> I suspect that we would both agree that adding 12 classes
> in 3 years is excessive, and continued growth at that rate
> is inadvisable.
I would agree that this rate of growth would be unmanageable.
My question still stands though I'll narrow it down a little. What drawback
to the sport is/was created by adding the 12 new classes? It puts it right
at my comfortable level, but a little over Roger's ( a lot over Jeff
Lloyd's) but these are purely based on our feelings. I guess if you add too
many classes, than you are dooming yourself to low participation in all
classes. But not having enough classes leaves out the new blood in the
sport (at least those who give up due to a perceived "better" car)
Were there any classes with open + ladies numbers less than 22?
The number 12 seems reasonable to me because if you figure that the average
regional event has 60 cars, with probably no more than 8 in any one class,
than 12 seems about right. Roger is coming up with the higher number of 22
based on what? (NOT MEANT AS SMART A$$)
I would love to see some opinions on the drawbacks to having the new classes
(FP, SM STR STS, etc) There must be something I am missing.
DaveW
Still the only one in the DaveW class
----- Original Message -----
From: <rjohnson@friendlynet.com>
To: <autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 5:59 PM
Subject: Re: BSM/SM2
>
> This is exactly my point - we are all talking degrees here.
> You are comfortable with 62 classes, I thought that 50 was
> too many when we were at that level. Someone else could
> make 70 their target, or even 24 as Jeff Lloyd suggests.
>
> I think that an Open + Ladies class totalling less than 22 at a National
> with 1100 entrants is too few. You think that a total of 12 is
> OK.
>
> I suspect that we would both agree that adding 12 classes
> in 3 years is excessive, and continued growth at that rate
> is inadvisable.
>
> Reasonable folks can (& will) disagree. . . . .
>
> Regards,
>
> Roger #2
>
>
>
>
> DA>This not meant as smart a$$, so please don't take it that way.
>
> DA>What are the drawbacks to having 60 classes as opposed to 50? What bad
> DA>thing does this bring to the sport? I guess my logic could create the
> DA>situation in 5 years of someone saying the same thing, just with 70
classes
> DA>opposed to 60 and so on. 150 classes is too many too, IMO, but the
current
> DA>mix seems pretty good.
>
> DA>Under subscribed classes should be eliminated under due course. The
current
> DA>rule seems to work. Wasn't AM under probation last year due to low
turnout?
> DA>This year, they had good turnout. The situation remedied itself.
>
> DA>Were there any classes with less than 12 entrants at nationals this
year?
> DA>The new classes just added participants without removing them from
other
> DA>classes (or they were replaced)
>
> DA>One thing is for sure, we (team.nut) could argue about this until our
> DA>keyboards wore out and still not change too many minds (among
ourselves)
>
> DA>RogerStock - 4 entrants and counting
>
> DA>Dave
>
>
>
> DA>----- Original Message -----
> DA>From: <rjohnson@friendlynet.com>
> DA>To: <autox@autox.team.net>
> DA>Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 5:03 PM
> DA>Subject: Re: BSM/SM2
>
>
> DA>>
> DA>> Clearly, we are talking about degrees in this stuff:
> DA>>
> DA>> Perhaps all would agree that 1 entrant in a class at the National
> DA>> Championship, on a consistent basis, is too few entries to warrant
> DA>> a class. 150 entries might be universally regarded as too many, and
> DA>> worth
> DA>> a split.
> DA>>
> DA>> Perhaps all would agree that 2 classes for National competition is
too
> DA>> few. 150 classes might be universally regarded as too many, and
worth
> DA>> consolidation.
> DA>>
> DA>> IMO, a class populated by less than 2% of the field at a National
> DA>> Championship, on a consistent basis, is too few to warrant further
> DA>> inclusion as a National class.
> DA>>
> DA>> IMO, 62 classes is too many. A previous SEB held strong
convictions
> DA>> that
> DA>> they would not exceed 50, and held to that number for 6 years. Since
> DA>> 1998,
> DA>> the floodgates have been opened.
