Too Few To Race?

[westfieldbend]

It has come to my attention that some race series regally attract far to few competitors. This makes things rather dull for the spectator... and i would think the competitors too? What can be frustrating for the spectator is that some series could so easily be combined, e.g. Ferrari open and Ferrari classic. I would think running races with such low grid numbers is also not very economical for the club involved.

Before anyone asks this is mainly about national race series that have attracted poor grids for many years, its not about new championships just starting up or regional/non championship series such as semsec.

A sensible suggestion would be that every circuit has a minimum number of starters (i believe castle combe had a minimum of 20). Another possible idea would be to put series with poor grids at the end of the programme so we can go home first.

[kipper]

Speaking as a marshal (so therefore the following is based on non-driving experiences), I do prefer categories with poor grids to be merged with something else. In many cases some categories (mainly series, as opposed to championships) have been producing poor grids for some times (such as Ferrari Open - although I will admit that I have seen some entertaining races from them despite the low numbers) so as such organising clubs can plan ahead.

However, in order to improve the spectacle merged grids need to be of a similar nature/performance. For instance, the fastest Ferrari Open car is around 15secs a lap faster than the slowest Ferrari Formula Classic runner around Brands Indy this weekend. Therefore a merged grid would result in a lot of more lapping, but not automatically more entertainment (at least from outside the car). I have seen some good races where all MGOC classes have shared a grid and also merged races between the MG Metro Championship and Cockshoot Cup, which are cases where the cars of similar performance.

In the case of Ferrari Open, I note that AMOC will be including these cars within their Super GT race at Snetterton and CCRC will be running a Ferrari Open v. Porsche Open race in August. Both of which seem to be sensible options in my mind.

I do wish that clubs would adopt a minumum number of starters, although such a thing would be difficult and would depend on the series available to them. Although CCRC does run incentives to series that attract big grids in the form of rebates of entry fees, they have still had to run races with smaller grids. On a postive note, I have seen a number of races with small grids that have delivered a very high level of entertainment - a lot does depend on the formula, drivers, circuit and weather.

[socram]

As a driver, promoter and also coordinator for two classic series, I agree that promoters have an obligation to make sure that grids are well supported.

From an economics point of view, low grids equals higher entry fees, as all meetings have to be self supporting!

From a flag marshal's point of view, it can be so boring, stuck all weekend on a flag point with nothing but empty track for 85% of the time.

Running two classes is not that difficult. Split grid with the faster guys starting a minute or about 3/4 a lap behind.

With classics, you have a variation on lap time anyway, so ALL our points races are handicaps, with all the faster guys in one series, and the slower in another. Grids are good and we have over 100 registered drivers each year. If we can do that in NZ, UK should have no problem....

Mind you, we emphasise that it is a fun series and the handicap has some manual interference to ensure there winner overall is somewhat random! Now been running thirteen years so we must be doing something right and the racing is tremendous and good spectator value.

[midgetman]

Speaking as a driver, this is one point where the needs of the competitor and the spectator overlap. I did a race on the Nordschleife with 13 cars spread over the entire track....it wasn't that entertaining for me or for the spectators.

I like amalgamated races, it introduces a new variable. It would be a good idea to rigorously enforce minimum grids, it would force either permanent amalgamation into a new super series or compulsory cancellation - we've all banged on about there being too many championships. Let the market start a cull if the MSA is too weak to do it.

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by midgetman

I did a race on the Nordschleife with 13 cars spread over the entire track

I don't know what you're moaning about, I would have thought to have the track to yourself for the money you paid was excellent value !

On a serious note I hope it hasn't put you off a great circuit.

[Al Weyman]

An amalgamation is OK in many cses but in some it could be self defeatin, example where we have a situation where drivers can take a 2nd race in another championship at the same meeting. Amagamate the two and the net result would be less entries overall.

[Steven Humphrey]

This has been my first full year marshalling and I've been suprised at how small some of the grids have been, especially at some of the club meetings I've attended but also some bigger series (13 cars for Brit GT). I've been putting this down to the economy but has it always been this way? There do seem to be too many single make series though, so can't some of these can be combined? Seems daft to me to have, for example, 30+ cars for production BMW cup and only 9 for the CLS cup. Surely a 40 car grid would be better for drivers & spectators (and marshals!)? Maybe it's all down to money-does the MSA get more money if there's more championships or does that go to the organising clubs? If it's the MSA then I can't see them doing anything as they will get the same whether there's 5 cars or 40 on a grid. I'm guessing the clubs get the entrance fees so maybe it's up to them to act.

