Should CCS grid by points?

[rwracer]

Absolutely terrific point but I think you were looking for this thread:
http://www.ccsforum.com/index.php/topic,14575.0.html

Hello Super Dave,

in response to your comment of fewer races/more purses, are you willing to pay $200 per class to race? Right now, to break even on a typical Blackhawk event, to have just SuperSport and GP Classes, that would be your entry fee to order to offer $1000 purse in every class and pay the overhead for staff, track rent, insurance, trophies...etc. with just those 16 classes. (And that is only if the entry numbers remained the same, any drop and the fee would be higher.)

How many are willing to pay that price? (it would also get you qualifying races on Saturday, finals on Sunday.)

[Super Dave]

I would be interested in that.  I'm sure not everyone would.  In that spirit, I feel like having a few more purse paying events during a CCS regional weekend would be good for those that invest the time in coming to more events.

Currently, we have Unlimited GP.  We used to have Sportbike, which I thought should have just been placed into Middleweight Supersport.  Thunderbike would be another great canidate for a purse class.

I don't have perfect answers myself, Kevin.  I wish I did, 'cause I'd like to see the local stuff remain strong, if not be stronger.

If we wanna talk Blackhawk...

I know the entries are decent there, and that's important for the region.  But we have no recognition with any press there.  Now that we're past the CCS of Roger, the CCS of CCE, can we have someone that writes about what happens?  I know I get the opportunity to read what Lisa Theobald writes about stuff in the SE, and the WSMC stuff gets written about quite often.  Yeah, I'll tell riders that they should invest in doing their own press releases, but anything that is written about what happens at Blackhawk is important to the riders and their sponsors, no matter how minor they are.  But this is all a separate issue.

Back to the task at hand...

I would like to see grids based on points for pre-entered riders.  I think Brian Hall forwarded the idea of setting up the first race by order of entry, but I would say by points from the previous season.  I don't have a great idea of how to integrate the new experts that have no expert points or standing into the new season, but that could be figured out.

[RC423]

Grid at least the top 10 in a class by points standings...if they pre-reg

if they post reg then they're thrown in the mix with everyone else. 

Just my $.02 but the current system of gridding sucks imo - I'm not proposing anything really I just like the way I've seen it done other places.....

[StuartV666]

I started the '02 season racing exclusively WERA. Gridding by points ended up being the main reason I switched to CCS mid-season. I went to every race in my region, from the beginning of the season, and after about 4 rounds, still didn't even have any points! I started out gridded way back and just went further as the season progressed. And I don't think it was because I was slow. I switched to CCS and immediately started finishing consistently in the top 3, and won several regional championships the next season.

Gridding by points gives TOO much advantage to the series regulars. A fast guy who shows up for one race all year should have equal opportunity to win as a series regular. The current system of gridding by order of entry is not ideal, but it comes much closer to realizing that goal than gridding by points.

The fact is, people keep whining about not being able to afford to pre-enter for the whole season at the beginning of the year, and using that as justification for changing to gridding by points. But, my experience is that, if you just pre-enter about a month before each race, you will pretty much always have a grid spot on the first 3 rows or so. And I think that is MORE than good enough. At least, it's way better than giving series regulars a big (unfair) advantage over the occasional racer who is still fast.

[StuartV666]

All that said, I think lap times (I didn't say qualifying) should determine grids. Everybody out there has a transponder. All the lap times are recorded, for the whole weekend. So, why not just take each rider's best time prior to the race and use that to determine his spot on the grid?

What are the potential downsides that people are going to immediately whine about?

- You can't keep track of which lap times go with which bikes for guys with multiple bikes. And it's not fair to grid somebody in a 600 Supersport race based on their laptimes on their 1000 Superbike.

Response: Who cares? If somebody is fast on their 1000, they're probably going to be nearly as fast on their 600. And the point of this way of gridding is to get the fast guys up front. The grid order isn't deciding the final results of the race. It doesn't have to be absolutely perfect. Otherwise, we wouldn't need to run the race at all. If a guy ends up on the front row because he was gridded based on his 1000 times, when he would have been gridded on the 2nd row, if he was gridded based on his 600 times, well, okay. That's better than gridding him in the last row because he post-entered, or because it's his only CCS race of the season and he has no points. The point is to get the grid in some reasonable semblance of order from fastest to slowest. That is both SAFER and more fair.

- A guy who is racing an EX500 and a 1000 shouldn't be gridded for his 500 race based on his 1000 times. That is too much of an advantage.

Response: I agree. Practice is broken up into groups based on bike size. Bikes of comparable speed are out on the track together. I think lap times for each rider should be tracked by what group he was practicing in. The time used for determing grid spots would be the best time in the practice group applicable to that class. I.e. his grids for his races on his 1000 would be based on his best time from the 1000cc practice sessions. Grids for his 500 races would be based on his best time from the Lightweights practice sessions.

- It would be dangerous to have everybody out there thinking they are "trying to qualify" all the time.

Response: I don't know about you, but all my racer friends always go out for practice trying to turn the best times that they can. I don't see how this would make any difference to anybody. If there were only certain sessions that counted, then yes, I could see some people making a special effort in those sessions. But, when every lap of every session is recorded and counts, then no lap of any session is "special".

- What happens when there's a malfunction and you end up with no lap times from practice for a particular rider (or maybe even all the riders)?

