SCCAForums.com

SpyderVenom:

Jojoo:

Incorrect. You're asking that each class has to be a strict time then if a car beats that time, it gets moved up. And I've already said that was a silly idea. There is a "gap" but it's not an exact number like you think it should be. It's not bracket racing.

This is the third time I'm having to tell you that.  

 

A car doesn't get moved because it beat the class limit of XX.XX time. It gets reclassed because it is constantly beating the other cars in it's class, was determined the other cars can't compete, and it's beating the competition by a wide margin. 

And you keep saying that if a car is too slow, it will get moved down.  When a class keeps getting faster, when do you determine that the slow cars need to get moved down?  Does every car get looked at every year?  Or might you only look at cars as people point them out - say in a letter?

 

I already answered that question in the other thread.

 

Jojoo:

It wont be moved because the SEB needs letters to move it.  And if you're the only one writing them, good luck. Even if you are right, they have to agree.

This is why the SEB needs to evaluate every class and car at the end of every year. And not reply on letters alone. 

 

Both. 

SpyderVenom:

Finally I can ask - How is your system for classing cars any different than the one that exists today?

 

 

 I already answered that as well. The SEB looks at car whether a letter comes in or not. I.E. at the end of every year to determine if there are cars too slow or too fast. Currently the SEB doesn't look at any car unless a letter is written. So for example. If no one runs the RSX in CSP and no one writes a letter about the car, nothing happens. Therefor no one in their right mind would ever campaign this car in CSP. It's a born loser in class. Without a doubt.

 

SpyderVenom:

I was saying that sandbagging would be a problem in a strict time based classification scheme like the one you were proposing.

 

And once again, it's not a strict time based "classification scheme" like you seem to think I'm saying. Classes don't get a time to beat or not. I get the idea I might be saying that again.....

Jojoo:

A few of us just hashed out a scenario where classing is done by speed. Progression from class to class would be so much easier.

Jojoo:

 

Jojoo:

It wont be moved because the SEB needs letters to move it.  And if you're the only one writing them, good luck. Even if you are right, they have to agree.

This is why the SEB needs to evaluate every class and car at the end of every year. And not reply on letters alone. 

Both. 

You proposed a classing arrangement that is so labor intensive that it can not be implemented with the resources that we have available.    Please stop referring to it as something that may be "good."  Maybe if the SEB ran on frictionless rollers, they wouldn't exert any energy, slowing down time, and could hash this out every year in a few minutes. 

---

Rob Leone

'07 Solstice GXP in AS
'87 Toyota Corolla in EP
ex - '91 MR2 Turbo in SM2 <- If you can't set a good example, serve as a horrible warning.

SpyderVenom:

Jojoo:

A few of us just hashed out a scenario where classing is done by speed. Progression from class to class would be so much easier.

Jojoo:

 

Jojoo:

It wont be moved because the SEB needs letters to move it.  And if you're the only one writing them, good luck. Even if you are right, they have to agree.

This is why the SEB needs to evaluate every class and car at the end of every year. And not reply on letters alone. 

Both. 

You proposed a classing arrangement that is so labor intensive that it can not be implemented with the resources that we have available.    Please stop referring to it as something that may be "good."  Maybe if the SEB ran on frictionless rollers, they wouldn't exert any energy, slowing down time, and could hash this out every year in a few minutes. 

 

Thank you for your opinion.

Once the classing is set it's not as labor intensive as you might think, but because you don't like the idea, I expect any negatives you can to be thrown my way. And yes we do have the resources to do this. It's far from an unreal thing to fix. People just have to acknowledge there is something wrong and want to fix it.

If that's the only real argument you have, you might as well stop posting. As of yet you have not posted any problem there isn't a solution for. It doesn't matter what or how it gets fixed, there's bound to be people that wont like it. But it can be better. 

Jojoo, if you really want your argument, that this is possible, to succeed I say show us. print out the results of a bunch of the Tours and Nationals of the last few years and throw together a set of classes, with Maybe 10 cars in each class and use that as an example to illustrate the viability of this idea. I think it's interesting sure, but I also have doubts of it's viability.

---

-Aaron G>

Timmons Subaru
ZZYZXmotorsports.com
www.ChaseCam.com

It's going to take me a bit of time to do that. But I think I can come up with something to give an idea of how it might work. Thanks for at least possibly giving this a chance.

Part of it would include fixing the cars that have been ignored for so long. And classing them in competitive classes.

When I have something worked out, I'll post it.

My first "sketch" of this idea is going to be very rough as I don't have access to all the information about each car that runs or data base the SEB has. Or the weather conditions of each event. I'll do my best with what I have.

