Change Nat. Champ /Regional affects?

I

IPRESS

New member
Just a BS session we had going on yesterday, but it did raise some thoughts and questions.

First thing that came up was why does SCCA name class champions based on one race? The consensus was that a much better way to determine a champ would be to do it over the course of a series of 5 or 6 Nat. Champ races in different parts of the country. Yeah it would mean long hauls and more money spent by teams, but it would also better determine who the top dog really is. Yes there would be a lot less entries due to travel, but the folks who were there for the entire series would be serious contenders for the most part. Now many folks just get points during the year and attend without much chance of being competitive.

The second thing that this discussion blossomed into was how the Nat. Series would change Regional racing.
Thoughts were that with less people committed to the National Series, regions would be able to run one racing program instead of two.
Maybe you qualify for the National series by being in the top three of your region or division the year before in a specific class. If you finish in the top 6 or 8 or 10 (pick a number) in the Nat. series points you auto qualify for the next year. May sound crazy, but with some smart people looking at things you might come up with a better way then the present Runoffs. At the same time regional racing might benefit.
 
First thing that came up was why does SCCA name class champions based on one race? The consensus was that a much better way to determine a champ would be to do it over the course of a series of 5 or 6 Nat. Champ races in different parts of the country. Yeah it would mean long hauls and more money spent by teams, but it would also better determine who the top dog really is. Yes there would be a lot less entries due to travel, but the folks who were there for the entire series would be serious contenders for the most part. Now many folks just get points during the year and attend without much chance of being competitive.[/b]
Click to expand...

I think you will find that the Nationals can't afford less entries. Who in their right mind would do such a series? If you know anyone who did a full season of GAC or SWC, ask them how expensive and taxing it is. Nobody would do it.
 
Like I said Andy it was just a group of racers BSing and the idea that the Runoffs was really not a great way to name national champs was brought up.

I am not saying having a national series is the best way either, but I personally think the present system is pretty lacking. Maybe when the BOD nuts up and makes some real class changes it will be more of a significant thing.
 
Like I said Andy it was just a group of racers BSing and the idea that the Runoffs was really not a great way to name national champs was brought up.

I am not saying having a national series is the best way either, but I personally think the present system is pretty lacking. Maybe when the BOD nuts up and makes some real class changes it will be more of a significant thing. [/b]
Click to expand...

It's a tough call. I alsways like Championships that are a 'best of'. SCCA, the NFL and the NCAA do it in one-and-done format but almost everything else is a series. Arguably, the NFL and NCAA are the most exciting playoffs in sports because so much is riding on every game. But just as Tommy Kendell says in the trailors for that show 'Set-Up', "Auto racing is the one sport in the world where the most talent guarantees you nothing"....so the question is valid...but nobody in amateur racing would do it. I think you would even have a hard time getting people to come to ONE venue more than once a year for a series but I would see that as a better solution. So 3 races at Mid-Ohio with some sort of points structure to name a champ....would that be MORE desirable to the Nationals crowd? Nahhhh.
 
sorry Mac, I don't think you could do this. I know we're jaded by seeing how much coin the SM crowd tends to spend doing this, but that's not the norm. I just can't see people spending the money.

But you're right, crowning a national champ after one race at one track under one set of conditions probably isn't the most 'accurate' way to do it.
 
It would be a nice thng to see a true national champion based on good finishes in a number of designated races around the country, but there's one key element that will always be lacking...bucks. We still consider ourselves amatuer racers, not just because we don't get paid, but most of the money comes from the hip pocket.
A nation wide series would prove awesomely expensive for the amatuer. I estimate my all inclusive weekend expenses to be in the $1G area. Put distant and frequent travel into the mix, and most couldn't afford it.
Without sponsorship of a large nature, it wouldn't be feasible.
 
