want to race often but can't afford the haul.

Just saying that fewer weekends and charging double for a race each day does not equal more seat time. You're just calling it something different.
 
john_rissberger said:
Randy,
I would suggest giving each Conference Member Club two championship races.
The club then has the option of a double race weekend or two single race weekends that is up to them. 10 Championship races total.
Click to expand...

This won't work for places like Spokane though. People won't make the drive if it's only a 2-race weekend.
 
Who said anything about charging double?
Where did that come from?
Back in the day we had fewer races and car counts of 300+
Let’s look at our customer base. Do we have other activities in our lives other than racing? Yes. Do we have a limited amount of funds for a race budget? Yes. Would we like to have a chance/opportunity to qualify for the championship? Yes.
I truly believe fewer championship races will lead to larger attendances at each event thus making the profit margins for all the clubs greater.
Just my opinion.....
 
You guys need to read what I wrote. I said two "events" or "weekends", not two races.

It would be the prerogative of the clubs to run single races, doubles or triples during the "event" or "weekend".

Theoretically, 5 clubs x 2 "events" x triple race weekends is actually 30 races. Not likely, but that's a possibility.

What's likely IMHO?

CSCC runs a double and a single = 3 races

IRDC runs a double at The Ridge and a single at PR = 3 races

TC runs a triple on Memorial day weekend (maximum value for the competitor) = 3 races

SCCBC runs a single and a double on Labor day weekend, or maybe a triple on labor day weekend = 3 races

NWMS runs a triple in July = 3 races

This is over 7 or 8 weekends. This is the benefit. Fewer weekends.

SCCA is looking at reducing their weekends, as is WMRRA.
 
Randy Blaylock said:
You guys need to read what I wrote. I said two "events" or "weekends", not two races.

It would be the prerogative of the clubs to run single races, doubles or triples during the "event" or "weekend".

Theoretically, 5 clubs x 2 "events" x triple race weekends is actually 30 races. Not likely, but that's a possibility.

What's likely IMHO?

CSCC runs a double and a single = 3 races

IRDC runs a double at The Ridge and a single at PR = 3 races

TC runs a triple on Memorial day weekend (maximum value for the competitor) = 3 races

SCCBC runs a single and a double on Labor day weekend, or maybe a triple on labor day weekend = 3 races

NWMS runs a triple in July = 3 races

This is over 7 or 8 weekends. This is the benefit. Fewer weekends.

SCCA is looking at reducing their weekends, as is WMRRA.
Click to expand...

That all makes sense :D
 
john_rissberger said:
Who said anything about charging double?
Where did that come from?
Back in the day we had fewer races and car counts of 300+
Let’s look at our customer base. Do we have other activities in our lives other than racing? Yes. Do we have a limited amount of funds for a race budget? Yes. Would we like to have a chance/opportunity to qualify for the championship? Yes.
I truly believe fewer championship races will lead to larger attendances at each event thus making the profit margins for all the clubs greater.
Just my opinion.....
Click to expand...

I 110% agree with this. Every year there have been additional races, and every year the car count goes down. The people that are clamoring for more races are the ones who can afford it, which by car counts is a dwindling population. People are not dumb, if they know they cannot win races or a championship because they cannot run enough races they simply don't run after a while...who wants’ to get their butt kicked by the person who has the means to run all the races?

About vintage race schedules, that is a completely different animal. Having worked for a vintage race team for a while I know that their form of "racing" is not like Conference or SCCA. If Conference penalized you for simply dropping a wheel off or kicking you out for contact there would be a lot less of it and the delays that shorten everyone’s races would be eliminated.

If all the people who seeming have endless funds and cannot get enough track time or races are free to run SCCA and ICSCC for more races, or run test days like people did in the old days. Keep the number of weekends shorter and give the little guy who wants to have a shot at a championship so the entire club can survive, otherwise it will all be gone. Right now it is 160 entries, used to be 250+ consistently, before long it will be 100 and then what?
 
As of the latest points report, 406 drivers have earned points in races.

Of 406 drivers, exactly **3** have raced every race so far. One other driver probably would have run every race so far if he had not had mechanical issues, so let's be generous and say it was 4 total.

This means that less than 1% of the drivers in Conference attend all the races (so far). This is not a statistical anomaly, this is and has been the norm for several years running.

So far this year 43 different classes of cars have participants. Only 15 of these classes have a participant with the minimum number of races, less than half the total, to be eligible to earn a championship trophy. Roughly 1/3 of the classes will even have a champion.

We do not have a problem of lack of racing opportunities. An argument can be made fairly easily just from this quick analysis, that we have too many races, far too many. The concession of our own rule set, that says a person can be eligible for a championship having run less than half the available races, can be construed as a de-facto admission that there are too many races.

The real issue I believe isn't the number of races, it's the quantity of weekends that are consumed by Conference alone, let alone the addition of other sanctions. And really, racers come and go. Workers/officials/volunteers on the other hand, are a core resource that we require to facilitate this recreation, and failing to do what it takes to make their life better WILL eventually force a change in the way we do business.

Or, why not take a step back, take an objective look at this, and make some tough decisions that will ensure the viability of this thing we all love?
 
The quantity of races versus the quality. More racing, less down time, fewer week-ends on the road, far fewer $$ spent. Running a 15 minute practice at say 9:45 and then not going out for qualifying until maybe 2:30 or 3:00 is so boring - and pointless.
Sovren has shown the way as far as the number of on track sessions for each group, which works regardless of car count. SCCA has run heat races and main events so to speak for decades, yet we cling to this outdated and ancient format. Why?
As I've mentioned before, we are about the only organization that has 2 qualifying sessions each week-end. Again, why?
We are a racing entity, and as such we should be racing, not running against the clock 3/4 of the week-end. Randy's scenario has been offered before in various guises, and it makes more sense now then ever.
I realize the clubs do not want to give up a week-end because they believe that it will cost them money. But one race less per year, with a higher car count could equal or possibly prove more profitable than the present format, could it not? And indeed no one said it should cost more, because it isn't any more expensive to run 2 or 3 races over a long week-end then it is to run 1.
I will be happy to join any group that wishes to promote a rule change in this direction, and I believe it should include both drivers and workers, (volunteers).
 
I agree with getting more racing in over a weekend. As it is, qualifying isn't really very much track time. Especially since, for many people, even though the qualifying session is 20 minutes, they only use some of it to get their fast laps in. I try to get my good qualifying done in the first 3 laps, first 5 laps worst case. After that you are catching lap traffic, or ..., and times are unlikely to improve. Then it's just burning consumables (gas, tires, brakes). Qual in the morning, race in the afternoon both days, or practice in morning, qual in afternoon, race in morning, race in afternoon. I usually bed brakes, break in tires in either practice or qual, doesn't matter. And I'd rather have 2 25 minute races than a 20 minute qual and a 30 minute race. There are very few classes/races anymore where the race is won in the last 5 minutes.
 
And the older we get and the hotter the weather the shorter the race should be! Seriously though, 2 shorter races would be much more enjoyable during a week-end, whether it be one each day or both on Sunday.
We wouldn't save much in the way of fuel or rubber, but we'd be racing, not just doing laps. Qualifying is obviously very important for the pros who may only visit each venue once per season, but most of us have circulated these NW tracks again and again, and it's not empty laps that we need for those $$ we spend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top