2018 participation numbers

[jimwheeler]

https://www.crbscca.com/public/runof...fsTracking.php

[smithpr]

Nine classes are lower than AS. Not a good sign. Remember we are perfectly aligned to get the results we are getting; if we want different results we have to do something different.

[jimwheeler]

These numbers are not so bad, given the Runoffs were on the west coast. I think that the numbers will improve with the Runoffs at VIR and then R.A. But, improving the class is worth the effort. Still the most affordable V8 RACING in the country.

[smithpr]

Jim, totally agree participation will be better in 2019. I just worry that other classes have really improved while AS continues to trend in a manner that concerns me.

[Ted Johnson]

The whole concept of participation numbers for a class to be eligibie for the runoffs puts a perceived notion that the regional classes are of lesser value and not as important as runoffs level classes. A dividing line that has hurt the club as a whole. This needs to go away. Sorry guys since this has taken place it's been downhill for scca regional participation. I keep hearing from different outlets the SCCA now stands for Sports Country Club of America which may or may not be true. Just another opinion from the peanut gallery like AS being the most affordable v8 racing in the country.

Happy Holidays

[jimwheeler]

No class has ever been dropped from Runoffs invitation due to participation numbers. There used to be a 3.5 rule, which was never enforced. The new 4.0 was introduced to set a guideline, should a venue require that the number of cars invited be restricted due to paddock parking or track length. This will not be a factor unless they put the Runoffs at some little track, like Hallett. That isn't going to happen. This number came from SCCA staff, not from the CRB. All SCCA classes, with the exception of IT and some regional only classes, like ASR, are invited to the Runoffs. That has not changed as long as I have been on the ASAC or the CRB and I don't see it changing in the future.

[mlanglin2007]

Good to know, Jim. It's always good to hear from someone who knows the difference between the "official" pronouncement and reality.

Ted brings up the collapse of the Regional racing programs, and while that is a topic for another forum, it is a shame that since the change from the "Regional/National" distinction to that of Majors/Super Tour events, vs Divisional events, the former Regional participation has evaporated. This was formerly the feeder system into "National" competition. It's something that must be addressed or club racing will fade away as people age out.

[Ted Johnson]

Originally Posted by jimwheeler

No class has ever been dropped from Runoffs invitation due to participation numbers. There used to be a 3.5 rule, which was never enforced. The new 4.0 was introduced to set a guideline, should a venue require that the number of cars invited be restricted due to paddock parking or track length. This will not be a factor unless they put the Runoffs at some little track, like Hallett. That isn't going to happen. This number came from SCCA staff, not from the CRB. All SCCA classes, with the exception of IT and some regional only classes, like ASR, are invited to the Runoffs. That has not changed as long as I have been on the ASAC or the CRB and I don't see it changing in the future.

All the more reason to get rid of it. If a rule isn't enforced then apparently it isn't needed. Although you haven't used this power to eliminate a class from runoffs participation, it is in place as a tool to threaten any class to self promote or get axed from runoffs participation. Leading to the "perception" of SCCA being a club of exclusivity vs. a club that should be of inclusivity.

[jimwheeler]

The 3.5 rule was not enforced so it was dropped.

[Ted Johnson]

Not exactly dropped. Replaced with a guideline seems to be the same thing. Doesn't really help with the perception issue