79 replies to this topic

[Jesse Prather]

Boys this is happening all over in lots of classes.  This terrible qualification process for the runoffs at Indy has lots of slow drivers out with us this year, we've seen it around here as well.  I'd bet that more than one runoffs championship will be affected by a driver who has no business being there.  

Back to actually qualifying for the runoffs with points please!

[LarryKing]

I heard a rumor that the SCCA needs 900 Run On entries to break even at Indy. Personally I don't believe it. No way they will hit that number.

[Jim Drago]

I heard a rumor that the SCCA needs 900 Run On entries to break even at Indy. Personally I don't believe it. No way they will hit that number.

I doubt that very highly as that is substantially more than we have ever had. 

[Peter Olivola]

How do you know they were "hot laps?"  Local yellows are not reported by T&S.  They are only recorded in the Race Control Log which is not public (a discussion for another thread.)  They should result in less than optimum laps (another discussion for another thread.)

 

Individual lap times are all posted on SCCA live timing, it shouldn't be hard to take an average of all hot laps.  

[mhiggins10]

Aside from Indy, has the change from Regional/National licensing driven this at all?  I know when I first got my license, it was regional-only.  Then, magically, the next year it was just a "Full Competition" license.

 

As a slow guy, and someone who worried quite a bit about impacting others, here is my $.02.  I know I'm slow.  I know I will likely be lapped, and did exactly this kind of analysis when deciding if I wanted to run at COTA.  I'd have qualified within 115%, and would not have finished last based on qual and race times from other competitors.  I'd like to think I would've been a better competitor for the fast guys and kept an eye in my mirror (as I did for my first few races when I was being lapped).  I also typically try to work out which lap I should expect the leaders to come through on, so I'm prepared when it happens.

 

In the end, I think this particular driver needs to remember what he was taught throughout his HPDE/racing journey: be safe, BE PREDICTABLE, pay attention to what is going on around you.  Point by if you need to.  That likely solves 99% of the problem.   If other local folks want to step in and show him video and explain how things should improve, that's even better- it sounds like he was amenable to hearing the input when folks talked with him.

 

 

BTW- this problem is not unique to SM, or SCCA.  Just ask Anthony Davidson, Mike Rockenfeller or Allan McNish about the privateer Ferraris that wrecked thier prototypes at Le Mans.  Or ask the current F1 grid what they think about Lance Stroll, Pastor Maldonado or a host of others.  

[Brandon]

What about different qualifying percentages between Super Tours (110%) & Majors (115%)?

Or whatever percentages you want but make the ST's more selective in who's permitted to take the green.

 

Tightening up the qualifying percentages may be a good disincentive to folks wanting to participate at the upper echelons of racing or at least give stewards the ability to exclude folks who are too slow to even be predictable and safe.

 

If someone were to be excluded for being above the percentage, would folks be in favor of allowing a refund for such an event? This may alleviate some apprehension in supporting the lower percents if the entrant were to receive back some portion of their entry fee. Registrars and treasurers would hate the paperwork but it could make someone's exclusion a bit more palatable.

 

Someone noted the change in the licenses sometime around 2014 or 2015 (reg/nat vs. novice/full) and having been an instructor at SCCA schools for the past 5 years, we certainly have signed off to race folks who were slow, but their exhibited on-track behavior was predictable and safe - the goals of SCCA driver schools. We don't teach speed...unfortunately don't have enough time in two days of on-track sessions.

[OrangeCrush86]

I'm new to SM but not new to racing. My opinion is that lapped traffic is just a fact of racing and it's easy to complain about people at the back when you are running at the front. The person making the pass is still mostly responsible to do it safely. If the slow car is ignoring blue flags, not staying on a predictable racing line, or is obviously trying to race with lapping traffic that's a different story.

[Michael Novak]

I'm new to SM but not new to racing. My opinion is that lapped traffic is just a fact of racing and it's easy to complain about people at the back when you are running at the front. The person making the pass is still mostly responsible to do it safely. If the slow car is ignoring blue flags, not staying on a predictable racing line, or is obviously trying to race with lapping traffic that's a different story.

I agree with many types of racing lap traffic is part of it. Club racing at 25-40 min races are different though. Its part of racing for professionals--On the amateur side it tends to bring out the worst. 

[FTodaro]

If someone were to be excluded for being above the percentage, would folks be in favor of allowing a refund for such an event? This may alleviate some apprehension in supporting the lower percents if the entrant were to receive back some portion of their entry fee. Registrars and treasurers would hate the paperwork but it could make someone's exclusion a bit more palatable.

 

It is not a big deal to refund someones fees, administratively. This is not a popular topic because we are a club and we all are entitled to a degree to use it. However, i would always vote the rules to favor safety. You can spin this any way you want but it does increase the risk and lower the safety margin. Just look at what happened at Pitt race, every B-Spec in the field got hit.

 

When your are racing in a mixed class, you come to expect that the out of class slower or faster car will not race you for the spot but do the gentlemanly thing of letting you by. Not so much when its in your own class.