I wasn't there, but back in the late 50's and early 60's the (single) SCCA National Champion was determined by a selected number of events located all across the country. I'm not sure, but I think the Chimney Rock Hill Climb was part of that "series" at least once, plus one of the Pennsylvania Hill Climbs was counted towards the overall points total multiple years. Major events like the June Sprints were part of the series, but only one race (with the biggest/fastest cars) was eligible to earn points. If you didn't run that class/race, you couldn't be National Champion.

At any rate, with all the travel required there were no more than ten people that could afford to compete. In the late 60's the club went to the current "single event, winner-take-all" format. The first four years the event that eventually became the Runoffs was run over Thanksgiving week and alternated between Riverside and Daytona, then found a "permanent" home at Road Atlanta in 1970. It moved to Mid-Ohio in '94 for twelve years before heading west to Topeka in 2006.

The current process for determining a National Champion certainly has it's shortcomings. Besides being a test of how one does at a single event vs. the entire season, there's the concern of home-track advantage, the travel costs for the teams farthest away from whatever location is the "Holy Ground" that year, and the inefficiency of spending (at least) a week at the track for 20-minutes of track time a day. Unfortunately, all other proposals that have been put forth also have been shot down because they have even greater perceived shortcomings (plus, as we all know, SCCA is VERY reluctant to change directions).

A couple of years ago the BOD requested input on improving the Runoffs and I proposed having THREE National Championship events, each in the fall and at least two weeks apart from each other. One would be at an East Coast track, one in the central part of the country, and the third out West. Rather than running all 24 classes at each event, you'd run eight different classes at each event and those classes would alternate sites each year. In other words, if you ran in QM, your National Championship event might be at VIR one year, HPT the next, then maybe Laguna the third year.

The advantages were numerous:
- there are a lot more tracks/regions that can host 300 car events versus 700 car events
- you could complete each event in a three-day weekend and all cars would race on Sunday
- whatever class you ran, your National Championship event would be "local" once every three years
- reduces the impact of home-track advantage
- others I can't remember now

As far as I know, the idea never received any serious consideration by the committee, much less the BOD. The main criticism I heard was "we've never done it that way before" and it removes the "gathering of the clans" aspect of the current Runoffs. I believe the primary objection is that it involved thinking outside the box.

It's probably just as well I didn't get elected Director of Area 12 back in 2004. If I had, I'd probably be doing hard time for justifiable homicide by now.. :lol:

Butch Kummer
 
"thinking outside the box" Therein lies the problem. How to do more of it without doing too much. Somethings need to be fixed and others can't be...for a number of reasons.
 
I was posting some of our discussion to get you guys to bring stuff up like what Butch has done.
I am not as negative about the Runoffs as I am about who or how you qualify.
I just find it silly to have a system that in some places awards a spot in the big show for just showing up at a number of races. It should be an event for National Championship contenders. not for racers that just want to say they made the race. (That would be my catagory so don't think I am picking on the less talented cause I am one:)
Maybe HPT is going to grow on the National crowd, but right now it is not a favorite place to run. Butch's three different weekend idea seems pretty good, but I am sure the club PTB would fight having to put on three different championship weekends. I can hear the $$$$$ argument from all the way here in Texas. On the other side, the club is non profit and can not give direct benefits to its members ($$$). BUT it can spend those $$$ on events members can enjoy. Hopefully a long range plan can modify the classes and incorporate a better way to qualify and determine champions.
 
Just limit the entries to top three of each class in each division. That would be what 20 cars at the most in each class?

The club would lose a lot of money on the reduced entries, or the entry fee would be astronomically high, but you would only have the cream of the crop competing.
 
The club would lose a lot of money on the reduced entries, or the entry fee would be astronomically high, but you would only have the cream of the crop competing.
[/b]
Click to expand...
Or those racing on their kids college fund, 401K's, or Daddy's war bucks. As with all things, the haves would continue to have, whether they were the best or the most deserving.
 
Simple solution - don't call the person who wins a run-off race the national champion. Call them what they are - Run-offs winner. To do a national championship right with multiple races just ain't gonna happen in amateur racing so don't try and fabricate something where it doesn't exist.

