101 replies to this topic

[Cnj]

Danny,

Re your quali letter, I suggest you give it some time to gain "likes" and then ask those who support you for permission to be listed on the letter as supporters of the idea to add collective weight. You certainly can add my name.

Craig Janssen

[Jamz14]

So if faster guys being behind slower guys is a safety issue and people can't be expected to make reasonable passes when faced with this situation, then does this mean we can put aside the idea of inverted grids? I know it doesn't happen much, but it does happen sometimes. I too think that 15 minutes is too little to get a real grid sorting, but shouldn't the concern be that the fast guys are spending too much time getting ahead of slower guys so the finish order won't be truely representitive of the pace, and not that people will lose their minds and control and make stupid decisions?

I have never agreed with arguements that imply that people will start making stupid decisions if faced with tough circumstances. Whether it be this, inverted grids, bump drafting ETC. Character is known when faced with tough situations, not when everything is groovy. In short....... whatever shakes out of this situation, it is no excuse to be a moron on track.

[Danny Steyn]

Danny,

Re your quali letter, I suggest you give it some time to gain "likes" and then ask those who support you for permission to be listed on the letter as supporters of the idea to add collective weight. You certainly can add my name.

Craig Janssen

Craig - thanks for the suggestion - I have edited the post to suggest LIKING the letter.

[MPR22]

Danny,

Re your quali letter, I suggest you give it some time to gain "likes" and then ask those who support you for permission to be listed on the letter as supporters of the idea to add collective weight. You certainly can add my name.

Craig Janssen

Or start a poll.

[Danny Steyn]

So if faster guys being behind slower guys is a safety issue and people can't be expected to make reasonable passes when faced with this situation, then does this mean we can put aside the idea of inverted grids? I know it doesn't happen much, but it does happen sometimes. I too think that 15 minutes is too little to get a real grid sorting, but shouldn't the concern be that the fast guys are spending too much time getting ahead of slower guys so the finish order won't be truely representitive of the pace, and not that people will lose their minds and control and make stupid decisions?

I have never agreed with arguements that imply that people will start making stupid decisions if faced with tough circumstances. Whether it be this, inverted grids, bump drafting ETC. Character is known when faced with tough situations, not when everything is groovy. In short....... whatever shakes out of this situation, it is no excuse to be a moron on track.

JAMZ - no issue with what you wrote, but we are trying to solve a perceived safety issue here - suggest another thread for your post

[MPR22]

So if faster guys being behind slower guys is a safety issue and people can't be expected to make reasonable passes when faced with this situation, then does this mean we can put aside the idea of inverted grids? I know it doesn't happen much, but it does happen sometimes. I too think that 15 minutes is too little to get a real grid sorting, but shouldn't the concern be that the fast guys are spending too much time getting ahead of slower guys so the finish order won't be truely representitive of the pace, and not that people will lose their minds and control and make stupid decisions?

I have never agreed with arguements that imply that people will start making stupid decisions if faced with tough circumstances. Whether it be this, inverted grids, bump drafting ETC. Character is known when faced with tough situations, not when everything is groovy. In short....... whatever shakes out of this situation, it is no excuse to be a moron on track.

Jamz,

I think the concern here is not that people will behave poorly but that there will be situational awareness issues. New track to everyone, vast difference in experience levels from top to bottom, more cars on the track at one time than most or all of the drivers have seen. Its not any one ingredient that causes the problem its the reciepe that has some of us concerned.

[Cnj]

Craig,

Without a seat at the table no dialogue can occur. Without dialogue no solutions presented can be properly vetted.

I am not complaining, I work with cities, counties and state officials everyday. NO, is always the easy answer to changes to the written regulations. Until you have a stakeholder sitting in front of the officicial providing solutions on the fly to each objection the answer is almost always no.

We need representation. Danny seems to have the time. I find him to be a reasonable person who can articulate our concerns, solutions and desires to the powers that be.

I use, the powers that be, because it appears there is no clear answer to who we should be negotiating. Tough to solve a problem talking to the wrong people.

Michael P. Ross (Irrational Racing Enthusiast)

Yes, my experience with regulatory authorities is the same. With that said I have seen and had considerable success winning concessions when a solution is put on the table that represents the best interests of all parties. In this case the interests of the Spec
Miata community is the same as the interests of Lone Star, other racers and Topeka; namely a spectacular success with maximum participation options, safe racing and recurring attendance in future years. The current path I believe fights against the best interests of all parties.

I would be thrilled to support Danny as spokes person as clearly he has the best accent for this.

CNJ

[Lee Thomas]

Craig - thanks for the suggestion - I have edited the post to suggest LIKING the letter.

Danny - I edited the original post on this thread directing readers to your post.

[Danny Steyn]

Hi guys

happy to report that there is action happening behind the scenes. Received word from National that they are looking at other options related to qualifying.

[Cnj]

Hi guys

happy to report that there is action happening behind the scenes. Received word from National that they are looking at other options related to qualifying.

