[Bruce Perry]

I have heard many people say they have written to the PRB about the 3 tier system in one form or another.

I would like to know who has actually submitted a letter to the PRB.

Please indicate with a reply if you have voiced your opinion. I plan to submit this again and I would like to include a little data as to the support this has in the rally community.

If you have not submitted a letter as of yet, and you believe in this idea -- DO IT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!! Get it in writting. Keep it simple if you want to and just say we need the middle tier to keep you interested! Get it in by July 15! It is easy. It has never been easier. Just write an email to [[email protected]].

My letter is critical of the PRB for not having this topic included in the recent rules change proposal.

The PRB claims that it will not take an issue seriously unless there is a volume of support. GIVE THEM VOLUME!!!!!

Bruce Perry
#992 PGT/P4 Talon

 

[Jerry Brownell]

Count one for me, plus separate discussions with Kurt, Beryl Ann, and Bruce.

 

[Bill Rhodes]

As I noted on two other threads, in August, 2001, Dan Cook and I submitted a reply to the PRB's 2001 suggested age and class rule proposals. In the memo, which I am happy to send to Bruce or anyone else, we strenuously argued for the three-tier structure as a way to avoid the imposition of the new rules on the average national and club license holder.

Our three tier system was like the one you suggest - a pro level added on top of the existing National (i.e. the circa 2000-2001 Pro class) and a Divisional (i.e. club) class. In the memo, we specifically allocated most of the then-current Pro events to Pro/National competition and a few to National/Club (or National/Super D?) competition. (Given what has happened with Prescott and Rim, those allocations might now need to be adjusted.)

Our proposal didn't suggest re-instituting the Super D level, but I think that we could have both. Add a Pro level (for the top 20-25 manufacturers and elite teams), rename the current "Pro" as "National" and keep the Club/Divisional. The new age and class rules would apply only to the new (truly) Pro level. Then, for fun and to inspire some travel among contigous divisions, you could create East, West (and Central?) Super D championships by nominating a few co-efficient 3 events in each Super-region to count for the new Super D titles. This is really just a question of record-keeping of results and I know Adrian has offered to maintain such results.

I think the two "three-tier" concepts could and should live together given the strong level of support for each concept. Some comepetitors may be attracted to one of the new levels (Pro or Super D) and not the other, but I know that everyone below the elite teams will be happy to be rid of the new rules. I think the Super D may be a good way to help divisional teams cut their teeth on travel, costs and logistics of running a nationally competitive team, but maintain a reasonable cost structure.

BTW, I also support the idea that the truly Pro teams (top 20-25) pay higher entry fees to Pro events than the National (or middle tier teams). After-all, they get all the media exposure, the lion's share of significant sponsorship, better road conditions and they make the rules. They should pay more.

E-mail me if you would like a copy of our August 2001 memo to the PRB

Bill Rhodes
[email protected]
Co-driver
1967 Datsun PL-510, Car 941

 

[Don Kennedy]

RE: 3 Tier System - Who Has Written To The PRB? - Clarification

Bruce, are talking about a 3 tier system for events or for points/trophies? The discussion on the thread 2003 Rule Concepts for Member Comment,seems to be indicating points keeping. And IMHO, that does nothing to compensate for the fact that the BIG guys are taking away possibilities for the little guy to run. I feel we need 3 tiers of events, not championships. Let the big guys with all the money find their own place to play, not come in and take over ours.

Edit. My question is answered. I was too hasty, didn't finish reading all of the other threads. x(

 

[jandreini]

In light of the current "revolt", perhaps you should resubmit it, along with this posting.

 

[Bruce Perry]

RE: 3 Tier System - Who Has Written To The PRB? - Clarification

My recent submittal to the PRB. Feel free to copy it and send it with your endorsement!

Bruce



PRB members;

I would like to take this opportunity to urge you to establish the 3 Tier, National ClubRally Championship for 2003. Many competitors, including myself, have submitted similar proposals over the last year or two. Many competitors, including myself, have attended town board meetings and brought up the 3 Tier, National ClubRally Championship. The importance of this issue must be brought to the top of your list.

