In a message dated 97-07-23 08:08:11 EDT, you write:
<< I think we've hit on it - anyone who wins a race MUST be bumped up into
another race class - no exceptions. Think about it - this means that we'll
have a constantly rotating window of opportunity for EVERYONE to win a race
(eventually, each race class will have only one entry, they HAVE to win, and
so move up), and as we go thru the cycle, we just have to keep thinking up
new names for the top level race group...wow, what a concept!
Cheers, Brian >>
Well said, sometimes taking the argument to the extreme points out the
absurdity of the the entire discussion.
By the way-- who is really responsible for this site? I didn't realize how
much I enjoyed it until I was gone for two weeks and then spent an entire
hour just reading my vintage mail. Many thanks to the organizer and
maintainer, who are you? I'd like to shake your hand at a track some day.
Next subject - I think that everyone in this originality argument is missing
the point and has probably not been to a board meeting for a long time. To
echo the Bush-Clinton campaign " IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID ! "
It cost $30,000 to rent Sears Point for a weekend. If CSRG litself to its
original concept it could not run this track and many others. If we all want
to race together regardless of income level, we must (unfortunately perhaps)
grow and liberalize our acceptance rules.
It's simple economics. A 100 car field equals a breakeven at $300 per entry
with no fancy shirts or food. CSRG does not average a 100 car field and I
marvel at how well the board handles our delicate finances.
DonSF
|