Here's an excerpt from a private reply I just sent:
I find that the turnout has been continued to be irregular. Certain areas
have strong support (Las Vegas) and most others do not.
A quick look at current year Tour results yields this:
Ft. Myers 3
San Diego 6
Houston 2
Atwater 0
Rome 1
Peru 6
Seattle 0
Not very encouraging. The good news is that F125 has seen a resurgence the
past two years, even if somewhat sporadic. So, relative to the pits it was
in for awhile, its at least on the way up. IMHO, that's cause to see if the
trend continues to where its finally consistent.
--Andy
PS: Like you, I also have noted the lack of consistent turnout in the P&M
classes. But I look at that not as a rationale for accepting similar
turnouts for a new class, but as a reason to consider consolidation of those
older classes.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Byron Short [mailto:bshort@AFSinc.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 9:16 PM
> To: awhollis@swbell.net
> Cc: bthatch@juno.com; evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com;
> autox@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: [evolution-disc.] SM2@25 now
>
>
> Since you brought it up, any idea why F125 isn't a full class yet?
>
> Lessee, they've been told several times what the "magic" number was, and
> hit it each time at the Solo II Nationals. Their first year was 1997,
> meaning that 2002 will be their 6th year. There were a couple of low
> attendance years in the middle there when folks first became
> disappointed that the class was not yet at national status, but there
> was a rebirth when the SEB gave the class a new magic number last year,
> which they again hit.
>
> If you are a believer that classes should be added based on acceptance,
> keep in mind that there have been, for each of the last several years,
> more drivers in F125 in Pros and Tours than in all the other mod classes
> combined. SCCA is now allied with WKA (World Karting Organization) to
> bring drivers up through the ranks in road racing. So it would seem
> that at the BOD level, SCCA "talks the talk" when it comes to karts.
>
> F125 has continued to flourish (not "languish") despite the difficulties
> of bringing people to a "supplemental" class for 6 years. If folks are
> serious about SM, SM2, and others, I'm glad, but I *really* expect the
> SEB to handle all classes evenly. So far, they haven't done that
> with F125.
>
> I shouldn't even jump in on this. But the entire issue gets more and
> more ridiculous each passing year. All the hoopla for new classes is
> well and good, but let's try to show some sense of fairness...If SM,
> STS, STR, SM2 are all acceptable classes, then why wouldn't F125 be when
> it's done what they've done for about twice as many years?
>
> --Byron
>
> Andy Hollis wrote:
>
> > I don't disagree with your sentiment, Ben. Just wanted folks
> to be clear on
> > what to expect so there is no confusion and no disappointment
> ("Hey, we got
> > this petition with 8,000 signatures, so we get our class now, right?").
> >
> > SM2 will get treated just like STS, STR, SM, etc. Those
> classes were all
> > supplemental for a couple of years until they showed
> consistency of support.
> > Or, in the case of STR, the lack of consistency of support.
> STS and SM got
> > made "real", while STR was shown the door. All of your
> comments about SM2
> > at this early stage in its life cycle could be said about STR
> at that same
> > relative time, but it did not pan out. And there's F125 which still
> > languishes in classing Purgatory. Which will SM2 be most like
> in the long
> > run, SM/STS or STR, or even F125? Only time will tell. I have
> my opnion
> > and its probably a lot like yours. But until it pans out, its just an
> > opinion/prediction...
> >
> > --Andy
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: bthatch@juno.com [mailto:bthatch@juno.com]
> >>Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 5:10 PM
> >>To: awhollis@swbell.net
> >>Cc: evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com; autox@autox.team.net
> >>Subject: Re: [evolution-disc.] SM2@25 now
> >>
> >>
> >>Andy, I fully expect the numbers in SM2 to build from here on out, just
> >>like SM did a couple years ago. This year was just too soon to see any
> >>significant numbers due to the temporary nature of a "supplemental"
> >>class. The wise and frugal driver won't pour development time and money
> >>into a project that has a fair chance of NOT being approved as
> a national
> >>class. That is the "Catch-22" of a "proposed" class.
> >>
> >>On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 16:30:18 -0500 Andy Hollis <awhollis@swbell.net>
> >>writes:
> >>
> >>>AFAIK, the only real "procedure" is for the class to continually show
> >>>significant subscription numbers. Helps if that happens throughout
> >>>the
> >>>country, but especially important is Nats and other nationals
> >>>events. At
> >>>the end of the day (or year, or decade), the SEB will eventually
> >>>make this
> >>>call when the preponderance of evidence suggests that its
> >>>appropriate. I
> >>>would not expect it to happen after the first year, though.
> >>>
> >>>The only "rule" has been the one for when a new supplemental class
> >>>gets
> >>>broken out into its own supplemental class, which it looks like SM2
> >>>and STX
> >>>have both done this year.
> >>>
> >>>--Andy
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>From: bthatch@juno.com [mailto:bthatch@juno.com]
> >>>>Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 4:03 PM
> >>>>To: washburn@dwave.net
> >>>>Cc: evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com; autox@autox.team.net
> >>>>Subject: Re: [evolution-disc.] SM2@25 now
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Just that Jean said that was the procedure we need to follow to
> >>>>
> >>>get the
> >>>
> >>>>class approved.
> >>>>
> >>>>On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 11:45:24 -0500 "Patrick Washburn"
> >>>><washburn@dwave.net> writes:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Why do you need a petition? Isn't it already on the table as a
> >>>>>provisional
> >>>>>class with rules that will allow it to become a full class?
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>Ben Thatcher
> >>http://ApexBenefits.biz
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >>evolution-discussions-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> evolution-discussions-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now
http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/MVfIAA/7_TolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
evolution-discussions-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|