[kipper]

Originally Posted by arnage arnie

This has been my first full year marshalling and I've been suprised at how small some of the grids have been, especially at some of the club meetings I've attended but also some bigger series (13 cars for Brit GT). I've been putting this down to the economy but has it always been this way?

I'm sure that British GT's current grid levels can in part be attributed to the current economic situation. For instance, in 2006 the average number of starters was in the region of 24, so far this year the average number of starters was 13 (perhaps not surprsingly, the lowest number of starters occured at Knockhill and Spa). However, it is perhaps worth pointing out that some series have improved their grids over recent years - a good example being Classic Thunder which a couple of seasons ago was poorly supported. This year, following the gain of the Blue Oval Saloon Series cars, there are big grids and some excellent racing. In addition the likes of TTRS and Production BMW have also been very popular.

Originally Posted by arnage arnie

There do seem to be too many single make series though, so can't some of these can be combined? Seems daft to me to have, for example, 30+ cars for production BMW cup and only 9 for the CLS cup. Surely a 40 car grid would be better for drivers & spectators (and marshals!)?.

In some cases I would agree with you. From a spectacle point, I see little need for the BARC to run a poorly supported MX5 championship when the BRSCC have a more popular championship. Similarly, is there any real need for a 750MC BikeSports Championship and the BRSCC's BESCR series, when neither gets good grids. However, both the 750MC Toyota MR2 championship and Red Dragon MR2 Challenge get good grids, which suggests that there is room and demand for both. In the case of merging series then I suggest that care needs to be undertaken in creating the best match of cars. For instance, in the case cited above adding a handful of BMW CSL Cup cars to packed grid of much slower Production BMWs in probably not going to improve the racing much. However, putting the BMW CSLs into the Kumho BMW Championship may be of more benefit.

[midgetman]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

On a serious note I hope it hasn't put you off a great circuit.

It's all right, but nothing special. Seemed quite easy really, couldn't see what all the fuss was about. Mind you, my car only had 69.9bhp at the rear wheels so the speed I was going no corners were difficult. Til it went bang

Then I spent the rest of the morning spectating and polishing my German, which is how I know how boring small grids are for the spectator. (He said dragging the post back on thread)

Standing at the Karussell was a bit like spectating at Wiscombe hillclimb, the demented groan of a tortured A-Series engine climbing up through the woods, sound of tyre squealing, then silence for minutes on end until the next one arrived.

[Stacy]

Combe do a lot of things right IMO, and they get the rewards - marshalls, crowds and consistent demand from competitors in what appears to be a virtuous spiral. As far as I'm aware they suffer less from the "cycles" mentioned elsewhere too.

The minimum grid size of 20 is a component of that, and I think most are agreed on the logic behind it. I don't think it's so much an issue whether those that fail should be closed/merged because most without vested interests would agree that it is, the real question is I guess how to do it..

The relevant MSA committee is staffed with those who are running the series and presumably have an interest in keeping them going. Whether this is why little seems to have occured who knows, but there's a conflict of interest there which I don't think has been addressed.

My view is this;

1. There are a set of "protected" series at any one time. These are recognised by the MSA and given a level of support/understanding in the wider interest. I'd throw in the example of Group 1 Touring Cars on the basis of it having a long history of previous success based on largely unchanged regulations, and a historic value preserving the grid of the period. These would be assigned a smaller grid size (say 15) to hit to allow for cycles - although we will note Combe does not seem to suffer but there you go. This status is only afforded a series where it can be shown at the time of application that a) they are the most significant series in that space, and b) commercial rivals have sprung up since spreading available cars across them putting them at risk.

They get a pass out in the interests of long termism if you will..

2. The rest are managed via the circuit owners who agree as part of their MA relationship not to run grids of less than 20 unless they form the protected list above.

All IMHO of course.

Incidentally if you haven't seen it, there is a thread for UK Grid Sizes over in the National Racing Forum. It's due an update at month end.

Stacy.

