I'm not one to normally worry about wasting bandwidth, but is it necessary
to have THESE SAME STINKING ARGUMENTS EVERY 6 MONTHS????
It's the same arguments, from the same people, about fixing the same things,
those things that BTW aren't really broken, every time....
Couldn't we just rerun the same e-mails and save the typing? :):)
DaveW
Tongue in Cheek!!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: <bthatch@juno.com>
To: <evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com>; <autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 11:13 AM
Subject: [evolution-disc.] Was UD/BD ST
> Frankly, Mattie, I thought your suggestion to consolidate all of SP, ST,
> SM, P and M into 5 classes was facetious and so I gave a facetious
> response.
>
> I'm not a proponent of the "50 classes is all we need" theory that wants
> to do away with classes to meet that magic number. We are competing in an
> amateur motorsport that needs to be inclusive not exclusive, IMHO. I
> think there is room for all of us and our particular car fetishes.
>
> I've been on record for some time about the rules problems for "Street"
> Prepared. Namely, that "Street" is a misnomer and that fact will rise up
> to haunt the class in the long haul. As Steve said, the category is still
> pretty healthy in its current iteration, so leave it alone. I'm cool with
> that. But down the road when more ST classes develop to cover other cars
> than just the "ricers" and their 4-seaters, I think SP will start to look
> more and more like Prepared looks right now. At that point some sort of
> combo reorg with Prepared might be in order.
>
> I don't think the appeal of ST is a "low cost alternative" to SP. I think
> the appeal is to be able to still drive your car on the street with the
> same tires you race on. The street car crowd probably spends more money
> than most SP competitors on their cars with a healthy dose of those
> dollars going to sound systems and fancy paint jobs.
>
> The fact that some very vocal ST competitors have gotten all worked up
> about their late found realization that creative reads of the rules can
> result in guys building more competitive cars out of the parts bin
> shouldn't mean a rules change is needed. As Steve pointed out this is the
> natural "maturation" of the category. IMO doing away with UP/BD in ST
> will hurt the category in the long haul because it takes that level of
> creativity, that I think should be inherit in such a class, out of the
> mix.
>
> <...And yes little
> <Bennie, there are too many Stock Classes. I'll your two Stock
> <classes to two SP classes.
>
> <I guess that won't happen in 2004. :^)
>
> <Matt Murray
>
> Ben Thatcher
> http://ApexBenefits.biz
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
> Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
> http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/sOykFB/k9VGAA/ySSFAA/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
|