Where are the Runoffs going in 2014?

[Joe Harlan]

Reno/Fernley could with some work be a possibility and it has the benefit of being a desination location with something for everyone. I know the facility still needs work but its a possible west coast location.

 

[Al Seim]

I actually like the crushed gravel paddock at VIR (was just there yesterday supporting some B Spec testing). Not everyone does, as it does track into trailers and motorhomes - but IMHO the addition of a nice deluxe astroturf welcome mat makes it OK. No mud, no worries about damaging asphalt or minor spills. Academic I suppose as I too have heard that it will be paved....

Al Seim

 

[David Dewhurst]

I miss Matt. He was right about alot of things.

I think we all miss Matt... :mrgreen:

Matt, can you do something about the fact that the SCCA does not have driver info in a usable format. :think:

 

[R. J. Sorensen]

Dave,

Not having information and not providing information are 2 different issues.

As logical as your approach would seem to be, the Run-Offs will be where Topeka wants them, in spite of driver's desires.

RJS

 

[Acme Speed Shop]

One thing Jeff said, that was not totally accurate was when the venue is new for the runoffs the first year numbers are high and then trickle off. This was not the case at Mid Ohio, the last Mid Ohio runoffs was the most attended in SCCA history.

Here's stat that might make people go hmmmmm, if you put the runoffs where the most licensed drivers are, that would be Florida :think:

I don't have a dog in this hunt, so I'm just thinking out loud

 

[msturminator]

Are you are kidding Hap? They must all have a AARP card. :mrgreen:

48 EP
Mike

 

[David Dewhurst]

Here's stat that might make people go hmmmmm, if you put the runoffs where the most licensed drivers are, that would be Florida :think:

I could really care less, BUT where did that stat ^ come from? :ask:

 

[Acme Speed Shop]

Here's stat that might make people go hmmmmm, if you put the runoffs where the most licensed drivers are, that would be Florida :think:

I could really care less, BUT where did that stat ^ come from? :ask:

David, Florida has more SCCA license drivers than most of the entire divisions in the SCCA, Jim Crieghton posted the numbers here a few years ago. Their after Thanksgiving regional race is the most attended SCCA race in the country, excluding the runoffs (and not by much these days), , but including the June Sprints. You know all you yankess keep moving South :mrgreen: Since you guys split up the CENDIV, the SEDIV has about double the amount of drivers of any other SCCA division, and most of the SEDIV drivers are from FL.

I guess that might be a major point here, as for numbers, regional racing in most parts of the country is way larger as far as entires , when compared to national racing, so if nothing else with the new program, national numbers will look better riding the coat tails of regional numbers.

 

[Acme Speed Shop]

Are you are kidding Hap? They must all have a AARP card. :mrgreen:

48 EP
Mike

Don't most SCCA drivers :mrgreen: I got tickled when my bud Fred said he wanted to go SCCA racing to race with younger people vs vintage, and we have a picture of him standing on the podium at VIR at a SCCA race with two bald guys

 

[David Dewhurst]

Tangent:

Since you guys split up the CENDIV,

Interesting point ^ Hap. Now that Topeka has named the original CenDiv (area 4 GLD & area 5 CenDiv) THE Majors Northern conference ALL the previous issues will vanish. :doh:

 

[Acme Speed Shop]

Tangent:

Since you guys split up the CENDIV,

Interesting point ^ Hap. Now that Topeka has named the original CenDiv (area 4 GLD & area 5 CenDiv) THE Majors Northern conference ALL the previous issues will vanish. :doh:

I know that at the time we were all going to the MO runoffs, the CENDIV was only slightly ahead of the SEDIV in membership, and drivers, but the SEDIV was growing like crazy, mostly because of folks moving to Florida, and the South in general, so even with the CENDIV not splitting up, chances are the SEDIV would have surpassed thm anyway.
I once heard someone give a stat of SCCA membership East of the Miss river, and it was attonishing percentage like well over 60%.

Getting to the runoffs simply moving around the country, I think what we may very well see is folks just waiting until it comes to their area, and then the area with the most people/memership having the largest turn outs. I think MO was so sucessful because it was near the masses of the membership, and a fair track to have the Runoffs at.

I read something the other day on another racing forum, and someone stated something so obvious to anyone on the outside looking in, but yet hard for many of us to see. The person's statement was "one day the SCCA and it's members will realize, the runoffs is only important to them".

I meet alot of people these days that get a car on a road course, one way, or another, whether it be NASA, Track days, time trials, Vintage, and many of them have no SCCA background, and they seem to care little to nothing about what happens in the SCCA. I think for now, the biggest chore the powers to be have in the SCCA is to please the members still with them. On this forum we see alot of threads talkiing about making changes to get people, and cars back into SCCA racing that may have parked them, but I think the cold reality is once someone has left, the chances of getting them back are very slim, so retaining what you have, should be priority #1.

