2007 Midwest Series
10-28-2006, 08:27 AM
#46
My comments were not intended to disrespect anyone, just wanted to spur on some converstation, the thread seemed pretty dead.
Not sure if I buy the "if ain't broke, don't fix it argument", the series attendence in the second half of the series was down considerably. Attendance at Detroit, Mentor and Racine was very low year over year. Not sure if this was because of the venue, or because folks don't feel that series itself, is worth striving for. Or the points system is too unforgiving... For example a DNF's early in the series coupled with not being able to make 1 of the series races, pretty much exclude a decenet series finish for the average racer?
On the points / main length, maybe the mains are fixed in length in terms of duration, but it doesn't necessarily mean the points system is equitable. Many of the intermediate drivers and novice drivers would benefit from overall position, versus total laps on the points. This would also support bumps, which would allow for more track time to all levels of racers.
Not sure if I buy the "if ain't broke, don't fix it argument", the series attendence in the second half of the series was down considerably. Attendance at Detroit, Mentor and Racine was very low year over year. Not sure if this was because of the venue, or because folks don't feel that series itself, is worth striving for. Or the points system is too unforgiving... For example a DNF's early in the series coupled with not being able to make 1 of the series races, pretty much exclude a decenet series finish for the average racer?
On the points / main length, maybe the mains are fixed in length in terms of duration, but it doesn't necessarily mean the points system is equitable. Many of the intermediate drivers and novice drivers would benefit from overall position, versus total laps on the points. This would also support bumps, which would allow for more track time to all levels of racers.
10-28-2006, 08:46 AM
#47
I like the format as it is... and agree it's "tried and true".
As long as we're exploring new ideas.... let's turn the tables...
Say I'm an "F main" driver and in 30 minutes I turn 70 laps. An "A main" driver will turn ... say 85 laps in 30 minutes... but only take, say 25 minutes to turn 70 laps... why not limit the higher mains to less time... and have a greater chance of a more heated and challenging points series... Still award points like we currently do for the Mains
i.e. A-main 25 minutes
B-main 26
C-main 27
D-main 28
E-main 29
F-main 30 minutes...
Besides... the fast drivers don't need the track time... hacks like me do... This would make for a great series... and give everyone a shot at the title...
However, the qualifying points would need to be modified so sandbagging wouldn't be an advantage...
just food for thought...
again... I like the points the way it is...
James
As long as we're exploring new ideas.... let's turn the tables...
Say I'm an "F main" driver and in 30 minutes I turn 70 laps. An "A main" driver will turn ... say 85 laps in 30 minutes... but only take, say 25 minutes to turn 70 laps... why not limit the higher mains to less time... and have a greater chance of a more heated and challenging points series... Still award points like we currently do for the Mains
i.e. A-main 25 minutes
B-main 26
C-main 27
D-main 28
E-main 29
F-main 30 minutes...
Besides... the fast drivers don't need the track time... hacks like me do... This would make for a great series... and give everyone a shot at the title...
However, the qualifying points would need to be modified so sandbagging wouldn't be an advantage...
just food for thought...
again... I like the points the way it is...
James
10-28-2006, 09:21 AM
#49
AH! Brent. I remember the good old days when Allen and I used to gang up on you the forums. Please come back racing. Allen and I haven't had anyone to bash in a while.
Mark
Mark
10-28-2006, 09:30 AM
#50
Originally Posted by Mark Unger
AH! Brent. I remember the good old days when Allen and I used to gang up on you the forums. Please come back racing. Allen and I haven't had anyone to bash in a while.
Mark
Mark
10-28-2006, 09:48 AM
#51
Tech Adept
Originally Posted by aaron_buran
My comments were not intended to disrespect anyone, just wanted to spur on some converstation, the thread seemed pretty dead.
Not sure if I buy the "if ain't broke, don't fix it argument", the series attendence in the second half of the series was down considerably. Attendance at Detroit, Mentor and Racine was very low year over year. Not sure if this was because of the venue, or because folks don't feel that series itself, is worth striving for. Or the points system is too unforgiving... For example a DNF's early in the series coupled with not being able to make 1 of the series races, pretty much exclude a decenet series finish for the average racer?
On the points / main length, maybe the mains are fixed in length in terms of duration, but it doesn't necessarily mean the points system is equitable. Many of the intermediate drivers and novice drivers would benefit from overall position, versus total laps on the points. This would also support bumps, which would allow for more track time to all levels of racers.
Not sure if I buy the "if ain't broke, don't fix it argument", the series attendence in the second half of the series was down considerably. Attendance at Detroit, Mentor and Racine was very low year over year. Not sure if this was because of the venue, or because folks don't feel that series itself, is worth striving for. Or the points system is too unforgiving... For example a DNF's early in the series coupled with not being able to make 1 of the series races, pretty much exclude a decenet series finish for the average racer?