> DA>>
> DA>> I congratulate the SCAC for holding the line at 9 open classes for
12
> DA>> years
> DA>> now, in spite of the participant population showing that, compared to
> DA>> the other categories, there should be more. I applaud their stand,
> DA>> especially in
> DA>> the face of no discipline as to the number of classes in SP-P-M &
> DA>> 'Other'.
> DA>>
> DA>> I have absolutely no problem with F125, SM, STS, STR, FP, OSP or
any
> DA>> of
> DA>> the other alphabet-soup classes run in various parts of the country,
so
> DA>> long
> DA>> as there are sufficient entries to warrant National status.
> DA>> If this means that some of the older, established but yet
> DA>> diminishing-number
> DA>> classes have to go away or consolidate or have Regional-only status,
so
> DA>> be it.
> DA>> People vote with their feet & their money.
> DA>>
> DA>> Roger
> DA>>
> DA>> (Note: I know of 4 'Roger Johnson' named folks that autocross.
There
> DA>> could be more. . . . .)
> DA>>
> DA>>
> DA>>
> DA>> DA>2 classes : People named Roger Johnson (2 entrants) and the rest
of us
> DA>:)
> DA>> DA>:) BIG GRIN INTENDED
> DA>>
> DA>> DA>Seriously, the current # of classes seems very close to the
correct
> DA>number.
> DA>> DA>Within reason, what pluses are there to only having 20 classes as
> DA>opposed to
> DA>> DA>the current 54. Shorter banquets? BFD IMO If they go to a 6 day
> DA>format to
> DA>> DA>handle the number of cars, then there will be more, shorter
banquets.
> DA>>
> DA>> DA>What does eliminating the ladies classes help? Does having these
> DA>classes do
> DA>> DA>anything bad to the sport?
> DA>>
> DA>> DA>Dave
> DA>>
> DA>> DA>----- Original Message -----
> DA>> DA>From: "Kent Rafferty" <gs96@sgi.net>
> DA>> DA>To: <autox@autox.team.net>
> DA>> DA>Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 1:07 PM
> DA>> DA>Subject: Re: BSM/SM2
> DA>>
> DA>>
> DA>> DA>> Based on Roger's criteria, we should eliminate the
> DA>> DA>> following classes:
> DA>> DA>>
> DA>> DA>> Street Prepared: DSP ASP,
> DA>> DA>> Prepared: BP, AP, FP, EP, DP
> DA>> DA>> Modified: DM, BM, EM, AM, FM
> DA>> DA>> Other: F125, SM
> DA>> DA>>
> DA>> DA>> That certainly will streamline Solo II :-)
> DA>> DA>>
> DA>> DA>> Kent Rafferty
> DA>> DA>>
> DA>> DA>> Roger wrote:
> DA>> DA>> > Me too - already too many classes. 20 entrants at
> DA>> DA>> > an event with almost 1100 competitors isn't enough
> DA>> DA>> > for a new class to be considered, or for an old class
> DA>> DA>> > to be retained.
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> > Roger
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> > BU>I agree, we don't need Natinal class
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> > BU>-----Original Message-----
> DA>> DA>> > BU>From: owner-autox@autox.team.net
> DA>> DA>> [mailto:owner-autox@autox.team.net]On
> DA>> DA>> > BU>Behalf Of Don Kline
> DA>> DA>> > BU>Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2000 9:30 PM
> DA>> DA>> > BU>To: lamont@mailhost.org; autox@autox.team.net
> DA>> DA>> > BU>Subject: Re: BSM/SM2
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> > BU>Brad wrote:
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> > BU>I still think that SM should be a regional only
> DA>> DA>> class, with no national
> DA>> DA>> > BU>level classes. It should be a catch-all for
> DA>> DA>> people who show up to events
> DA>> DA>> > BU>with cars not prepared to SCCA rules so they don't
> DA>> DA>> run DM/EM.
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> > BU>Just my opinion,
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> > BU>Brad
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>> >
> DA>> DA>>
> DA>>
> DA>>
> DA>>
>
>
>
|