Generic Chit Chat with WeelNut
03-07-2004, 02:42 PM
#31
I think we all need to appreciate that things are changing in our hobby and that commercial interests are becoming more dominant, particularly with regard to big races... and race series.
I don't think this is a bad thing... on the contrary. If a commerical minded person or company wants to throw some money into staging a big race to gain some sort of commercial advantage, then good luck to them. This is what sponsorship is about... commercial return. NOT to give the sponsor a warm fuzzy feeling inside.
And what does this have to do with the Winter Nats? As major sponsor, you would expect to have a say in the structure and rules of the event and clearly these will be tailored so as to provide some sort of benefit to the sponsor... be it generating increased awareness of a particular product, brand or whatever.
Fundamentally, this is how sponsorship works. As racers, we have the choice of whether to race or not. On the extreme side, if we all chose not to race, then the sponsor would pull out and there would be no Winter Nats. Conversely, if we support the race, it may attract a greater level of sponsorship in future, enabling it to grow into a bigger and better event.
Consider this... I bet that no-one could purchase a VB at the GP this weekend due to Foster's sponsorship. Punters make the choice whether they want to drink Foster's or do without. Same deal for us here. Except I'd rather drink nothing than Foster's, so maybe a bad example!
Scotty P
I don't think this is a bad thing... on the contrary. If a commerical minded person or company wants to throw some money into staging a big race to gain some sort of commercial advantage, then good luck to them. This is what sponsorship is about... commercial return. NOT to give the sponsor a warm fuzzy feeling inside.
And what does this have to do with the Winter Nats? As major sponsor, you would expect to have a say in the structure and rules of the event and clearly these will be tailored so as to provide some sort of benefit to the sponsor... be it generating increased awareness of a particular product, brand or whatever.
Fundamentally, this is how sponsorship works. As racers, we have the choice of whether to race or not. On the extreme side, if we all chose not to race, then the sponsor would pull out and there would be no Winter Nats. Conversely, if we support the race, it may attract a greater level of sponsorship in future, enabling it to grow into a bigger and better event.
Consider this... I bet that no-one could purchase a VB at the GP this weekend due to Foster's sponsorship. Punters make the choice whether they want to drink Foster's or do without. Same deal for us here. Except I'd rather drink nothing than Foster's, so maybe a bad example!
Scotty P
03-07-2004, 02:53 PM
#32
Tech Regular
Originally posted by ScottyP
I think we all need to appreciate that things are changing in our hobby and that commercial interests are becoming more dominant, particularly with regard to big races... and race series.
I don't think this is a bad thing... on the contrary. If a commerical minded person or company wants to throw some money into staging a big race to gain some sort of commercial advantage, then good luck to them. This is what sponsorship is about... commercial return. NOT to give the sponsor a warm fuzzy feeling inside.
And what does this have to do with the Winter Nats? As major sponsor, you would expect to have a say in the structure and rules of the event and clearly these will be tailored so as to provide some sort of benefit to the sponsor... be it generating increased awareness of a particular product, brand or whatever.
Fundamentally, this is how sponsorship works. As racers, we have the choice of whether to race or not. On the extreme side, if we all chose not to race, then the sponsor would pull out and there would be no Winter Nats. Conversely, if we support the race, it may attract a greater level of sponsorship in future, enabling it to grow into a bigger and better event.
Consider this... I bet that no-one could purchase a VB at the GP this weekend due to Foster's sponsorship. Punters make the choice whether they want to drink Foster's or do without. Same deal for us here. Except I'd rather drink nothing than Foster's, so maybe a bad example!
Scotty P
I think we all need to appreciate that things are changing in our hobby and that commercial interests are becoming more dominant, particularly with regard to big races... and race series.
I don't think this is a bad thing... on the contrary. If a commerical minded person or company wants to throw some money into staging a big race to gain some sort of commercial advantage, then good luck to them. This is what sponsorship is about... commercial return. NOT to give the sponsor a warm fuzzy feeling inside.
And what does this have to do with the Winter Nats? As major sponsor, you would expect to have a say in the structure and rules of the event and clearly these will be tailored so as to provide some sort of benefit to the sponsor... be it generating increased awareness of a particular product, brand or whatever.
Fundamentally, this is how sponsorship works. As racers, we have the choice of whether to race or not. On the extreme side, if we all chose not to race, then the sponsor would pull out and there would be no Winter Nats. Conversely, if we support the race, it may attract a greater level of sponsorship in future, enabling it to grow into a bigger and better event.
