Upcoming runoffs location(s)?

Sounds like everybody agrees with me that the track as run by SVRA is not Runoffs worthy. Hope the powers that be read this and get us a real turn one and 2 less 120 degree push arounds before the front straight.
 
Todd... Indy should be a piece of cake compared what we had at Daytona. Sort of a scrambled area just inside gate 40 to put rigs of all sizes to stage for getting through the tunnel one at a time. We pulled it off but it took a lot of planning, paddock design and last minute adjustments. No one on the SCCA staff left Daytona without being very aware of how critical the load in is.

Bob
 
I ran my Mustang with SVRA 2014 and 2015 at INDY in both the sprints and the Pro/AM events. 2014 ran the motorcycle course and the 180's between turn 1 and 2 were a real pain in a big high horsepower car with old brakes. We ran the GP course in 2015 and it had much better flow. The track is similar to Daytona in that it is just fast, fast, fast, and then a couple of turns to keep you from dozing off. We hit over 160 in the Mustang last year. You can find pictures of me in full lock up, as well as several others, on the SVRA photo site.

I'm racing in Europe next year in the Fun Cup. So no Mid-Ohio for me.

James
 
Russ Myers":1l3atqjh said:
Wake me up when the Runoffs return to Road Atlanta.

Russ
Click to expand...

Might be well after you start the long term slumber ..... I'd guess at least 8 years at the soonest.
 
It seems to me that the "Run-Offs" have become less of crowning a National Champion demonstrating superior driving / vehicle preparation skills, and more about driving on someones "Bucket List" of tracks.

RJS
 
why do driving skill, preparation and a bucketlist track (or any track..) have to be exclusive to one another? in fact I'd argue the ability to adapt yourself and car is a great measuring stick for a national champion.
 
While I agree with that Mike, I also feel that nobody will take the time to build and develop a new car when the "big dance" rotates every year. Different tracks inevitably favor different cars/builds within each class, and most club racers don't have the time or funding to build and develop a new car every year. Personally, I like the idea of a 3-4 year location, and then moving it. It allows people to develop new cars and learn the track, thus increasing the level of competition each year. It also builds a spectator base at the track (think Mid Ohio in 2005, or Road America in 2013 - TONS of spectators). This fear that this "one and done" approach isn't going to advocate the building/developing of new cars, isn't attracting new fans or new members, and in the long run, won't be sustainable for the club.
 
Build a new car for each track? Say whaaaa? How about setting up the car you have for each track and learn to drive? We use the same old tired car(disclaimer, it's an Ave rocket) in Trans Am and stand at the threshold of a 2015 Trans Am Championship. You guys in Club sure think differently. :shock:
 
Jason, while I was on the board we heard from plenty of people bemoaning the fact that the runoffs stayed too long at tracks, was getting stale and the same hometown ringers won every year. so you can look at it both ways. I also think that in todays society people are looking for new/fresh experiences over repeats. There's no question that if we were to tie ourselves down to 3 year contracts we could never have taken the 'risk' to go to laguna for example. but having it that one year out there really sparked a bit of a renaissance in west coast national racing that is still being felt today. and this is after years of stagnation out here.

So as with most things in life there are positives and negatives but I really think moving around and letting different parts of the country experience the runoffs reinvigorates the product. its our all-star game and like MLB I think it makes sense to keep it moving around.

as for spectators, while on the board during the rd America years I had access to numbers and the spectators were negligible. I don't know about mid-ohio. it was before my time on BOD but as a competitor the crowds there were dwindling towards the end. those are some great, well educated fans for sure at MO!!
 
Stiner0931":1kg287jj said:
While I agree with that Mike, I also feel that nobody will take the time to build and develop a new car when the "big dance" rotates every year. Different tracks inevitably favor different cars/builds within each class, and most club racers don't have the time or funding to build and develop a new car every year. Personally, I like the idea of a 3-4 year location, and then moving it. It allows people to develop new cars and learn the track, thus increasing the level of competition each year. It also builds a spectator base at the track (think Mid Ohio in 2005, or Road America in 2013 - TONS of spectators). This fear that this "one and done" approach isn't going to advocate the building/developing of new cars, isn't attracting new fans or new members, and in the long run, won't be sustainable for the club.
Click to expand...


I agree with the multiple year in a location idea. I also believe in time we will all see that the current model will continue to dilute what used to actually really mean something and actually was quite difficult to even get an invite to the Run Offs
 
Hi Jason -

I'd almost take the opposite view, that moving around often may prevent the sort of thing that we saw with the Runoffs at Road America where Spridgets dropped out of SCCA racing in droves due to perceived uncompetitiveness at "the big show". The Spridgets suffered greatly from being "the car not to have" at Road America which seemed to generally demoralize their owners into quitting SCCA altogether or switching to bigger engined cars. Maybe too late to bring many back but Laguna Seca and Mid Ohio sure make the Spridget look like a better choice in SCCA than Road America ever did!

