Able to register Gen3 for Runoffs?

All things specracer!

Ready to Write a Book
Ready to Write a Book
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2016 5:11 pm
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 2:55 pm
We're the victim of the struggles impacting other run groups. They had to drop qualifying standards to fill the fields, making SRF/SM fields massive. Super Tour is now more of a true championship while Runoffs is more bucket-list experience.

Forum Hermit
Forum Hermit
Posts: 111
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 12:32 pm
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 3:16 pm
Well, CoTA and Indy are two bucket list tracks. Both have had huge entries from the SRF-SRF3 classes on the first visit to the tracks.

What is the problem with making SM and SRF3 the only two classes that qualify on points? Let the other groups qualify after completing the 6 Hoosier major races. SCCA Inc. will get the max cars for these tracks probably every time we (SRF-SRF3) run at them.

But in difficult financial times for the Club, I can see their reasoning. However, where are all of the cars entered for Indy going to park? THAT is going to be a problem I think. We will see. And really, $0.12 a square foot for parking charge....

Hopefully I'll be in the top 60 and get to watch one of the best races of the weekend as the 12 cars try to qualify for the Saturday spots!!
Mick Robinson

Still Learning to Type
Still Learning to Type
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 9:47 pm
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 3:36 pm
Every time this comes up I think back over my 50 year membership in SCCA and remember when the club was being paid a royalty to use the Trans-Am name by Pontiac and we collected a very nice fee for sanctioning the U.S.G.P. There was also Champion Spark Plug sponsorship of the Runoffs.

That was then. This is now. No Pontiac money. No U.S.G.P. money. No Champion money.

Like every region in the country hosting events, Topeka now depends on entry fees to finance the Runoffs. How would you do things in the current reality?

JFR wrote:There was a time in the SCCA that qualifying for the runoff's meant something. Having to qualify to qualify in over subscribed groups makes absolutely zero sense to me. I have already decided not to attend, but was shocked to see 80+ cars entered so quickly. Qualification should be more than how quickly you get your entry submitted.

Jim Regan
PermitLink SRF3 #0
2017 events: 3 Super Tours (Sebring, VIR and Watkins Glen), 1 Northeast Major (Thompson)

Still Learning to Type
Still Learning to Type
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:53 am
Location: Bloomington, MN
Chassis:
513
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 4:41 pm
JFR wrote:
Up to 88 now. Looks like there will be a "last chance" race for 28+ gen3's, with the top 12 of that race advancing to join the top 60 on Saturday for the championship race.


There was a time in the SCCA that qualifying for the runoff's meant something. Having to qualify to qualify in over subscribed groups makes absolutely zero sense to me. I have already decided not to attend, but was shocked to see 80+ cars entered so quickly. Qualification should be more than how quickly you get your entry submitted.

Jim Regan
PermitLink SRF3 #0
2017 events: 3 Super Tours (Sebring, VIR and Watkins Glen), 1 Northeast Major (Thompson)


It is probably of little solace to you but people can enter the Runoffs without being qualified. There are still races to be run. Granted, qualifying for a chance to qualify for the race is no great challenge but how quickly you get your entry in is not a criteria.

Jim

Needs a Life!!!
Needs a Life!!!
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 10:12 pm
Location: Texas
Chassis:
821
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 5:11 pm
The "entry race" that is being referred to is not a race. Qualify (attend races) and you can enter. The only reason to get in early was that the test day registration opened at the same time as the race reg. I do agree with the comments about the ease of entry to the Runoffs. I remember when making the field conferred some prestige and ability, not just attendance. Unfortunately that is not the case this year. The really old guys can remember when the top 3 in the division got invites; when I started I think it was top 6, last year i think it was top 10. The event has become a major income source for the club; more entries= more $$.