Consider this... I bet that no-one could purchase a VB at the GP this weekend due to Foster's sponsorship. Punters make the choice whether they want to drink Foster's or do without. Same deal for us here. Except I'd rather drink nothing than Foster's, so maybe a bad example!
Scotty P
Expanding on your analogy, Fosters didnt however change the Tech Regs for the Melbourne GP though. Its not like the Fosters guys said "Well, in Melbourne we dont rate V10's, so the Aus GP will be run with 2.0 engines did they?
03-07-2004, 03:07 PM
#33
No, but if they had organised their own race series they would be able to make whatever rules they wanted - eg Formula Renault, Nissan World Series, Tamiya Championship Nats, MECA
If its not an even organised by AARCMAC then the organised is free to set their own rules.
Racers can choose either to race, or not to race. Its simple.
On this occasion if you want to race in a big event, with potentially some of the best drivers in world R/C, you choose to follow the rules that the organiser has chosen to run.
For goodness sake its not that complicated....
If its not an even organised by AARCMAC then the organised is free to set their own rules.
Racers can choose either to race, or not to race. Its simple.
On this occasion if you want to race in a big event, with potentially some of the best drivers in world R/C, you choose to follow the rules that the organiser has chosen to run.
For goodness sake its not that complicated....
03-07-2004, 03:08 PM
#34
Hi T2Q,
Your expansion would work great IF Foster's marketed a 2.0 litre engine. They would never impose such a rule (or try to) because it is totally unrelated to their business.
To make the analogy a bit more litteral, I did not see any 360 Ferrari's in the Porsche challenge race, sponsored by none other than... Porsche!
Mr Pee Pee
Your expansion would work great IF Foster's marketed a 2.0 litre engine. They would never impose such a rule (or try to) because it is totally unrelated to their business.
To make the analogy a bit more litteral, I did not see any 360 Ferrari's in the Porsche challenge race, sponsored by none other than... Porsche!
Mr Pee Pee
03-07-2004, 03:30 PM
#35
Tech Regular
Originally posted by ScottyP
To make the analogy a bit more litteral, I did not see any 360 Ferrari's in the Porsche challenge race, sponsored by none other than... Porsche!
Mr Pee Pee
To make the analogy a bit more litteral, I did not see any 360 Ferrari's in the Porsche challenge race, sponsored by none other than... Porsche!
Mr Pee Pee
No, no, no, no. What we have here is entirely different. The Winternats are not a "one make" motor event. Its not like it will be JUST Orions, or Epics etc. What we have here is an exclusion of one particulaur TYPE of motor, which is legal at a National level. What would happen if they banned Monsters from the event in stock?
To keep going on the Analogy thing.............It would be like having the an event like say "The Nations Cup", but excluding Holden so as not to upset Ford.
I Love You!
XXX
PS - Last time I checked, Racing Lines wasnt a manufacturer either, for if they were, it would be a dodgy ill fitting product full of brochures & errors & would be a redundant model by the time it hit the LHS. The instructions would be wrong & incomplete, & there would be parts for a different product contained within it. The product would be designed by amatuers & would be overpriced!
Last edited by Timmy2qik; 03-07-2004 at 03:36 PM.
03-07-2004, 03:41 PM
#36
Hi Timmy,
I was speaking in general terms. If you're going to be specific, you're going to have to be VERY specific.
Are you referring to brushless?
Even if you are, it makes no difference. The sponsor has the right to call the shots. If they wanted to, they could make it a one-motor series, or one-chassis (TCS), or one tyre brand... or whatever.
The National rules don't count for anything... the sponsor calls the shots. That's all I'm trying to point out.
Also, I was not referring to any one sponsor. IF the sponsor is RL, then what's wrong with them looking after their advertisers? This is business and people are out to make a quid. No-one I know goes to work each day for nothing.
In addition to all this, all I'm seeing at the moment is comment based on speculation... none of us will know for sure until the regs are published. I highly doubt hybrid stocks and custom wound arm will be allowed.
I love you more T2Q,
Scotty P
I was speaking in general terms. If you're going to be specific, you're going to have to be VERY specific.
Are you referring to brushless?
Even if you are, it makes no difference. The sponsor has the right to call the shots. If they wanted to, they could make it a one-motor series, or one-chassis (TCS), or one tyre brand... or whatever.
