|
|
Post by Der Administrator on Jul 12, 2005 18:17:23 GMT -8
If anyone comes up with another catagory please e-mail me and we will run another poll. These are the ones I have seen suggested most.
Please excuse the abbreviation "sep" of course means separate or separations. Limitations of the board I am afraid.
|
|
GregM
Novice Driver
Posts: 27
|
Post by GregM on Jul 13, 2005 12:29:41 GMT -8
This event the pace car driver was Mary Lou Robson, not exactly a full time driver of pace cars. On Saturday she did a very good job of maintaining a medium speed on the pace lap for Gr2, we got our brakes and tires up to snuff without strain. Sunday she was feeling her oats and it was a drag race to the start line from pre grid.
Appears that she did that to you guys as well. From the sidelines, the starts on both days looked very well controlled, but we can't see if people are truly brake-checking. That's chickenstuff and should be addressed with the Tech Steward after the race in Impound.
Once again I will send an email to the Stewards that I have email addresses for, and ask that they keep the Pace Car drivers speed under control.
|
|
|
|
Post by brian on Jul 14, 2005 10:58:20 GMT -8
You should also mention that the pace lap is NOT the place to make up time on the schedule.
|
|
|
|
Post by qposner on Jul 14, 2005 17:37:17 GMT -8
Any chance of things being different by Labor Day at Sears? If the start will be split, we will probably make it down. However, we would like to know prior to making the trip.
Thanks!
Quinn
|
|
|
|
Post by dave FF 50-aka "Harm" on Jul 18, 2005 13:35:49 GMT -8
Quinn
Anything is possible!! We may, if we, the drivers, want, change things for Laguna. The changes can be made in a week or less. We just need to give our input.
ps: Note, I've added Harm as an alias. That's because I keep hearing drivers say "Keep out of Harm's way" and I thought I'd try and use that to my advantage. LOL
dave HARM jalen
|
|
|
|
Post by qposner on Jul 18, 2005 15:41:53 GMT -8
If someone would post how the start was handledafter the Laguna regional, I would appreciate it.
Thanks,
Quinn
|
|
|
|
Post by btatum on Jul 19, 2005 11:15:21 GMT -8
We had a board meeting yesterday 7-18-05. It was decided that group 4 will line-up according to the qualifing times at the event after the Laguna regional/national. If competitors in the group want a real split start with separate greens then they will have to petition the stewards for the split.
Thanks,
Blake
|
|
|
|
Post by qposner on Jul 19, 2005 18:29:36 GMT -8
Thanks for the info, Blake.
I gotta say, I cannot understand why the region will not grant split starts at the outset. The fact that they will force 60+ cars of differing performance that will be MUCH safer and have MUCH better races by a split start, to start in a jumbled pack is beyond me. Frankly, it doesn't make sense. You have a number of NW Region drivers who have supported SF Region more than a number of your SF Region drivers for well over 20 years who will not be coming down now. I know I sound heated, I am. It just does not make sense and I fail to see the reasoning in pairing these groups without providing a split starts. It is much more dangerous and provides for worse racing. Afterall, we all do this for fun, no one is getting paid or will be getting a F1 ride. Remember that.
Hopefully we will see you guys at a regional again sometime.
Quinn
|
|
GregM
Novice Driver
Posts: 27
|
Post by GregM on Jul 19, 2005 20:45:08 GMT -8
Maybe I'm just old and stupid, but after a few iterations, this appears to be starting to sort itself out. The FV's sarted out within sight of the FF's and that didn't work well for some. Then the FV"s got closer and that didn't work well for some. Now is proposed a mix of cars based on qualifying times. I predict this will work better than all the others.
Blake, good job on getting this through.
|
|
|
|
Post by brian on Jul 20, 2005 8:21:36 GMT -8
First, it's been clear since day one that this region does not like to do split starts. Some of us old timers remember what it took to get them. Second, a couple of current board members view this class with contempt and consider the class as a group of whiners. Believe me, they like nothing more than to capriciously say they have no other options but to abandon split starts because WE caused the problem. Don't forget, one board members got tangled up with a vee and he's already made his mind up and another, RJ Gordy, has an offensive name for this class that maybe Blake could like to share with us. They have left the class with two options, run a straight up start, or to petition for a true split start. If the vees want a split start, a petition should be presented as soon as possible and not wait for the event after Laguna.
Greg, I will not comment on either your age or mental stability but, the true split start was viewed unfavoralbly by the powers to be because the vee pole sitter was allegedly playing games with the pace of the field. Rather than throw out the baby with the wash and not do split starts, the errant pole sitters should have been delt with. We, as a class, have to prove that we can do split starts correctly. As I've said before, experience has tought me to not wait for the stewards to act. If you are on the second row and see the pole sitter playing games, protest him.
|
|
|
|
Post by btatum on Jul 21, 2005 14:46:16 GMT -8
The big problem with having the split start as part of the acceptance letter is that both groups have to have at least ten cars in each group. The number of vees showing up to this point of the season has been about eight cars.
