Qualifying

[motomadness]

It may not be obvious from most of the responses, but the bulk of the fields don't get any contingency, so for many this argument doesn't even apply.  Although most do strive to achieve better results, it takes time to get there.  This is my 4th season and I have never collected contingency, but I finished 4th in the LWGP championship and my laptimes aare continuously getting better.  

At this point, I know where I want to compete, expert/pro.  I am learning a pace that will allow me to improve every weekend, so maybe I will be a top 5-8 competitor soon.

I think many of the things we have proposed are good for CCS in general and bad for some competitors in others.  But it would become a system of it's own, where racers truly rise up through the ranks.  If you want contingency, race at a level that allows it.  If you just want wood, which is what most 4th and 5th place finisher get anyway, stay an amatuer.  

Please don't be offended, but a racing system of advancement shouldn't be based on a lazy few.  It should have some level of integrity that says, this racer is qualified, not by points, but by achievement.  Most FIM licenses aren't granted unless you have had a National Championship of some sort at least at the AMA level.  What does that tell you about the expectations of the classes?

If we check ourselves, we may find that we are better at this sport than we give ourselves credit for.

[OmniGLH]

I am one of the people who probably belonged in expert, but chose to stay Am for a few rounds.

25% of the reason - the contingency.  Since I was fast enough to be in contention for a win, it almost felt silly go throw away the potential to make back several hundred bucks a weekend.  $180/win for two GT races (GTO, GTU), $70 in Michelin money, plus whatever else I'd collect from VP, Hotbodies, etc.  Hell if I played my cards right, I could MAKE money at it, running as an Am.

The remaining 75% - I only raced 2.5 weekends in 2002 (my first weekend, I ran ONE class... hence the ".5")  My first weekend in 2003 I crashed in morning practice, breaking my shoulder.  I eventually ran 2 weekends in 2003 - Barber in August and Daytona ROC.  Starting off the 2004 season, I knew I wanted to go expert mid-year.  I just wanted to get myself back in the game a bit.  Re-acquaint myself with riding and racing.  

Had there not been ANY Am contingency, I still probably would've run Am for a few rounds this year.  Maybe just not as many.  The contingency made it MUCH easier to not rush up to expert.

Now that the season is 1/2 over, and I STILL have not seen any of my Michelin contingency yet (should be close to $600 by now) I realized that it was the contingency keeping me there.  I wanted to go faster, get better, go beat the guys that everyone looks up to at a MW regional event... Hall, Janisch, Rosno, Purk, Tez, etc.  Rather than sit around and wait for money that, my luck, won't show up until December, I decided to say screw it and bump up.

And I'm glad I did.  Expert has been good for ~2 seconds.  I should've moved up sooner.  I am learning a tremendous amount each time I set foot on the track with the rest of the white plate guys.  I can't wait for Barber - I want to hit the FUSA classes and see what I can do.  With any luck - I will have my AMA license in time to run at least a partial season next year.  I don't expect to be the next Ben Spies, or be the next Yamaha factory guy.  But I have the desire to always improve, always do better.  Can't do that unless I continuously look to race against faster guys.

My vote, based on the current class setup?  Drop Am contingency.  OR lower it considerably.  Michelin drops to $20/win from $70.  Then crank the expert stuff up.  Give the Ams a little something to show the appreciation for using the product - but not enough to keep them staying Am longer than they should be.

Or - roll with a class setup like SD has proposed.  Dave - you have email.

Jim

[motomadness]

It's getting pretty bright in this area of the www.

 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)

[OmniGLH]

Please don't be offended, but a racing system of advancement shouldn't be based on a lazy few.  It should have some level of integrity that says, this racer is qualified, not by points, but by achievement.

Agreed - my feelings exactly.  

[Super Dave]

Jim, Sean...

Recognize that neither of you would have been in my first tier classification that has no contingency.  You would have both been in the second one with contingency and some purse money.  So, you would have been racing with some pretty fast company, but I wouldn't see myself in that classification...I'd be looking for the money classes.

[4and6Shawn]

I have to admit i didn't read every post on here.I was at Gingerman this past weekend. The grids didn't seem very large to me , my impression of what i witnessed was that there were really no experts out there.If you take away Brian Hall,Larry Denning ,Joe Gill, Taylor Knapp ande Jesse Janisch .
Joe gill won one race cruising around do hi 25's fell down with about a 12 sec lead in the last corner,picked up the bike, at about the 4th lap of 8, was about 12 sec behind then , passed the leaders and won by over 6 secs. His fastest lap was a 24.5 after the crash.Maybe some of the faster experts were not in attendance? When i think back to the mid 90's there were 12 guys that could run near the front and be maybe a sec only off the pace.The riders I mentioned earlier could all do 24's and with the exception of Knapp and Hall did 23's.In my opinion they are moving riders up to soon. I think we need a class structure like Loudon where there is a junior class.  Jim

[motomadness]

I'm for the change, and understand I still may not qualify, but if I petitioned to be moved up, unheard of I know, then that is my choice.  That's the essence of an advancement system.