The National rules don't count for anything... the sponsor calls the shots. That's all I'm trying to point out.
Also, I was not referring to any one sponsor. IF the sponsor is RL, then what's wrong with them looking after their advertisers? This is business and people are out to make a quid. No-one I know goes to work each day for nothing.
In addition to all this, all I'm seeing at the moment is comment based on speculation... none of us will know for sure until the regs are published. I highly doubt hybrid stocks and custom wound arm will be allowed.
I love you more T2Q,
Scotty P
03-07-2004, 03:46 PM
#37
Tech Master
Thread Starter
While we on the GP thing. Did anybody notice how quick Ambrose was in Race 3. Why??? Fresh tires as he didn't race in race 2.
That's what you get when you have controlled sets.
So inturn if you clock a q time in your first run then don't run in the next 3 q's you have great sets for the finals and you will be so fast.
Not much fun is it, with contolled number of sets.
Coxy.
That's what you get when you have controlled sets.
So inturn if you clock a q time in your first run then don't run in the next 3 q's you have great sets for the finals and you will be so fast.
Not much fun is it, with contolled number of sets.
Coxy.
03-07-2004, 04:19 PM
#38
Tech Regular
Originally posted by ScottyP
Hi Timmy,
I was speaking in general terms. If you're going to be specific, you're going to have to be VERY specific.
Are you referring to brushless?
Even if you are, it makes no difference. The sponsor has the right to call the shots. If they wanted to, they could make it a one-motor series, or one-chassis (TCS), or one tyre brand... or whatever.
The National rules don't count for anything... the sponsor calls the shots. That's all I'm trying to point out.
Also, I was not referring to any one sponsor. IF the sponsor is RL, then what's wrong with them looking after their advertisers? This is business and people are out to make a quid. No-one I know goes to work each day for nothing.
In addition to all this, all I'm seeing at the moment is comment based on speculation... none of us will know for sure until the regs are published. I highly doubt hybrid stocks and custom wound arm will be allowed.
I love you more T2Q,
Scotty P
Hi Timmy,
I was speaking in general terms. If you're going to be specific, you're going to have to be VERY specific.
Are you referring to brushless?
Even if you are, it makes no difference. The sponsor has the right to call the shots. If they wanted to, they could make it a one-motor series, or one-chassis (TCS), or one tyre brand... or whatever.
The National rules don't count for anything... the sponsor calls the shots. That's all I'm trying to point out.
Also, I was not referring to any one sponsor. IF the sponsor is RL, then what's wrong with them looking after their advertisers? This is business and people are out to make a quid. No-one I know goes to work each day for nothing.
In addition to all this, all I'm seeing at the moment is comment based on speculation... none of us will know for sure until the regs are published. I highly doubt hybrid stocks and custom wound arm will be allowed.
I love you more T2Q,
Scotty P
I love you the mostest with a cherry on top.
P.S - Why were Brushless legal last year & not this year?
Oh & regarding Stock Motors, all they have to do is include the words "ROAR APPROVED", otherwise there will be some very special tones heard going down the straight
03-07-2004, 04:27 PM
#39
Hi Timmy,
Good call on "ROAR APPROVED". It would be good to see what people can pull out though!
I have a theory on BL... YGPM!
Scotty P
Good call on "ROAR APPROVED". It would be good to see what people can pull out though!
I have a theory on BL... YGPM!
Scotty P
03-07-2004, 04:27 PM
#40
If thats how you choose to manage your tyres then thats your perogative. However, in this case, everyone should be allowed a set for qualifying and a set for finals (if they choose to buy 2 sets). Given that most people run a quicker time in their second or third qualifying attempt, the scenario you mentioned probably wouldn't occur.
I also don't know too many people who would miss a qualifying race purposely for any reason (but I don't know many pros either...)
I also don't know too many people who would miss a qualifying race purposely for any reason (but I don't know many pros either...)
03-07-2004, 04:28 PM
#41
Tech Master
Thread Starter
Originally posted by ScottyP
Hi Timmy,
In addition to all this, all I'm seeing at the moment is comment based on speculation... none of us will know for sure until the regs are published. I highly doubt hybrid stocks and custom wound arm will be allowed.
I love you more T2Q,
Scotty P
Hi Timmy,
In addition to all this, all I'm seeing at the moment is comment based on speculation... none of us will know for sure until the regs are published. I highly doubt hybrid stocks and custom wound arm will be allowed.
