Rulebook Meeting

[csmutty]

For 2013 there were a few things discussed at the rulebook meeting on Saturday night.

• One thing that was brought up was the length of the GT races. The request was made to lengthen the GT races from 20 minutes to 25 minutes to get them closer to what they actually used to be. Tommy said this sounds doable, so it sounds like it has a strong possibility of happening for 2013.
  
• Another thing that was brought up was Endurance Racing. With the successes of the USCRA endurance Tommy said they are interested in maybe doing a 3 race endurance series during the 3 weekends with the most daylight. There could be less or more races depending on how it is worked out. No details have been worked out for this yet.
  What I would like to see after talking to a few people. No quick fill endurance tanks or cans. No quick change spacer kits for swapping rims.
  
• The novices that we have reeled in this year have been staying and racing. Compared to the previous year this is a large change, as persons that we sold licenses to the previous year would race 1 or 2 weekends and leave. This means the new novice program and the LRRS program in general is improving for the better! Another provision for novices was also brought up. This would be a few expert level racers mixing in with the novice practices in the morning and helping them with lines and other on track technique. It would be on a volunteer basis.
  
• Also VP fuels is not doing anything for LRRS or the racers in terms of price benefit. Right now Sunoco is the same price as VP, but if LRRS supplied Sunoco instead of VP we could get a better price on the fuel with the volume that we are purchasing. If you have no problem with switching to Sunoco or do have a problem email Tommy. He wants to hear feedback on this as he has to make this decision in the near future.
  
• There was some verbiage that was changed to make some classes clearer, like ULWSB.
  
• A request was also made to look into separating the experts and amateurs on the big infield scoreboard. It is being looked into, but the code would have to be created in order to run it.
  
• A request was also made to change the practice numbers from 1-7. This makes it much easier to run practices and creates less confusion. There is an expense associated with the scoring program code to change the practice numbers in the system, so that cost is being looked into. If it is feasible, the numbers will be changed to 1-7.
  
• The 250 class was also brought up. It will be discussed at a future date.
  
• In years past planning for the Loudon classic did not start until 3 months before the event. This year planning has already started. This year the idea is to try to attract people to the track using different techniques to try to create a show. This year they are already talking of having a concert at the speedway on Wednesday of bike week to try to get people into the speedway and hopefully get them to come back for racing Friday-Sunday. There was also talk of cole slaw or mud wrestling. Regardless, they are doing a lot to try to increase the spectator numbers for this event!

I know I am forgetting some things. This is a good gist of what was discussed. Please feel free to add to it and I will edit this post to reflect it.

[mzdagrl]

Was there any talk of actually promoting the series in any way? They have been advertising the heck out of Legends, which is unfortunate given that it is only a few hours out of a whole weekend dedicated to bikes.

[csmutty]

Was there any talk of actually promoting the series in any way? They have been advertising the heck out of Legends, which is unfortunate given that it is only a few hours out of a whole weekend dedicated to bikes.

It was brought up in a discussion also. They did put up a billboard in Sturgis during the rally there last year to promote the Classic. But what was said by Tommy is the line that 97% of the track's income is derived from Nascar, and that they have the only Speedway in 2012 that had a sell out crowd. From what I gathered what he is saying is that it is hard to get the big man, Mr. Gappens, to ok stuff like promoting bikes instead of Nascar. Not sure what the big push is with Legends.

[Slowpoke387]

How do we contact Tommy? A bunch of people want to bring back Formula 50. I know at the riders meeting they said there was limited time for suggestions...

[brady]

Not sure what the big push is with Legends.

Legends has always had close ties with Nascar. They share the same weekends at some tracks, the "spec racer" rules create parity, traffic, rubbing like Nascar and they are often co-promoted.

[wheelieman14]

"New England Legends", I believe is owned by Bruton Smith of SMI (owners of 7 or 8 NASCAR tracks) and is pushing to get the series to expand in the Northeast Region. By NHMS having both the Turn1 Legends Car Oval AND enough events for them on the Road Course, they are allowed to qualify for the Finals. Personally, as long as we still have majority (like 90%) of the available track time for our own LRRS motorcycles to use the track on our 7 week schedule, I don't mind sharing it with Legends Cars. Giving them 20 minutes of practice following the scheduled 3 hours of motorcycle practice & pushing the start of our racing by 20 minutes wasn't an issue. Having the Legends cars run at the end of scheduled motorcycle races also minimizes any change to our daily schedule.

Perhaps the Legends Cars using the Road Race Course might help to someday expand the track to 2.0 miles and give everyone a better course?

[mzdagrl]

All I am saying, is they are promoting Legends, which happens on the same weekends as LRRS, and yet, no mention of motorcycles is ever made. Of course they make no money on us, they don't bother letting anyone know we are there.