Response: For all the entries without a logged practice time that applies to a class he or she is entered in, grid by order of entry. If there's a total failure and nobody has any lap times, everbody is gridded by order of entry.

Also, everybody should keep in mind that there is business reason for CCS to keep things as they are. It gets more money into CCS' hands and sooner. There ARE people who will send in a bunch of entries really early, just to secure those good grid positions. That money is interest earned for CCS.

Plus, I suspect that they get more entries than they might otherwise by virtue of people who enter early and then later can't make it. Or maybe it's a case where they entered early and then stuff happens later where, if they weren't already entered, they wouldn't enter at all. But since the entry is already paid for, they go ahead and go to the race.

Not to mention the people who only do one or two races a year who wouldn't bother entering at all if they knew they were going to be gridded at the back because they have no points.

Any way you slice it, gridding by order of entry is more of a money-maker for CCS than gridding by points would be. My proposal above somewhat preserves this advantage for CCS.

[Woofentino Pugrossi]

As I said a couple years ago. Best way. IMO would be 1st 2 rows by points for the region and the rest by entry as usual.

But theres been posts on this before saying they should have qualifying friday. Well alot of people have to work fridays and cant get off work. Then you get the people saying "too bad then". Well guess there will be alot less racers then. Fees then go up.

Then the make satuday qualifying and race sunday. SAme thing. What about people who can only get sat or sunday off?

Then theres the less classes. As Kevin said, fees are gonna go up since more people will probably drop out then.  CCS is CHEAP compared to other racing. IF this got to the point racing bikes costed close to what it was when I raced cars, then I'd just would had went back to racing cars.

Isnt any change thats gonna please everyone but for the majority its better. And as Dave said in other topics, most people only stay 2-3 yrs before quitting anyways.

[Super Dave]

At least, it's way better than giving series regulars a big (unfair) advantage over the occasional racer who is still fast.

If anyone should be rewarded, it NEEDS to be the regulars, as they finance CCS.

Any way you slice it, gridding by order of entry is more of a money-maker for CCS than gridding by points would be.

And there would still be the ability for CCS to continue making money through preentries for grids based on pre entries.


Simple basis for better sportsman type racing is this, my point of view:  keep the organization financed and reward those that commit to showing up.  Qualifying for certain races is good and adds to the show, but it would be cumbersome to do it for all twelve hundred classes.

[TommyG]

I`ve read some interesting points from several different people. Some I hadn`t even considered. Some are completely stupid. Without getting into my opinion on who`s totally f-ing stupid I`ll place my vote for whatever financially benefits CCS. I`m gonna go out on a limb and guess that`s probably the current system. There are rumors of too many weekends running at low/no profits right now for ccs to make a change without careful examination of the bottom line. I believe most racers think all racing organizations/promoters are rolling in the cash. Some are.......some are not. Better profits/better staffing/better customer service = a better racing experience.       

[Racingxtc7]

Racing organizations maintain their operations through racers continually entering races. 

This is true BUT only because raceroad organazation have grown custom to putting ALL financial burden on the racers. Ever notice that at every other type of sporting event has advertisements of all shapes and sizing. CCS could sent out a promoter to sell the idea of advertising banners for around the race track, stickers and whatever else they can think of. There's a good chance that there is one RV dealership , one Trailer dealership, one Motocycle dealer, one Truck Accessory shop, one whatever local shop near each raceway that would be willing to pay for advertisement and/or even setup a booth.

This new revenue could be the purse money, used to reduse entry fees or whatever.

GRIDDING- I like the idea of gridding based on lap times from practise. If someone is racing both a 500cc and a 1000cc bike, there laps times from the 500 will come from the lightweight practise while there lap times from the 1000 will come from there unlimited practise. Its a little more work and you'd probably not want the last prastice group be the first race, not that any of us would want that anyway.

NEW CLASSES- One class I really belive should start up again is the 250GP! There has been atless FOUR 250gp bikes at every CCS weekend(midwest) which is more than can be said for the ultra lightweight class. Plus, the class will grow quickly because some many people have them but refuse to race with CCS because to the lack of the class so they drive farther to go do an ahrma or wera event. On top of that there's people like myself that would love to race a 250gp bike but doesn't buy one because of the lack of the class.

Having the 25min GT races is great because is something different.
F40 races, you guys rock! It just as fast as the normal races.

[ahastings]

Looking at the poll it is currently about 80% for gridding by points in some way and only 20% keeping the same system. CCS are you reading this? If a system is used that more riders prefer it will increase participation.

[Super Dave]

I'll agree with Tommy that it's important for CCS to be healthy. 

I also feel that riders that race regularly help keep CCS healthy.  Keep them happier, and maybe they will decide to stay around longer than two or three years and enter five races rather than two.

[ahastings]

I started the '02 season racing exclusively WERA. Gridding by points ended up being the main reason I switched to CCS mid-season. I went to every race in my region, from the beginning of the season, and after about 4 rounds, still didn't even have any points! I started out gridded way back and just went further as the season progressed. And I don't think it was because I was slow. I switched to CCS and immediately started finishing consistently in the top 3, and won several regional championships the next season.

First of all WERA only gives points back to 15th where CCS gives points back to around 25th or so. If you can't get to the top 25 or even the top 15 by the end of the race before you have points then you probably shouldn't be gridded up front anyway just because you got your pre-entry in early. I find it hard to believe that if you were fast enough to finish top 3 that you couldn't even crack the top 15 even if you were in the back of a 40+ grid.