The 3 tier concept would work like this:

ProRally - Manufacturers and wealthy independents.
Declare their intention to run in the ProRally Tier before their first event.
Pay an entry fee at ProRally events that is proportional to the amount of air time that will be available to the ProRally Tier in the televised event coverage.
Run at the front of the start order based on seed and speed factor.
Limited to Open and GN (and maybe G2) only.
Stage notes supplied.
Car preparation based on current ProRally rules.
National Championship with 100 % of events counting.
Estimate 25 entries at a typical ProRally.
Car numbers 1-30.

National ClubRally - Amatuers that are willing to travel and invest in the coefficient 5 and large coefficient 3 events in their area of the country.
Declare their intention to run in the National ClubRally Championship before their first event.
Pay an entry fee at Prorally events that is proportional to the amount of air time available to the National ClubRally Tier in the televised event coverage.
Run behind the ProRally competitors in the start order based on seed and speed factor.
Limited to Open, G5, G2, P and PGT only.
Stage notes supplied where available.
Car prep based on current ClubRally rules (no age limits, no restrictors).
Coastal Championships (2 or 3) with 70 % of events counting.
National ClubRally Runoffs take place at last event of the Prorally schedule. LSPR or Ojibwe. Perhaps the "Runoffs" could be televised separately.
Estimate 50 to 100 entries at a typical ProRally.
Car numbers 31-200 or 300.


ClubRally - Amatuers that run local, cost effective events that are typically coefficient 1, 2 and 3 events.
No declarations required. High seed and ProRally competitors excluded from entry unless the maximum entry is not met. Easy entry for low seeds.
Pay event entry fee.
Run in seed and speed factor order. At events where National ClubRally is concurrent, run within the National ClubRally competitors.
Limited to Open, G5, G2, P and PGT only.
Stage notes optional. Event organizer has control.
Car prep based on current ClubRally rules (no age limits, no restrictors).
Divisional Championship as we have today.
Car numbers as today by division.

I have no desire to run coefficient 1 or 2 events. I have no desire to follow the direction that the ProRally rules are headed with respect to age limits, restrictors, cost, or the FIA Group N rats nest. I need a coefficient 5 (or long 3) event championship where I can run the best events in the country without all of the additional expense the ProRally marketing circus requires. Without this middle tier, I will be forced to abandon the SCCA in favor of the CARS Championship where most of my objectives are met with open arms.

This concept seems very simple to implement. The look and feel of the existing events would not change significantly. The car preparation rules already exist in whole. It appears that the majority of the competitors want this concept in place as soon as possible. Due to the age limit fiasco, I am faced with a decision for the 2003 season that will unnecessarily cost a significant amount of money and time with no real value.

I would like to volunteer my services to the PRB to help draft a detailed proposal, with the PRB or as a member of a subcommittee, if it would help.

Sincerely and respectfully,

Bruce Perry
122996-01
#992 PGT/P4 Talon

 

[Carlos Lopez]

I just sent my e-mail to the PRB. It reads as follows:




Dear PRB:

I totally support the proposal being presented by some of the membership in regards to the change of the current SCCA Performance Rally Championship to a better "3 tier" system. I agree that there should be a "PRO" division (where the mfg's and the wealthy privateers can compete amongst themselves for airtime, money and trophies) a "National" level ( what we currently call "Pro Rally" division but without the above competitors) and the known "club" level. Bruce Perry has submitted a proposal that more-or-less puts the 3-tier system into perspective. I propose that this new system gets adopted for use starting with the 2003 season.

Respectfully,

Carlos Lopez
E. T. Racing
Car # 151
Member # 272807


I hope and encourage all my fellow rally competitors to stand-up and help get this proposal passed once and for all! (Canada is just too far for me to go and rally every other month!

 

[Bill Rhodes]

I just re-submitted it as an attachment to an email strongly supporting (i) Bruce's three-tier proposal, (ii) the addition of Super-Divisional championships and (iii) higher entry fees for manufacturers and top independents at National events.

