To all,
Bryan's, below, message accurately presents the issue and the December
Steering Committee(SC) meeting discussion which we had.
>
> I haven't left yet, so am commenting on the Street Tire Issue.
>
> Checking with those who keep track of the history of these things I found
> out that the class idea came from people running at Sacramento Chapter
> events back in 1998 when it became part of our Championship Season. As has
> been stated, the size of the class has gone up and down over time. This of
> course presents a real problem for making the run groups as equal as
> possible. This is the reason Pat and Jerry brought this thing up.
>
> Mark Mervich laid out the facts of the meeting pretty well. We spent a
> great deal of time discussing this and did not rush to judgment. The real
> issue here is adjusting run groups. This was a solution we came up with.
> It appears that some strongly vocal people using this forum have expressed a
> desire to not make the change.
>
> I will not be in charge of the next meeting as Ed Runnion is taking over in
> January. I would strongly encourage those interested in this subject to
> attend the meeting at Coco's on Jan 18th and not just express opinions on
> the class structure but come up with a creative solution to the run group
> problem, which is the core issue. If we cannot find a better solution to
> the run group problem we may have to stand on the Street Tire class
> restructure.
However, what hasn't been expressed by anyone, on this forum, is that there
WAS concern that the committee really didn't have a sense of how the many,
un-represented, STi competitors might suggest SOLVING the problem of group
imbalance. There was an understanding, by most members, that the solution
arrived at would not be received with raves. Change, even for the better
good of all is still change and, sometimes, unpleasant and difficult to
accept. However, since the run-group imbalance problem had been at it's
most obvious during the very recent lower-turn-out Slush series, the issue
had not surfaced until just before the Dec. meeting. The committee was
concerned that, with the '05 season just around the corner, a decision
needed to be made sooner rather than later to give as much "planning" notice
to affected competitors before the next season start. In this vein, putting
the decision off till January was thought to be inappropriate.
Since most SC members subscribe to this Bay Area Autocross forum, we've
heard the, understandable, complaints.
>
> Bring your statistics!!
>
> Bryan
Accept Bryan's suggestion and bring your, statistically sound, ideas to the
next meeting. However, to most effectively get you specific solutions
understood by the SC, notice of specific ideas, in advance of the meeting
will help the SC evaluate any proposal(s).
In order to have the best chance of getting an idea understood and accepted
by the SC, think about using this forum, some time in advance of the
meeting, to express any solutions you plan to bring to the next SC meeting.
Then the SC, using it's private discussion forum, can do some advance work
on evaluating and discussing possible change to the Dec. decision.
Don
|