dg50@daimlerchrysler.com wrote:
>
> Randy Chase <randyc2@home.com> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to stay out of this, really, I am - but some of this bleeds back
>into
> "Why STU?", or indeed, "why any class n?"
Now I did it... 8-)
>
> > Paul Foster wrote:
>
> >> And what job is that? To provide a venue for a select few cars but
> >> everybody else is at a huge disadvantage? This is total BS.
>
> [Randy's reply snipped]
Whew...the digest thanks you!
>
> Actually, I'm with Randy on this one.
And I thought I was just being cranky.... 8-)
>
> I see where you're coming from, but you've got to be careful. "If you build
>it,
> they will come, and they will stay" is NOT true. You need a core group that
> works, passively or actively, to recruit and retain class members.
>
> For a National class, you need that core group in pretty well every Region.
Well put.
>
> Agreed, agreed, and agreed.
>
> One caveat I'd like to add though, is that it must be reasonably clear that a
> given car in a given class has a reasonable chance of becoming competitive
>given
> enough work and practice. I think for most Regions, the C4 in SS passes this
> test. On the other hand, your average over-prepared Riceboy in E Mod fails
>this
> test miserably.
True. I think in mod/prepared form, many cars no longer seem to work
well. I do think that this is recognized, and a lot of drivers see that
if they want to get serious, they can go back to stock rims. I do
sympathize with the guys who show up with non-stock mods. I try to let
them run in stock anyways locally.
> > 3. Creating more classes may tend to dilute the classes and we will have
> > more undersubscribed classes.
>
> This argument doesn't hold water. If class "X" is created, and it steals cars
> from classes A, B, and C, then classes A, B, and C were failing to meet some
> need of the former competitors that X fulfills.
Look at the impact the Pro classes had on the National Series in
ProSolo. Many of those classes were full classes, but creating a
separate Pro class made some classes undersubscribed. I do see your
point though.
X is therefore a "better" class,
> as more people choose to participate in it. If it kills class "A" in the
> process, then that's evolution at work.
I agree with that. This will always be evolving, and we will be having
this discussion years into the future.
>
> Agreed, and agreed - to a point. The trick is to class cars such that the
> differences between cars are smaller than the typical differences between
> drivers. As long as a given car has a reasonable chance to win with the proper
> preparation level and decent driving, it is correctly classed.
>
> Nobody should have to be the class slug - at least, not for more than one
>year.
> ;) (Goodbye, P2!)
>
> Incidently, identifying slugs is just as difficult as identifying overdogs.
I drove a class slug for a few years. The 91 MR2. I was told over and
over that there is no way that the MR2 (too much weight, etc) could hang
in CS. So, yes, who is going to say absolutely which car is a class
slug?
> > 5. The emphasis on having to win locally, IMHO, means that someone has
> > forgotten to enjoy the sport. It means just as much to me, to do the
> > best I can in whatever car I show up in. I know if I drove it well, and
> > that is enough.
>
> Ahh, but you're not everybody Randy. ;)
Proven by driving on Toyos when I know I am going to be back a bit, yet
enjoying the driving anyways. 8-)
Hey, thanks for a positive and well thought out response.
Randy Chase
|