49 replies to this topic

[Butch Kummer]

As some of you know, there's been a long-standing policy that drivers who participate at the Runoffs cannot enter the ARRC by GRM in the same class. This was implemented so we (Atlanta Region) are not seen as competing with the Runoffs for entries plus it adds to the "Regional Driver's National Championship" nature of the event. Last year Topeka said they'd actually PREFER we eliminate that restriction, but I've not been able to overcome the second objection in the racing community. In the past cars have had to go through the dual-homologation process and/or we've had invent classes for everyone to play in, and quite frankly that's been a PITA.

So what if we did this?

"Runoffs drivers that enter the ARRC by GRM in the same class will automatically waive their finishing position at the ARRC and be listed behind all non-Runoffs drivers on the official results. Any track records set by those drivers will still be valid assuming they are competing in a compliant car."

What this means is you guys can all race together in your "proper" class, but the Runoffs drivers will be moved to the bottom of the sheet on the official results page. If the official winner (which means s/he is a non-Runoffs driver) chooses to hand the trophy to a Runoffs driver than might have finished ahead of them that's up to the individual parties.

I'd like to make a final decision on this at our Aug. 22 Race Board meeting, so let me know whatcha think...

Butch Kummer

[James York]

Why not let the Runoff drivers race and place where they finish on the track. Don't put any restrictions in the sups and all who enter know the game.

If the same driver wins both, kudos to them. They are good and lucky.

[MPR22]

Keep the ARRC the way it is.

[Jim Drago]

Butch
There are several drivers going to the ARRC this year that can win the Runoffs but chose to go the ARRC due to time and money constraints. A "regional" driver IS NOT GOING TO WIN in SM, NO WAY. I hate to disillusion anyone, but that is the fact. More than likely the winner will come off the top 25 in National points or a pro driver. Like Cliff Brown, Mike Cotrell, Matt Reynolds, Blake Clements or Todd Buras, all are supposedly going to the ARRC this year. Let everyone go and compete for the win or put the same stipulations on anyone inside the top 100 in National points, no pro drivers and have a "true" regional champion if that is the goal. If you want more entries, allow all to compete
Jim

[Butch Kummer]

Keep the ARRC the way it is.

I posted this same idea on multiple forums and although it's only been a few hours so far this is the ONLY person that wants to keep the restriction against Runoffs drivers at the ARRC by GRM. Everyone else is saying "let 'em all run".

MPR22 - Would you care to expound upon your answer?

[Steve D]

Let everyone go and compete for the win or put the same stipulations on anyone inside the top 100 in National points, no pro drivers and have a "true" regional champion if that is the goal. If you want more entries, allow all to compete

Damn, but that Drago feller makes more and more sense every day!

[Neil O]

Let all come out, no restrictions.

[Mike Collins]

Damn, Neil must feel pretty strong about this! I know for a fact he is the biggest LURKER on this forum of all time, so for him to post it must be BIG..

Let them all run!

[davew]

Any chance of adding B-Spec to the class list. I have the donor and hope to have it ready for the ARRC. Having a class would make me more inclined to rush the car through the build process.

Dave

[Danny Steyn]

Butch - Lots of really fast east coasters dont have the money, time or inclination to spend 7-10 days at Elkhart lake, but a 3-day ARRC weekend makes a lot of sense

And from what I know of all my fellow competitors, we all want to win against the best. Jamie drove an excellent race and won last years SM. His race win meant way more to him than my ARRC SMX win meant to me - mine was a hollow victory (but I'll take it)

Knowing Jamie, I am sure that Jamie would have preferred to win against me, Charbs, Chip, Drago and all the others that would come to the ARRC to run in teh best event in the SE but some of the National front runners were precluded from racing becuase of this rule.

If you allow them all to run, then I seriouslky beleive you could have an EVEN stronger field at the ARRC than at the Runoffs !!!!

I say let em ALL run

In this economy I would be chasing the biggest field possible - not chasing them away !

[Strongbad]

I'd prefer to get beat (er,learn,compete) by the best.
Let'em in.

Anyone got a fast 99 I can rent?

Joseph

[MPR22]

[quote name='Butch Kummer' timestamp='1311794403' post='10925']
I posted this same idea on multiple forums and although it's only been a few hours so far this is the ONLY person that wants to keep the restriction against Runoffs drivers at the ARRC by GRM. Everyone else is saying "let 'em all run".

MPR22 - Would you care to expound upon your

As Danny stated some of us don't want to spend the time or money at the Runoffs but the ARRC is reasonable alterntive for more of us to attend. Right or wrong my logic is: if everyone (Runoffs competitors) shows up the cost of being competative will go up as well. I am a have not that can hang close to the haves most of the time. But if I need to rebuild, tune, and get my car to runoff conditions to hang in at the front of midpack or back of the front I'm not that interested. I can do that at any National for a lot less money. My logic may be crazy but it is mine.

