I wonder how spread out the trophies were by marque in
BSP, ASP, ESP, or even CSP? SM was a new class this
year and many interested national level drivers were
taking a "wait-and-see" approach to the class, so you
were left with a core of committed SMers that ran all
the national events, and took home many of the
trophies. I expect that to change next year as SM
becomes more established. Regardless, the competition
in SM was always extemely close - especially notable
given the dissimilar cars that ran.
Kent Rafferty
> >Rules, like it or not, are a necessary evil. And
hey! Look! We did a pretty
> >good job last year with SM.
>
> Actually Dennis, I'd have to disagree with you on
that. You had a good
> year, and a few other people had a good year with SM,
but I really can't
> agree that it was a success.
>
> Looking at the pro results, we find that 16 out of 17
trophies were won by
> four models, and 12 out of 17 trophies were won by
just two cars. I don't
> see this as a success.
>
> [The numbers in the table are the finishing trophy
positions of the models.]
>
> Pro
> DSM Supra S4 Camaro
Other
> Ft Meyer 2 1
> San Bernardino 1 2,3
> Lemoore 2 1
> Peru 2 1
> Petersburg 2 1
> Harrisburg 3 2 1
> Wendover no SM cars...
> Topeka 1 3 2
>
> Looking at the tour results, we get a bit better mix,
but 14 out of 21
> trophies are still the same four models.
>
> Tour
>
> DSM Supra S4 Camaro
Other
> Meridian 1
> San Diego 1
> Ft. Worth 1 2
> Ayer 2 3,4 1
> Peru 2 1
> Bremerton 1 2,3,4
> Pikes Peak 1
> Nationals 5 1,6 4 2 3
>
> From the inside, yes, it was a success. You drove
well, won some
> trophies, had a good competitive season with Kent
Rafferty, Dave Schotz,
> and Karl Witt. You had fun. It was your "I-Class".
>
> But from the outside, I see it as a private
playground where just a few
> cars are competitive.
>
> I do agree with the need for an SM class, but I can't
really say that this
> year it worked very well or offered a chance for very
many cars to be
> competitive.
>
> In your own words:
>
> >Level playing fields are an absolute necessity in
any successful
> >motorsport. Other wise, why play? And "level playing
field" doesn't mean
> >that every single car on a given day has a chance to
win; it means that
> >every single car in the class, given enough time,
work, and effort, has a
> >**reasonable shot of some day being competitive**.
As long as a competitor
> >feels that they still have a shot at making
themselves and their car
> >competitive _some day_ within the scope of the
rules, then those rules are
> >Good.
>
> At the pros and tours, if one of they four cars
showed up, it won. The
> only exception was at Ayer. That's 14 out of 15
events where there wasn't
> a chance for any other cars. It doesn't seem like a
very balanced class.
>
> Was it because there were some excellent drivers in
SM? Of course, but how
> does that help improve the sport if the drivers leave
other classes to
> dominate a new class?
>
> I still think that SM should be a regional only
class, with no national
> level classes. It should be a catch-all for people
who show up to events
> with cars not prepared to SCCA rules so they don't
run DM/EM.
>
> Just my opinion,
>
> Brad
>
>
|