Still Learning to Type
Still Learning to Type
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 9:47 pm
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 5:21 pm
Everyone who's ever looked at the numbers says the Runoffs are a major revenue source. Income, not so much as the expense of the event eats a very high percentage of the revenue.

steve kramer wrote:The "entry race" that is being referred to is not a race. Qualify (attend races) and you can enter. The only reason to get in early was that the test day registration opened at the same time as the race reg. I do agree with the comments about the ease of entry to the Runoffs. I remember when making the field conferred some prestige and ability, not just attendance. Unfortunately that is not the case this year. The really old guys can remember when the top 3 in the division got invites; when I started I think it was top 6, last year i think it was top 10. The event has become a major income source for the club; more entries= more $$.

Ready to Write a Book
Ready to Write a Book
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 9:22 pm
Location: Framingham, MA
Chassis:
95, 950
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 5:25 pm
The current points system is poorly constructed, with non-tour majors almost totally devalued and no bonus for doing well in a large field, but even so they should have kept a hard cut off for entries based on performance for each group.

With 800+ entries, its starting to get into the territory where the lowest seeded entries will get "event wait-listed", but I doubt it will be enough to get the 91 Gen3s back down to 72.

Scratch that last part. Looking at the Event Information from 7/18/17:

We have carefully crafted an event plan that can accommodate up to 900 cars in the main paddock (within the outline of the road course) with additional space outside of the oval on the north end. Because of this, it will not be necessary to limit the overall number of entries.



.
Last edited by tomkirchman on Thu Jul 20, 2017 6:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Needs a Life!!!
Needs a Life!!!
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 10:12 pm
Location: Texas
Chassis:
821
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 5:50 pm
tomkirchman wrote:The current points system is poorly constructed, with non-tour majors almost totally devalued and no bonus for doing well in a large field, but even so they should have kept a hard cut off for entries based on performance for each group.

With 800+ entries, its starting to get into the territory where the lowest seeded entries will get "event wait-listed", but I doubt it will be enough to get the 91 Gen3s back down to 72.


i think a point system that takes the current points awards and adds a point for each of the "number of starters that finish behind you" is a good place to start. Since a 21st place finish in a 60 car field has the same value as a 59th place finish....but a 15th place finish in a 16 car field is rewarded with points.
User avatar
Ready to Write a Book
Ready to Write a Book
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 6:53 pm

Chassis:
562-1
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 6:42 pm
steve kramer wrote:
tomkirchman wrote:The current points system is poorly constructed, with non-tour majors almost totally devalued and no bonus for doing well in a large field, but even so they should have kept a hard cut off for entries based on performance for each group.

With 800+ entries, its starting to get into the territory where the lowest seeded entries will get "event wait-listed", but I doubt it will be enough to get the 91 Gen3s back down to 72.


i think a point system that takes the current points awards and adds a point for each of the "number of starters that finish behind you" is a good place to start. Since a 21st place finish in a 60 car field has the same value as a 59th place finish....but a 15th place finish in a 16 car field is rewarded with points.



I couldn't agree more. However, the only classes that had more than 20 cars in a single major or super tour were:

FF: 22@ VIR; AVG of 7
SM: 80 @ Sebering; AVG of 24
SRF: 22 @ Sebring; AVG of 7.3
SRF3: 75 @ COTA; AVG of 26.8

The average count of all other classes except for SRF & SM over the past 3 years is 5 cars per event.

Why are SRF3 & SM using the same points structure for these classes?
How do we ask the CRB for a point structure that benefits good finished in big fields but does not hurt our west coast buddies, or middle of the country who averaged far fewer cars at their majors events? Could we use Head to Head finishes?

Super Tour Participation:

Sebring - 45
NOLA - 45
WSIR - 20 - Everyone finished in the points
COTA - 75
HMR - 35
VIR - 35
BRP - 24
POIR - 20 - everyone finished in the points
MO - 34
RA - 59
WGI - 33

Ready to Write a Book
Ready to Write a Book
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 9:22 pm
Location: Framingham, MA
Chassis:
95, 950
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 6:58 pm
I am sure the feeling is mutual, but I am really not looking forward to having 20+ "desperate to post a top 60 lap" gen3s dumped into the Gen2 qualifying session. I hope they just split the Gen3 session into two groups.
PreviousNext

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 19 guests