[Tom Hampton]

As Danny stated some of us don't want to spend the time or money at the Runoffs but the ARRC is reasonable alterntive for more of us to attend. Right or wrong my logic is: if everyone (Runoffs competitors) shows up the cost of being competative will go up as well. I am a have not that can hang close to the haves most of the time. But if I need to rebuild, tune, and get my car to runoff conditions to hang in at the front of midpack or back of the front I'm not that interested. I can do that at any National for a lot less money. My logic may be crazy but it is mine.

+1

[Jim Drago]

As Danny stated some of us don't want to spend the time or money at the Runoffs but the ARRC is reasonable alterntive for more of us to attend. Right or wrong my logic is: if everyone (Runoffs competitors) shows up the cost of being competative will go up as well. I am a have not that can hang close to the haves most of the time. But if I need to rebuild, tune, and get my car to runoff conditions to hang in at the front of midpack or back of the front I'm not that interested. I can do that at any National for a lot less money. My logic may be crazy but it is mine.

If that is the logic, you better spend the money or stay home There are guys there like Blake, Buras, Cliff Brown and the Pombos who are already committed to going. ALL have beaten everyone headed to the Runoffs at that track. So you will be as far forward or back already in terms of lap time, there may just be a few more cars between p1 and you at the finish. Blake won one National there and Cliff Brown won the other. The current rules don't keep them from going. So if you want a regional championship, exclude the top 50 or 100 National drivers and all who have run in any pro series. If not, let them all come. The current rule doesn't accomplish what it was intended to do IMO.
Jim

[Butch Kummer]

As Danny stated some of us don't want to spend the time or money at the Runoffs but the ARRC is reasonable alterntive for more of us to attend. Right or wrong my logic is: if everyone (Runoffs competitors) shows up the cost of being competative will go up as well. I am a have not that can hang close to the haves most of the time. But if I need to rebuild, tune, and get my car to runoff conditions to hang in at the front of midpack or back of the front I'm not that interested. I can do that at any National for a lot less money. My logic may be crazy but it is mine.

I mean this seriously - thank you for your input. What I need to do is decide whether allowing Runoffs drivers will increase or decrease the number of entries at the ARRC, so hearing from both sides is important.

BTW - We WILL have SM2 for the 1.6 cars and SSM for those that meet the DC Region SSM rules. SM, SM2, and SSM will all run together.

[Butch Kummer]

Any chance of adding B-Spec to the class list. I have the donor and hope to have it ready for the ARRC. Having a class would make me more inclined to rush the car through the build process.

Dave

B-Spec is already classified as SSC, isn't it? If so, you could certainly bring it and run in that group.

How many B-Spec cars are in existence? If there's a shot at three or more showing up I could see adding it specifically - it could even help prove the concept and grow the class.

[MPR22]

I mean this seriously - thank you for your input. What I need to do is decide whether allowing Runoffs drivers will increase or decrease the number of entries at the ARRC, so hearing from both sides is important.

BTW - We WILL have SM2 for the 1.6 cars and SSM for those that meet the DC Region SSM rules. SM, SM2, and SSM will all run together.

I know this year several of the Southwest Division folks are skipping the Runoffs and going to the ARRC. Some that wouldn't normally go to the Runoffs are going to the ARRC, so predict a big turnout for the race.

[Jerry Cabe]

Butch,

From a "Corner Spectator" point of view, the thing I like about the ARRC is that it gives the non-Runoffs contenders some place to have strong competition. For the IT classes, it easily meets their needs of having a Championship Race. But with SM being a National Class, it doesn't hold the same importance. The SM-alphabet soup you had last year was too much, even I had no idea of who was running against each other out on track. Not playing games with class designations to allow almost anyone to run would make things simpler, for you, the competitors, and the spectators.

The ARRC is still my favorite event to flag all year.

[davew]

B-Spec is already classified as SSC, isn't it? If so, you could certainly bring it and run in that group.

How many B-Spec cars are in existence? If there's a shot at three or more showing up I could see adding it specifically - it could even help prove the concept and grow the class.

Currently there are 3 Mazda2's built or being built to B-Spec rule. Randy Hale has the car that ran at the 25 hours and at VIR 13 hours. He is finishing his second car in the next couple weeks. I am driving mine as a street car until we get caught up with SM jobs.

With the alphebit soup of classes at the ARRC, what would the problem be to add another BS (pec) class!!!!!!

Dave

[Butch Kummer]

Currently there are 3 Mazda2's built or being built to B-Spec rule. Randy Hale has the car that ran at the 25 hours and at VIR 13 hours. He is finishing his second car in the next couple weeks. I am driving mine as a street car until we get caught up with SM jobs.

With the alphebit soup of classes at the ARRC, what would the problem be to add another BS (pec) class!!!!!!

Dave

Dave,

If I add BS(pec) to the class list, how many do you reasonably think would show up? As I said, if there's a chance in hell of three I'll do it (we still carry ITT, you know).

Butch