[Al Weyman]

Well my opinion for what its worth and not only relates to Group One but also prehaps PHTC's is that since the club (CTCRC) has annouced sealing of ALL engines as a matter of course the numbers have dropped. May be coincidence of course but I think it generally accepted there has been some dodgy stuff out there in the past and I for one support the clubs unilateral stand on this as I dont think any other historic championships/series are doing this from what I read here and there seems to be one hell of a lot of bad feeling floating about and I would like to think that entrants and preparers who try to do things right when they get fed up with getting blown into the weeds by similar cars to the ones they are racing may just come back and join us. Funny how Future Classics where over sized engines is OK is booming is'nt it and it can't just be the 40 minute race format!

Time will tell because as I said on the other thread these things have a habit of going around in cycles and what is the dogs dangles this year may be flat as a pancake next.

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by midgetman

Mind you, my car only had 69.9bhp at the rear wheels

.

Was the .9bhp on a good day at the dyno ?

[Stacy]

I don't see much competitor/car crossover between Post Historics/Group 1 and Future Classics so can't see the logic supporting that I'm afraid.

I also doubt very much if sealing is an issue because the ctcrc sealed the leaders for years early in the season and never found anything. I'd be very surprised if there is a current problem as the lap times are still off what was achieved many years ago with fully vetted machines.

More likely as a reason for dropping numbers with those two is simply that we are all fond of certain era of cars (usually what we stuffed into ditches in our youth). While that 'generation' are the ones filling the paddock the series boom' - but then they become more and more unpopular until they come back into fashion. And historic racing seems to be something of a fashion business sometimes.

Dave Nixon (RX3) said at an AGM many years ago that he could see cars disappearing from 74's and action should be taken quickly. There was some tweaking but ultimately the regs weren't the issue, it was the availability of the cars/spares and the number of people passionate enough to prepare/run them.

This applies to period racing more so than non period obviously.

Unfortunately it is rare for a series come back from the dead and certainly not quickly - it has taken 5 years to bring Pre-66 up from death to amber alert and it's still not where it was 10 years ago. The cyclic phrase is probably wishful thinking, the cycles are certainly very slow. and too slow for the purposes of a thinning out.

The game now is prevention in the future I believe.

S.

[Al Weyman]

Someone must have fed me incorrect information then as thats what I have been led to believe and I am not totally convinced, I never had a Chevy in my youth more like Austin Healy 3000's, Mk 2 Jags and a Volvo 122S .

Take some of the cars competing in Future Classics and Swinging 60's I have asked several to come over and have the odd race with us but the answer generally is always that they just would not be legal or they needed different tyres etc. Actually talking about tyres going back to my days in modprods where we ran in Falkens that was the biggest bone of contention when guys wanted to come in for a run out and we had to say no because of the tyres they were running and who wants to shell out for a set of tyres for just a couple of races, the difference was Falken were putting in a lot of money into the prize pot something that seems unheard of today so I am not sure staying loyal to a particular brand is helpful if amalgamations are required.

Also I dont think the pre 66 thing in general does anything a bit later any good either. Take my old car its nearly 40 years old, now is that not a classic now not one in the future (as in Future Classics)? It is in my eyes but not according to many of the pundits who seem to be stuck in this pre 66 thing, never understood that one to me it should be rolling on annually.

[Stacy]

Al,

I guess I'd make the point that an unwillingness by non CTCRC people to come across due to non compliance is not evidence that they have exited because of a likeihood of being caught..

In any event I see few drivers signing up to a full season of FC - instead people tend to pick and choose where it fits their main calendar.

In my 9/10 years of CTCRC committee I can't recall anyone being stripped and found to be oversized and plenty of sealing & stripping was undertaken.

Further there is an analysis that can be undertaken to establish the likely "true" pace of classes, and in the vast majority of cases rumours were started when cars were well within tolerance. Sometimes it was noted that the competitiveness of entrants in the series had declined instead, so it wasn't that x was going faster, it was that the new people weren't as fast as the old ones so x kind of stood out..

Yes I don't really get the '66 stuff, although they are often lovely cars. Have a penchant for Lotus Cortina's based on a demonstration run on a summers night from my Father when I was in short trousers, but like I said it's a fashion business.

I gave a talk a few weeks ago and found at the bar afterwards that a member of the audience was an MSA steward. He said that they have a private joke where it seems every year all the classic guys seem to get together and decide where to race for the season, then up sticks and go. Interesting view I guess.