 

If i were king, there would be a lower limit for the Majors and no limit in Regional. If SCCA is going to open the door to registration at the Runoffs and if they are going to eliminate the Experience requirement of National vs Regional license, they have some obligation to consider skill qualification for the big events.

[mellen]

This past weekend we had a situation where we had one competitor who was clearly not up to the task of racing in the Super tour series. He was so far of the pace that we were lapping him twice in the 25 minute sessions and three times in Sundays race. A few drivers lost their best lap in qualifying for passing him under yellow. It was actually unsafe not to pass him in some instances.  This driver did meet the 115% rule barely, but was endangering himself and other drivers all weekend.  If you can picture yourself driving your Sm at 100% in a field of 50 SRF3 cars, that was basically what we had. I cant imagine driving in our field constantly looking in mirrors while trying to drive forward.  Many people had near misses and very close calls and I am sure it messed up many battles within the races. The driver himself is a very nice man, but I can't imagine he enjoyed himself or the weekend, which is sad. What do we do in this situation? Should we tighten the supertour to 110%

this would be the same driver we had issues with at Blackhawk. not safe for anyone and did mess up the races and qualifying.

[tylerbrown]

This past weekend we had a situation where we had one competitor who was clearly not up to the task of racing in the Super tour series. He was so far of the pace that we were lapping him twice in the 25 minute sessions and three times in Sundays race. A few drivers lost their best lap in qualifying for passing him under yellow. It was actually unsafe not to pass him in some instances.  This driver did meet the 115% rule barely, but was endangering himself and other drivers all weekend.  If you can picture yourself driving your Sm at 100% in a field of 50 SRF3 cars, that was basically what we had. I cant imagine driving in our field constantly looking in mirrors while trying to drive forward.  Many people had near misses and very close calls and I am sure it messed up many battles within the races. The driver himself is a very nice man, but I can't imagine he enjoyed himself or the weekend, which is sad. What do we do in this situation? Should we tighten the supertour to 110%

I agree with needing to tighten this rule. I don't know how anyone watching from outside the car can't tell that the car was so far off the pace that it is dangerous. The same car affected the outcome of both races at Blackhawk, including mine, and from what I watched and what you are saying here, affected qualifying, and both races at Mid-Ohio. 

 

At a Majors event, you should not get lapped TWICE in a 25 minute race, that is dangerously slow IMO. (This happened at Blackhawk). 

 

Thanks for bringing this up Jim, I was going to if no one else did after seeing it happening again at Mid-O.

[Butch Kummer]

I had planned to stay out of any discussions regarding "leadership" in SCCA, but I'm thinking some background regarding the Majors 115% rule is in order:

 

As head of the Majors program I implemented the 115% rule for the 2014 season after the issues caused by slow drivers in slow cars at the 2013 CoTA Majors. People (and cars) that had not raced in ten years came out of the woodwork for that event since they felt it might be the only chance they'd ever get to race there, and while it was not the only challenge we faced that weekend slow/unaware drivers certainly created a lot of issues that could/should have been avoided. When I originally proposed the rule to the BoD I called it the "No Wankers" rule, but they requested I not call it that publicly.

 

Why is it 115%? Because I knew the BoD wouldn't approve it if I tried to make it 107 or even 110. Even at 115 I got a lot of pushback from drivers and regional officials that I was "telling folks they weren't welcome to race with SCCA"!

 

And why is it based off track records rather than qualifying? That way it could be included in the Supps and those who knew they were on the cusp of NOT hitting the number due to (lack of) car prep and/or driving experience could make a decision before registering whether or not they should attend - if they'd run Mid-Ohio five times with a best lap ever of a 1:57 and their "bogey" was a 1:52, they knew there was a possibility they might not be able to race. If they never showed up then there's no need for refunds or hurt feelings.

 

The reality is in two years heading up the program I only saw one person "counseled" that they needed to pick up the pace (and they did). Neither the stewards nor T&S had the manpower to monitor the times so I would do it at the events I attended and get with the Series Chief Steward (now Race Director) when I had concerns. Now that the Hoosier Tire Super Tour has a dedicated T&S person (and wizzy software), those events (and the Runoffs) would be the place to start enforcing the rule. It's also entirely possible that single-class run groups could have more stringent qualifying standards than multi-class run groups, but I'm sure others would object to that not being user-friendly.

 

And yes, seeing conversations like this make me glad I'm no longer involved in trying to make things better - just let me show up at the events/tracks I want to run and I'll constantly remind myself, "It's not my event".

 

Lots of layers, indeed...

[MPR22]

Too lazy to look this up.  If a car is shown and deemed to ignore multiple blue flags can the chief of whatever tell the starter to black flag the car.  Without spinning or other offs getting lapped twice in 35 minute Super Duper Tour race is ridiculous.  They want us to haul our ass all over the country to race these "special" races but are afraid to offend someone that paid a fee to circle the track as a rolling road block.  

