dwight aldred
Member
Talked to Harold in F prod. 1. Kanard 2.Kulman 3. Briton 4. Weber 5? 6. Harold in a itb vw and he started shotgun, but got a finish.
Homestead Nat.
- Thread starter dwight aldred
- Start date
Mark Coffin
Well-known member
dwight aldred":hflpli9r said:
Harold in a VW?? Now I've seen it all. :mrgreen:
I should let him drive my car...then I'd know how fast it really is.
MC
EPrill
Well-known member
Harold Flescher
Member
My whole race was making sure I didn't get in anyones way
paul kullman
Member
Shit, looked like you were smoking a big fat cuban going down the back straight. hahaha. Glad to see you again.
Harold Flescher
Member
Worse, I got 9 points for being the most proficient slowly moving non-road block in history. 3 more races in this car and I'd actually qualify for the runoffs!!!!! What a good rule, isn't it? What a farce! I couldn't make myself go to the runoffs in this car. I have too much respect for myself. It's just plain embarrassing to look that bad.
I don't have any perspective of how/why people justify going to the Runoffs in cars like this.The new 115% rule will eliminate those who couldn't run within 24 seconds a lap (24 SECONDS EACH AND EVERY LAP!!!!!!) slower than the polesetter, yet this IT car would still qualify. What is the purpose in going to the runoffs like this? Where is the fun? If being there is the purpose, just go without all the money, the work of qualifying and carting a piece of s... like this, just so you can spend your time trying hard to not ruin anyone's race.
So the CRB put a new qualification rule in place with a desired intent of only getting the best of the best. That rule didn't work, as I have proven, in all cases. The new rule will indeed help raise the bar, but not enough. I told the CRB last runoffs that they should implement a VERY FIRM 110% rule. At RA for FP that means one has to qualify within 16 seconds of the top qualifier or be sent home. 16 SECONDS!!!!!! means you would only be lapped almost twice. Someone who had a bad mechanical week could petition the stewards for exemption. The stewards would look at the history of the car/driver and make a judgement as to whether or not this appeared to be a fluke, and could accept that person as a driver as a starter with the understanding that if they do not achieve 110% of the fastest race time within 3 laps, they would be black flagged and sent home. Forget the points, which has to be a lot of work for somebody, and everything else save finishing 4 races and 2 starts in division.
I don't have any perspective of how/why people justify going to the Runoffs in cars like this.The new 115% rule will eliminate those who couldn't run within 24 seconds a lap (24 SECONDS EACH AND EVERY LAP!!!!!!) slower than the polesetter, yet this IT car would still qualify. What is the purpose in going to the runoffs like this? Where is the fun? If being there is the purpose, just go without all the money, the work of qualifying and carting a piece of s... like this, just so you can spend your time trying hard to not ruin anyone's race.
So the CRB put a new qualification rule in place with a desired intent of only getting the best of the best. That rule didn't work, as I have proven, in all cases. The new rule will indeed help raise the bar, but not enough. I told the CRB last runoffs that they should implement a VERY FIRM 110% rule. At RA for FP that means one has to qualify within 16 seconds of the top qualifier or be sent home. 16 SECONDS!!!!!! means you would only be lapped almost twice. Someone who had a bad mechanical week could petition the stewards for exemption. The stewards would look at the history of the car/driver and make a judgement as to whether or not this appeared to be a fluke, and could accept that person as a driver as a starter with the understanding that if they do not achieve 110% of the fastest race time within 3 laps, they would be black flagged and sent home. Forget the points, which has to be a lot of work for somebody, and everything else save finishing 4 races and 2 starts in division.
Mark Coffin
Well-known member
Amen, Harold! :applause:
Unfortunately, the "Runoffs" have become simply a way to refill the SCCA's coffers each year. They're not about bringing ONLY the best together anymore.
Harold, you should take that ITB VW to the ARRC at Road Atlanta in November. There are some ITB racers there each year who would give you all you could handle. :wink: This year some hack named Ruck won it... just kiddin' tKR... 8)
MC
Unfortunately, the "Runoffs" have become simply a way to refill the SCCA's coffers each year. They're not about bringing ONLY the best together anymore.
