Jump to content

Alex Macevicius for Board of Directors


Recommended Posts

My name is Alex Macevicius, I’m the owner/driver for Crowd Control Racing.  I also run inActiv Motorsports arrive and drive Mazda 626.  Previous to those I was part owner/driver in Everything Incredible Racings 300zx.  I started in ChampCar in 2015, have now built 3 different types of cars for the series and all 3 have been in different classes.  I am a Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge Certified Master Technician for over 20 years and also own ADM Motorsports, we are a small independent shop mostly dedicated to Dodge Vipers, track prep, restoration, and general maintenance.

 

Thank you to all for the nomination for BOD.  I’d like to explain my beliefs of what the series should be and what we should do moving forward.   I am very fair and think everyone should be playing by the same rules, evenly enforced, across all platforms.  I’m also for minimal rule changes every year.  ‘If it an’t broke don’t fix it’  large sweeping changes like all new classing structure or massive changes in points or VPIs doesn’t make for great racing and keeps costs high.  We need to help bring the costs of racing down for teams with smaller tweeks to the rulebook.

 

Things i’d like to see;

Item one;  No more ‘free stuff’ it seems every time you turn around we giving away items that should be points even though tech desk or the BCCR state otherwise.  Speed creep is taking speed jumps by allowing too many items for free.

 

Item two; The tech desk needs to be revamped, its a great idea and a quick way to get answers.  However its been treated as a second rule book thats not voted on by members or the BOD.  We have tech desk tickets that are given in February then different rulings later in the same year.  We also have tech desk tickets that are private, they should all be public so that every team understands rulings.  Rules are made by the BOD and the members, not the tech desk.

 

Item three;  VPI adjustments, this year has had minimum changes but they were clearly targeted.  We have a lot of cars that should have VPIs lowered as they have been proven by many teams to be uncompetitive (such as the Neon platform) 

 

Item four;  more transparency with the series, both tech and BOD should give more info about what is going on and what rule changes have been made.

 

I have many more opinions on things should be done, if you have questions about my thoughts please post them here and I will answer them.
 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alex-

 

I very much support the ideas that you have put forth above.  I think I have talked to you a total of 10 seconds at the track, which is unfortunate.  I have found that forum personas and in-person personas can be very different (people probably say the same about mine/me).  I have spent a lot of time with some of the other candidates.  This year's election will be challenging - there are a lot of good people in the mix and a lot of important issues that need to be confronted by patient, collaborative, and communicative BOD members.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had and seen extensive forum exchanges with Alex and also raced against his team a number of times. 

While I think he can come off strong at times, I have a hard time finding anything that Alex posts that is off base or that I disagree with.

And frankly, at this point we need people on the board who will stand up to leadership decisions to say NO when the need presents itself (as it has a number of times in the last year, even) And diversity of opinions is always good. I also appreciate the emphasis on consistency which I think would help to diminish the current standing strategy of creating parity by mole-whacking winners with unexpected VPI increases, while simultaneously giving other teams free parts.

 

Edited by Slugworks Paul
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Alex,

 

Talked with you and your team quite a few times now at the track and have enjoyed some fun competition with one of the few other family cars out there on the track!

 

I have a question for you regarding changing the way classes work now and why you're against a change:

 

It has been proposed that a change of classing structure away from displacement based to points based would be a 'better' way of dividing up the field.  Personally, I like this idea, as our team runs a 2.5L car that just barely squeaks into class C, meaning we run for a class win against nearly all the BMWs and SC300s, despite having the smallest possible engine for that class.  Obviously, I'm biased, but I feel like for new teams, having points based classes would allow folks that barely scrape together enough to get their Sentra/Neon/Escort race legal have an attainable goal to reach before deciding how much more development they'd like to put into their car, or move on to a more capable chassis.  I believe this would also help avoid so much cost creep at the lower end of the field, as if you've got a car that's reasonable competitive in your class, you're under much less pressure to build it faster to try for an overall win.

 

Would you mind explaining why you disagree with the discussed class changes, and why you think keeping the current structure is better for Champcar in general, and the bottom half of the field in particular?

 

Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, krispykritter said:

It has been proposed that a change of classing structure away from displacement based to points based would be a 'better' way of dividing up the field.  Personally, I like this idea, as our team runs a 2.5L car that just barely squeaks into class C, meaning we run for a class win against nearly all the BMWs and SC300s, despite having the smallest possible engine for that class.  Obviously, I'm biased, but I feel like for new teams, having points based classes would allow folks that barely scrape together enough to get their Sentra/Neon/Escort race legal have an attainable goal to reach before deciding how much more development they'd like to put into their car, or move on to a more capable chassis.  I believe this would also help avoid so much cost creep at the lower end of the field, as if you've got a car that's reasonable competitive in your class, you're under much less pressure to build it faster to try for an overall win.