 

[David Dewhurst]

I know that at the time we were all going to the MO runoffs, the CENDIV was only slightly ahead of the SEDIV in membership, and drivers, but the SEDIV was growing like crazy, mostly because of folks moving to Florida, and the South in general, so even with the CENDIV not splitting up, chances are the SEDIV would have surpassed thm anyway.

Getting to the runoffs simply moving around the country, I think what we may very well see is folks just waiting until it comes to their area, and then the area with the most people/memership having the largest turn outs. I think MO was so sucessful because it was near the masses of the membership, and a fair track to have the Runoffs at.

The person's statement was "one day the SCCA and it's members will realize, the runoffs is only important to them".

I meet alot of people these days that get a car on a road course, one way, or another, whether it be NASA, Track days, time trials, Vintage, and many of them have no SCCA background, and they seem to care little to nothing about what happens in the SCCA. I think for now, the biggest chore the powers to be have in the SCCA is to please the members still with them. On this forum we see alot of threads talkiing about making changes to get people, and cars back into SCCA racing that may have parked them, but I think the cold reality is once someone has left, the chances of getting them back are very slim, so retaining what you have, should be priority #1.

This year SE entries were 106 above the old CenDiv.

Agree with people waiting for the Runoffs. Agree Mid Ohio was/is a great track for the Runoffs. IMHJ Road America has 3 to many long straights that don't fit many of the cars/classes.

Agree Runoffs only important to SCCA people. Most people ask about racing my car & I start with road racing with the SCCA. Next words SC?? :doh: who/what. Not a clue what a SCCA is.

A couple weeks ago was the LOOOOONG race for Midwestern Council sports car clubs where I crewed for a guy, IIRC 171 entries for a 2 day deal, more than some CenDiv regional or national events. No stress, no hassle & most of all the folks running the deal are not all full of themselves.

 

[eprodrx7]

I am told (by people who should know) that WG wants NOTHING to do with the Runoffs. And that's it's not WG itself but ISC (NASCAR).

Why would any track want anything to do with the RO's? We've built it into an unsustainable model. Tooooooo many classes means to long a schedule. Widdle it down to 10 classes and a 4 day event and then its feasable or better yet don't race at all have it in Vegas and give everybody a "Participation Trophy".
Matt says "Hi" :shock:

 

[jdh]

better yet don't race at all have it in Vegas and give everybody a "Participation Trophy".
Matt says "Hi" :shock:

Already on the schedule:
http://www.scca.com/events/index.cfm?eid=4495

 

[Rob]

Tangent:

Since you guys split up the CENDIV,

Interesting point ^ Hap. Now that Topeka has named the original CenDiv (area 4 GLD & area 5 CenDiv) THE Majors Northern conference ALL the previous issues will vanish. :doh:

I know that at the time we were all going to the MO runoffs, the CENDIV was only slightly ahead of the SEDIV in membership, and drivers, but the SEDIV was growing like crazy, mostly because of folks moving to Florida, and the South in general, so even with the CENDIV not splitting up, chances are the SEDIV would have surpassed thm anyway.
I once heard someone give a stat of SCCA membership East of the Miss river, and it was attonishing percentage like well over 60%.

Getting to the runoffs simply moving around the country, I think what we may very well see is folks just waiting until it comes to their area, and then the area with the most people/memership having the largest turn outs. I think MO was so sucessful because it was near the masses of the membership, and a fair track to have the Runoffs at.

I read something the other day on another racing forum, and someone stated something so obvious to anyone on the outside looking in, but yet hard for many of us to see. The person's statement was "one day the SCCA and it's members will realize, the runoffs is only important to them".

I meet alot of people these days that get a car on a road course, one way, or another, whether it be NASA, Track days, time trials, Vintage, and many of them have no SCCA background, and they seem to care little to nothing about what happens in the SCCA. I think for now, the biggest chore the powers to be have in the SCCA is to please the members still with them. On this forum we see alot of threads talkiing about making changes to get people, and cars back into SCCA racing that may have parked them, but I think the cold reality is once someone has left, the chances of getting them back are very slim, so retaining what you have, should be priority #1.

I've pointed this out once before but the best thing that was at the Clubhouse in Denver IMO is the quote that was over the coffee machine in the lunch room. It read something like - It's eight times more expensive to get a new customer than to keep an old one.

I wonder if they moved that to Topeka?

 

[Bob Clark]

Tangent:

Since you guys split up the CENDIV,

Interesting point ^ Hap. Now that Topeka has named the original CenDiv (area 4 GLD & area 5 CenDiv) THE Majors Northern conference ALL the previous issues will vanish. :doh:

I brought that very issue up at the info session held for Majors at the Runoff's. It was one of the many things I mentioned that were basicly blown off by the presenters. Asked four times who was paying for this program and four times it was deflected into other topics..