Only 22 ProRally entries at Cog, 13 finishers, and now Gruppe N appears to have succumbed to technical protests again, no?
A relatively successful NASA season, not too many ProRally class championships hotly contested this season, worries about future insurability of SCCA rallies, new strata of price levels for upcoming Club events, and increasing talk by CenDiv types (among others) of migrating to CARS events. These seem to all be indicators of bad road ahead. Could it be that SCCA sponsored performance rally is losing its relevance in North America?
Perhaps the classic nature of LSPR will encourage enough support to sustain ProRally into 2005, although not much left to decide in the way of class championships this year won't help.
I hope you are right about LSPR springing the sport back in 05, becasue it is hopless watching people competeting against nobody in their classes and winning by mearly showing up. Makes for a boring sport. At the current state of the sport I can not justfy spending nearly $10K per Pro Rally of my $$ or any sponsors $$ just to run.
I knew our beloved sport would suffer for a bit after the manufactuers left, but this is 10x worse than expected, and if LSPR's entrie fees (specialy the late fees) indicate anything in the future,we can kiss SCCA Pro Rally good bye. I am sure people can find something more meaning full to do with their $$.
Is this alledged infraction with the water spray nozzle a violation of Group N rules or is it illegal in Open Class too? The reason I ask is that if Pat's WRX was declared ineligible for Group N, could he not be re-assigned to Open Class? He has already locked the class championship and second overall (no matter what class) is all he needs to win the overall SCCA title.
>Only 22 ProRally entries at Cog, 13 finishers, and now
>Gruppe N appears to have succumbed to technical protests
I'm looking forward to folks bragging up their top 10 finishes.
>A relatively successful NASA season, not too many ProRally
>class championships hotly contested this season, worries
>about future insurability of SCCA rallies, new strata of
>price levels for upcoming Club events, and increasing talk
>by CenDiv types (among others) of migrating to CARS events.
>These seem to all be indicators of bad road ahead. Could it
>be that SCCA sponsored performance rally is losing its
>relevance in North America?
Yep, the baby is sick and has been getting sick for a long, long time. I think we need to rally in a completely different way. I would look towards successful rally regions in the world and see what makes them successful. Then we would need to, and this is the tough part, swallow our stupid American pride, and copy them.
I think rally could be big over here, not that I want it to be but I think we make excuses why it isn't that aren't always true. It just needs to grow, in the right way, with the emphasis on benfits for the organizers and competitors. See below
>Perhaps the classic nature of LSPR will encourage enough
>support to sustain ProRally into 2005, although not much
>left to decide in the way of class championships this year
LSPR will be a blast for all the competitors who haven't gotten so serious that they forgot how to have fun.
I've been critical of the sorry state of things.
Load your pistols, light your torches, I offer a from the hip, unscrutinized solution:
Costs need to be addressed not only for competitors but for organizers.
I think that 2 people from each rally organizing committee need to meet in 3 areas across the country, one west, one central, and one east and have a huge video conference with each other and discuss how to implement Lurch's vision for a new business model for events. Take every idea that comes up seriously and explore them. People have beaten more difficult challenges in the past. I would definitely have Ray Hocker around.
If there are events to be run that aren't such a lifeforce sucking experience to put on and can be more affordable I think that the competitors will follow.
Here is another idea from the brainstorm expert. Remember in a brainstorm there are no wrong ideas, that's why I like 'em.
Screw all this traveling across the country. It is the variable that drives up cost the most. Let's develop local rally clubs with stronger events that embraced Lurch's vision. Let's get rid of the emphasis on the national level club. Let the SCCA or NASA provide only the things that the local clubs cannot provide for themselves. Maybe this is insurance maybe this is a uniform class structure. I would like it to be as little as possible
I want sustainability and growth of the sport at the club level, from the ground up. Emphasis on Organizers and Competitors.
>Is this alledged infraction with the water spray nozzle a
>violation of Group N rules or is it illegal in Open Class
>too? The reason I ask is that if Pat's WRX was declared
>ineligible for Group N, could he not be re-assigned to Open
>Class? He has already locked the class championship and
>second overall (no matter what class) is all he needs to win
>the overall SCCA title.