Bill Rhodes

 

[MDBodnar]

RE: 3 Tier System - Who Has Written To The PRB? - Clarification

Bruce:

I am not sure the PRB can impliment some of your proposal, see below. I like the idea of the letter, I just don't think it accounts for all the details:


> Pay an entry fee at ProRally events that is proportional
>to the amount of air time that will be available to the
>ProRally Tier in the televised event coverage.

The entry fees are paid to the organizers, the organizers are not "paying" for the event to be televised.

Instead the SCCA national championship events are televised, and to be a national championship event you have to meet a few requirements.

This year Hyundai, Subaru and Mitsubishi are paying the TV bill -- everyone else who sees TV time should write their thank-you notes to them.


> Limited to Open and GN (and maybe G2) only.

MY POV: ANY CLASS with 5 committed competitors should be part of the National Pro Championship. (I'd like an incentive for a low bucks P class to be part of the National Pro Chamionship.)


>
>National ClubRally - Amatuers that are willing to travel
>and invest in the coefficient 5 and large coefficient 3
>events in their area of the country.
> Declare their intention to run in the National ClubRally
>Championship before their first event.

How many events does this equal? Shouldn't you have to commit to x number of events, otherwise the many competitors who only run their 2 local events might take a spot from someone who is running for a championship.

> Pay an entry fee at Prorally events that is proportional
>to the amount of air time available to the National
>ClubRally Tier in the televised event coverage.

Agian -- this pay for TV relationship does not exsist in the entry fees.


> Run behind the ProRally competitors in the start order
>based on seed and speed factor.

Some of these competitors will be mixed in with the Pro guys (I hate 5 minute gaps...)

> Coastal Championships (2 or 3) with 70 % of events
>counting.


Do any out of "region" events count? Can I cross the country and earn points?


> National ClubRally Runoffs take place at last event of
>the Prorally schedule.

So would Maine Winter then be the first event for next year?
MY POV: 100 acre wood is well located in the country and on the calendar.



So really not a lot to change, but I think specing out which events would count for the championship in each of x areas would help, as well as defining exactly how to tabulate points. These would be suggestions, the organizers would really have the final say.

If you could add in estimates of how many cars per class that are currently competing in multiple events: segmenting them by the proposed regions: it would help the PRB understand that the proposal is viable for x number of competitors and in which classes.


That information should go a long wat towards ironing out the details and helping the PRB see the need for the championship.


-- I have not heard that anyone is against a new way of counting points, so a few more facts will solidify the need.

Good Luck,
Mike

 

[BVG927]

Endorsed to PRB with note

Sent endorsement in today...
with the following:
I am writing to semi-endorse the proposal submitted by Bruce Perry, and copied below.
Though I may not totally agree with the concepts Mr Perry has outlined I agree with the concept and the need for something similar. The costs of ProRally are skyrocketting and events are becoming unreachable by neumerious teams looking to compete. The increased attention brought on by the manufacturers and increased TV coverage is great for the sport. But the skyrocketting cost and sketchy rule fiasco is pushing the smaller private funded teams out of the sport. Please do not forget that these teams are the fabric that makes up the community. The private funded teams are what make up the bulk of your events and are the teams that are most personally involved and attached to the sport. They are involved because they love the sport and it is in their blood. The Manufacturers might bring money, a few new spectators and other forms of attention but other than that, you would be hard pressed to find what involvment they have in the sport. If the numbers don't look good on their end, they are gone, no matter how you change the rules around to work for them.
Your personally funded teams coming into the sport, or the long time regulars are who you need to pay some attention to. There is a lot of hate and discontent brewing in the community, and it has your name written all over it. When you love the sport as much as most of the rally community, you get upset when our concerns are ignored. I think a lot of us get upset when we consistently go unheard.
Individually we may not bring a big wad of cash to the sport, but combined the contribution we make to the sport dwarfs manufactures input.
Please keep the small entry level or regional level teams in mind when planning the future of SCCA Rally.

 

[Bruce Perry]

RE: 3 Tier System - Who Has Written To The PRB? - Clarification

Mike,

All good points. I presented a basic plan that I feel takes into account many of the complaints that I,mand others, have. The basic plan is not a major tear-up and could be implemented quickly.