 

So I would actually think about adjusting the classes before a full revamp.  I've have to look thru a bunch of platforms to see why 2.5 liter cars are in C and not B.  Is there a commonly run 2.5 liter that is much faster that i'm unaware of?  I feel like just going points based doesn't give a proper spread of the field, you'll have 90% of the cars in the top class, while others might only have a few.   The other option i'd perfer to look into is just moving some cars to other classes, example would be a 2.0/2.2 Honda S2000 makes WAYYYY more power stock than a Dodge Neon with a 2.0.  these clearly aren't in the same class of car.  I'd rather have an exemption for the Honda to be moved to C class since per displacement doesn't equal speed.  If we put a V6 in our Mazda 626 it would also move to C class where it would never be the same as the SC300 or countless BMW platforms.

 

The other issue for completely reclassing all the cars is we have had people who have built there car for a certain class.  (myself included)  It would increase costs for teams if they then had to try and reclass the car.  I think minor adjustments to classes might be a better option then throwing out the whole system for a new one.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, E. Tyler Pedersen said:

image.png

 

1.  I think tech/tac should give opinions on petitions and how they think it would effect the series, but ultimately its the boards approval.  They are supposed to be a advisory committee, and they should be advising rules not making new ones.

 

2. Cost cutting can come with less rulebook changes and less 'free items'.  Once something is given away for free, larger budget teams will spend the money and the low budget teams have to spend the money just to keep up.   I have yet to see any tire rules I agree with as far as how many you can change/run/etc, but looking into something with tires since they are the most expensive consumables we run.  This is a budget series and we need to help teams keep budgets low.

 

3. I think having BOD members who are move active on the forums and facebook would be best.  Possibly one or two BOD members who are spokesmen for the series.  Along with other board members being able to speak for the series when needed.  Currently seems like everyone is holding back on public posts and waiting for the CEO or Champcar to make official announcements about things.

 

4.  I think the current TAC situation is kind of a mess, TAC/Tech should not be making rules for the series.  Things like the rear IRS for 50 points should have been approved by the board only not a single Tech member.

 

5.  I think my role would be the promotion of fair and equal racing.  I'm also very active on social media and the forums.  I want to be able to help members get the information they need in a timely fashion.  Some items shouldn't have to wait months for answers.  I would like to move the series forward while keeping costs down for the teams. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
25 minutes ago, MoparBoyy said:

 

1.  I think tech/tac should give opinions on petitions and how they think it would effect the series, but ultimately its the boards approval.  They are supposed to be a advisory committee, and they should be advising rules not making new ones.

 

2. Cost cutting can come with less rulebook changes and less 'free items'.  Once something is given away for free, larger budget teams will spend the money and the low budget teams have to spend the money just to keep up.   I have yet to see any tire rules I agree with as far as how many you can change/run/etc, but looking into something with tires since they are the most expensive consumables we run.  This is a budget series and we need to help teams keep budgets low.

 

3. I think having BOD members who are move active on the forums and facebook would be best.  Possibly one or two BOD members who are spokesmen for the series.  Along with other board members being able to speak for the series when needed.  Currently seems like everyone is holding back on public posts and waiting for the CEO or Champcar to make official announcements about things.

 

4.  I think the current TAC situation is kind of a mess, TAC/Tech should not be making rules for the series.  Things like the rear IRS for 50 points should have been approved by the board only not a single Tech member.

 

5.  I think my role would be the promotion of fair and equal racing.  I'm also very active on social media and the forums.  I want to be able to help members get the information they need in a timely fashion.  Some items shouldn't have to wait months for answers.  I would like to move the series forward while keeping costs down for the teams. 

 

In regards to your answer for #4, do you feel that 4.4.4 in the rules should go away?  If it goes away then who would be the person responsible to determine what a value or ruling is at a race?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, E. Tyler Pedersen said:

 

In regards to your answer for #4, do you feel that 4.4.4 in the rules should go away?  If it goes away then who would be the person responsible to determine what a value or ruling is at a race?

