Rules, Organizational layout

[narider]

Everyone makes complete sense for what they are individually talking about. I think the fact comes down to something Jimmy said though, TIME IN EXISTENCE. SCTA was not where they are now, when they started. It's the same reason a child doesn't come out of the womb walking and looking for a job. It needs to grow, and I think everyone is helping it by speaking their peice(ok, maybe not everyone, maybe not me), either way it's all good if we can still race while we grow. JB started it off and grew it the right way so ECTA can continue to learn from SCTA without having to exactly emulate it's very large footsteps, while just a fraction of it's age and size.
 TD

[equimania]

Originally posted by Todd Dross:
  Everyone makes complete sense for what they are individually talking about. I think the fact comes down to something Jimmy said though, TIME IN EXISTENCE. SCTA was not where they are now, when they started.

Right. . . and?  I'm not sure what your point is.  Should it be changed?  Left alone?  Follow SCTA?  Not follow SCTA?  I'm confused.
 
 Mark

[narider]

Originally posted by Mark:
   

Originally posted by Todd Dross:
  Everyone makes complete sense for what they are individually talking about. I think the fact comes down to something Jimmy said though, TIME IN EXISTENCE. SCTA was not where they are now, when they started.

Right. . . and?  I'm not sure what your point is.  Should it be changed?  Left alone?  Follow SCTA?  Not follow SCTA?  I'm confused.
 Mark [/b]

Many don't see the point Mark and I didn't mean to confuse you. To answer your question, I think ECTA should progress with it's longevity being the main objective. But what I think ECTA should be is not important. Me helping one small step at a time by working to make ECTA what I want it to be is important, and that's what I'm doing.
 TD

[KeithTurk]

Todd... I understand you care about Maxton and your efforts are always applauded...
 
 We are Land Speed Racers... Not just Maxton racers... yes MOST Of us Race only at Maxton... but that experience should be on line with the experience everywhere...
 
 Some folks don't think we need the credibility that comes from playing by the rules... but we do... it's Very important for us to extend our growth.
 
 Collectively the members voted to outlaw vehicle class jumping next year and stick to Motor only changes... I think that is the easiest to support... it still means you can "SET" a record in motor sizes and fuel ( and my understanding blown using a non blown motor) above your class.
 
 Plenty of records are avalible... But a record has to have merit... and a record set with a Camaro in a streamliner class just gets lost in the shuffle...
 
 No Matter what.. whoever has won the points race has played by the rules inposed that year... Scottie for example figures and plays by the rules better then anyone... and he deserves the championships he's won...  trust me I've raced him pretty hard, it takes effort to beat him...

[DaveO]

OK..If the class "upgrading" is not allowed....How many entries are we goin to have in the 2000cc and up non pushrod classes???
 
 Dave

[narider]

Originally posted by DaveO:
  OK..If the class "upgrading" is not allowed....How many entries are we goin to have in the 2000cc and up non pushrod classes???
 Dave

Dave, the restrictions(for bikes) are going to be in the Frame class. Everything else will remain as it's been for now. It takes four things to enter a bike into a class.
 1- Frame Class
 2- Engine Class (meaning Type of engine)
 3- Engine Displacement Class
 4- Engine Stroke(misnamed Engine Cycle)
 
 What it appears is going to happen is that you will be bound to your base frame class(lowest frame class designator your bike qualifies for), but you will still be able to move up in Engine Type and Engine Displacement(to answer your question). Hope that helps explain the way I understand it(and yes, this is simply my understanding of it, nothing more. and strictly the bike side of it).
 TD

[equimania]

Originally posted by Keith Turk:
  Some folks don't think we need the credibility that comes from playing by the rules... but we do... it's Very important for us to extend our growth.
 
 . . . .
 
 No Matter what.. whoever has won the points race has played by the rules inposed that year... Scottie for example figures and plays by the rules better then anyone... and he deserves the championships he's won...  trust me I've raced him pretty hard, it takes effort to beat him...

I don't think anybody said we don't need credibility.   Certainly I did not.  My point was that I just don't think bracketing motor sizes (as opposed to just having an upper limit, as is proposed) does not, IMHO, go to credibility of the record.
 
 On the point about the championship points, also, I agree with you, Keith.  Cheers to Scott and all the other points leaders this year and past years.  I said above, I don't necessarily think the points championship as constructed is a bad thing -- I said, everyone knows the rules and can choose to compete or not.  I was not advocating a position, but trying to open minds and induce healthy debate as to whether a differently designed points constuct could reward things we value more.
 
 Mark

[Seldom Seen Slim]

Hey, somebody finally got me going here. . .
 
 One of my goals for the next year is sort of "adjective-related".  I'm ging the other way, though -- won't fill in all the details (you'll have to wait to see if I can pull it off), but I'm hoping to REDUCE the number of adjectives it takes to describe the configuration of my entry.
 