On the points / main length, maybe the mains are fixed in length in terms of duration, but it doesn't necessarily mean the points system is equitable. Many of the intermediate drivers and novice drivers would benefit from overall position, versus total laps on the points. This would also support bumps, which would allow for more track time to all levels of racers.
Aaron,
You have raced in this series a long time, so you already know that the 1st race of the year gets a great draw and last race of the year does not draw very well. Cinci was well attended this year because of the Nats and so was Toledo because of the GLC and being the 2nd event of the series. Now you add in the fact that these two tracks are the best in the series. That was not a very good scheduling move, having the two best tracks back to back. Mark will need to use a little better judgment this year when making out the schedule.
The points system seems to work just fine for the racer who attends most of the series events. After all that is what the points system is supposed to do, award the best racers of that weekend series event.
10-28-2006, 10:54 AM
#52
Yes, I have raced the series a long time, and haven't understood the points system since I started. In my mind it doesn't entice everyone to particpate, like it could. This is just my opinion... It seems like the points system is holy grail of sorts? Because moving to a traditional points system, wouldn't hurt anybody. All the other major series, like Heart of America, The Florida State Series and now the RC Pro Series, award points based on position, not laps.
As more of these new purpose built tracks pop up around the Midwest, like Leisure Hours, Evolution, 301 etc... There will be many more "large / regional" races to go to. In my opinion if the series doesn't make some changes, that make competing in the series more equitable, interesting and exciting. These larger races will eat up the crowd that has been traveling to the Midwest Series events.
This happened with the US triple crown in carpet racing, people became less and less interested in the series, and only cared about the events.
Yeah, I agree the order of the series this year wasn't optimal, but if you were to study how many racers actively compete for points, I would argue that number is very low as a percentage of racers that race the events.
Now while the rcpro series, in onroad did not seem to be sucessful at all this year. What they have done with the dirt, is impressive. Coverage in multiple, magazines and cable TV... As well as manufactures taking credit for wins in their ads. Go to the rcpro website and check out the level of particpation in terms of numbers, and how close the points are in the top 20 of any class in dirt, that's what I am referring to.
Don't get me wrong, I am not dissing the series, and what Mark and Brian have done. I too have ran race track, hosted a national event and ran a couple series of my own, it is thankless work, and everything these guys have done is much appreciated.
I just think could be better, try a few things, and learn from it, thats all.
As more of these new purpose built tracks pop up around the Midwest, like Leisure Hours, Evolution, 301 etc... There will be many more "large / regional" races to go to. In my opinion if the series doesn't make some changes, that make competing in the series more equitable, interesting and exciting. These larger races will eat up the crowd that has been traveling to the Midwest Series events.
This happened with the US triple crown in carpet racing, people became less and less interested in the series, and only cared about the events.
Yeah, I agree the order of the series this year wasn't optimal, but if you were to study how many racers actively compete for points, I would argue that number is very low as a percentage of racers that race the events.
Now while the rcpro series, in onroad did not seem to be sucessful at all this year. What they have done with the dirt, is impressive. Coverage in multiple, magazines and cable TV... As well as manufactures taking credit for wins in their ads. Go to the rcpro website and check out the level of particpation in terms of numbers, and how close the points are in the top 20 of any class in dirt, that's what I am referring to.
Don't get me wrong, I am not dissing the series, and what Mark and Brian have done. I too have ran race track, hosted a national event and ran a couple series of my own, it is thankless work, and everything these guys have done is much appreciated.
I just think could be better, try a few things, and learn from it, thats all.
10-28-2006, 12:13 PM
#53
Tech Adept
Aaron,
You bring up some very interesting points . It wouldn't hurt to try some kind of new points system like you proposed. But I think the main reason for lack of midwest paticapation is $$$$$. Plain and simple just cost too much to race out of town for the average racer. So for the few hardcore guys who really support the series, their voices should be heard the loudest!!!
Change is good at times, just don't over do it!!
You bring up some very interesting points . It wouldn't hurt to try some kind of new points system like you proposed. But I think the main reason for lack of midwest paticapation is $$$$$. Plain and simple just cost too much to race out of town for the average racer. So for the few hardcore guys who really support the series, their voices should be heard the loudest!!!
Change is good at times, just don't over do it!!