 

No, during a race is different then Tech Desk.  However i do think tech should be making racers aware "This is pending board approval"  I also think tech should be updating the BOD via messaging service when something is questionable so that possible a answer can be given maybe before the end of the race (obviously if this happens in impound its up to the tech inspector)

Not to beat a dead horse, but i will use GBU as example.  When the 50 IRS was given out at Daytona, there was a tech desk article stating that IRS swap was 'per component'.  Tech should have advised the BOD "i just gave someone 50 points for a complete IRS swap"  the BOD could have discussed it then and said 'sorry there is a tech desk article saying its per component'  and the team could have been updated either during the race or even a day or two later.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2020 at 6:30 PM, MoparBoyy said:

My name is Alex Macevicius, I’m the owner/driver for Crowd Control Racing.  I also run inActiv Motorsports arrive and drive Mazda 626.  Previous to those I was part owner/driver in Everything Incredible Racings 300zx.  I started in ChampCar in 2015, have now built 3 different types of cars for the series and all 3 have been in different classes.  I am a Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge Certified Master Technician for over 20 years and also own ADM Motorsports, we are a small independent shop mostly dedicated to Dodge Vipers, track prep, restoration, and general maintenance.

 

Thank you to all for the nomination for BOD.  I’d like to explain my beliefs of what the series should be and what we should do moving forward.   I am very fair and think everyone should be playing by the same rules, evenly enforced, across all platforms.  I’m also for minimal rule changes every year.  ‘If it an’t broke don’t fix it’  large sweeping changes like all new classing structure or massive changes in points or VPIs doesn’t make for great racing and keeps costs high.  We need to help bring the costs of racing down for teams with smaller tweeks to the rulebook.

 

Things i’d like to see;

Item one;  No more ‘free stuff’ it seems every time you turn around we giving away items that should be points even though tech desk or the BCCR state otherwise.  Speed creep is taking speed jumps by allowing too many items for free.

 

Item two; The tech desk needs to be revamped, its a great idea and a quick way to get answers.  However its been treated as a second rule book thats not voted on by members or the BOD.  We have tech desk tickets that are given in February then different rulings later in the same year.  We also have tech desk tickets that are private, they should all be public so that every team understands rulings.  Rules are made by the BOD and the members, not the tech desk.

 

Item three;  VPI adjustments, this year has had minimum changes but they were clearly targeted.  We have a lot of cars that should have VPIs lowered as they have been proven by many teams to be uncompetitive (such as the Neon platform) 

 

Item four;  more transparency with the series, both tech and BOD should give more info about what is going on and what rule changes have been made.

 

I have many more opinions on things should be done, if you have questions about my thoughts please post them here and I will answer them.
 

 

Hi Alex,

Thanks for running for the BOD.  I have seen at least one Facebook post from either you or one of your teams co-owners about not racing with Champcar any longer after this year, except, possibly the Championship.  Has your team changed its' mind?   

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Ronh911 said:

 

Hi Alex,

Thanks for running for the BOD.  I have seen at least one Facebook post from either you or one of your teams co-owners about not racing with Champcar any longer after this year, except, possibly the Championship.  Has your team changed its' mind?   

 

This is a very interesting question.

 

If a person isn't committed to continuing to race with CCES, I don't feel they deserve a seat on the BOD.

 

That being said, this year's rules rollout and the GBU disaster has stepped on a lot of people's toes.  I can also see that a 50 point bump for what has not been what I would consider an overdog car would leave a very bad taste is a teams mouth.  Not to digress, but a year over year 50 point increase was excessive.  A VPI increase was warranted, but how much is up to debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Ronh911 said:

 

Hi Alex,

Thanks for running for the BOD.  I have seen at least one Facebook post from either you or one of your teams co-owners about not racing with Champcar any longer after this year, except, possibly the Championship.  Has your team changed its' mind?   

 

My team is currently undecided on our plans for 2021.  With the compressed schedule of this year it has made us all quite edgy and a little burned out.  We as a team want to take a break after Sebring which we'll have at least 2.5 months before Road Atlanta.

 

My team is a group effort and does not effect me being on the BOD.  If i was elected to the BOD i would serve as a racer and not as 'Crowd Control Racing'  You are electing a person to the position, not the team associated with them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ian said:

That being said, this year's rules rollout and the GBU disaster has stepped on a lot of people's toes.  I can also see that a 50 point bump for what has not been what I would consider an overdog car would leave a very bad taste is a teams mouth.  Not to digress, but a year over year 50 point increase was excessive.  A VPI increase was warranted, but how much is up to debate.

 

Agreed its what drove me to run for BOD in the first place.  Seems like a lot of changes are about to come to ChampCar which could be a good thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MoparBoyy said:

 

My team is currently undecided on our plans for 2021.  With the compressed schedule of this year it has made us all quite edgy and a little burned out.  We as a team want to take a break after Sebring which we'll have at least 2.5 months before Road Atlanta.