It all goes back to a numbers. We used to run by ourselves but the numbers started to dwindle. We then had the F500s added to our run group. When the numbers started to fall again FB was added to the group. Then when the numbers fell again we were combined with FFs. The FV community either needs to start racing or accept the consequences.
Look at the number of votes we got on this poll (7), to me only a few really care.
The idea of a close split was brought up last year at the drivers meeting and the group agreed to it. The thought behind it was that it would take longer for the lead FF to pass the lead Vees thereby allowing for the greatest possible time for the racers in each class to decide the outcome of the race. The problem happened when the definition of a close split was never fully codifed. Since my definition of a close split and the stewards definition of the close split did not agree there was threat by the stewards of changing the way we start races in group four. If you raced with us last year or the year before we did not always have split starts because often times both groups did not have ten cars. Basically the close split will not work without a separate green flag for the second group. If we want a split start then it can still happen we just need to do the petition. But before that happens people need to show up and race.
Blake
|
|
GregM
Novice Driver
Posts: 27
|
Post by GregM on Jul 21, 2005 15:39:46 GMT -8
Brian: I agree completely with your statements. Anybody playing games in a split start is not only protestable, but subject to a side discussion with their peers. Aside from Steve Archer, I don't have any idea who on the Board dislikes this run group. A couple fo years ago we had a Ford drivers meeting to discuss the etiquette issue, the side-by-side issue and racing in general. It was well attended, private and very honest. Maybe it's time to do that in this run group as a whole. Next year when I'm back in the FF for the year, I expect this issue to be resolved with at least a decent solution, if not a really good solution.
As a side note, between the 2 open wheel and sport racer groups, at the last event we had a decidedly large turnout, about 1/3 of total. Discounting the dual entries, it's probably closer to half. That's a force to be reckoned with. We have a voice, but right now it's not unified.
As for the old and stupid part thank you for your discretion. ;~)
|
|
|
|
Post by DerElf on Jul 21, 2005 16:34:06 GMT -8
I have been trying to stay out of most discussions on the board because I believe that since I am currently not actively racing I don't really have a say. That having been said I will chime in as I hope to be racing again soon.
The board has good cause to think of us (the Vees) as a bunch of whiners as that is all we have been of late. When the proposal was first made for the combination of Groups 4&7 I was on the road to Washington State. I got a cel call about it and tried to call RJ to see what was going on. When I got ahold of him he asked if I had posted something on the INTERNET as his phone had not stopped ringing....AT HOME.
At the same time we were asking to retain a run group our numbers were shrinking and SPEC Miata was growing at an amazing rate. Still we whined.
Now we have had 8-10 stalwarts who have been keeping us alive as a class in the region (I salute you guys). The Group 4 guys have welcomed us into their ranks and although there has been some problems we have to thank THEM for putting up with us.
The level of hubris involved in a class with EIGHT GUYS showing up causing more headaches for the Stewards than entire run groups is amazing. I am trying to financially make it to Laguna, if I do please do not ask me to sign any such petition. Until we vote the way the region can quantify BY PUTTING CARS BACK ON THE TRACK we need to shut up and be glad we have a place to drive our VINTAGE CARS.
As for me, well Mr. Toad and I are working on a car that will make mixed qualifying more bearable and racing less expensive.
|
|
GregM
Novice Driver
Posts: 27
|
Post by GregM on Jul 21, 2005 18:33:35 GMT -8
Marty: You may rest assured that the FV's are not even in the same universe when it comes to sucking up Stewards time. That award is still and will most likely remain the domain of the SM's.
Like my previous post stated, the Region listens to groups that bring in entries. When real race cars are 50% of total entries, it is not only impressive, it is impossible to ignore.
2 years ago, when Gr4 and Gr7 combined entries were around 30, no one paid us any mind. Now with 50+ entries in Gr4 we are an important asset. Add the Gr2 to the mix and all of a sudden the SM/ITA dual entries can take a back seat. To US for once. Keep the numbers up!!!
Also, I'd say that the prevailing sentiment is that we're glad to have the FV's in Gr4, far safer than having you guys getting destroyed in Gr6. We are bonded by the fact that we race open wheel cars. Shame on us if we can't find a safe place to pass that doesn't spoil a class position race for you guys.
Remember, real racers don't whine. About anything. We just RACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by dave FF 50-aka "Harm" on Jul 24, 2005 10:14:43 GMT -8
Greg
I have heard that with the repaving and new berms, Laguna will be much faster. Specically T6. My tires, Michelins, can not hold up under that kind of G force and the increased grip! Can a chicane be placed in this turn to slow the speeds down? Otherwise, I will have to change RR tire after every 5 laps, which would put me at a disadvantage. Or, would you consider that request to be a French wine (like a Bordeaux)? "Real racer don't whine"? some much for F1.
dave
|
|