10-28-2006, 03:22 PM
#54
Tech Adept
I have attended a few mid-west races over the past two seasons and every visit has been very memorable.
i like the format and the way they were run, but if its time for change, lets do it.
i noticed that the attendance of the host club was very high on the club race prior to the mid-west, most guys wanna get a feel for the track.
what if we did trials at the host tracks on the club race day before the mid-west race??
such as the longer qualifiers and different mains format?
other than that, im looking forward to 07', getting tips from the pros, talking to some familiar faces as well as new ones, and most of all doing what we love the most,,,,,,,RC!!!!
p.s. a big thanks goes out to everyone involved in making this series possible.
i like the format and the way they were run, but if its time for change, lets do it.
i noticed that the attendance of the host club was very high on the club race prior to the mid-west, most guys wanna get a feel for the track.
what if we did trials at the host tracks on the club race day before the mid-west race??
such as the longer qualifiers and different mains format?
other than that, im looking forward to 07', getting tips from the pros, talking to some familiar faces as well as new ones, and most of all doing what we love the most,,,,,,,RC!!!!
p.s. a big thanks goes out to everyone involved in making this series possible.
10-29-2006, 02:54 AM
#55
I think Aaron's comments about tracks need to run a regular schedule are valid, not just midwest series events. I used to say that myself actually. I don't think he's referring to purpose built tracks only for the midwest series. All clubs that now have permanent tracks used to setup temporarily, after all its how they got a chance to build one in the first place. The Midwest series has been a lifeline to our club for years so that we could invest in new equipment and materials. It has been my plan to take the Detroit club back into regular club events, but I wanted to do so with new track materials to make for easier setups (our bigest problem). I'm hoping to get that going for next year. We will have to do it with or without the Midwest Series on our schedule, but if we end up losing the series I hope to be able to get it back in the future.
That being said, we should relize that its possible for clubs that setup on temporary parking lots to put on good races. I'm not trying to say that my club has done a flawless job over the years, I realize our mistakes. The midwest series shouldn't have to stipulate it being permanent tracks only.
That being said, we should relize that its possible for clubs that setup on temporary parking lots to put on good races. I'm not trying to say that my club has done a flawless job over the years, I realize our mistakes. The midwest series shouldn't have to stipulate it being permanent tracks only.
10-29-2006, 08:02 AM
#56
Tech Regular
iTrader: (1)
I was one that agreed with " if its not broke don't fix it"
I have now changed my mind, maybe the points system needs to be changed to make it closer and more exciting for the last races of the season instead of racers not attending if they have their 4 good races in. Maybe double points races at the end of the season if you have attend 2 or more previous races is a good idea. Maybe the points split should be different instead of 20/80 maybe 50/50 as we do spend half of our track time qualifying, also add in bonus points for TQ, and winning your Main.
If we do go with bump ups then we will need to change the points to the way you finish your main and not total laps otherwise there is no incentive to bump up.
Ideas not answers.
I would agree that the MWS races should be held at tracks/clubs that have regular club races, as I think they will attarct more entries. Sorry Tom K I would like to see Detriot hold a race because you are only 2 hours from me, but If we want to grow the series we need to support the active clubs. Fact is Detroit is too close to the best track in the country (Toledo) and it would be very difficult to compete for members.
I have now changed my mind, maybe the points system needs to be changed to make it closer and more exciting for the last races of the season instead of racers not attending if they have their 4 good races in. Maybe double points races at the end of the season if you have attend 2 or more previous races is a good idea. Maybe the points split should be different instead of 20/80 maybe 50/50 as we do spend half of our track time qualifying, also add in bonus points for TQ, and winning your Main.
If we do go with bump ups then we will need to change the points to the way you finish your main and not total laps otherwise there is no incentive to bump up.
Ideas not answers.
I would agree that the MWS races should be held at tracks/clubs that have regular club races, as I think they will attarct more entries. Sorry Tom K I would like to see Detriot hold a race because you are only 2 hours from me, but If we want to grow the series we need to support the active clubs. Fact is Detroit is too close to the best track in the country (Toledo) and it would be very difficult to compete for members.
10-29-2006, 12:27 PM
#57
Wasn't total attendance for the series UP, not down? Sure the last couple of races were down in attendance, but isn't that somewhat normal in any series?
RC pro is an exception due the final championship event concept.
Putting our best tracks last, would of course, improve attendance for the last couple of races.
I would like to make some observations on the MWS v.s. other formats (both series & single events). A typical 'large' race will charge everyone the same fee, but reward the racers with completely different track time oportunities. Like; no more than 10 minutes of practice (while several top factory drivers stay on the stand for an hour or more), lower mains with drastically shorter lengths, attitudes of race officials and anouncers that ignore or look down on the guys in lower mains.