Gee guys, thanks for totally fing up a good thread.  If it's not apparent, I do NOT support joojos ideas.

 jojo, if you want to propose your own idea, thats great.  Get your own thread.  But don't think you can use mine as a public sounding board.

I have no real issues with the way cars are currnetly classed.  Just that the SP rules are antiquated by whatever means.  And that maybe that or something else is preventing SP from growing an evolving.  Is classing to blame?  Maybe, but I don't think that is the whole picture.

 

---

Jeremy Foley
2001 Subaru 2.5RS Retired G-Stock Autocross Beast
2003 Evo 8 Modded Daily Driver
2004 RX-8 Current Borrowed B-Stock Killer

President
Team if you can't beat them-Join them!

Jojoo:

My first "sketch" of this idea is going to be very rough as I don't have access to all the information about each car that runs or data base the SEB has. Or the weather conditions of each event. I'll do my best with what I have.

Not sure where you got that idea... There is no special data base for cars or events for the SEB.  

---

Jason Isley
2005-2006-2007-2008 B Stock National Champion

Jojoo:

My key board sucks. My keys are sticking...fixed.

 If I had said SEB, would it have been better? The SCCA is ultimately responsible for the classing and rules.

"SCCA needs to stop pus*y footing around about the rules and classing and fix it and keep it fixed instead of letting things get antiquated before fixing them. And that's why waiting for letters to fix things is a horrible way to work the system." 

 Relying ONLY on letters is a bad way to do things.

I don't think your keyboard had anything to do with it. 

I read the above quoted statement three times to be sure I was reading it correctly.  That someone actually wrote it has my head spinning...

I have served on the SEB and can tell you that the SEB doesn't "rely only on letters".  The SEB reviews event results, data obtained from competitors cars (dyno sheets, weights, tire sizes, etc...) and other pertinant information along with letters from members (called "member input") to determine classing issues. 

Incidentally, its the SCCA Board of Directors that is ultimately responsible for classing and the rules.  The BoD is elected by the membership and is there to serve them.  The BoD appoints the members of the SEB and has oversight and approval of their work.  The BoD and SEB both consider member input as the cornerstone of the process.   The club isn't run as a pure democracy but by its elected representatives (the BoD) who appoint the various committee members selected for their experience and expertise, so serve the membership.  What you are proposing is a Dictatorship where the governing body ignors the desires of the membership and issues rules by fiat.  Geez, wouldn't that be a great way to go.  If the SEB/SCCA operated the way you are proposing, you couldn't be on this forum (or writing them a letter) suggesting improvement if you weren't happy with their decrees.  Realize that when you say they should "fix" it before it becomes antequated; its your opinion that its antequated and in need of fixing.  That's not everyone's opinion so who do they appease?  You?  Everybody else? 

Your classing proposal won't work. Period.  I could spend the rest of the night explaining why but I won't bother.   I competed in Street Prepared for 20 years and won 4 DSP National Championships.  And as already noted, I served on the SEB.  Trust me, it won't work.  While there may be a lot of noise on this board about SP being broken, it really comes down to just a few cars.  SP has worked quite well for  many years in its current state.  Remove the awd cars and much of the problems go away.   "Antiquated"?  Because the SEB didn't see the full potential of the Evo/STI SP is antiquated?  I can argue that the SEB tried to "fix" the awd car issue before it became antiquated. 

 

 

---

Steve Hoelscher
#27 DP - Toyota MR2
http://www.terriehoward.com

ratt_finkel:

Gee guys, thanks for totally fing up a good thread.  If it's not apparent, I do NOT support joojos ideas.

 jojo, if you want to propose your own idea, thats great.  Get your own thread.  But don't think you can use mine as a public sounding board.

I have no real issues with the way cars are currnetly classed.  Just that the SP rules are antiquated by whatever means.  And that maybe that or something else is preventing SP from growing an evolving.  Is classing to blame?  Maybe, but I don't think that is the whole picture.

 

 

My posts are exactly what you're asking about. Half of your first post is about classing not rules. By just updating the rules you're  not going to create much change to SP.

You don't have to agree with me. I merely posted what you are talking about.

 

So what exactly are you thinking that's going to make these changes? You've got me confused now. Now you have the spotlight...go!

Steve Hoelscher:

Jojoo:

My key board sucks. My keys are sticking...fixed.

 If I had said SEB, would it have been better? The SCCA is ultimately responsible for the classing and rules.