Harold, you should take that ITB VW to the ARRC at Road Atlanta in November. There are some ITB racers there each year who would give you all you could handle. :wink: This year some hack named Ruck won it... just kiddin' tKR... 8)
MC
kruck
Well-known member
For more to chew on, my ITA record at Road America (in my other Integra) is a 2:43.4, as compared to Sargis' 2010 Runoffs pole time of 2:30.7. I set that record in 2006, and bet I could now get it to around a 2:42.0 in the same car. Either way, even it would be WELL within 110%....as an ITA car. :think:Harold Flescher":13cejryy said:
115whp ITB Honda Civic DX, FTW! Possibly the funnest car I've ever driven! That was a hell of a race...Mark Coffin":13cejryy said:
dwight aldred
Member
Give back the 2 races and start over, would not want you to make the run-offs in a car that could not run 110%, give back back the 2 races, not everyone has a 50,000 race car , this is CLUB racing no one here is going to make it into F-1.
If it is the Olympics of road racing, and the top of ametuer competition, then it is not the winning or losing, but the taking part. If I've paid my dues, run within the rules, and qualify, who's to say I can't take part. Let's hear it for all the Eddie the Eagles out there.
Russ
Russ
Harold Flescher
Member
off Eddie and the Eagles. He was an absurdity then and would be now, however lovable. Just remember, Eddie never had the chance to get in anyones way or cost anyone a title
Bill Blust
Well-known member
Harold, Dwight, Russ et all,
I agree with both positions and that is a problem. We are a club and as long as one followes the rules all are welcome.
The issue is weather the club wants the RunOffs to be truly a "fastest of the fast" race OR a race where, if you meet whatever the guidelines are, you can race the event, no matter how slow you are.
A fastest of the fast race shoud have a minimum qual speed where one can not be lapped. At RA in HP that would be about a 1.05% of the pole. If a 1.05% rule were in place at the 2010 RunOffs there would have been apx 17 starters.
The current 115% or 110% proposed rule guarantees that back markers will impact the RunOffs in some way.
Bill Blust
I agree with both positions and that is a problem. We are a club and as long as one followes the rules all are welcome.
The issue is weather the club wants the RunOffs to be truly a "fastest of the fast" race OR a race where, if you meet whatever the guidelines are, you can race the event, no matter how slow you are.
A fastest of the fast race shoud have a minimum qual speed where one can not be lapped. At RA in HP that would be about a 1.05% of the pole. If a 1.05% rule were in place at the 2010 RunOffs there would have been apx 17 starters.
The current 115% or 110% proposed rule guarantees that back markers will impact the RunOffs in some way.
Bill Blust
JasonIsley99
Well-known member
It may be my 17+ years of Solo background talking, where any hack can enter the National Championships... But I think it is a Club first, and anyone who "qualifies" should be allowed to go to the Runoffs. One of the best ways to improve you driving is to race with the fast guys, and what other event has that many in one place. Certainly there should be performance standards, and anyone who is a hazard should not be out there, but beyond that lets get some cars on the track.
I for one would hate the idea of a Championship race with only 15 cars. In any given class you have maybe half a dozen guys that can stand on top of the podium anyway, so should we only let them play? No way.
If you want "exclusivity" try Pro Racing.
I for one would hate the idea of a Championship race with only 15 cars. In any given class you have maybe half a dozen guys that can stand on top of the podium anyway, so should we only let them play? No way.
If you want "exclusivity" try Pro Racing.
Harold Flescher
Member
F1 has a 107% rule!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That would be ok by me!
If you figure it out, a 110% rule basically means the slower guys only get lapped once. The 115% the CRB set means the slower guys will get lapped twice.
Let's see. It is a race for the national championship. You get lapped twice, and why are you there? For the camaraderie? It would be a whole lot cheaper to attend for the camaraderie w/o a car, wouldn't it?
H
If you figure it out, a 110% rule basically means the slower guys only get lapped once. The 115% the CRB set means the slower guys will get lapped twice.
Let's see. It is a race for the national championship. You get lapped twice, and why are you there? For the camaraderie? It would be a whole lot cheaper to attend for the camaraderie w/o a car, wouldn't it?
H
hpmowog":1aqrzf3c said:
Harold Flescher
Member
Except that for all but the very underattended classes, national championships are one class per race