The details DO need to be worked out. That is why my final statement was to volunteer to work on a committee to hammer out the details. You would be a good choice to join me!

Bruce Perry
#992 PGT/P4 Talon

 

[Adrian Wintle]

RE: 3 Tier System - Who Has Written To The PRB? - Clarification

>> Limited to Open and GN (and maybe G2) only.
>
>MY POV: ANY CLASS with 5 committed competitors should be
>part of the National Pro Championship. (I'd like an
>incentive for a low bucks P class to be part of the National
>Pro Chamionship.)

My POV here is that the ProRally championship should be limited to a maximum of three classes (Open, N, ans 2WD) since any more than that would tend to dilute the entries. This simplifies the marketing and presentation of the classes for television.

>>
>>National ClubRally - Amatuers that are willing to travel
>>and invest in the coefficient 5 and large coefficient 3
>>events in their area of the country.
>> Declare their intention to run in the National ClubRally
>>Championship before their first event.
>
>How many events does this equal? Shouldn't you have to
>commit to x number of events, otherwise the many competitors
>who only run their 2 local events might take a spot from
>someone who is running for a championship.
>

I'd actually prefer to see National ClubRally NOT require pre-registration. I'd like it to be scored based on what you enter an event as. If you enter as Divisional, then you get scored in the appropriate Divisional championship. If you enter as National, you score in the (appropriate) National ClubRally championship. I think only the ProRally level should have to commit beforehand, since they are at a level where they should not be subject to the outside influences that affect a ClubRally competitor's schedule (work, family vacations, ...).

>> Pay an entry fee at Prorally events that is proportional
>>to the amount of air time available to the National
>>ClubRally Tier in the televised event coverage.
>
>Agian -- this pay for TV relationship does not exsist in the
>entry fees.

True, but it could, especially if the costs of the services provided were pro-rated. ProRally competitors get the biggest and best service locations, so they pay more...

>> Run behind the ProRally competitors in the start order
>>based on seed and speed factor.
>
>Some of these competitors will be mixed in with the Pro guys
>(I hate 5 minute gaps...)

I agree, I don't like gaps, but if you run the ProRally competitors initially at the front with an extra minute gap per car, you could achieve the same sort of thing.

>> Coastal Championships (2 or 3) with 70 % of events
>>counting.

>Do any out of "region" events count? Can I cross the country
>and earn points?

I carefully didn't address that when I made that suggestion. I think not, but some events could count for both costal championships (Ojibwe?).


>> National ClubRally Runoffs take place at last event of
>>the Prorally schedule.
>
>So would Maine Winter then be the first event for next year?
>MY POV: 100 acre wood is well located in the country and on
>the calendar.

I don't think a National ClubRally Runoffs is necessary. I do think there is still a place for the CRNC, to bring together the Divisional champions. 100 Acre Wood is well positioned for that.

Adrian

 

[Bill Barfoot]

RE: 3 Tier System - Who Has Written To The PRB? - Clarification

>>> Pay an entry fee at Prorally events that is proportional
>>>to the amount of air time available to the National
>>>ClubRally Tier in the televised event coverage.
>>
>>Agian -- this pay for TV relationship does not exsist in the
>>entry fees.
>
>True, but it could, especially if the costs of the services
>provided were pro-rated. ProRally competitors get the
>biggest and best service locations, so they pay more...


no, it can't. It doesn't work that way. The relationship between the organizer and the national office is not set up like that. Now, an organizer can (and some have) charge manufacturers more for their entry, as i think they should, but it will never have anything to do with TV (the national show that the SCCA pays for), it can't, the 2 aren't tied, and really shouldn't be.

 

[Bruce Perry]

RE: 3 Tier System - Who Has Written To The PRB? - Clarification

>>>> Pay an entry fee at Prorally events that is proportional
>>>>to the amount of air time available to the National
>>>>ClubRally Tier in the televised event coverage.
>>>
>>>Agian -- this pay for TV relationship does not exsist in the
>>>entry fees.
>>
>>True, but it could, especially if the costs of the services
>>provided were pro-rated. ProRally competitors get the
>>biggest and best service locations, so they pay more...
>
>
>no, it can't. It doesn't work that way. The relationship
>between the organizer and the national office is not set up
>like that. Now, an organizer can (and some have) charge
>manufacturers more for their entry, as i think they should,
>but it will never have anything to do with TV (the national
>show that the SCCA pays for), it can't, the 2 aren't tied,
>and really shouldn't be.