 That Nailhead Buick includes some decription of "from Canada" and maybe "painted black".  Better still is the way that each describer is in slightly smaller type font than the previous line, 'til at the bottom you darn near need your good glasses to read what they're saying.
 
 As for production bikes - well, doesn't Triumph have that 2,300cc 3-cylinder scooter on the market now?  Something like 11-gazillion foot-pounds of torque, and a motor only slightly (physically) smaller than the one in my big snowplow truck?

[DahMurf]

Originally posted by Mark:
 I was not advocating a position, but trying to open minds and induce healthy debate as to whether a differently designed points constuct could reward things we value more.

I would really like to see the ECTA rethink the points system. I would like to see the ECTA define what they are trying to accomplish, what they are trying to reward, and then how best to fairly do it.
 
 For example:
 Are they trying to generate revenue by encouraging attendance at every meet and multiple class changes per meet?
 Are they trying to reward the racers that continually show up, run reliably and continually improving?
 
 Lets face it, the points race is given a more ?prestigious? award at the ECTA and up until this year you didn't even have to go to impound to collect your points. If I remember correctly, the point?s winner gets a trophy, their vehicle picture on the shirts for the following year, on the rulebook & on the web site and the others in the top 5 or 10 get a plaque. When you make a record you get a paper certificate. I think if you?re going to be given a more ?prestigious? award, you should be scrutinized at least as much as you are for a record if not more.
 
 Limiting class jumping will help make it a little fairer but that's not all it's going to take.
 
 Here?s some thoughts I?ve seen thrown around on the subject, maybe we can brainstorm a decent proposal:
 - Minimum speeds for points only (alleviates the advantage of open classes)
 -   Getting points for running in base class only (will show/reward actual improvement not just the ability to find a ?soft record/minimum? to run on)
 -   Coming up with a way to award points based on a percentage to somehow tie in the CC/characteristics of the actual engine or class entered to the speed achieved to make it a little fairer for the little guy.
 
 Deb

[narider]

I believe you forgot one other option there Deb...
 Get rid of the points system totally, and simply race for speeds.
 TD

[DahMurf]

Originally posted by Todd Dross:
 Get rid of the points system totally, and simply race for speeds.
 

True that is an option but I personally feel it has the potential to reduce the number of entrants/class changes ultimately reducing the ECTA income. We know there are members that only race for points because their vehicle's may not be competitive enough to achieve new records. On one side it may encourage racers to enhance their vehicles to become more competitive thus raising the level and quality of racing but on the other side the organization may loose racers.
 Deb

[Paul Batts]

1. On class jumping...it is quite amusing the lengths folks want to go to protect their class from being invaded by machines of, obvious, lesser capability.
 
 2. On rules and "seamless transition"...the IHRA does not write their rules with concerns about copying what the NHRA does, the AHDRA does not copy how the AMRA or AMA/Prostar runs their show when considering rule changes and enforcements.
 Even though, pay attention 'cause here's the kicker, they race at the same tracks. Imagine that.
 
 dad wrote:
 "..............if playing football it's not that the rules are changed from atlanta to pittsburg.it's all nfl.........or lsr,right?"
 
 wrong...it's all football...did the AFL or WFL copy the NFL rules?
 
 right...it's all LSR but it's not all SCTA
 
 How can one suggest a "seamless transition" from a venue with unlimited shutdown area and rules that do not require brakes to a venue with limited shutdown area. Do we need to hire more ambulances?
 
 3. On credibility...respect is earned not given.
 
 4. On points...to hell with 'em
 
 If what the ECTA is doing is so wrong maybe somebody should tell them folks down in Texas they got it TOTALLY screwed up.
 Maybe we just won't call them Land Speed Racers.
 whatayathink?
 
 PB
 2801

[dad land]

all good points of veiw. that said:"i'm glad to have a place to run on the east coast!" but however the rules end up...it is a fair level playing field with certification and displacement checks.fuel checks ,etc.
 that's an addition that adds credibility (IMO).points i do not have an opinion on as they hold no interest to me personally. but i love the speed and this sport!
 and yes, i love running out west on the salt!and plan on being there at every opprotunity. and plan on running on the dry lakes some day.and maybe on another continent one day! it's all lsr to me!but i'm glad to have a place this side of the salt to run.
 dad land

[k.h.]

So, should a 50cc moped jump to the 3000cc class and grab a soft record?  If my kharma is too slow to out run my dogma, can I use a turbo to boost my ego?
 
  <small>[ December 09, 2004, 04:23 PM: Message edited by: k.h. ]</small>

[narider]

Originally posted by k.h.:
  So, should a 50cc moped jump to the 3000cc class and grab a soft record?  If my kharma is too slow to out run my dogma, can I use a turbo to boost my ego?

Hell yes if he can beat the 3000cc machine that made that soft record.
 If you have a 2000-3000cc(or 100cc for that matter) machine that has allowed a 50cc moped to beat you.. then  you need to worry more about your effort then who's running where.
 TD