No mas AMA Superstock...

[apriliaman]

it is about how much money is in the bike results are always like this.



factory team
semi factory team
performance shop team
the guy down the street team like me comes on a 30 year old pick up truck and everything i got fits on an 8ft bed,and a 8 year old bike with over 20,000 racing miles on the same engine and everything else on the bike.

[tzracer]

Well if they do decide to run USGPRU 125 as a suport class, go out and buy a 125. I don't think any factories are going to enter. Cheap class to run and more fun than you can imagine.

[Mongo]

The 250's didn't work, they won't go to 125's.

[tzracer]

The 250's didn't work, they won't go to 125's.

125s are at 2 rounds this year.

ISTR the 250s were dropped because the manufacturers did not want the class. ISTR the 250 class running for about 20 years. Not too bad for a class that didn't work.

[onedwn5up]

Celtic racing is a really bad example as Barry and Mark Rozema are anythign but new to this. Plus they have factory yamaha equipment. Their bikes are bostoms and disalvos equipment from last season with Mark doing the tuning. And Chaz comes from overseas GP racing, so again, not a good example.

>>>>>But back to the subject at hand.....Removing superstock from the lineup is a bittersweet approach to doing things. The problem with superstock is that manufactures starting cranking out limited editin production bikes so they could run upgraded equipment "legally" ala yamaha's r1 le. That was the first step in the demise of the class. And reality is, there is no cost-efficient class in racing. I don't even think the two words go together. Nothing in racing is cost efficient and hi end production bikes made it even harder. If anything, the class should have be spec'd or made ultra-conservative. It would be a better display of equipment potential to the public because a well-prepped superstock bike is still tons better than just stock.

But it raises other problems and issues as well. What is the stepping stone now to the superbike class? and how are you supposed to get a superbike license? The rules for licensing state that you need to compete on the same equipment to qualify for a superbike license. So obviously that will be revised as well. Essentially what they are doing is forcing a superstock racer to step down to supersport or FX.

Whats more useless anyway? Formula extreme or superstock? If anything they should have done away with FX but the market share of 600cc bike owners is too big. Many racers would do supersport and superstock. Now those racers are screwed. I know my plan was to do supersport and superstock. Guess thats gonna change now. And even if I can get a superbike license good luck qualifying. You have 30 rider grids in superbike. Whats going to happen in superbike with no supersport? Are there going to be full grids with 2 waves starts? Nothing sucks more than being in the 2nd wave with a national crowd so I can imagine that will be quite discouraging.

I just think Dingelman was speaking to from the hip. I don't think this is in the riders interest at all. And it certainly isn't to alleviate costs because I can't go race a 20-30K superstock bike in superbike and even expect to be remotely competitive.

If anything shoulda been dropped it shoulda been Formula Extreme. Just look at the grid and you will see that more than 50% of them are supersport bikes anyway.

[weggieman]

OK, let's remember this isn't happening over night. We're looking at '09 for the change of classes. there's a lot of stuff to work out yet and plenty of time to do it. Until more is known, don't panic.

Also, if you are an AMA pro licensed rider and have an opinion or rules proposal, get your butt on the AMA web site (riders only page) and submit it to the rules committees. That's the only sure way we know what you guys are thinking. You can talk on here or in the pits but if you make a rules proposal official on the web site we're more likely to look at it.

If you do this, be professional and accurate. If you're just blowing off steam or don't have accurate facts it won't go anywhere.

[onedwn5up]

I would love to leave comments if I had my AMA license but wait.....That was another fly-by-the-seat-of-our-pants decision to change points requirements for your pro-expert license at the end of last season. Out of no where they change the pro-expert requirement to 300 points instead of 100 points. I know its a different subject but what BS. I swear, rules are changed without anyone even thinking about the impact it makes on people that plan their lives and racing careers around these rules. I even called the pro-racing department a couple months ago to ask about this point increase for licensing and whoever was in charge that I left a voicemail for never called me back. I was heard allright. And then probably promptly deleted.

If the AMA really cared about "us riders" when it comes to making and changing rules they would have a better way of going about things. Their methods make me think of horseshoes and hand grenades.

[JBraun]

I would love to leave comments if I had my AMA license but wait.....