I really didn't mean it literally. My point was that the manufacturers and the ProRally tier should pay more for their entry because they get more benefit from their entry such as TV time, marketing attention and prefered status wrt servicing, and some other details like that. What I am hoping to achieve is a similar cost / benefit ratio for the ProRally category compared to the National ClubRally category. With entry fees approaching a level equal to a mortgage payment, the average National ClubRally competitor is paying a whole lot more for their benefit than the ProRally competitor.

I think a formula could be suggested which assumes the Prorally entry fee to be, say 5 times as much as the National ClubRally fee. The organizer would then take the amount of revenue that is needed in their budget and would calculate the entry fees based on the pre-registered ProRally team count and their maximum (or expected total) entry.

For example, R=5FX + FY where R = revenue required, F = base entry fee, X = number of ProRally teams, and Y = number of ClubRally teams expected. F is calculated. ProRally entry fee = 5F and National ClubRally fee = F.

5 may not be the correct number, I am using it as an example. However, I suspect the entry fee for a TransAm team is at least 5 times the entry for a National GT-1 team, per event!

These are the kind of details that need to be worked out by a subcommittee with input from the community...

Thanks for the input! If you agree with the basic principles but not the details, don't let that stop you (meaning everyone, not necessarily Bill) from sending the PRB a letter requesting a 3 tier system.

Bruce Perry
#992 PGT/P4 Talon

 

[Bill Barfoot]

RE: 3 Tier System - Who Has Written To The PRB? - Clarification

I agree with the concept, and the math is a good example...

 

[Bruce Perry]

RE: 3 Tier System - Who Has Written To The PRB? - Clarification

>For example, R=5FX + FY where R = revenue required, F = base
>entry fee, X = number of ProRally teams, and Y = number of
>ClubRally teams expected. F is calculated. ProRally entry
>fee = 5F and National ClubRally fee = F.
>
>5 may not be the correct number, I am using it as an
>example. However, I suspect the entry fee for a TransAm
>team is at least 5 times the entry for a National GT-1 team,
>per event!

I put some numbers to this formula last night:

MFR entry = $650
100 entries = 650 x 100 = $65,000 = R
let's say X = 30 and Y = 100-30 = 70
65,000 = 5*F*30 + F*70
F = 295 (say $300)
5F = 1477 (say $1500)
I think this formula would be close!

Bruce Perry
#992 PGT/P4 Talon

 

[Don Kennedy]

Has anyone looked at the September Fas track on the web? If not, go look at it.

 

[Bill Rhodes]

An Ad Hoc committe appointment is usually the deathknell of a proposal to the PRB. Of course, the issues then become when are the actual appointments to the Committee made, who makes the appointments and who is appointed to the Committee. They should appoint Bruce P., Mike B. and others to sit on it.
Bill Rhodes

 

[Over Exposure Racing]

>An Ad Hoc committe appointment is usually the deathknell of
>a proposal to the PRB. Of course, the issues then become
>when are the actual appointments to the Committee made, who
>makes the appointments and who is appointed to the
>Committee. They should appoint Bruce P., Mike B. and
>others to sit on it.
>Bill Rhodes

Actually the PRB and Kurt seem open to the idea and in support of it if the series would be strongly supported by competitors. The number of different possible structures that such a series could have make it difficult to just choose and go with one, especially since if they did that most people would jump down their throats for not properly designing it or something.

The committee sounds to me like a good idea and unfortunatly in order to do this thing right it won't be able to happen till 2004 (remember these are all volunteers and have a limited amount of time they can spend on all this). This will allow us to really come up with something that people will support and compete in rather than just another Super D.

Bradney A. Boli
Over Exposure Racing
Honda Accord #311