> Not necessarily. IF the sport's popularity grows sufficiently,
> one way to accommodate increased demand is to have more events.
It certainly seems that way right now. OK, so one season does not a trend
make, but I think we're headed there.
> More to the point, the notion of requiring qualification
> necessitates placing limits on CLASS sizes, whereas the
> objections raised on team.net have been to excessive EVENT sizes.
> Two different animals entirely. Fixing one doesn't fix the other.
Ahh, Grasshopper, there is no contradiction in duality. :)
If one assumes the creation of a Runoffs-esque Super Tour in which
qualification is required before one can participate, it is a logical
conclusion that *classes* will have to qualify, as well as drivers. This
means that there will be correspondingly less classes running at our
fictional Super Tour.
Less classes, filled with better drivers... Can you say "spectator event"?
:)
Although I'll admit that choosing the qualifying criteria is a thorny
problem, especially for events early in the season. Quite possibly you'd
need something like "a top-3 finish at at Tour, Divisional (like a BFG
series) or Pro in the *previous* year or the current year qualifies you"
Anyway, I don't want to get sucked into arguments over exactly what those
qualifying criteria should be. But I do think that there's room - or that
there soon will be room - for "invatational" events. And I also think that
as long as the criteria for getting an invitation are fair and equitable as
possible, that there's nothing at all exclusionary or elitist about the
concept.
DG
|