[Woodcraft]

Add on : Cheaper spectator admission - particularly on Saturday, which I guess is in the works. Also, working on a lap time / performance based advancement for Amateurs, potential restructuring of the LW/ULW/AM/EX Pracitce sessions.....and more

[JettaJayGLS]

Thanks for the update for people like myself who couldn't make it!

[Mustang]

Add on : Cheaper spectator admission - particularly on Saturday, which I guess is in the works.

Very cool!

. Also, working on a lap time / performance based advancement for Amateurs,

Don't we have this already? How would it differ (roughly speaking)?

[Kurlon]

[*]There was some verbiage that was changed to make some classes clearer, like ULWSB.

Any details on this?

[Jim]

Don't we have this already? How would it differ (roughly speaking)?

Right now, the only requirement to bump to EX is having 400 points in 12 months.
I think Eric is talking about doing a similar auto bump rule based on lap times like for the NV class.

For the AM MW, i think it should be 1:17 lap times would bump you to EX.

[Woodcraft]

Quote "Don't we have this already? How would it differ (roughly speaking)?"

No - as of right now there is not performance metric in there, only points....which I do not like very much.

My personal opinion.....points for advancement is a garbage way to know if someone is ready to be an expert. For example, you can consistently win a class with no one in it, score a million points and still be 10 seconds off the expert pace. Conversely, you can be finishing 6th in a competitive class, be running fast times, and only run 2-3 races per weekend and never get enough points to advance. Points do not give a whole lot of information, other than a rough measure of experience. I am proposing a system that uses points (only as a means to ensure that you have some experience) combined with a lap time index that is very similar to what we use for the Novices. Obviously it will be more of a matrix for the AM classes, but it will be very clear. Once you run "X" times on a certain bike, combined with "X" points, you can advance. My proposal is that once you reach the threshold you can choose to finish the year as an AM if you choose (to get championships and to go to the Race of Champions and contend for a national title), but at the start of the following season you are required to move up. This way, you HAVE to go fast to advance, and no one is forced out before they are ready just because they do a bunch of races.

For those of you who want an example - here it is. In the past three years (all this data is online), the fastest time on a 600 has been a 1:10.9. At 110%, that means that you need to be faster than a 1:17.99 to bump up, as long as you have (for example) 300 points. So, anyone in a MW or HW class that runs 1:17's would get the option to bump out that year, or will be bumped automatically the next year. This number (110%) may be adjusted per class, and the race director will have the final say, as there are always exceptions to consider both ways.

Now, keep in mind that this is not done yet, it is my personal recommendation as an official. We are going to construct a complete grid of times per class. MW/HW is easy as all the bikes are the same, and there will be one time for all. When it comes to differentiating LWSS from LWGP from LWSportsman, they will likely be a little different.

[CEO]

Quote "Don't we have this already? How would it differ (roughly speaking)?"

No - as of right now there is not performance metric in there, only points....which I do not like very much.

My personal opinion.....points for advancement is a garbage way to know if someone is ready to be an expert. For example, you can consistently win a class with no one in it, score a million points and still be 10 seconds off the expert pace. Conversely, you can be finishing 6th in a competitive class, be running fast times, and only run 2-3 races per weekend and never get enough points to advance. Points do not give a whole lot of information, other than a rough measure of experience. I am proposing a system that uses points (only as a means to ensure that you have some experience) combined with a lap time index that is very similar to what we use for the Novices. Obviously it will be more of a matrix for the AM classes, but it will be very clear. Once you run "X" times on a certain bike, combined with "X" points, you can advance. My proposal is that once you reach the threshold you can choose to finish the year as an AM if you choose (to get championships and to go to the Race of Champions and contend for a national title), but at the start of the following season you are required to move up. This way, you HAVE to go fast to advance, and no one is forced out before they are ready just because they do a bunch of races.

For those of you who want an example - here it is. In the past three years (all this data is online), the fastest time on a 600 has been a 1:10.9. At 110%, that means that you need to be faster than a 1:17.99 to bump up, as long as you have (for example) 300 points. So, anyone in a MW or HW class that runs 1:17's would get the option to bump out that year, or will be bumped automatically the next year. This number (110%) may be adjusted per class, and the race director will have the final say, as there are always exceptions to consider both ways.

Now, keep in mind that this is not done yet, it is my personal recommendation as an official. We are going to construct a complete grid of times per class. MW/HW is easy as all the bikes are the same, and there will be one time for all. When it comes to differentiating LWSS from LWGP from LWSportsman, they will likely be a little different.

I thought they were already applying the 110% rule to the bump from AM to EX?

