SD's new AM/EX idea...

[tomer]

i do agree that we need more riders, growth is very important on the other hand if the new riders dont feel safe they will not come back and i have seen many riders not come back because of that. i do think safety is very important and i really do believe that some very few riders have a switch that turns off when they put helmets on, and thats when the right elbow hits the pavement as soon as the green flag is up with complete disregard to safety. now dont get me wrong i am not the slowest rider out there but not the fastest one, all im saying is that most of us that work the 60 hr. weeks to be able to race on the weekends and like to bring the bike home still in one piece need to have a safer track. if you put less riders in the front , make it a thiner grid, than turn one will be safer, or if we can get the corner workers to use the blue flag correctlly it will get safer (if we dont just ignore it),we as riders need to make the change first. i was at barber and personally walked around the pit area to get people to be more involved in what it is we riders want out of ccs but no one gave me an answer as to how can we change this for the better, and im talking racing as a whole not just grids, or safty, or different classes. we need to write to ccs (kevin elliot) and give them/him solutions on what it is we want changed and HOW. i have spoke with many officials over the years and became close friends with some, they all tell me the same thing write to kevin he really want to help us riders since he is one himself.

[tomdavid]

i do agree that we need more riders, growth is very important .

Very interesting idea. Growth, or lack there of is what has nearly killed Dirt Track racing. It stopped growing from the bottom up and anyone could see that coming as long ago as 1980. Win a big time major mile event and maybe make @ $ 4,000 ( that is excepting Dave Despains Springfield deal ). Where in the early 70s there would be maybe 130 + riders show up to qualify for a Championship event, Now they are lucky to get a full field of 48.


Absolutely it is the newer riders that will help the sport grow.  

[Super Dave]

Win a big time major mile event and maybe make @ $ 4,000 ( that is excepting Dave Despains Springfield deal ). Where in the early 70s there would be maybe 130 + riders show up to qualify for a Championship event, Now they are lucky to get a full field of 48.

In 2003, Mladin's take for the AMA Superbike win was a little over $4000, on a $250,000 machine.  A week later, Larry Denning took home $8000 in Yamaha contingency money at Blackhawk Farms for winning four CCS races.

In 1994, I qualified for the AMA 600 Supersport race.  There were 105 qualifiers for 80 positions.  If they bring 56 to the grid at Daytona, I'd be surprised.

AMA Pro racing is on it's own.  They have their own marketing, etc.  and they have WERA now.  CCS needs to do its own thing.

[Super Dave]

Tomer, again I'll say that there is no way you can regulate turn one unless you send riders off one at a time for timed laps only.  Go to Loudon on a Suzuki Cup weekend and put Jeff Wood at the back...he'll make it to the front or at least very close.  That's road racing.

Please re read my whole post.  This is about licensing.

Recognize that if you, personally, have a problem with turn one and the fanatical rush forward, mabye my top tiered class is not for you.  Something more sportsman related may be best for you where riders race to have fun and improve.  You can race for all the points you want, you can have a couple of money races, but the brunt of it would be for the top class.

A REAL amateur class would be available.  A guy gets going pretty good in the amateur class?  Well, he isn't getting points, contingency, or any money in that class there...time to move to the next tier.  

Any questions?

[tomer]

so sorry, maybe i didnt get my point across as will as i should have. tiered classes good idea, and maybe i will go to what ever class, but thats not the point im trying to to make, all of you have ideas and like my ideas some will work some will not but untill we write to ccs(kevin), they will not know how to fix the problems we are having on the track.

[Super Dave]

all of you have ideas and like my ideas some will work some will not but untill we write to ccs(kevin), they will not know how to fix the problems we are having on the track.

Sorry you didn't follow this on a prior thread.

Yeah, it needs to be written to KE.

But until something I take this up a bit, refine it and all, writing down a half-a$$ed idea doesn't work.  That's what this thread is all about...establishing an idea, refining the concept, and then trying to put it together in a form that might be usable for CCS.  

[r6_philly]

we had an at length talk about this last year as I recall. I would endorse this tired system as I thought the amatuer class needs to be changed and give the real new riders a place to start.

