SCCAForums.com

Unfortunately there already exists a moderately unpopular solution to mixing cars with real performance differences

-it’s called Indexed Mod or Indexed Prepared class.

Pro Solo has had those Indexed classes back again now for several years (and on a less official basis, the Tours seem to have that arrangement too.) 

That's one solution to providing a "class or everything" that is relatively fair (perhaps very fair) and also helps to ensure a better level of competition. 

There hasn't been 2 Amod cars to run against each other for many years now in Pro-Solo.

-but the Indexed Mod class still exists if one ever shows up again someday.

F125 didn't like the Indexed Mod class They evidently weren't getting as many class wins nor getting into the challenge as much anymore.

So, they made the argument that they had evidence of plenty of entries and could keep their participation up.

ProSolo management then broke them back out of Indexed Mod and gave them their separate F125 class back.

Lesson here? 

I don't like the big Indexed class idea myself, but it solves some problems. 

No class ever has to be eliminated.

Show enough growth and you might get a chance to be a standalone class again.

47CP:

Are any non P&M people reading this thread?  (Besides SEB or EX-SEB members)  If you are, and have an opinion either way, please write a letter to seb@scca.com

 

P&M aren't "relevant" to those folks so they don't care to write.

Sorry, had to go there.

--Andy

Cold Andy, Cold

Andy Hollis:

P&M aren't "relevant" to those folks so they don't care to write.

Sorry, had to go there.

--Andy

I know you were joking, but if this issue is not relevant to S* classes, then there truly is no one to get hurt by lowering the minimum number. They can ignore the existance of both categories and be just as happy with thier SCCA membership. 

Unfortunately, when your 3-4-5-10-20 year investment gets reduced to zero value by an arbitrary number, you likely won't be very happy with your SCCA membership.  You'll fall somewhere in between "disgruntled" and "buying your own NASA chapter."  But the S* competitor mentioned above is still happy, perhaps wondering why membership is down to 40,000 this year. :)

DaveW

47CP:

I know you were joking, but if this issue is not relevant to S* classes, then there truly is no one to get hurt by lowering the minimum number. They can ignore the existance of both categories and be just as happy with thier SCCA membership.

As you will learn with more years on the board, people only tend to get whicked up enough to write a letter when something is directly negative towards them.  I wasn't joking.

It was interesting to note at last year's Solo Town Hall at Nats, a number of folks got up to say we had too many classes and stop adding more.  A similar sized group got up and said we needed more classes.  Welcome to trying to please everyone.
 

--Andy

ESP89:

So how about if you just say below some number no more rule changes?  I know nobody thinks resources matter, but they do and are limited.  Trying to find a solution to a dying class takes time.  That was my basic point above.  At some point you have to let it go and spend your limited time on something  that might have a chance of succeeding. 

In any business, you don't want to give up on ideas but at some point you need to manage your resources.  I know both Randy and Katie are familiar with this. We are only just discussing at what point is it hopeless?  0 is a dead horse and at that point you have wasted resoureces if you were working on it.  The higher the number the more motivated competitors will be to make sure their class has good competition and fun.

The ladies class discussion is totally out of this in my opinion.  As a family sport, we live with the ladies classes to support families.  At the National Championship there are arguments to not have Ladies Classes.  At local events, I think it depends on the region.  

I need to know what you mean by resources. As far as running event, having a five car class would not impact the event negatively in any way.

As long as people keep showing up, I can't see why it's a dead horse. It could be argued that an 8 person class isn't that competitive or fun, but that is a subjective opinion, and I can't see why it's the SEB's place to even rule on that. There is a natural ebb and flow. Some years you will see smaller numbers than others, and this is going to change, constantly. It could happen in any class, not just Prepared and Modified. All of these things will happen on their own, without the SEB's help. This is not a problem you even need to solve, so just remove the rule, and give yourselves one less thing to worry about. You'd be making people happy at the same time, which in the long term, would be good for business.

 -Katie Kelly

Katie, I'd just love to see what you describe happen.

It is a fine solution for us in Mod and Prepared-at least for awhile

BUT

It does not address the other criticism we are subject to:

"Meaningful level of competition"

It has been said by Marcus and others that low participation numbers are associated with less value in a National Championship.

I guess it can therefore be inferred that the rest of the membership are annoyed by those who get trophies in tiny classes. 

Solution:

Print the numbers of actual participants next to the class in the rule book from now on.

We then have the "value" listed next to each Championship.

You might perhaps get better acceptance for having low or no minimum participation numbers by the rest of the membership then.

Postcript: 

I guess I would still ask the question, does the rest of the membership really truly care or do we just think that they do?

Is the SEB actually getting any complaint letters about tiny class trophy winners? 