But I do agree with what you've laid out here. I do think some further clarification is needed as well though. I'm sure you're working a series of if/then's for how this is all going to pan out but just a couple scenarios that might be worth considering.

For example, what if a guy does a lot of races so he has the points, runs very consistently in the 19s with a maybe a couple 18s in there, and throws out one hail mary lap at 17.9? Should he be allowed to bump and/or forced the next season to bump?

Or what if a guy only can make a couple race weekends and only afford to do a couple races but does consistent 17's? He should bump.

Also, what about riders on multiple bikes? Do they need to be expert pace on both bikes? For example, Shane did a 16 on his tard this year, so 110% of that is 1:23.6... that's easier for me to obtain (I did a 22.9 a couple years ago, only made one race this year on it though and only did 24's) than getting into the 17's on my r6... and I'm not fast enough to be an expert. I guess if your 110% threshold is adjusted to 107% for smaller bikes though or something like that, you could alleviate this issue partially.

[Mustang]

I thought they were already applying the 110% rule to the bump from AM to EX?
<snip> I guess if your 110% threshold is adjusted to 107% for smaller bikes though or something like that, you could alleviate this issue partially.

That's exactly how it's applied now (at least that's my interpretation of the rulebook). Riding an SV, I had to be at 107% of the fastest lap of similar bikes.

The confusion in my earlier post was that the AM-to-EX bump isn't auto. Thanks for the clarification Eric and Jim.

[Slowpoke387]

I've been saying this for years. Points mean nothing without the times. I am the classic example Eric is using. I am the 6th overall AM this yr but am a slug out there. All that those points mean is that I entered a boatload of races and spent the most cash on entries. Thats it. Hell I get lapped by AMs sometimes. It's a flawed system if I was allowed to bump right now.

Oh and if anyone who deals with rules is reading, there is a bunch of us geezers who are demanding F50 be brought back....

And how bout letting us tech a rain/B bike without charging extra? Maybe as long as its in the same class of the A bike kind of thing...

[Woodcraft]

There will alwas be the "what if" situations, and that's where the Race Director will always have the final say. However, I think that having some concrete numbers will help everyone grasp this. There is a 107% thing in there right now, but it is not followed up on actively. The new system would involve a weekly review of performances. As always, we would make adjustments to whatever we put out at first as they make sense. The main point is to bump guys, once they have a baseline of experience, strictly based on consistent track performance. The people looking at the results will be able to discern the "one time flyer" from consistent performance.

[Woodcraft]

.

Oh and if anyone who deals with rules is reading, there is a bunch of us geezers who are demanding F50 be brought back....

And how bout letting us tech a rain/B bike without charging extra? Maybe as long as its in the same class of the A bike kind of thing...

All F50 needs is entries...it was lost as a result of too few.

As for a 2nd bike....there is no issue with that as I am aware....you can tech as many bikes as you want as long as they are for the classes you entered.

[CBR929RE]

I've been saying this for years. Points mean nothing without the times. I am the classic example Eric is using. I am the 6th overall AM this yr but am a slug out there. All that those points mean is that I entered a boatload of races and spent the most cash on entries. Thats it. Hell I get lapped by AMs sometimes. It's a flawed system if I was allowed to bump right now.

Oh and if anyone who deals with rules is reading, there is a bunch of us geezers who are demanding F50 be brought back....

And how bout letting us tech a rain/B bike without charging extra? Maybe as long as its in the same class of the A bike kind of thing...

I'm right there with ya. I felt the 400 points is like buying it. We both finished top 10 overall in AM but I don't feel either of us is ready for EX.

you old geezers already have F40. we need a F30 where you have to be in your 30s to enter. give guys like me and Jim a chance at something.

teching a rain bike costs extra? that's retarded.

[Slowpoke387]

All F50 needs is entries...it was lost as a result of too few.

As for a 2nd bike....there is no issue with that as I am aware....you can tech as many bikes as you want as long as they are for the classes you entered.

Just for $h!ts n giggles, what would a feasible number of entries be? This keeps coming up in the pits for F50...

[Slowpoke387]

you old geezers already have F40. we need a F30 where you have to be in your 30s to enter. give guys like me and Jim a chance at something.

Fine, then I propose a F47 class...

[Jim]

Fine, then I propose a F47 class...

And I propose a "slower than Jim class"

[jasnmar]

Fine, then I propose a F47 class...

And I propose a "slower than Jim class"

I'm still waiting for that class that requires factory radios. Cup holders and ashtrays are optional, but do earn extra points .

[KB]

What about the get rid of the water break between race 7 an 8 for the corner workers. I go to work I bring food and water for th day they don't give me a special water break. Let's keep the racing going. They should be bringing there water and luch to work with them.

KB

[Rambunctous]

F60's in a few years. They wave the flag & you are forgotten.