 

My team is a group effort and does not effect me being on the BOD.  If i was elected to the BOD i would serve as a racer and not as 'Crowd Control Racing'  You are electing a person to the position, not the team associated with them. 

So you as a racer or as a team owner do not know if you will be driving or fielding a team with Champcar in the 2021 season? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ronh911 said:

So you as a racer or as a team owner do not know if you will be driving or fielding a team with Champcar in the 2021 season? 

 

Correct.    The GBU situation has been a complete disaster and has taken peoples faith in tech.  On top of that my specific car was targeted for a VPI increase in 2021 without any explanation. No other mustang, camaro or other 'American iron' car has been increased, only the 1995 Mustang Cobra.  Now brakes and suspension are open for 2021 the difference from GT to Cobra is even less.  The cobra and F-body camaro are now equal VPI, dispite the Camaro having more horsepower, same fuel tank size, same weight, a panhard bar, better front suspension design, and a better transmission.  In fact in CMC racing, the mustang is given many free items so that it can compete with the camaro.  I have been in contact with the BOD about how its clearly feels like retaliation for the car doing well, we were also accessed 20 points at Road America mysteriously without any notice or reasoning.  My logbook and tech sheet show under 500 points, but timing and scoring said otherwise.   With now repeated attacks against our car the team feels 'why bother spending the time and money to continue in a series that doesn't want it?'   If we could figure someway to get 70 points back out of the car and stay competitive, would we just get another 70 or 100 point increase next year?  The car can barely go 1.5hrs on fuel and doesn't turn but only a few seconds a lap faster than cars that go 2 hrs, so where exactly does a 50 point increase come from?  My team is currently awaiting the boards thoughts on the VPI increase.

 

Now with a new CEO, possibly replacing 3 new board seats we could see some good change in the series which may restore that faith.  I'm not in any way saying myself being elected to the board is what will determine the 2021 season for 1 of my 2 cars.   I'm saying the team wants to see some positive effective change in the series all which come about before 2021 but after our last race of 2020.  We still dont know if we will even run National Championship race due to the multiple transmission failures we had there.  42 hr drive to blow up some crappy Ford transmissions doesn't sound fun at this moment, but i sure do want that number 1 plate.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MoparBoyy said:

 

Correct.    The GBU situation has been a complete disaster and has taken peoples faith in tech.  On top of that my specific car was targeted for a VPI increase in 2021 without any explanation. No other mustang, camaro or other 'American iron' car has been increased, only the 1995 Mustang Cobra.  Now brakes and suspension are open for 2021 the difference from GT to Cobra is even less.  The cobra and F-body camaro are now equal VPI, dispite the Camaro having more horsepower, same fuel tank size, same weight, a panhard bar, better front suspension design, and a better transmission.  In fact in CMC racing, the mustang is given many free items so that it can compete with the camaro.  I have been in contact with the BOD about how its clearly feels like retaliation for the car doing well, we were also accessed 20 points at Road America mysteriously without any notice or reasoning.  My logbook and tech sheet show under 500 points, but timing and scoring said otherwise.   With now repeated attacks against our car the team feels 'why bother spending the time and money to continue in a series that doesn't want it?'   If we could figure someway to get 70 points back out of the car and stay competitive, would we just get another 70 or 100 point increase next year?  The car can barely go 1.5hrs on fuel and doesn't turn but only a few seconds a lap faster than cars that go 2 hrs, so where exactly does a 50 point increase come from?  My team is currently awaiting the boards thoughts on the VPI increase.

 

Now with a new CEO, possibly replacing 3 new board seats we could see some good change in the series which may restore that faith.  I'm not in any way saying myself being elected to the board is what will determine the 2021 season for 1 of my 2 cars.   I'm saying the team wants to see some positive effective change in the series all which come about before 2021 but after our last race of 2020.  We still dont know if we will even run National Championship race due to the multiple transmission failures we had there.  42 hr drive to blow up some crappy Ford transmissions doesn't sound fun at this moment, but i sure do want that number 1 plate.

Thanks Alex for your honesty.  I was surprised to see your VPI increase for next year and I don't agree with the amount.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alex,

I have some rather pointed questions on some hot button issues from the forums.  While it may not be possible to be too specific (but appreciated if you can/will), I would like to hear your thoughts on the following:

 

Regarding classing, are you more likely to favor the status quo with some adjustments, a move to points based classing, or possibly a two tiered “Open” class and two tiered “limited prep class”?

 

What are your thoughts on addressing “fuel for points” or other fuel rules that would allow more fuel limited models another path to being competitive?

