Paul...
I'm going to disagree with the part about STS and SM only bringing in
existing members..(at least in my region)
In the final 2000 points standings for STS in the Utah region, there were 16
MEMBERS that competed out of these 16, 6 were new drivers this year!! 3
more were new drivers last year that is 9 new MEMBERS in one region because
of just one class. On top of this at each event STS was always one of the
largest classes averaging just under 14 drivers per event.... excluding the
Pax'd street tire class, the next closest classes for average attendance
were CP and F-stock, both averaging about 5 drivers per event.... I'd say
STS is doing rather well in Utah!! (now STR is a different story)
As far as SM goes, we had 6 Members compete in 2000.... 2 of these were new
members this year, and the others were stolen from single competitor classes
like AP... where they had no competition, no chance of Paxing well, and
would have been hopelessly outclassed if anybody had shown up in a car truly
prepared for the class. So I'd consider that a great way to retain current
membership based on fairly common mods, and avoiding throwing these
enthusiasts to the wolves (so to speak...)
</Dave Kizerian>
URSCCA
> You see this sort of thinking in Solo II with classes such as STS and SM
> that are being pushed as a way to encourage the youth to get involved. But
> that's not what happens. People who would have competed in other classes
are
> the ones to get involved and do well, chasing off any momentary gain you
> might see from a few fresh faces. The net result is zero growth or close
to
> it. I see lots of young people at every autocross I attend. Why? It is
> already within their price range. If they have the desire they will come.
If
> they don't they will stay home and watch football. Big surprise. Trying to
> tear them away from drag racing or street racing to autocross with us is
not
> going to work.
|