Jump to content
Ron_e

2018 petitions

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Crank Yankers Racing said:

Maybe you should email the board. Board@champcar.org. They can answer your questions about this issue. 

But in the meantime it's ok if they don't follow the rules? 

Definitely not right, and why people get pissed about these type of things!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mcoppola said:

But in the meantime it's ok if they don't follow the rules? 

Definitely not right, and why people get pissed about these type of things!

No one filled out a protest at Daytona for a swapped 944 that finished on the podium. I'm just saying the BoD or most of the Champ staff doesn't read the forum. Send emails. Voice your concerns. It's been beat to death here. Also per the by laws get x % of the membership and you can present cases to the board and have a special board meeting as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Crank Yankers Racing said:

No one filled out a protest at Daytona for a swapped 944 that finished on the podium. I'm just saying the BoD or most of the Champ staff doesn't read the forum. Send emails. Voice your concerns. It's been beat to death here. Also per the by laws get x % of the membership and you can present cases to the board and have a special board meeting as well. 

So your logic here is that they aren't aware of the issue? BS

 

FYI: I emailed Mike about it in February. I'm disgusted that they haven't even addressed it publicly yet.  

Edited by ABR-Glen
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ABR-Glen said:

So your logic here is that they aren't aware of the issue? BS

 

FYI: I emailed Mike about it in February. 

 

Nope not my logic Glen. Just stating what's the point of complaining on the forum about it over and over. Send emails. Make phone calls. Voice your opinion. I talk to Mike on the phone. It does work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also included it in my response to the board about the 2018 petitions.

 

Just because you are sick of reading it here doesn't mean people haven't used other methods. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just sad that I can't figure it out and apparently I need the BOD to help me understand it.  :unsure:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ron_e said:

I'm just sad that I can't figure it out and apparently I need the BOD to help me understand it.  :unsure:

You're from the West. And even worst, from Canada. I'm beginning to think the East has their own rules or are strongly favored by the buddy system. 

Edited by mcoppola
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mcoppola said:

You're from the West. And even worst, from Canada. I'm beginning to think the East has their own rules or are strongly favored by the buddy system. 

Probably.

 

It's working pretty well however!

 

I'm glad people care enough to complain!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was at the meeting and left with mixed emotions.   I will say I feel the BOD communicated well on why they voted the way they did on the issues and overall it was productive.  I don't necessarily agree with it all but at least I understand their thought process.   I had 1 petition approved, 1 is a operations manual deal, and 1 denied.   I was VERY glad to see that the ban on open fueling petition was approved.   The same petition was presented last year and denied, so progress there.   Also glad that they voted to punish teams caught cheating, this is a good thing for the series IMO.    I was surprised to hear that the board is open to restructuring the entire classing system of the series.  They made it clear they don't want a lot of changes but were open to this one, surprising.    We then didn't talk about it at the end as it was running late.   I'm sure there will be some interesting discussions in the future on the topic.     I do hope they keep their word on developing a tech committee for the series.  I do believe most of the board wants one and hope they figure it out and have it implemented for 2019.   I think its something that the series really needs.    

Edited by Snake
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was impressed with the openness of the meeting and mike continues to impress me with the direction he is taking the leadership of the club. 

 

Like alot of us, some of the things that did or didn't go through concern me, but if we have faith in change and the option to change in the future it will be fine. The tech committee is a great idea, as someone who works in the industry i am always open to help on any technical questions. I think some explanations on turbo compressor maps for oem vs aftermarket turbos, for example, might have lead to a different outcome. Or at least a few less google searches for "gtx 35" 😂

 

I forsee some sort of fuel balancing in the future, pushed as a petition or brought about by competition. The only thing that really chapped my butt was a quote the board displayed during a petition, I think mender wrote this correctly, but if not excuse me.

 

"We chose our car carefully to allow room for the modifications that we feel will allow us to compete equally with the 500 point cars. 

 

The part that bothers me was the context it was used, that they felt the investment of building a car should lock in some advantage for them over others. I picked a car with fuel, underrated engine, coolers, whatever, and despite it being an unfair advantage i want to keep it. If we want this to survive some of us may have to race cars that are equal, give our neighbor an equal chance to win, despite their car choice. In my world i would like to see us get to a point where a new team asking "what car should i build" could get a nearly endless supply of cars with equal opportunity to win (and in my world, from similarish laptimes). That will require some rebalancing, as right now i have about a handful of cars i would suggest are dominant over the rest. These are not the cheaper cars to aquire either (seems most of life left unbalanced goes this way).

 

Or we can just make this a spec series with a limited amount of competitive car options carefully chosen by performance potential not availability or cost.....

 

Edited by Black Magic
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will always be resistance to changes that take away or neutralize an advantage whether real or perceived.

 

The resultant effect of the proposed change must be considered objectively, for the good of the entire organization and not any particular segment. A good change will remove an advantage without creating a new one. I think the fear of making a change that appears beneficial to the overall good but results in an unexpected unicorn is the driver behind most of the negative responses to petitions.

 

In this specific case, I see that fear lashing out with a strawman argument. No V8 car that I know of has less than a 15 gallon tank, so using that as part of the reasoning for denying this petition is both silly and disingenuous. Citing fuel mileage instead fuel capacity is also off target and distracting from the purpose of the petition.

 

That being said, I would have voted against that petition because although I agree with the basic thought behind it, I feel the petition isn't specific enough to prevent the possibility of a smaller advantage to surface. It's likely that others also opposed it for that reason. I have hope that a petition using the same premise as the swap formula will be seen as more inclusive and fair across the spectrum of cars in Champ.

 

However, before a petition to equalize/neutralize the present fuel imbalances using a fuel to weight formula can be successful or even considered, I feel that the current method of assigning curb weights for use in the engine swap formula has to be revised and returned to some semblance of reality and sanity. Using a list of weights that can be as much as 35% higher than what the car configuration is entitled to is a huge issue for any weight-based rule whether presently in force or proposed.

 

I support getting the engine swap list weights back under control as a top priority, hopefully before cars taking advantage of that loophole are built then used as justification for denying a 2019 rule change to negate that advantage.

 

Edited by mender
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P.S. I don't see the need for a petition to that effect for the BoD to investigate and rectify the weight list issue; I see that as due diligence and follow-up on a decision that they made and the prevention of complications that could arise from that decision.

 

It would be prudent to roll the clock back to before the most recent changes that resulted in the exposure of the questioned practice rather than locking in the changes that were made.

 

 

Edited by mender

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mender, 

 

I suggested to mike that he weigh a few cars in post race, do nothing for now and make a change in the future based on the internet weights and some of the actual weights found in post race. Hopefully it just takes a little time to work out 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure we already know what the post-race weights will be. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, mender said:

I'm pretty sure we already know what the post-race weights will be. :)

Like you I have a really solid idea....but to prove to others i am right would take data.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last month in broadcast meeting Mike said there would be some discussion with members about Troy’s reclassification proposal.  Any idea if this ever happened?  I dropped an email to ChampCar today asking but no reply yet.  

 

The thought occurred to me that if classes are decided by points then the same class (with points closest to 500)  is probably going to win most every time.  Like more than C class does now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×