I love you more T2Q,
Scotty P
Unless they relise they have open a can of worms. Esp in Stock.
Coxy.
03-07-2004, 04:33 PM
#42
Tech Master
Thread Starter
Originally posted by Andrew_XXXs
If thats how you choose to manage your tyres then thats your perogative. However, in this case, everyone should be allowed a set for qualifying and a set for finals (if they choose to buy 2 sets). Given that most people run a quicker time in their second or third qualifying attempt, the scenario you mentioned probably wouldn't occur.
I also don't know too many people who would miss a qualifying race purposely for any reason (but I don't know many pros either...)
If thats how you choose to manage your tyres then thats your perogative. However, in this case, everyone should be allowed a set for qualifying and a set for finals (if they choose to buy 2 sets). Given that most people run a quicker time in their second or third qualifying attempt, the scenario you mentioned probably wouldn't occur.
I also don't know too many people who would miss a qualifying race purposely for any reason (but I don't know many pros either...)
Coxy.
03-07-2004, 04:43 PM
#43
Tech Regular
Originally posted by ScottyP
It would be good to see what people can pull out though!
Scotty P
It would be good to see what people can pull out though!
Scotty P
03-07-2004, 06:55 PM
#44
Coxy,
I'm not sure why the tire management thing is a concern?
I'm sure ambrose would be choice have rathered to finish the second race in the top 3 and have knackered tyres than have a dnf and nice tires for race 3.
Similarly, hara would rather have one the second race than sat out and have to put everything on the line for the final.
If you have controlled tires (or controlled anything) its your perogative (sp?) to manage those resources in any way you see fit. If you're good enough to run one qualifier and conserve your tyres for the finals - then I say good on you!
It will of course be a question of juggling the best use of available resources (# of tyres, # of qualifying heats, # of finals) to get the best mix.
Personally I think it adds an intriguing element to a race meeting and is well worth the trouble and effort to experiment with.
It's certainly no worse than comparing some drivers who can afford to true foams down to minimal levels and throw a new set at the car ever other race, with the guy who has to start at 63mm because he only has one set (or the guy who can throw a new set of rubber tyres at the car every other race).
I think we also need to check our terminology, because I think we're using the word "sponsor" when we should be talking about "organiser" or "promoter".
I'm not sure why the tire management thing is a concern?
I'm sure ambrose would be choice have rathered to finish the second race in the top 3 and have knackered tyres than have a dnf and nice tires for race 3.
Similarly, hara would rather have one the second race than sat out and have to put everything on the line for the final.
If you have controlled tires (or controlled anything) its your perogative (sp?) to manage those resources in any way you see fit. If you're good enough to run one qualifier and conserve your tyres for the finals - then I say good on you!
It will of course be a question of juggling the best use of available resources (# of tyres, # of qualifying heats, # of finals) to get the best mix.
Personally I think it adds an intriguing element to a race meeting and is well worth the trouble and effort to experiment with.
It's certainly no worse than comparing some drivers who can afford to true foams down to minimal levels and throw a new set at the car ever other race, with the guy who has to start at 63mm because he only has one set (or the guy who can throw a new set of rubber tyres at the car every other race).
I think we also need to check our terminology, because I think we're using the word "sponsor" when we should be talking about "organiser" or "promoter".
03-07-2004, 07:05 PM
#45
Tech Apprentice
ScottyP, thankyou for the patronising, dismissive and useless response about "commercial interests" - Whatever!
An example commercial series - MECA challenge - now allows brushless, while still supporting its own preferrred JRM23 type motors.
My point is that considering how much discussion and debate went on before the adoption of brushless into mod racing for Aussie racing - I find it very disappointing that the organisers of such a big event as Winter/Summer Nats would not support the move by AARMACCA.
ps. I'm not a B/L evangelist like coxy and contact, but I think we (clubs and commercial race organisers) need to support AARMRC to make it viable. Unity, brothers!!!
An example commercial series - MECA challenge - now allows brushless, while still supporting its own preferrred JRM23 type motors.
My point is that considering how much discussion and debate went on before the adoption of brushless into mod racing for Aussie racing - I find it very disappointing that the organisers of such a big event as Winter/Summer Nats would not support the move by AARMACCA.
ps. I'm not a B/L evangelist like coxy and contact, but I think we (clubs and commercial race organisers) need to support AARMRC to make it viable. Unity, brothers!!!