Maybe this should only be done on an experimental basis at tracks that have track championships, like Blackhawk and Loudon.  These track generally have enormous attendance, and could probably survive the class shuffling without a lot of problems, Although, a weekend in which attendance is light might make experiementing much simplier.

[r1owner]

I like the idea of a three tier class structure a lot!  

Maybe I missed this in some of the earlier posts, but would the first and second levels race a 2 wave race as is sometimes done with expert and ams now?  If not, how could you get all three classes run in a weekend?

Also, is there any way to put this proposal in front of CCS and get a vote on it?

[motomadness]

Again, I say we proactively create (write and pay for) our own mailer, get it to CCS, then have them mail it to the membership.  We can get the members opinion and make CCS aware of what we are suggesting.

At the Mid-Ohio AMA race, I spent some time talking to Kenny Abbott.  Just from talking to him, I think I am beginning to understand the madness of his job within CCS and CCE.  He is very enthusiastic about his job, but he gets stifled by upper management, as we all do.  However, I think if the membership were to be proactive in planning and cultivating new ideas for how to develop CCS, with reasonable lead time, then we could off load most of the work from the CCS staff, which might make things happen for us.

[cstem]

I think there is no reason you cannot havea competitive amatuer class. Contingency is not the answer here.  The answer is quite obvious- as an amatuer spend less money on brand new bikes, high tech paint jobs,  a 25 foot plus race trailer, the trcuk necessary to haul that beast, race gas and slick tires.  

Spend more money on track days, instruction from schools, better handling components on the bike, and pre-entries!

The reason a racer usually only lasts 3 years is due to overabundant enthusiasm.  I see way too many amatuers (read most) who are spending way to much money to go slow, crash their brains out and destroy equipment that is not even paid for.  The riders I see who have been doing this for 5+ years started out kinda slow, in a peice of crap pickup, using second hand bikes (even third and fourth hand FZR's) and slowly and methodically grew within the sport.  Not all of these riders are super duper fast- but they compete every time they are out on the track and do it well.  More amatuers would be able to move to expert if they showed better judgement in the first year or two of racing.  There is absolutley no reason for an amatuer to rack up $25K on the credit cards in one season of racing!  It happened to my best friend and 6 years later of no racing he has paid it off. Three classes just makes smaller classes.  Combining level one and two on the grid then racing level three seperately still makes for a few extra races by the end of the weekend.  It is hard enough to get what we have now.  I bleieve you all when you say there is a problem.  If there is not a problem we have no reason to strive to be better- but I really don't think making three rider classifications or shelling out a bunch of cash to amatuers is the way.  

[cstem]

I thought about this and tell me what you all think of this.  Instead of a third rider classification, what about a 'Threshold' class.  A class where the truly uninitiated racer, or the guy who just has progressed as far as they will, can race.  Maybe hold it twice in one weekend scoring it like outdoor motocross on the two finishes.  The new rider gets three weekends in this class.  If they are ready to move up sooner- they may.  They may not race any other class during the weekends they are in the 'Threshhold" class.  Once they have moved out of threshold racing- they can only go back if allowed by the race director of the region and only due to safety concerns for the racers.  No contingency for this class.  Maybe set a minimum time and once met- auto move up to amatuer.  This way you do not pollute the amatuer ranks where true racecraft is learned with guys that are not ready and could pose a danger to others.  I also believe if contingency is given for amatuers, that any amatuer lapping in the same time (now that we have transponders) as the top 75% of experts consistently gets bumped- no whining, no ?'s , no sandbagging.  This frees up contingency gfor true learning amatuers.  Just an idea of course.

[cardzilla]

Ok, I know I started this thread with the qualifying question, but I think S. Dave has some excellent points that I would like to add to / touch on.
First, let me say that the am/ex question also boils down to desire or pride, I was informed upon my return from about ten years off that I would have to do rider school and return as an amatuer.  Not happy, I decided to buckle down and ended up turning 16's @RRR in rider school, earning my white plates back before any racing.  Some people like challenge, some don't, I was just afraid (no offense) to be in the back of a pack of yellow plates.
To the new organization point, I think the 3 tier idea is good, but I think we all need to concentrate on an idea that has been kicked about in all forms of European bike racing and that is "owner/operator".  A race organization owned, managed, operated by racers.  A 100% return to the people who deserve it, the riders !  Who better to market to spectators?  Who better to make decisions on purse structure?
You can't tell me that if an organization like this existed and was properly marketed that we couldn't pull in a few thousand spectators per event... that is at least an extra 20K to divy up among the racers.  I honestly believe that if this existed, you could be in the black if you finished top 5 every event.  I know the logistics are daunting, but I know some very smart racers (myself included :) ) who could do it.

Any takers?