autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: A way to reduce some classes

To: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>, dg50@daimlerchrysler.com
Subject: Re: A way to reduce some classes
From: "Jeff Winchell" <Jeff@Winchell.Com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 08:11:01 -0700
Quotes abbreviated:
>From:                  dg50@daimlerchrysler.com
> Someone else asked if I thought that 2 SM classes could replace 6 SP
> classes, and do so fairly. As it sits _right now_ - yes. ...if the SM rules 
>are more attractive to the majority, then
> we'd expect that, over time, CSP, DSP, ESP, and FSP's raw material would
> gravitate over to the SM portions of the 2 combined classes and the "old
> skool' SP classes would attrit below the Nationals cutoff point and go
> away. 

> ...It  is absolutely essential that the performance of the married classes be
> equal to each other, and I agree 100% that it is too early to predict with
> any certainty which classes will wind up the performance counterparts of SM
> and SM2. My educated guess is that SM==BSP and SM2==ASP, but that
> definately remains to be seen. 

BSP is MUCH faster than DSP, ESP, FSP, and yet you say CSP, DSP, 
ESP, FSP would become SM. This appears to be contradictory. Did I 
misinterpret something?

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>