Offer the most classes in the middle class where most people will fit in. Offer less classes for the beginner, and less/longer classes for pro's.

But the money has to be right for CCS. And the contingency sponsors has to go for it. I am not sure how the companies will like classes they cannot offer contingencies in. New riders are most likely to buy one product over another. By the time you become an Expert, you become molded into your own thinking and opinions when it comes to products. You know what works for you and what not, and contingency will less likely to influence you to buy one product over another (except bikes). New riders will get excited about the $25 vortex cert, where as I don't really care anymore. So would the sponsors go for a no-point, no money, no-contingency amatuer status?

the idea will probably work better for racers. I believe so, and if I were to implement it, I may be able to make it work overall. But does it make enough business sense for CCS to change to this? Are they even able to take on a change with a scope as deep as this (regardless of whether they like the idea or not).

I work in the education industry, have  for a long time including consulting to schools/colleges. I see that the best way to improve the overall performance/level of a school is to improve students. Not the buildings, equiptment, and certainly not the rules.

If racing is to be safer, then the racers has to be of a higher caliber. They need to be educated more and better in how to race, mentally and physically. Know how to ride better. Know how to make better decisions. Know when NOT to do certain things. Rules and flags and etc are not the ultimate answer to safer racing. no matter what we put in place, it is up to the head in that helmet who ultimately decide what to do in any situation. If they can't process the information input better, they will just ignore the rules and guidelines and the flags.

How do we raise the level of racers? Limit participation in major races/classes until they are more qualified to race. So a 3 tier system with a limited entry tier is great. They should not be allowed to race in a money race, race in a highly contended race, race where they can easily go over their head, until they are ready.

But would CCS turn away more immediate income (from the fledging new amateurs) for better/safer racing?

If I have an org that was set up to make the profit margin foremost, I certainly wouldn't.

[K3 Chris Onwiler]

I certainly know where I would fall in a three tiered system.
I got pretty good as an amateur, but the jump to expert just kicked me in the sack!  At 41 years old and on a budget, I find myself racing against guys wjo have done AMA and FUSA pro events regularly.  These guys put on a new tire for every race, and they ride only the best of equipment.  In both money and talent, they are out of my league.
So where does a guy go if he's not competitive as an expert and can no longer be an amateur?  If you're me, you ride around at the back of the expert pack and hate it.  Most guys just quit.  
I like to RACE people.  But I can't hang with Perk, Ortega, Janich, SD, Tez, ect.  Most other guys with my problem have quit, so I have no one to race with.  How boring to take the green and watch the field leave, only to circle around alone for 8 laps.  That's not racing.
Excuses?  I've got 'em!  I don't have the budget to be a competitive expert.  I haven't got the talent, either.  My average is 6 to 8 seconds off the lap record wherever I go.  
My teammate once suggested that if he and I had new bikes, plenty of spares, fresh tires, race fuel and the budget to do every test day and then ten races a weekend, that we could ride and spend until we were as fast as the best experts.  He may be right.  But since we don't have the money, it's a moot point.  In six years, I've seen many guys more talented than me graduate to expert, get outspent to death, and then just quit.  As an example, Tez was very close to being out of the game when his Jordan deal came through.  This guy can qualify for AMA, but he was just too broke to continue on his own.
The three tiered system could give slower experts like me a reason to stay and keep spending money.  If Clearchannel really is all about the money, then this is a very good idea for both us and them.
Mongo had actually suggested last year that guys like me should just quit and leave it to the "Real" racers.  Problem is that thwere are way more of us than pros.  Drive out all the half-fast guys and CCS won't be able to make track rental.

[Woofentino Pugrossi]

How boring to take the green and watch the field leave, only to circle around alone for 8 laps.  That's not racing.

I still have fun. ;D


But you are right K3, if you are on a limited budget, you are basically screwed. Not all of us can afford to buy new bikes and race them right off the showroom floor. My F2 has been a racebike since 1994. I;m currently making a racebike out of my 97 YZF750R and that bike was considered outdated in 96. Its 106rwhp isnt a match for a 04 GSXR750's 120+rwhp, nor is it as light, but its a bike I love riding. When its done, it may not be the fastest and flashiest high tech bike, but it will be enough to give Kim fits. ;D ;D ;D

[Super Dave]

...suggested last year that guys like me should just quit and leave it to the "Real" racers.  Problem is that thwere are way more of us than pros.  Drive out all the half-fast guys and CCS won't be able to make track rental.