 

Also very concerned that this individual is doing this for the right to perpetrate the same rolling road block at the the Run-offs. Why the hell would I want to go to the Run-offs if I know there will be a lapper there that clearly doesn't belong.  That weekend usually costs me about 7-10k, not counting lost revenue from missing a week of work.  I have better things to spend money on. 

[Danica Davison]

I do think the 115% is too much, especially for certain classes like SM or SRF/3.  I think the way I would change it would be to factor in the duration of the race ... and then figure out how many laps it would take to finish the race without any driver being lapped. 
 
Indy will have a track distance of 2.592 miles, and lets assume the pole sitter time runs 2:00 lap times, and it is going to be a 40 minute race (20 laps or 2,400 seconds). 
 
If the 115% logic applied, that would be one lap in 138 seconds (2:18), which extended would be 2,760 seconds to complete the 20 laps. 2,760 seconds minus the 2,400 is 360 second difference (6 minutes). Now when we limit the time to 40 minutes (2,400 seconds),  and divide that by 138 seconds/lap, the slowest guy will only travel 17.39 laps.  Which means the leader will lap him 2.60 times.
 
Now, the method I am proposing is going to assume that the leader passes the last place car at the same exact time he crosses the finish line, meaning the last place guy will finish 19 laps.  19 Laps divided by 2,400 seconds is 126.32 seconds/lap, or a 2:06.32 lap time.  That is a difference of 6.32 seconds a lap, and 105.26% of the leader.

 

Note:  This is assuming that the leader and the last place car run their same lap times every lap, which we know is not very possible. It isn't perfect, but this is a much closer method than what we currently have. Given this, if we have something like adding a buffer of an extra 20 seconds (1 second/lap) to make sure we don't lap anyone. Then, the threshold would be a 2:05.32 lap time. Which is 104.43%. 

 

Sorry for all the math.


 

[Peter Olivola]

There is nothing compulsory in the definition of a blue flag.  It is considered advisory only.

 

GCR pg 48

6.1.1. Meaning of Each Flag

C. BLUE FLAG (Blue with Diagonal Yellow Stripe)

Another competitor is following very closely or is trying to overtake. This flag may be displayed standing

or waving, depending upon the speed differential.

 

Too lazy to look this up.  If a car is shown and deemed to ignore multiple blue flags can the chief of whatever tell the starter to black flag the car.  Without spinning or other offs getting lapped twice in 35 minute Super Duper Tour race is ridiculous.  They want us to haul our ass all over the country to race these "special" races but are afraid to offend someone that paid a fee to circle the track as a rolling road block.  

 

Also very concerned that this individual is doing this for the right to perpetrate the same rolling road block at the the Run-offs. Why the hell would I want to go to the Run-offs if I know there will be a lapper there that clearly doesn't belong.  That weekend usually costs me about 7-10k, not counting lost revenue from missing a week of work.  I have better things to spend money on. 

[Danica Davison]

Just curious ... did any one of the front runners maybe offer some free coaching to the guy?  I feel a little bad for him, as he is just trying to have fun.  Remember, this is amateur racing after all.  Don't get me wrong, I don't think he should be in the majors or at the runoffs either ... but maybe a little help from some of you good coaches out there would help him maybe drop 5 seconds or so and at least not make him as dangerously slow.  Then everyone would have more fun.  Just a thought.

 

Also, maybe I would like to see the scca be a little more flexible and move him to whatever group B-spec is in. Still give him the credit for the SM race so if he gets faster, he can run indy.

[38bfast]

this whole 115% rule goes out the window if you have a mixed class field. SM does get other classes mixed in from time to time. Case in point at Pit Race majors when SM had to share the Group with BS. Or in wings and things that has a range from FM to P1. Or GT1 to AS. My feeling is its just another dynamic of your race you have to deal with. 

[Jim Creighton]

Here's something to think about. SCCA has created the Majors and the Super Tours. As a result, Regions are having a difficult time making ends meet with Regional races. And the rules don't allow to easily combine the events any more. So, how does the new guy get any experience? Sure, he can go run another organization but that even further damages the Region.

 

So, I suggest that when you can, enter a non Majors event to support your local Region. Otherwise, they will cease holding the events and what you are discussing will happen more often Use them as test sessions. I know many drivers in SEDiv DO support their local Regions because I see them at these races. Thanks.

[LarryKing]

The Great Lakes Div use to hold "Rationals" - a regional race group within a National weekend. They were great fun - regional racers got to join the party while having their own group, thus staying out of the national racer's way.

 

Jim C., since moving to the SEDiv I've been running SMSE and having big fun. Hope it stay a regional class so it doesn't get F'd up like SM.

[Danica Davison]

Jim C., since moving to the SEDiv I've been running SMSE and having big fun. Hope it stay a regional class so it doesn't get F'd up like SM.

 

I don't think you will have that issue. At times is makes me want my 1.6 back.