"SCCA needs to stop pus*y footing around about the rules and classing and fix it and keep it fixed instead of letting things get antiquated before fixing them. And that's why waiting for letters to fix things is a horrible way to work the system." 

 Relying ONLY on letters is a bad way to do things.

I don't think your keyboard had anything to do with it. 

I read the above quoted statement three times to be sure I was reading it correctly.  That someone actually wrote it has my head spinning...

I have served on the SEB and can tell you that the SEB doesn't "rely only on letters".  The SEB reviews event results, data obtained from competitors cars (dyno sheets, weights, tire sizes, etc...) and other pertinant information along with letters from members (called "member input") to determine classing issues. 

Incidentally, its the SCCA Board of Directors that is ultimately responsible for classing and the rules.  The BoD is elected by the membership and is there to serve them.  The BoD appoints the members of the SEB and has oversight and approval of their work.  The BoD and SEB both consider member input as the cornerstone of the process.   The club isn't run as a pure democracy but by its elected representatives (the BoD) who appoint the various committee members selected for their experience and expertise, so serve the membership.  What you are proposing is a Dictatorship where the governing body ignors the desires of the membership and issues rules by fiat.  Geez, wouldn't that be a great way to go.  If the SEB/SCCA operated the way you are proposing, you couldn't be on this forum (or writing them a letter) suggesting improvement if you weren't happy with their decrees.  Realize that when you say they should "fix" it before it becomes antequated; its your opinion that its antequated and in need of fixing.  That's not everyone's opinion so who do they appease?  You?  Everybody else? 

Your classing proposal won't work. Period.  I could spend the rest of the night explaining why but I won't bother.   I competed in Street Prepared for 20 years and won 4 DSP National Championships.  And as already noted, I served on the SEB.  Trust me, it won't work.  While there may be a lot of noise on this board about SP being broken, it really comes down to just a few cars.  SP has worked quite well for  many years in its current state.  Remove the awd cars and much of the problems go away.   "Antiquated"?  Because the SEB didn't see the full potential of the Evo/STI SP is antiquated?  I can argue that the SEB tried to "fix" the awd car issue before it became antiquated. 

 

 

 

So then you're saying the SEB is outright wrong in it's classing of some cars, if that's the case. From your above statements. I've been told more than once the SEB waits for letters to come in before taking any action. By an SEB member.

I think your taking this way too personally, or maybe I just hit a funny bone because a part of you knows the rules need an alignment. 

What I'm proposing is not at all like what you say I'm proposing. It is not a dictatorship. That's why I said member input as well. That right there takes the dictatorship out of the equation. 

Some of the rules are already antiquated. Truth is truth. Someone should speak up about it so it gets fixed. Is that wrong? Or would you rather members just sit back and take what's handed to them. You're speaking out of both sides of your head. You don't like it, great, thanks for your opinion. But I'm here speaking up just as you say members should.
 

 Yes, it would work. You may not think so, but it would. You just have to want it to work. It's absolutely pointless to have more than one class posting the same times as each other and then to say the SP classes have similar cars in each class (not). Yeah that works great. I think you'll find more people than not want change. The classing is so well done right now each class has 2-3 cars that are "the" car to have. That's not well done.

You're off on a tangent. Who here said anything about the EVO/STi?? Neither car has anything to do with what I'm talking about with some rules being antiquated.

 

 

RX7 KLR:

Jojoo:

My first "sketch" of this idea is going to be very rough as I don't have access to all the information about each car that runs or data base the SEB has. Or the weather conditions of each event. I'll do my best with what I have.

Not sure where you got that idea... There is no special data base for cars or events for the SEB.  

 

Maybe not a data base per se but they get more than just event information to class cars from. Or I certainly hope so.  

Howdy,

Jojoo:

Maybe not a data base per se but they get more than just event information to class cars from. Or I certainly hope so.  

You seem to take hopes & dreams as fact more often than is wise.

Mark 

Jojoo:

So then you're saying the SEB is outright wrong in it's classing of some cars, if that's the case. From your above statements. I've been told more than once the SEB waits for letters to come in before taking any action. By an SEB member.

I said nothing of the sort.  However, lets see... is every car classed correctly?  No.  The SEB is who classes cars.  Therefore, the SEB is wrong in its classing of some cars.  Duh... 

I doubt you were told the SEB waits for letters before taking "any" action.  Lets see... you "were told", I actually served.  Who has a better idea of how this works?   The SEB will address any issues it see deems necessary.  However, if a member wants a particular issue addressed, they must write a letter before the SEB will address it. 