I agree.

I've seen good friends and friends of friends leave because they didn't have a "place".  Even if they were just entering a race or two, it still would have added to the field.

I think the double edged problem is that they system only continues to look for ways to farm new racers because they know that the "average" racer only lasts about 2.5 years or so.

When I started Visionsports, I wanted to try to give racers some tools that would keep them in longer than that.  Or maybe they would learn enough to stay involved in another kind of way.

Our Midwest race director, Bill, asked me early on this race weekend what I though about fewer races and making them longer....
 ;D  Hey, I was on a roll...I gave him a copy of this thread...so, we have an opportunity to work on some ideas.



On another note...

Let's look at what I think the reality is for Clear Channel Entertainment.

CCS is something that makes a bit more money that keeping the money in the bank.  So, they are not going to spend money on advertising, etc.  Let's just get that up front.

To them, this IS only sportsman type racing where everything is paid by the racers.  I've always contested that the only way to get spectators would be for racers to promote themselves anyway.  If you were operating your "race team" like a business, you'd want people coming to see you anyway.

So, if we could change some of the structure of the racing, it might be beneficial to us, for fun and for $$.  Just by chance it might attract someone to see it.

I don't see anywhere in this thread where I asked CCE to spend money on advertising....they can continue doing the things they do with fliers, etc...that would be great.

[Bernie]

K3, I'm in the same boat.  I share your thoughts and feelings pretty much to a T.  Luckily, I have been able to have some great races with guys for, uh, 15th place.  If you are ever in the Mid-Atlantic region, I think we'd be able to give each other a wicked dice for first place in the last third of the field!!

[GSXR RACER MIKE]

     I am much in the same situation as K3 since I came back after my 2 year break, I am not spending the necessary time, involvement, and money to get back up front.

     An observation I have made is that there has been a very noticable change to regional racing since I started in '96. Those 1st 4 years of racing were good for me and I was able to run in the top 5 often and in the top 10 at almost every event as an expert. I was running 6 classes per event back then, riding a 750, and could usually run competatively on a pair of tires for 1 1/2 to 2 events depending on the tracks.

     After returning to racing I found that things had changed quite a bit, ultimately having the bar raised to a whole new level. Costs for entrys, gate fees, travel costs, and hotels had all gone up quite a bit. What I found was wide spread use of high dollar fuels, multiple sets of wheels per bike, numerous racers running lots of classes per event on different late model bikes, and tires being used for only 1 to 3 classes by many of the leaders in the MW / HW / UL classes. That tire cost alone has risen dramatically due to all the new bikes having so much more horsepower which eats tires quickly. Another thing I have noticed is the 'lines' that numerous leaders are running currently which utilizes much less flowing lines around the track and is much harder on the tires, but is ultimately faster. I agree that set-up is a major factor in going fast, but take away fresh rubber and that set-up is only going to do so much.

     This is where I believe that people like K3 and myself have been kind of left behind in the leaders dust. With a constantly rotating field of some new experts every year willing to spend horendous amounts of money on the previously mentioned items it keeps the expense bar raised to that level, yet doesn't have the return available to the majority of the racers to stay competative. Ultimately you have to spend all that money also in order to get close to running up at the front before you will ever see any kind of return, kind of a double edge sword. I am running a bike that is down a minimum of 20 horsepower from the other MW bikes, I'm still running tires that I ran at the R.O.C. last fall, and I weigh in at 230 lbs! (I'm running about 12-15% off the pace of the leaders with that combination) For me I am just trying to stay in the sport while I build back-up financially, but realistically I know I couldn't run in the front 1/2 of the pack in a MW race with that combination.

     A 3 tier system would probably help to relieve some of this, but I would be willing to bet that their would still be outragous spending even in the middle level. I don't know a way around this other than eliminating tire contingency at that level, but that's not practicle. :-/