Chuck Voboril

KatieKelly:

ESP89:

So how about if you just say below some number no more rule changes?  I know nobody thinks resources matter, but they do and are limited.  Trying to find a solution to a dying class takes time.  That was my basic point above.  At some point you have to let it go and spend your limited time on something  that might have a chance of succeeding.

I need to know what you mean by resources. As far as running event, having a five car class would not impact the event negatively in any way.

The time that the SEB and various ACs spend on discussing rule changes.  Just looking at the Feb. Fastrack - the majority of changes were to Modified. 

I know that it's been said before, and I'll write a letter to this effect, the first year the number of competitors drops below some threshold they should be run as a supplemental class at Nationals.  Just like all the new up and coming classes.  Then you have to make numbers again to be considered for national status again.  If you don't make numbers for "X" number of years - the class is out.  THIS TO ME IS NOT NECESSARILY PERMANENT.  You, as a class, then need to reorganize yourselves and get more people interested.  Just like STU, STS, STX, STS2, SM, SM2, F125, and every other new class that has appeared in the last 10 years.  Make a set of rules that everyone can live by and reintroduce yourselves to the SEB. 

JIm,

We disagree but that does not mean I disrespect your opinion or anybody else's for that matter.  I can agree with Andy's definition.

Katie,

It takes resources (AC and SEB members plus someobody take manage the incoming calls and letter) for every rule.  Event management is not an issue here at all in my opinion.  Detroit runs a ton of classes and we still manage to have fun well run events.  I believe a few years ago the number of classes was lowered due to the lack of participation for some classes.  The market spoke and I think a few were added over the years due to participants requests.   

Andy Hollis:

P&M aren't "relevant" to those folks so they don't care to write.

--Andy

Not relevant to them this year. Just wait until they want to move up...

Andy Hollis:

It was interesting to note at last year's Solo Town Hall at Nats, a number of folks got up to say we had too many classes and stop adding more.  A similar sized group got up and said we needed more classes.  Welcome to trying to please everyone.
 

--Andy

Like you once told me - you consider it a success if only half the folks are upset. Understandable.

P38overhead:

It has been said by Marcus and others that low participation numbers are associated with less value in a National Championship.

I guess it can therefore be inferred that the rest of the membership are annoyed by those who get trophies in tiny classes. 

Solution:

Print the numbers of actual participants next to the class in the rule book from now on.

I did not know that this rule was about protecting national champions' feelings. If that's what this is all about, and if that solves the problem, uh, wow, but okay, whatever it takes!

-Katie Kelly

modernbeat:

Andy Hollis:

P&M aren't "relevant" to those folks so they don't care to write.

--Andy

Not relevant to them this year. Just wait until they want to move up...

And here is where I think that you've missed some of the things that have been said. 

Prepared and Mod aren't moving up in the sense that you think.  Time was that in order to go fast, you have to build a P/M car in order to use real racing slicks.  Now DOT R-compounds are just as sticky and many classes in SP and SM are within a couple of tenths of Prepared cars on course at substantially lower investment costs. 
 

KatieKelly:

P38overhead:

It has been said by Marcus and others that low participation numbers are associated with less value in a National Championship.

I guess it can therefore be inferred that the rest of the membership are annoyed by those who get trophies in tiny classes. 

Solution:

Print the numbers of actual participants next to the class in the rule book from now on.

I did not know that this rule was about protecting national champions' feelings. If that's what this is all about, and if that solves the problem, uh, wow, but okay, whatever it takes!

-Katie Kelly

Right or Wrong, the assumption apparently driving a lot of this hoopla now seems to be exactly that.

Beyond saving Mod and Prep with standalone classes......

Just think-the one who wins in a 77 car class will have clear bragging rights over the one who wins in a 27 car class if the participation numbers get posted in the rulebook

.

Chuck

P38overhead:

apparently driving a lot of this hoopla now seems to be exactly that.

Beyond saving Mod and Prep with standalone classes......

Just think-the one who wins in a 77 car class will have clear bragging rights over the one who wins in a 27 car class if the participation numbers get posted in the rulebook.

There could be patches for the national champion jackets that show how many people were in your class. Like, say, cones, designating a count of 17.  So obviously, winning a 3 cone class can give you tons of prestige.

-Katie

SpyderVenom:

modernbeat:

Andy Hollis:

P&M aren't "relevant" to those folks so they don't care to write.

--Andy

Not relevant to them this year. Just wait until they want to move up...

And here is where I think that you've missed some of the things that have been said. 

Prepared and Mod aren't moving up in the sense that you think.  Time was that in order to go fast, you have to build a P/M car in order to use real racing slicks.  Now DOT R-compounds are just as sticky and many classes in SP and SM are within a couple of tenths of Prepared cars on course at substantially lower investment costs. 
 