 

Jojoo:

 

What I'm proposing is not at all like what you say I'm proposing. It is not a dictatorship. That's why I said member input as well. That right there takes the dictatorship out of the equation. 

Lets see... governing body issues rulings without input from the governed.  Sounds like a dictatorship to me. 

Jojoo:

Some of the rules are already antiquated. Truth is truth. Someone should speak up about it so it gets fixed. Is that wrong? Or would you rather members just sit back and take what's handed to them. You're speaking out of both sides of your head. You don't like it, great, thanks for your opinion. But I'm here speaking up just as you say members should.

I am speaking out of both sides of my head?  I am?  You just said that the SEB should "fix" the rules before they become antiquated.  That waiting for a letter is wrong.   And now you are complaining that I want them to just sit back and take it?  I was the one explaining that member input is how the system does and should work.  You were the one wanting the SEB to act unilatterally without member input and are now defending your act of providing input.   Do you have the slightest idea that you are contradicting yourself in every other paragraph?

Jojoo:

 

 You just have to want it to work.

Again, you write something that I actually can't believe somebody wrote.  The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

 

Jojoo:

 

It's absolutely pointless to have more than one class posting the same times as each other and then to say the SP classes have similar cars in each class (not). Yeah that works great. I think you'll find more people than not want change. The classing is so well done right now each class has 2-3 cars that are "the" car to have. That's not well done.

So show me a class that doesn't have 2-3 cars that are "the car to have".  If you had been around this sport long enough you would know that people are basically sheep.  They follow the leaders.  Somebody builds a car and is successfull with it, other people see it and think "hey that's a good car, I could build one of those and probably win".  Duh....

Yes, there are classing issues in SP.  I have pointed this out before.  The same basic car, turning similar times in two or three different classes is not a productive use of the class structure.  Best of Breed solves much of that problem.  But,  I don't need to rehash that here. 

More people than not want change?  Hell, EVERYBODY wants change because everybody has an opinion on how it should be done.  That's why you can't "fix the rules before they become antiquated".  You can't please everybody all the time.  And some people have distorted views of classing that will never work anyway.

---

Steve Hoelscher
#27 DP - Toyota MR2
http://www.terriehoward.com

Jojoo:

ratt_finkel:

Gee guys, thanks for totally fing up a good thread.  If it's not apparent, I do NOT support joojos ideas.

 jojo, if you want to propose your own idea, thats great.  Get your own thread.  But don't think you can use mine as a public sounding board.

I have no real issues with the way cars are currnetly classed.  Just that the SP rules are antiquated by whatever means.  And that maybe that or something else is preventing SP from growing an evolving.  Is classing to blame?  Maybe, but I don't think that is the whole picture.

 

 

My posts are exactly what you're asking about. Half of your first post is about classing not rules. By just updating the rules you're  not going to create much change to SP.

You don't have to agree with me. I merely posted what you are talking about.

 

So what exactly are you thinking that's going to make these changes? You've got me confused now. Now you have the spotlight...go!

My posts have nothing to do with your proposed changes.  Yes classing is an issue, I just don't share the seem view on it that you do.  

I'd have to disagree.  I'd say changing the rules in ANY class -- would create LOTS of change.

I'm thinking a complete re-vamp of the entire rule-set.  One that would allow more diversity in cars.  One that would allow more modifications.  But one that would also negate some of the more costly upgrades.  All the while keeping the same challenges in engineering and creativity.  As well as basic setup and tunning.  I'm thinking of a class that will attract not only new blood to the sport.  But one that will have the rest of the members considering running.

I don't have some false hope that my 1984 corolla is going to dominate YSP.  Or that the rally cars will have a competitive place to play.  Though I think they should.  The class philosophy should be well known and the rules kept to its intent.

I also don't claim to have all the answers.  I'm not bitching about the current rule-set.  To me, SP is attractive.  Or at least some aspects of it are.  I have strong intentions of building either a DSP Subaru, or an ESP Subaru.  My goal here is NOT to allow more favorable classing of either of those projects.  I'd happily build a car and compete under the current rule-set.  Or more likely compete in an already proven car.  Either way I would still have fun.

 

I started this thread to get everyones creative juices flowing regarding the current state of affairs in SP.  The BSP thread is just a small example of the bigger picture.  And again, it doesn't take much reading there to come to the conclusion that something is seriously wrong.  You have several instances where a new and or popular car is upsetting the entire class structure.  The rally cars are just one more example of that.  I've been around long enough to know that not ALL cars are going to be competitive.

But I do think we are short changing out selves, and future members.  There is no reason why we can't have A-stock like disparity in Street Prepared.