One year is too short to bring out many "cars to have at track x" but conversely it may be too short to drive away the "cars not to have" at track x.

Hope that makes sense!

Al Seim
HP VW Scirocco 1.6
 
HP yes. And they get their rotating chance next year at MO which is a good thing. Interesting that we now know the only problem with FP Spridgets at RA was that they didn't show. 138mph at Daytona probably could have been 140 on radials instead of bias tires. Crazy impressive.
 
Yeah, clearly this is working.

At the Runoffs in Daytona, a track that is held up as being on every racer's bucket list, the showing was poor at best. One of the things I always enjoyed was seeing how the guys who won the year before did in defending their titles.

This year over 50% of last years winners never showed.

Over 25% of the classes had entries that were abysmal: FC, GT3, P1, and FA barely fielded 10 cars.

GT1: 7 cars,
GTL: 9 cars,
T3: 5 cars made the grid.
3 classes that didn't name a Nat Champ.

I said it before, and I will say it again: the Runoffs has been turned into a glorified regional. Half the entries are made up of regional drivers who would have never been invited in previous years. I am not trying to diminish their efforts, nor am I belittling the winners. But when over half your previous winners don't show up to defend, something has changed in the perception of what it means to win the Runoffs.

I think MO will be the kind of event that the Runoffs used to be, mainly because EVERYONE in the country is equally screwed in distance and costs. Relatively speaking. However, don't underestimate what a cluster f**k it will be with the number of local regional guys who will qualify.

Maybe a name change to "Runoffs Lite" is in order...

Flame away...
 
"sparked a bit of a renaissance in west coast national racing"

A 25% decrease in entries from one year to the next is a renaissance?

The only reason SoPacs numbers stayed up at all is the fact that everyone south of Thunderhill can do 8 races with out driving more than 400 miles. I'm guessing the majority of Western Majors championships were won by CA drivers.

How about having only 6 races (3 doubles) down in CA this year so we can get some warm bodies up in Portland and Seattle???

This whole Majors thing is supposed to foster competition. but it stinks with out the ability to bring in points from other divisions.

I don't want to run Fontana, Chowchilla, or Buttonwillow. For me, Sebring, Homestead (ehh, but we are already there), Thunderhill, Seattle, Portland, and Road America sound like a whole lot more fun. No ability to migrate points means we do the minimum to qualify and that's it. What a waste.

Since the Runoffs is all about the cash for the home office in Topeka, how about throwing the doors open and letting anyone who wants to pony up a 3000 dollar entry fee show up at the Runoffs? It's cheaper in the long run. Hell, you could even divvy up some of the money for the regions so they don't get left out.
 
of course there was always going to be a falloff the year after. did anyone expect anything else? the renaissance is in the guys who came out of retirement and stuck around, the increased buzz on the west coast, the greater visibility for local racers.

the vast population of west coast driver/member population is calif so it makes sense that majority of conference races are there. sometimes geography and circumstances work against you. someone's always unhappy. particularly in the scca. its no walk in the park being from san diego with all the track northward...

sorry to burst what seems to be a popular bubble, but as treasurer for many years I can tell you the national office hasn't made a dime on the runoffs in years.
 
"Over 25% of the classes had entries that were abysmal: FC, GT3, P1, and FA barely fielded 10 cars.

GT1: 7 cars,
GTL: 9 cars,
T3: 5 cars made the grid.
3 classes that didn't name a Nat Champ"

Well... not so much. I do not know about GT-1 or T3 but GTL had 10 cars qualify during the week and per the GCR that is all you need to crown a national champ in the race even if only 9 cars start.
 
The challenge going forward is to attract new drivers. Listening to the announcer at Daytona going down the grid and listing number of previous runoffs was eye opening. Seeing how many of these drivers are near retirement or vintage inclined was also clear. The gap between 25 plus and almost no experience was not filled. These every year drivers drop out and you will not be crowning champions in half the classes anyway. Better find a way to get new blood interested in the championship or you will be racing alone. Many of these "regional" drivers that ran Daytona and Laguna will build a better car now that they have a feel for what is needed to win at that level. Some kicked butt right out of the box in their first Runoffs. Stroke that $3000 check you speak of and go buy a championship, looks like a lot of fun to beat 1 car.
 
Clearly rotating the runoffs is a good idea. Bucket list maybe not so much. This event really needs to be about crowning champions. West coast numbers will be up every time it comes here as long as it is held at a decent facility, Right now that is really limited to Sears, Laguna and Portland when it comes to infrastructure. (calspeedway is really not a good infield) I have been told by my vintage guys that Indy was cool to go to but the layout was not great. I have a group headed to Mid-ohio in 2016 because it's a great track with decent support. Maybe we should bag the bucket list and get this race back to being about the race and hanging with friends.

Mike, saying So Cal should have the majority of the nations based on populous isn't necessarily correct because if that were the case then the runoffs would be an east coast event.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top