If you change to the appropriate class before the first time control, you are good (8.2.C.11).
If not, you are subject to the whim of the Event Steward (8.2.C.3), which I believe would be Mr. Coughnour. Exclusion is the one listed penalty, but it is "at the discression (sic) of the Event Steward".
I have competed in an event where the car was entered in P class, but after an inquiry at the end of the rally, the steward reclassed it as G2.
>I hope you are right about LSPR springing the sport back in
>05, becasue it is hopless watching people competeting
>against nobody in their classes and winning by mearly
>showing up. Makes for a boring sport. At the current state
>of the sport I can not justfy spending nearly $10K per Pro
>Rally of my $$ or any sponsors $$ just to run.
>I knew our beloved sport would suffer for a bit after the
>manufactuers left, but this is 10x worse than expected, and
>if LSPR's entrie fees (specialy the late fees) indicate
>anything in the future,we can kiss SCCA Pro Rally good bye.
>I am sure people can find something more meaning full to do
>with their $$.
I don't think that the manufacturers would make it any better. They would still be fun to watch but it wouldn't make me or anyone else able to rally any more.
Before people start to speculate, for the record, our DQ and the other competitor's DQ were NOT for the same reason. I cant give any specifics to the other team's DQ. They did not protest the Steward's decision.
We wrote two inquiries: one regarding the alleged illegality, and a second inquiry, notwithstanding the legality of the issue, regarding the assessed penalty. Both inquiries were not able to be acted upon by the event officials so we filed a protest againt the event stewards' decision to DQ us, citing both inquiries.
BIG EDIT: I've received too much email already about this, so I'm just leaving this post as it is (now).
The protest commitee heard our protest, and accepted our protest, re-instating us into the results.
The re-instatement of our result was appealed by Ralph Kosmides.
The above are the facts, and since this is being appealed, I have nothing else to say on this matter, other than, lets for the sake of argument go with the notion that we are in thw wrong, the two questions are: 1) then what are you supposed to use, and 2) does the penalty fit the alleged crime.
I'm posting all of this, because I dont want any of this to taint anything that we have done this year or in the future.
We did not extend the size of the tank, nor make it bigger, nor pump extra into it, nor adding nozzles, nor make it internally re-fillable, or anything like that. So in the end, I just want people to know what we didn't do, to STOP SPECULATION.
Sounds to me like everyone involved did the right thing, and the question was ultimately resolved. Obviously, either Ralph or Jimmy feels he has grounds to appeal. This might all have been avoided if the relocation of the bottle(along with the reason) and it's approval by FIA scrutineers had been brought to the attention of Doug Robinson at the beginning of the season. Sometimes I think competitors go looking for battles to win.
Adrian, I posted the above just to state the situation. I dont want to get into it here, and it would probably be better if people didn't speculate on this or that, that was my reason for posting. To stop speculation. I would prefer it if you just make your own decisions and keep them (and the basis for them, like what you are writing above) offline. But hey I'm not in control of the internet so do what you want.
Ralph has like 10 days to write his appeal, so I think things need to settle until then. Until the appeal is actually submitted, there isn't anything to discuss, and the results are as they are. All speculation is going to do is make things weird. I promise to fully disclose whatever happens in due course. Good or Bad.
Assuming that Pat's appeal will be upheld... CONGRATULATIONS to Pat and Nathalie for an incredible achievement!! For dominating the North American rally scene by securing the SCCA Overall / Group N, Canadian Overall / Open class, and NARC in a single season!
Both of you are not only highly skilled competitors, but true ambassators to the sport.
Solo, TSD and the Run-Offs (R in a circle) have a history of protests ruining the competition, guess it was only a matter of time.
That rant out of the way, there are a few ways that protests in SCCA work, one is the obvious:
Blatently illegal cars enter, and are never questioned until it is too late.
Second, idiots who can't come close to competing without finding a way to win.
Third, filing a protest to force the club to rule on a grey area. This is usually done at a lesser event with approval of both racers who can't get anyone in "Denver" to take a stand. Sometimes the officals still won't rule untill the run-offs (R in circle) when it has become a major pain to change the car and the damage is done.