It's not always about going fast. One of the big challenges that most competitors in these classes face is BUILDING and TUNING the cars. They're not know as builder's classes for nothing. Plus, if any Stock class competitors ever get tired of the what-car-this-year hokey-pokey, they can move to P&M and feel free to modify their car as it becomes obsolete, rather than trading it in on the next car with a quasi-warranty. 

Howdy,

ESP89:

So how about if you just say below some number no more rule changes?  I know nobody thinks resources matter, but they do and are limited.  Trying to find a solution to a dying class takes time.  That was my basic point above.  At some point you have to let it go and spend your limited time on something  that might have a chance of succeeding. 

In any business, you don't want to give up on ideas but at some point you need to manage your resources. 

Again, in real life you look at what more resources cost.  In this case, more resources cost.... Nothing.  Give the job over to the MAC/PAC/SMAC completely.  There you go, the SEB has more time to focus on its pressing business elsewhere.

 

The ladies class discussion is totally out of this in my opinion.  As a family sport, we live with the ladies classes to support families.  At the National Championship there are arguments to not have Ladies Classes.  At local events, I think it depends on the region. 

If one of the primary movers behind this is "must have a minimum participation to have relevent classes", it's only natural to draw the comparison to Ladies classes which frequently have <5 entrants and yet we seem to be ok with calling the winner there a national champion.  Interestingly, all the folks who are all gung-ho about higher minimum participation #'s don't want to talk about the exact same "problem" in Ladies classes.  Doesn't make much sense to me.

You can support families in autox without a gender biased class.  I've outlined how in the past, and others have offered suggestions as well.  And, to be really hard nosed about it, look around the freaking paddock sometime and see just how many families are actually there, if you want to talk about "wasting resources on a small group of folks".

Mark

(who, btw, is a part of one of those autocrossing families...)

Howdy,

SpyderVenom:

Prepared and Mod aren't moving up in the sense that you think.  Time was that in order to go fast, you have to build a P/M car in order to use real racing slicks.  Now DOT R-compounds are just as sticky and many classes in SP and SM are within a couple of tenths of Prepared cars on course at substantially lower investment costs.  
 

Is that the same SM that has one of its two classes on the minimum participation bubble as well?

Sounds like maybe that's not the full story then, eh?

Mark

I think we just fundamentally disagree on a basic point.  For Solo to be respected form of motorsports competition, I believe a National win needs to have some value based on competition.  A Runoffs win is a highly respected trophy and it is not because they have a lack of competition.  Many people think of solo as just a stop over until they move on to real racing.  Is that our goal, just to be a stop over when somebody is bored?  A step child in the SCCA family? 

As for Ladies classes, there are multiple options to handle this differently and it is a big discussion.  Regional and National handling could very well be different. Mark has made constructive suggestions but there was not (at least while I was on the SEB) a ground swell of support for any changes in that area. 

Adding classes or keeping old classes will for the short term (I think) grow participation but over the long haul, I question the strategy. 

And just for your information, Jennifer and I do not agree on this at all.  :)

That is my opinion and it is not worth the paper it is not written on.  We have change over in leadership for this very reason.  Opinions differ and in a sport full of type "A" personalities, they will often disagree vehemently.  The pendulum stings with each change, hopefully in smaller and smaller angles each time.  I believe I understand the points for not having the number but I don't agree.  I think solo should be a respected motorsports competition and I believe others share that feeling.  We don't necessarily agree on what that means and how to make it happen.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled off season discussions.   Can we get rid of R tires in Stock?  Should Stock mean showroom floor condition?  Can I please change my timing belt in Stock?  How about each Stock class gets a rim size?  Spec tires in a Spec class? What should be done about direct injection in Prepared and Modified and Street Mod?

:)

Marcus 

My conclusions on how "management" regards the participation issue (not my views-but what I think I'm hearing):

Lowering participation numbers on a lot of small classes isn't considered  good for long run growth-just makes us more lazy about attending.

It looks bad, perhaps unsporting, to hand out trophies for small class wins

BUT small classes appear to be a little more OK for National championship trophies if they already are clearly recognized as "different"

The Ladies classes don't offend as many members because they all know what they are.

Mod and Prepared aren' the targets of undue negative bias or hate--management just doesn't know exactly what to do with us to keep us alive,

I think we are headed for one big combined Mod class/category at Nationals except for the classes that show real numbers (like F125).

Thats the Pro Solo story anyway-what happens there might be considered a model for what works for the rest of  Solo.

Unless there are some better ideas out there. 

Applying bumping with no class eliminations looks promising.

Meaningful participation can be satisfied

Nobody loses their right to still drive or tinker with same car they have had for 25 years-their class never goes away

Chuck Voboril