Good. Now lets see if there is a possibility of more inclusion.

CNJ

[mdavis]

Good. Now lets see if there is a possibility of more inclusion.

CNJ

South Africans to the rescue! Thanks Danny for your efforts. And I agree with Craig about inclusion. Maybe the 15 minutes of Saturday qualifying could be the 'B" race instead? Not ideal but we're going to have to give something back in order to be inclusive.

[Johnny D]

Hi guys

happy to report that there is action happening behind the scenes. Received word from National that they are looking at other options related to qualifying.

You may want to make it easy on them and submit a proposed schedule. Then all they have to do is show and say "how's this" to others?
J~

[Ron Alan]

Jamz,

I think the concern here is not that people will behave poorly but that there will be situational awareness issues. New track to everyone, vast difference in experience levels from top to bottom, more cars on the track at one time than most or all of the drivers have seen. Its not any one ingredient that causes the problem its the reciepe that has some of us concerned.

Well said Michael and to the point. Though we all want and assume exactly what James has eluded to, the reality in these large car qualifying and races can be anything but Utopian. And rarely are the stories because someone was intentionally being a moron.


Great efforts Danny. I certainly hope you get back in when the lottery opens

As an outsider with nothing at stack, I would hope someone also has Topeka's ear on allowing all entries. If SM is cut off at 85 and there are groups that end up with only 30 cars...this will not go over well. I realize safety is priority #1, but my guess is overflow can be accommodated with a little outside the box thinking??

[davew]

I sure hope that the powers to be, from Lone Star Region, SCCA, COTA, DLB etc., get their acts together quickly. I am already getting phone calls that drivers are not going to re-register. Too much hassell, drama and a potentially dangerous situation. Each individual must make their own judjements on risk vs reward, cost vs fun, etc.

My opinion is that none of this drama was needed. As Mr Krebs wrote, we have only one chance to get this right. He was addressing the competitors. Maybe he should have been addressing the organizers.

Dave

[Caveman-kwebb99]

I sure hope that the powers to be, from Lone Star Region, SCCA, COTA, DLB etc., get their acts together quickly. I am already getting phone calls that drivers are not going to re-register. Too much hassell, drama and a potentially dangerous situation. Each individual must make their own judjements on risk vs reward, cost vs fun, etc.

My opinion is that none of this drama was needed. As Mr Krebs wrote, we have only one chance to get this right. He was addressing the competitors. Maybe he should have been addressing the organizers.

Dave

+1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000...

[Drew]

Wow - I'm just catching up on all this drama. I was fortunate to register within the 85, only to now learn that went *poof*.

I don't know Danny or what kind of pull he has with SCCA, but it seems to me that the letter will have more weight if we can put a lot of names behind it. Even better if folks are willing to include their SCCA member numbers, unless that causes a security concern. Otherwise it looks like one person (Danny) is trying to speak on behalf of all of the racers without any real authority to do so.

I would also note in the signature line that the names are of Spec Miata drivers. That way, let's say you get 20 people to put their names on the letter, that represents almost 1/4 of the SM field. If you can't get at least 10+ names though, I wouldn't bother listing them. My 0.00002 - I don't know jack about dealing with SCCA so feel free to ignore my suggestion.

And you can include my name on the letter if you want to. Drew Kim.

[Caveman-kwebb99]

last I checked there was already 10 names within a few minutes...

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Craig,

Without a seat at the table no dialogue can occur. Without dialogue no solutions presented can be properly vetted.

I am not complaining, I work with cities, counties and state officials everyday. NO, is always the easy answer to changes to the written regulations. Until you have a stakeholder sitting in front of the officicial providing solutions on the fly to each objection the answer is almost always no.

We need representation. Danny seems to have the time. I find him to be a reasonable person who can articulate our concerns, solutions and desires to the powers that be.

I use, the powers that be, because it appears there is no clear answer to who we should be negotiating. Tough to solve a problem talking to the wrong people.

Michael P. Ross (Irrational Racing Enthusiast)

And here I think you were just a lowly consultant... No idea you are big man on campus LOL

[Blake Clements]

Sign me up. Blake "I was first" Clements

[FTodaro]

I sure hope that the powers to be, from Lone Star Region, SCCA, COTA, DLB etc., get their acts together quickly. I am already getting phone calls that drivers are not going to re-register. Too much hassell, drama and a potentially dangerous situation. Each individual must make their own judjements on risk vs reward, cost vs fun, etc.

My opinion is that none of this drama was needed. As Mr Krebs wrote, we have only one chance to get this right. He was addressing the competitors. Maybe he should have been addressing the organizers.

Dave

Dave I am with you on this one. I can forsee some people will get closed out of the two practice days so not only will you have 85 cars on track with all that is going to go with that, you will have some drivers who have never been on track.

I sure hope i get in on one or both practice days.

Atlanta is starting to look good.