Jump to content

Mike Coleman running for Board of Directors


Recommended Posts

I'm Mike Coleman and I would like your vote for Board of Directors. You can read my bio and qualifications on the election ballot email.

 

Chumpcar/Champpcar has been a big exciting part of my life since my first race in 2013 and would now like to help the organization into the future.

 

My strength would be in helping the organization with business plans, growth and financial stability. As well as assessing what the best approach to rule changes is and does it affect everyone equally to the best of our ability. No organization will ever make everyone happy. If we can make 80-90% of the membership happy and listen respectfully to the remaining 10% we will be successful.

 

A board of directors is a governance body with responsibility to see that the organization has proper management goals with measurable metrics, checks and balances and accept a fiduciary responsibility for the financial position of the corporation. Further, the board should assist, as requested, the senior staff with planning and budgeting. I have extensive business and non-profit board experience in these areas.

 

I would be happy to answer any specific questions to the best of my ability, here on the forum, or you can reach out personally  mjcoleman1946@gmail.com or 508-454-1674.

 

I'd love to have your vote!

Thank you for taking the time to be active.

Edited by MJC
Forgot to add my name
  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, mindspin311 said:

Mike has my vote. I appreciate that he has a business background and isn't making his platform completely about rule changes. Rules are great, but if the series can't be run successfully as a BUSINESS then we're all doomed.

I agree 100%. Mike has my vote!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/29/2022 at 11:02 AM, MJC said:

I would be happy to answer any specific questions to the best of my ability, here on the forum

Mike, I would like you to address two questions that I have relating to your bio.

 

1) Many of us are racing antique automobiles. As we add newer vehicles is the current VPI system the best way to keep competition relevant.

2) As discrepancy between speed and power grow shouldn’t we have distinct classes racing for championships on an equal basis? More exciting for everyone and with proper organizing not a big management issue.

 

Regarding #1, if a car being introduced to the VPI list is thought to be equal in performance to an exiting 500 point car, it is added at 500 points. If it's thought to be equal to existing 400 point cars, it will be added at 400 points. Etc. Etc. How is this not a good system? What shortcomings in the system are you concerned about?

 

Regarding #2, what discrepancies do you see growing? The balance at the top is very tight... the championship in April was tight between NC Miata / 944 / CRX / RX7 / e30 (before they crashed on day 2) / and others. At any given race a variety of cars fill the top 10 spots, this looks like "an equal basis" to me.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VPI system; I'm not necessarily saying the VPI system is not adequate, but I do think it needs to be looked at going forward. When the series started it was equated to a $500 Lemons valuation. Transitioned to a points system as these are obviously not $500 cars. There are 350-400 models listed. How many have ever raced Champcar, will, or should? In order to allow newer cars onto the list which come in with far better characteristics don't the existing numbers at least need to be lowered. Rule changes like free EC (used to be 75 points) aero at 10 points (wing used to be 100) and the big one, engine swaps, have changed the whole dynamic of the VPI system. As time goes on isn't  this is only going to become more difficult to administer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding driver tracking, if you are talking about something similar to what WRL does to know who is in the car at any given time, I haven't given it a lot of consideration. I haven't seen it as a big problem in Champcar, but I'm also not in the control booth. Our team has always been able to track down a given driver if needed. Not saying it's not a good idea, I just don't have all the information to speak to the issue. I do think as speeds increase it might be good to consider whether a new to the series driver should have at least one or two HPDE days under their belt.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think every team should have tires, hard to race without them🙄. Sorry, couldn't resist.

Complex question: If we had a tire sponsor with a spec tire at affordable prices that would solve the problem, but probably not likely to happen in the foreseeable future. I'm a business guy, not a techie I'll listen to reasonable proposals to help check costs. I think just limiting size has potential problems for the high HP heavier cars. I have no issue with a max size if it is reasonable and doesn't negatively impact teams from a cost perspective.  Maybe allowing 2,3 or 4 sizes larger than spec for all cars?? I run a Miata with 245's, only a few options for 15" wheels. I imagine others with different platforms might have similar problems. I don't think you can say you have to run tire sizes that came on the car. That would cause huge problems with many platforms. Again, I'm not a techie I'm a business and marketing guy. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some stats on racing classes compiled from 16 Champcar race results in 2022 posted on Race Monitor:

Top 10 overall

60% class C,

29% class A,

10% class B

4% class D

8 out of 16 races class C cars were top 3

Winners:

Class C  62.5%    10 wins

Class A  18.75%     3 wins (2 by one team)

Class B  18.75%     3 wins ( 2 by one team)

 

Percent of total entries

Class C  33%

Class A  30%

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MJC said:

In order to allow newer cars onto the list which come in with far better characteristics, don't the existing numbers at least need to be lowered?