JMHO.

David
 
That's more accurate...Run Off's champion. For those of use running the ARRC, we always thought of it as our "National Championship" as it took over for the loss of the IT festival when the National Office first began turning it's back on IT. I made the mistake of referring to a past, current, and future ARRC champion as "National Champions". I got my mistake force fed to me by those who run NARRC, SARRC, etc. that the ARRC was simply a local championship, even though the A stands for American rather than anything regional.

The difference is, that no matter what is involved in becoming a Runoffs champion, they will always be referred to as National Champions whereas IT will always be referred to as a regional class.
 
How about expanding on the "knockout" formula that F1 uses in qualifying and the dirt guys use all the time?

Everyone gets access on Tuesday and Wednesday for qualifying. On Thursday, everyone races for the top 12 spots. On Saturday, those 12 race for the top "Elite 8" spots. On Sunday, you race to become the National Champion of your class.
 
Simple solution - don't call the person who wins a run-off race the national champion. Call them what they are - Run-offs winner. To do a national championship right with multiple races just ain't gonna happen in amateur racing so don't try and fabricate something where it doesn't exist.

JMHO.

David
[/b]
Click to expand...

DING DING DING! No more calls please, we have a winner.
 
The only thing that I see that could happen would be a points system that carried into Runoffs with Runoff point the equivalent of 2 or 2 1/2 national races. You would take top three finishes from Nat races. The points would need to weighted by field size.

I don't think three rotating events would ever be approved nor would a series. If you want to run a real championship series stick to SARRC, NARRC, ARRC, etc. For now the runoffs is a race with SOME of the best SCCA drivers and/or cars (not nessicarily both) :o in the country.

My 2 cents.
 
A couple of years ago the BOD requested input on improving the Runoffs and I proposed having THREE National Championship events, each in the fall and at least two weeks apart from each other. One would be at an East Coast track, one in the central part of the country, and the third out West. Rather than running all 24 classes at each event, you'd run eight different classes at each event and those classes would alternate sites each year. In other words, if you ran in QM, your National Championship event might be at VIR one year, HPT the next, then maybe Laguna the third year.

The advantages were numerous:
- there are a lot more tracks/regions that can host 300 car events versus 700 car events
- you could complete each event in a three-day weekend and all cars would race on Sunday
- whatever class you ran, your National Championship event would be "local" once every three years
- reduces the impact of home-track advantage
- others I can't remember now

[/b]
Click to expand...

This is basically the same thing I have proposed in the past, except I hadn't thought of 3 different rotating tracks...only a single one on 2 weekends. I like it a lot personally. Would be cool to have formula cars in one location, production/gt in another, and touring/ss/sm in a third and have the tracks rotate. Sears Point or Laguna Seca, Mid Ohio, and Road Atlanta?

The other advantage you're forgetting Butch is that you may get more participation from far away tracks if you only need 3 days of racing. The way it is now...you need 3 to tow from the west coast...what something like 2-3 to tow from far NE or southern Florida? Then there's a test weekend, etc. That means most serious contenders need something like 2 weeks for the Runoffs...what's the average vacation time awarded per year? 2-3 weeks?

Then again, if you're in the SFR or Atlanta regions and have great tracks and great regional programs...who cares about national races and the Runoffs? Seriously...I got to race at Laguna Seca this past weekend...I don't know who'd trade what they have for the Runoffs at HPT. The fact that the Runoffs are so far away from them and at an unattractive track is probably a blessing in disguise.
 
I know the logistics are more difficult, but I like the idea of a 3 race championship series. One East, one Central, one West. Your best two finishes are scored, so if you have a dud weekend, you can recover or you can skip that cross country trip.

IMO those that are truely competing for a national championship, and not just taking their car to the runoffs for the atmosphere, will be willing to go to more than one big race. Start them in early Sept, leave 2-3 weeks between each. You reduce the homer advantage, hold a large scale race in more locales each year, and have a legitimate champion in each class.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top