Finally I was having tea and chocolate cake at Dave Nixon's (Post Historic RX3) last night. He showed me a beautiful road RX3 (to me anyway) that was a 1972 car. I have to say I thought it was every bit as attractive as pre66 cars so it does seem a shame that it's neither here to there so to speak.

Anyway, very off topic now..

S.

[Al Weyman]

As I understand it in previous seasons not ALL cars were routinely sealed like they are now just the class winners or at least they were not while I have been racing with the club in 05,06,07,08 and 09 and have yet to see a seal although I would have at the last race but with the big hole in the side of the engine the scrut could have checked mine without a strip down, maybe they dont bother with me as my legal engine is just too slow!

For what its worth I would not mind a run out in Future Classics with the IROC but the 40 minute races would not suit because (a) I am too old & unfit to do it on my own (b) dont think anyone would want to drive one of my cars as they aint easy (c) probably wouldnt last that long :-( and (d) not a big enough tank at 4 to 5mpg apart from that great!!

[R59]

Al, I've got some dry break refuelling kit..........

We can always stuff a couple of tennis balls in the carb to reduce fuel consumption.....

[Al Weyman]

In a hatchback????

[G.Walker]

With swinging sixties, you can race your saloon, sports or GT car from the 1960s. With future classics you can race your saloon, sports, or GT car from the 70s & 80s. Thats quite a catchment in terms of regs, an the grids reflect this.

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

As I understand it in previous seasons not ALL cars were routinely sealed like they are now just the class winners or at least they were not while I have been racing with the club in 05,06,07,08 and 09

Other seals were applied if there were specific concerns, specifically if people were turning up only for the odd meeting say.

Like I said though, most "concerns" seemed to reflect the lack of competitiveness of a given complainee getting out prepared (legally) and outdriven, as opposed to a genuine likelihood of an illegal car.

And getting back to the point there seems little or no evidence to say FC has drawn illegal cars from the CTCRC..

S.

[Al Weyman]

Possibly not but they have gone somewhere or are languishing in garages which is a shame.

When I see a Camaro entered as a 6.6 turn out in Post Historics with a small block fitted and ask the guy how is that (it should be 5.7) and he tells me its OK because his engine man told him, I point out its not and never could be with correct crank and block and never see him again. And a few other incidents including one thats just come to light after I advised the would be entrant in my role of championship rep that his engine would be illegal and that ALL cars would be sealed tells me he is not coming out then it leads me to this conclusion i.e (and to get back on thread) another lost entry resulting in a smaller grid. Chances are if the sealing as a matter of course was not in place said car would probably have come out and wiped the floor now it has to be put right or go to one of the hot rod formulas which in my view is preferable but may take a season to settle down as in this example the guy wants to come out with us but now needs to source another power unit which all takes time.

For what its worth I think we should hang on in there and see how it all pans out because as Pete Edwards told me the other week 'You can fill any grid if you chuck away the rule book, trying to fill the grid with legal cars is not so easy'. (or words to that effect). (BTW in both these incidents I genuinely believe or at least I like to that these guys were mislead by their engine and car preparers as they both openly furbished me with details and were not trying to hide anything.)

Now I may well be wide of the mark and prehaps I should not have highlighted FC or Swinging 60's or Heritage but I used them as an example where cars prepared like this could run freely and I have no problem with that at all as I said you get what it says on the tin and more power to them but reading many of the posts on here and talking to people who race against some of the so say more strictly policed historic stuff in legal cars and get blown out of the water I think its a fair assumption to assume its happening elsewhere and guys are simply getting away with it where prehaps they would not now be able to quite so easily in CTCRC events.

[BJD]

Originally Posted by kipper

For instance, in the case cited above adding a handful of BMW CSL Cup cars to packed grid of much slower Production BMWs in probably not going to improve the racing much. However, putting the BMW CSLs into the Kumho BMW Championship may be of more benefit.

No room for anything else in Production BMW, full grids + reserves all season. Possibly a bit more recession proof than some series because of the relatively low spec of the cars, overall the budget series seem to be doing a bit better than some of the higher profile series where bigger budgets are required.

[Stacy]

I don't think that's an indicator of the recession per se, but a general fact - more people have £3k than have £30k..

The PBMW's do buy extra time to accomodate their reserves, so being a reserve for them isn't the same as being a reserve elsewhere.

Their success is also due to the one make nature of the series though, so the CSL cars should very much belong with Kumho IMO.

S.