|
|
Post by CoolGuy094 on Dec 2, 2013 9:03:23 GMT -5
I see some potential disappointments.. A couple class leaders only have 5 events.. You need 6 events in class to qualify, right? Rules on the first page say minimum of 5 events in-class to qualify. |
|
|
|
Post by CoolGuy094 on Dec 2, 2013 9:04:36 GMT -5
Thank you Cindy for doing such an awesome job with results/auditing/posting this year, and every other hat that you wear.
|
|
|
|
Post by z3elda on Dec 2, 2013 10:01:13 GMT -5
I see some potential disappointments.. A couple class leaders only have 5 events.. You need 6 events in class to qualify, right? Rules on the first page say minimum of 5 events in-class to qualify. I thought it was "more than half" - I stand corrected! |
|
|
|
Post by integra55 on Dec 2, 2013 13:20:44 GMT -5
more than half has been my suggestion for several yrs. now … it would take away the possibility/temptation of someone trying to cherry pick a second class and winning 2 championships in one yr … the number 5 was picked in a yr that made it half (or maybe 1 more than half) of the events run….. since the number of events each yr is subject to change .. my opinion is that the rule should read … more than half
|
|
|
|
Post by matthugie on Dec 2, 2013 14:53:23 GMT -5
The discussion in the timing trailer Saturday was that it is one more than half.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolGuy094 on Dec 2, 2013 15:01:45 GMT -5
I don't have a horse in this race, but the first post in this thread which was posted back at the start of the season in February and has remained the same ever since says:
Season Championship eligibility:
1. Must be an CCR SCCA member by the 7th CCR points event
2. Compete in a minimum of 5 CCR points events in the same class
3. 2 lowest points events scores will be dropped for each competitor
If there is a tie, first tie breaker is to the most first place finishes.
There was a subsequent discussion in the following posts between Walter and AJ on this exact topic in which AJ says that he is leaving it like it is, meaning that the minimum number of events would be left at 5.
I feel it would be unfair to change the rules at this point. I was joking with Michael on the last page about how we should change the number of dropped events from 2 to 3 because it would cause me to finish in front of him in SSM, but obviously it would be unfair to change the rules at the end of the season.
|
|
|
|
Post by yellow CR on Dec 2, 2013 16:12:06 GMT -5
It is going to be 5 events for season championship, because that is what it says. Although I agree it should be more than half and moving forward it will be.
|
|
|
|
Post by W. Dean Furr on Dec 2, 2013 19:22:49 GMT -5
It is going to be 5 events for season championship, because that is what it says. Although I agree it should be more than half and moving forward it will be. Good move, Mike. Until recently, the rule HAD been more-than-half. At one point, it was one-more-than-half. (I prefer a simple more-than-half. It was always messy when there was an odd number of events and we had to explain why 5 of 9 was not one-more-than-half.) I don't see any instances this year where a driver qualified for two championships, though several of us recognized the possibility. I didn't check 2nd or 3rd place finishes. |
|
|
|
Post by W. Dean Furr on Dec 2, 2013 19:28:37 GMT -5
And, on a related subject (2014 rules), has there been any further discussion on combining classes for year-end championships next year? Last year, there was serious discussion about pooling all the Prep drivers in one factored class, and perhaps doing the same with some of the other groups. I liked the idea, but it was brought up too late last year to allow time for proper discussion. If it's still worth thought this year, this would be a good time to open a thread for that subject.
|
|
|
|
Post by integra55 on Dec 2, 2013 20:24:42 GMT -5
The discussion in the timing trailer Saturday was that it is one more than half. all it needs to read is … more than half … be it 6 for a 10 event season, or 6 for an 11 event season, 7 for a 12, 7 for a 13 … etc … that way you never need to think about it … it's more than half …that's it |
|
|
|
Post by integra55 on Dec 2, 2013 20:26:53 GMT -5
I don't have a horse in this race, but the first post in this thread which was posted back at the start of the season in February and has remained the same ever since says: Season Championship eligibility:
1. Must be an CCR SCCA member by the 7th CCR points event
2. Compete in a minimum of 5 CCR points events in the same class
3. 2 lowest points events scores will be dropped for each competitor
If there is a tie, first tie breaker is to the most first place finishes.There was a subsequent discussion in the following posts between Walter and AJ on this exact topic in which AJ says that he is leaving it like it is, meaning that the minimum number of events would be left at 5. I feel it would be unfair to change the rules at this point. I was joking with Michael on the last page about how we should change the number of dropped events from 2 to 3 because it would cause me to finish in front of him in SSM, but obviously it would be unfair to change the rules at the end of the season. I've never said to change it now .. I'm usually opposed to any changes that come about after the season starts … my "discussion" with AJ was for the start of the season … same as I'm calling for now … for the start of the season (next season) edit: I see where Michael has already addressed this there can be a min. requirement to run in a particular class … I'd be for that … but the low number that allows double championships …. that's what I have a problem with |
|
|
|
Post by jprice130 on Dec 2, 2013 22:30:15 GMT -5
And, on a related subject (2014 rules), has there been any further discussion on combining classes for year-end championships next year? Last year, there was serious discussion about pooling all the Prep drivers in one factored class, and perhaps doing the same with some of the other groups. I liked the idea, but it was brought up too late last year to allow time for proper discussion. If it's still worth thought this year, this would be a good time to open a thread for that subject. I'd love to see this brought up for discussion again and maybe some kind of official vote. I enjoyed the Intermediate class this year, but I think I'd prefer to see that class go away and have prep-based PAX classes instead. I think we'll also need to discuss what to do with the Tire class now that the SCCA has made the "Street" classes official. I know "Tire" class is meant for any non-Street Touring class, but by and large, most of the Tire class participants were stock prepped cars, so I'm wondering if something ought to change there. |
|
|
|
Post by integra55 on Dec 3, 2013 6:19:17 GMT -5
I live a bit far away to make it to any meeting (for voting purposes) … but I'll say here that I'm completely opposed to any prep-based PAX class autocrossing … run the national classes … if the club wants to run Pro, Intermediate, Tire, Novice …. whatever I don't care … but leave the national classes alone …. please …
|
|
|
|
Post by belcher on Dec 3, 2013 7:43:06 GMT -5
As long as we're tossing around ideas, I'm for doing away with the Novice Championship. I stayed in Novice because there were a couple of drivers and myself that were close and I thought it would be fun to have some type of competition. Unfortunately for reasons beyond their control the other drivers dropped out. Mike Cassino brought this up at trophies at the last event. There are many one drive wonders that come out and get in Novice so there is not it seems a great opportunity for a championship in novice. My thought is you win a Novice race you then have to move up to whatever class you would normally run in. The points earned should then be calculated into that class based on where you would have finished. Just give the points don't rearrange all the standings. So yes there maybe 2 third place finish points awarded but that would be a one time thing per Novice driver. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by matthugie on Dec 3, 2013 9:36:06 GMT -5
Steve, as someone who was a novice in 2012 I have a different view on the Novice Championship. I think it provides a great platform for competing against drivers of roughly the same experience level. It can be discouraging to compete in an open class with experienced drivers and class prepped cars when you're just starting out. If you're doing well you can always elect to jump into an open class.