So now what is YOUR agenda?
 

 

---

Jeremy Foley
2001 Subaru 2.5RS Retired G-Stock Autocross Beast
2003 Evo 8 Modded Daily Driver
2004 RX-8 Current Borrowed B-Stock Killer

President
Team if you can't beat them-Join them!

Steve Hoelscher:

I said nothing of the sort.  However, lets see... is every car classed correctly?  No.  The SEB is who classes cars.  Therefore, the SEB is wrong in its classing of some cars.  Duh... 

I doubt you were told the SEB waits for letters before taking "any" action.  Lets see... you "were told", I actually served.  Who has a better idea of how this works?   The SEB will address any issues it see deems necessary.  However, if a member wants a particular issue addressed, they must write a letter before the SEB will address it. 

 It was a sarcastic comment loosely based on what you had said. I was trying to make a point...You reiterated what I said.

Uh....I was told by one of the members of the SEB. You missed that little fact there.
 

Steve Hoelscher:

Lets see... governing body issues rulings without input from the governed.  Sounds like a dictatorship to me. 

 

You are having a serious problem with not reading. I never said they should take it upon themselves to "take action". I included member input. Another missed fact. 

 

Steve Hoelscher:

I am speaking out of both sides of my head?  I am?  You just said that the SEB should "fix" the rules before they become antiquated.  That waiting for a letter is wrong.   And now you are complaining that I want them to just sit back and take it?  I was the one explaining that member input is how the system does and should work.  You were the one wanting the SEB to act unilatterally without member input and are now defending your act of providing input.   Do you have the slightest idea that you are contradicting yourself in every other paragraph?

 

NO!!! That's not what I said. I said some rules ARE antiquated already. I'm not contradicting myself at all, you are not reading.  

 

Steve Hoelscher:

Again, you write something that I actually can't believe somebody wrote.  The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

 

Great argument. Now write some facts as to why it's bad idea considering you could "spend all night doing it". You seem to have plenty to say. Might as well dig right into why classing based on speed is such a terrible way to class as opposed to the random classing we have now. I'm ready to hear it.

 

Steve Hoelscher:

So show me a class that doesn't have 2-3 cars that are "the car to have".  If you had been around this sport long enough you would know that people are basically sheep.  They follow the leaders.  Somebody builds a car and is successfull with it, other people see it and think "hey that's a good car, I could build one of those and probably win".  Duh....

Yes, there are classing issues in SP.  I have pointed this out before.  The same basic car, turning similar times in two or three different classes is not a productive use of the class structure.  Best of Breed solves much of that problem.  But,  I don't need to rehash that here. 

More people than not want change?  Hell, EVERYBODY wants change because everybody has an opinion on how it should be done.  That's why you can't "fix the rules before they become antiquated".  You can't please everybody all the time.  And some people have distorted views of classing that will never work anyway.

At least you can admit there are problems. And no the sleep thing isn't the only problem with why there are only 2-3 cars in each class that are competitive.

Again....not what I said. If you're going to try making points about what I have said, at least have the decency to read what I have actually said. And you still have yet to say why it's a bad idea.

ratt_finkel:

Jojoo:

ratt_finkel:

Gee guys, thanks for totally fing up a good thread.  If it's not apparent, I do NOT support joojos ideas.

 jojo, if you want to propose your own idea, thats great.  Get your own thread.  But don't think you can use mine as a public sounding board.

I have no real issues with the way cars are currnetly classed.  Just that the SP rules are antiquated by whatever means.  And that maybe that or something else is preventing SP from growing an evolving.  Is classing to blame?  Maybe, but I don't think that is the whole picture.

 

 

My posts are exactly what you're asking about. Half of your first post is about classing not rules. By just updating the rules you're  not going to create much change to SP.

You don't have to agree with me. I merely posted what you are talking about.

 

So what exactly are you thinking that's going to make these changes? You've got me confused now. Now you have the spotlight...go!

My posts have nothing to do with your proposed changes.  Yes classing is an issue, I just don't share the seem view on it that you do.  

I'd have to disagree.  I'd say changing the rules in ANY class -- would create LOTS of change.

I'm thinking a complete re-vamp of the entire rule-set.  One that would allow more diversity in cars.  One that would allow more modifications.  But one that would also negate some of the more costly upgrades.  All the while keeping the same challenges in engineering and creativity.  As well as basic setup and tunning.  I'm thinking of a class that will attract not only new blood to the sport.  But one that will have the rest of the members considering running.

I don't have some false hope that my 1984 corolla is going to dominate YSP.