 

What are your thoughts on containing the (potential) tire “arms race”?  Limit or exclude brands, mark/limit tire use per weekend, limits on tire change tools/personnel, other or none?

 

Many have said “no more free stuff” and “we need to address speed creep”, would you be in favor of or consider a full review of points based items to the extent of rolling back some allowances (with enough notification/lead time)?

 

Thank you and congratulations!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats you take on free stuff when it's needed for reliability, example the Ford Focus have horrible wheel bearing failures to the point that you can't race on the stock units. Luckily there have been members that have done group buys on "super hubs" which are CNC custom units. Do you think that should be a free item or is that the cost of choosing that car?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, craig71188 said:

Alex,

I have some rather pointed questions on some hot button issues from the forums.  While it may not be possible to be too specific (but appreciated if you can/will), I would like to hear your thoughts on the following:

 

Regarding classing, are you more likely to favor the status quo with some adjustments, a move to points based classing, or possibly a two tiered “Open” class and two tiered “limited prep class”?

 

What are your thoughts on addressing “fuel for points” or other fuel rules that would allow more fuel limited models another path to being competitive?

 

What are your thoughts on containing the (potential) tire “arms race”?  Limit or exclude brands, mark/limit tire use per weekend, limits on tire change tools/personnel, other or none?

 

Many have said “no more free stuff” and “we need to address speed creep”, would you be in favor of or consider a full review of points based items to the extent of rolling back some allowances (with enough notification/lead time)?

 

Thank you and congratulations!

 

Craig, 

I would be more in favor of status quo and making adjustments to the current class system.  I addressed it above but some cars should be moved out of there class and perhaps we should look into expanding B class to more cars.  A limited prep class could be an option but honestly havn't heard any solid ways to easily class them just yet.  I think throwing out the whole system and starting over is a bad idea, i want small meaningful changes.

 

I've never been a fan of fuel for points because there are too many variables, you'd then have to take cars that are fuel low and lower the base VPI while raising others who are fuel rich to balance it out.  Too many changes, i'd be for a rule more like WRL where you get X% over stock capacity for the max available in that platform.  Even that would have to be looked at more closely to make sure some cars aren't getting completely screwed while others just got handed throphies.

 

As for the 'tire arms race'  There are a few good options, but nothing I have been 100% on board with.  Teams dropping $7000 a weekend on tires alone does not help this series and we need to do something to bring it back.  I think ultimately its going to have to be a hybrid of many things, limiting the number of tires you can use (unless failure) i think might be an option.  However you have to carve out something for teams who are willing to use 3 sets of old tires just to get there monies worth out of them.  Not everyone starts the race on fresh rubber.  At PBIR we kept throwing on used tires and getting a couple hours on them in our mazda it was a great way to get all of our money out of them.

 

I would love to do a full review of points based items, but if any changes are made they should be done slowly so teams have time to adjust.  There are too many things we've given away for free, alternators and brackets being the first one that comes to mind.  You pay for billet hubs, billet engine mounts, but get billet engine brackets for free?  that makes no sense.

 

 

2 hours ago, trigun7469 said:

Whats you take on free stuff when it's needed for reliability, example the Ford Focus have horrible wheel bearing failures to the point that you can't race on the stock units. Luckily there have been members that have done group buys on "super hubs" which are CNC custom units. Do you think that should be a free item or is that the cost of choosing that car?

 

As far as the hubs, I currently agree with the current points value for nice hubs.  I was torn at first because its almost a safety item because it could cause a crash, but with the low points you have to pay for hubs it seems like most teams shouldn't have a problem with 5 points.   Currently I only know of Miata and Focus that require these both cars have low enough starting VPIs that they can easily absorb the points.   I have no seen many focus in the series so a VPI adjustment could also be required to offset things like hubs which we should encourage most teams to do.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alex

 

Rodger brought up the topic of driver training/education in his platform. I'd like your take on it as well. Do we need some minimum requirements (x days DE, etc.) to ensure that we have some basic level of trust that the guy/gal in the car next to you has some idea how to react in passing situations or when they go off track?

-Dan

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RocketHamRacing said:

Alex

 

Rodger brought up the topic of driver training/education in his platform. I'd like your take on it as well. Do we need some minimum requirements (x days DE, etc.) to ensure that we have some basic level of trust that the guy/gal in the car next to you has some idea how to react in passing situations or when they go off track?

-Dan

 

I think having DE experience should be a must, not only a trackday here or there but also recently.  With our rental car we don't take anyone without experience.  I think adding that requirement wouldn't hurt the series one bit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...