I have only been involved in the MWS for a couple of years. I have been very enthusiastic & proud to be a part of it. I have gotten a few others 'sucked' into it. A big part of it's apeal (as I see it), is the equity it offers to ALL racers. The guy who is just starting out, will be offered the same amount of track time as the faster guy. Will get the SAME length main (he usually doesn't get the oportunity to race for 30 minutes). I was very impressed by Brian Berrys' write-ups, that gave equal respect to the drivers in the lowest main to those of the A. I would certainly argue against any change that would threaten that equity.
I think the current points system is both logical and fair. In a system that rewards qualifying in a higher main, you have some difficulties. Tradition puts top ten in the A. Digital transponders & software developments allow for more drivers in a race. Top ten + a couple of bumps, has become common.
Our driverstands & track sizes vary. Some stands only allow room for 9 (or less). So at location X you qual 10 and reap the rewards of higher qual points & possibillity of greater mains points. At location Y, you qual 10 (against the same competition) and get put in the B, thereby automatically receive less points for the same performance. Add bumps and one or two more racers get screwed!
With the current system, you get the same reward for the same performance, no matter what size the driver stand. More flexibillity is afforded the race director, when setting the mains board. Seldom do track conditions change enough (during the mains) to make the current mains points structure un-fair.
Again, 'it aint broke'.
RC pro is an exception due the final championship event concept.
Putting our best tracks last, would of course, improve attendance for the last couple of races.
I would like to make some observations on the MWS v.s. other formats (both series & single events). A typical 'large' race will charge everyone the same fee, but reward the racers with completely different track time oportunities. Like; no more than 10 minutes of practice (while several top factory drivers stay on the stand for an hour or more), lower mains with drastically shorter lengths, attitudes of race officials and anouncers that ignore or look down on the guys in lower mains.
I have only been involved in the MWS for a couple of years. I have been very enthusiastic & proud to be a part of it. I have gotten a few others 'sucked' into it. A big part of it's apeal (as I see it), is the equity it offers to ALL racers. The guy who is just starting out, will be offered the same amount of track time as the faster guy. Will get the SAME length main (he usually doesn't get the oportunity to race for 30 minutes). I was very impressed by Brian Berrys' write-ups, that gave equal respect to the drivers in the lowest main to those of the A. I would certainly argue against any change that would threaten that equity.
I think the current points system is both logical and fair. In a system that rewards qualifying in a higher main, you have some difficulties. Tradition puts top ten in the A. Digital transponders & software developments allow for more drivers in a race. Top ten + a couple of bumps, has become common.
Our driverstands & track sizes vary. Some stands only allow room for 9 (or less). So at location X you qual 10 and reap the rewards of higher qual points & possibillity of greater mains points. At location Y, you qual 10 (against the same competition) and get put in the B, thereby automatically receive less points for the same performance. Add bumps and one or two more racers get screwed!
With the current system, you get the same reward for the same performance, no matter what size the driver stand. More flexibillity is afforded the race director, when setting the mains board. Seldom do track conditions change enough (during the mains) to make the current mains points structure un-fair.
Again, 'it aint broke'.
10-29-2006, 05:50 PM
#58
Tech Adept
Duneland,
I wouldn't worry too much about the points system or look for any really big changes in the current format, other than maybe a change in track location. I think that Racine will be dropped for St.louis, ( I hope ) and move Chicago to leisure hours. Sounds like Tom might try to get Detroit back up and running again, so if that happends I'm sure we will be racing there once again.
I wouldn't worry too much about the points system or look for any really big changes in the current format, other than maybe a change in track location. I think that Racine will be dropped for St.louis, ( I hope ) and move Chicago to leisure hours. Sounds like Tom might try to get Detroit back up and running again, so if that happends I'm sure we will be racing there once again.
10-30-2006, 06:42 AM
#59
Not to worried 
. Just letting my take on things be known (for what it's worth).
As far as location changes go,,, I doubt that any changes will be made unless a current host elects to step down. It certainly doesn't hurt to discuss & vote on potential replacements, if that should occur.
. Just letting my take on things be known (for what it's worth). As far as location changes go,,, I doubt that any changes will be made unless a current host elects to step down. It certainly doesn't hurt to discuss & vote on potential replacements, if that should occur.
10-30-2006, 07:22 AM
#60
The only comment I have. 99% of us started in this hobby by racing in parking lots. All of a sudden were to good to race in a parking lot. I love racing at a preped perminant track ie(toledo and cinci). But you have to remember The MWS can not survive with out the local club action. How do expect to grow the series if you don't support the local club (Parking lot). Removing sites that don't have a permenant track is totally insane. Sometimes you have to adapt to the track conditions even if its a parking lot.
Gentleman don't forget where you came from.
Gentleman don't forget where you came from.