Why would such cars be added if they are far better? Some high performance models have never been on the VPI table (e46 M3, c6 corvette, most generations of porsche 911). Likewise, a 2022 BMW 235i or a 2020 Civic Type-R should not be added to the VPI list, they are just too good. Not all new cars are this fast. Look at a 2022 Toyota Camry... with one trim at 205ish HP, FWD, and curb weight of 3300 lbs, even though it is new and probably has excellent ABS, low drag aerodynamics, and an efficient lean-burn engine, it could slot in to the existing VPI table (at some time in the future) somewhere between 400 and 550 points (TBD) without changing the point values on existing cars.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I’m probably on the same page as @enginerdon this:

 

My hope is that most of the cars racing today will be racing 5 years from now, so stability in their VPIs is important. Building a car is time consuming AND expensive.  Champ’s goal should be to maximize laps per dollar, and having a car that only needs to be maintained is the best way to do that.  If VPIs change, then lots of new investments in the car are required. Let’s avoid that. 
 

I’ve got to think that there are plenty of more modern cars that can be added that won’t be so fast that their VPIs have to be above 500.  We are low cost racing - we don’t want 911s and caymans. There are other series for those cars.  Many of the “less than 500 point” cars will be dirt cheap to acquire, because they aren’t performance editions. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Technical Advisory Committee
1 hour ago, Racer28173 said:

- we don’t want 911s and caymans. There are other series for those cars.  

We didn't need Boxsters either. That was a big surprise when they showed up on the VPI list.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be clear, I did not say the VPI list should be eliminated. I asked the question, is it the best way to determine eligibility for the future. Isn't the Boxster of today kind of like the E30 of yesterday in its relative performance to its peers of the day. Same as the NC Miata is today compared to the NA or NB with their peers of the era. Do we bring all newer cars in with high point values so they can't have aero or other add on? That's fine for now, but how about 5, 10 or 20 years from now when these cars become as old as the E30's and NA Miatas and the next generation of today's mid perforcemance options enter the field. Are we going to just let in lower and lower level models and are the points for an E30 and NA or NB Miata still going to be what they are now? Are we going to keep adding models so the list has 500, 600 models on it even though only 200 have ever raced in the series? Why are we adding in models that are already over 500 points if our goal is to have 500 points the max? Is it just so people can scavenge parts and swap motors? Don't see how that keeps costs in check. Before free parts, free ECUs, engine swaps, when custom parts, brackets etc had to be made with hand tools, the VPI system worked pretty I think. I'm just asking whether with all the rule changes over the last 10 years is it still the best system for the future.

 

Look, I'm not an engine nerd, or car expert. I'm a business guy and that's what I hope to bring to the board. Asking "is this the best way" is what I do. If the answer is yes move on, if the answer is there might be a better way now or for the future, what is it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MJC said:

Look, I'm not an engine nerd, or car expert. I'm a business guy and that's what I hope to bring to the board. Asking "is this the best way" is what I do. If the answer is yes move on, if the answer is there might be a better way now or for the future, what is it.

This.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Technical Advisory Committee

Hi David. I’m not sure. I almost didn’t post this cuz I knew some folks wouldn’t agree. Yep I was thinking about you! 
No harm meant to anyone. I just don’t think it’s the type of car that portrays low entry level investment for a low budget series. It’s  also a much more purpose built car than most of the econoboxes or other vehicles built in its time, that were racing in the series before the boxsters inclusion.

I wasn’t the only one surprised to see them added to the VPI list. Other tac members were surprised at the time too. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DEE DEE said:

Mike how many times has a Boxster won overall?

I'll bite.  after a quick look I get this.

 

2020:  1 win, 1 second, 3 thirds

2021:  6 wins, 3 seconds, 3 thirds

2022: 3 wins, 2 seconds, 4 thirds

 

not the car I hate most... that's the GBU C3...  it should be kicked to EC.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ben 595 said:

I'll bite.  after a quick look I get this.

 

2020:  1 win, 1 second, 3 thirds

2021:  6 wins, 3 seconds, 3 thirds

2022: 3 wins, 2 seconds, 4 thirds

 

not the car I hate most... that's the GBU C3...  it should be kicked to EC.

10  O/A wins  in like about 130  or more races sure is a dominant car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...