Am I missing something? What credentials did you give the AMA to merit a pro license?

[Mongo]

I know how long the 250's ran and why they went away.  It wasn't the manufacturers that did them in, it was boring racing and lack of fan interest that did so.  Having promoters allow the USGPRU some track time for two rounds is not even close to the AMA adding them as a class. 

[Super Dave]

Agreed, having the USGPRU in the AMA doesn't make them a class.  But it takes up space in the AMA Pro event program.  So, what is the real difference?  Certainly adds to the marketability of someone that is planning on running USGPRU at those events for exposure.


AMA rider rules proposals are limited.  I submitted proposals last year, and they were not put on the viewable site as the direction I had with the rules "The proposal that you submitted is a operational/procedure type of proposal,  The web site is intended for Technical rules that pertain to the motorcycle.  All operational proposals that I receive will be passed on the senior staff for consideration."  I wanted a restriction on testing at tracks that are on the schedule similar to other professional racing organizations.  Additionally, I felt that testing should only be allowed on available equipment.  One can agree or disagree with this.  However, I do feel that testing on new bikes in October that aren't even seen in dealerships until January/February don't help AMA event day racing.

Which brings us back to Celtic Racing.  I don't believe they were are the Daytona tire test doing work like some of the other teams and riders.  Nor do I believe they were offered that opportunity.  Chaz is an excellent rider, period.  In the US, he has no factory team that he's signed with.  Yes, the bike he rode was former factory equipment, but give that bike to a rider further down on the qualifying grid and their result would not have been as good as his even with their experience at Daytona.

[G 97]

What are the six foot one, 205 pounders like me suppose to do now.   

[onedwn5up]

Am I missing something? What credentials did you give the AMA to merit a pro license?

I didn't say anything about providing credentials. What I said was that they decided to change the points requirement to get your pro-expert license without taking current racers working towards that license into consideration. 100 points is not a lot and for some can be attained in the first part of the season so that they can hit an AMA round to attempt to qualify in the latter half. My personal plans were to finish out last season as an AM with my titles since that was my first full season of racing and I wanted to accomplish something. My plans for this season were to build my 100 points as fast as possible and get out there to start trying to qualify for supersport and formula extreme. But their changing the points requirement screwed not only me who was basing their plans on the current rules, but also those that were eligible last season with over 100 points but less than 300. I have a few friends that have over 100 points and were planning on trying to qualify for the supersport race in daytona but couldn't because of the point bump with no notification.

We all know how short lived careers can be in this sport, if by the way of finances and not even ability. This rule change sets me back another season unless I am out there every single weekend in the top 10. But last seasons budget isn't the same as this seasons so my chances of making an AMA round are not that great simply based on being able to get to the track that much. And at 29 years old I'm not getting any younger and its hard enough racing against 16 year olds with no mortgage or adult responsibility. I want to get out there while I can and have the ability, ya know? I thought 100 points making the cut-off was good enough. Apparently the officials at hand didn't think so.

I just don't get the rational for the point requirement change. It's like they are trying to keep the local guys or the guys that can only do a handful of rounds out of the picture. That just hurts the local scene and keeps local supporters from showing up at ama race days. 100 expert class points is a pretty significant showing of ability. And if you can make the qualifying grid why isn't that good enough? Why the points increase to 300? It is just making it more difficult for the people that already have planned their lives around this rule. And it screws those people that were previosly eligible under the 100 point rule who don't have 300.

If I would have known this rule was going to come to fruition at the end of the season I would have gotten out of the am class as fast as possible and made enough points last year to already have my AMA license in my hand. But no, they change a major rule with no notification to the racing community and screwed up a whole bunch of people. If I knew this rule was coming in october I would changed my license status last spring to be eligible before the end of the season. I can't help but feeling shafted here.

The same people that are supposedly "helping" us racers are really hurting us by changing rules in closed door meetings with no survey of the current racers and what their feelings are on the change. It is their series and they can make the rules but we are the ones spending god-awful amounts of money to make it to the track each weekend to pay their entry and licensing fees. At least they could do is survey us or provide ample notification of a rule change.

I know this is off topic from the superstock class elimination but it is just another example how we get impacted by rule changes, for better or for worse.