It also greatly depends on what car you're running, and as you can see from the championship points there are lots of classes that suffer from consistent participation, not just Novice. Heck, I would have taken the SM championship had I not run Tire class just because no one in that class ran more than 5 events. Just my $0.02.
|
|
|
|
Post by integra55 on Dec 3, 2013 9:45:15 GMT -5
Steve, the only real strike against using the points that way … would be someone who has several 2nd and 3rd place Novice finishes before "winning" Novice … are you going to transfer all those finishes into their base class … could really bugger up that particular class for those that have run it all season …
other regions run Novice, without any points .. their times are published, they know how they did against others in Novice (via PAX… which I dislike ) … but not getting pts they are encouraged to move on to their base class, after they figure out that they actually like to a-x …they get event trophies, but not season trophies
|
|
|
|
Post by belcher on Dec 3, 2013 10:48:24 GMT -5
Walter, my thought was only to apply the Novice win, not all previous finishes. I was thinking selfishly as this is what happened to me in Triad. If those points were transferred I may have taken the STX title there.
Matt, you're correct in fact there many classes where there wasn't consistent participation. And I'm sure that won't change. I'm guessing what Cassino was alluding to was that myself in Novice this year did very well as the standings show. That being said, I was not necessarily happy with my driving performances at each event even though I won. I can see how other competitors could get discouraged just as if they competed in Open classes. I wish that Will, Justin, and others had been able to compete more.
|
|
|
|
Post by caSSino on Dec 7, 2013 23:57:52 GMT -5
Walter, my thought was only to apply the Novice win, not all previous finishes. I was thinking selfishly as this is what happened to me in Triad. If those points were transferred I may have taken the STX title there. Matt, you're correct in fact there many classes where there wasn't consistent participation. And I'm sure that won't change. I'm guessing what Cassino was alluding to was that myself in Novice this year did very well as the standings show. That being said, I was not necessarily happy with my driving performances at each event even though I won. I can see how other competitors could get discouraged just as if they competed in Open classes. I wish that Will, Justin, and others had been able to compete more. Steve, I am not completely sure what I was getting at. Most likely just being a smart ass as usual but you did do a good job this year and I am always happy to see people getting more into the sport and moving on from Novice class. Overall I agree with the concept of removing the championship aspect from the class. If we remove the points from the class to try and motivate people to move on it then gives the competitor the opportunity to decide whether they want to compete with like skilled individuals or try to compete for a championship. |
|
|
|
Post by belcher on Dec 9, 2013 8:07:24 GMT -5
Mike, I don't think you were off base with your comment after the last event. Somewhere on this forum someone stated as to how throwing newbie's in with the open class would discourage their further involvement. I feel that having a Novice Championship can effect the same result. Any novice who has run all year will definitely have better skills than someone at their first event. Or should.
The hardest thing I think about solo is learning the track. You walk this sea of cones of which maybe only 8-10 have any merit. Then you get in the car and it looks TOTALLY different. And that's if you remember any of it. And then the next time you come out it is a different course. This is amazingly difficult to do. A road course stays the same and you get to practice.
Sorry got a little off course here. Should have saved this for the other thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by mr2aw16 on Dec 10, 2013 10:16:17 GMT -5
good discussion...I am in my 5th year now, but I identify with the comments about learning the course. I remember a lot of DNF's my first year. Trying to take in everything and remember a course was a little difficult. I would like another crack at the Carowinds course, November/December of 2009, I believe. What a great course ! Didn't get a single clean run, all DNF's. Very frustrating - and embarassing too.
The point... as a novice, the best strategy is to concentrate on the elements of a course and how they affect a car (ie. how to drive). My goal the 2nd year was simply to remember courses better and only have 1 or 2 DNF's at each event - while increasing driving skills. A big mistake I made was getting too caught up in making changes to the car, whether adjustments between runs or the latest things to "bolt on". Those things are certainly a big part of racing, just not so much when you start out. I don't know how many times veteran drivers told me to concentrate on the driver. That is my philosophy to this day - mainly why I run in "street" class. Here at Highlands, if you win one or two events, many drivers move on. I think I am for staying a Novice the first year for the reasons above - too easy to get the cart before the horse. I agree that competing for a novice championship is motivation. Thanks... I wish you success.
|
|
