NCAC CUP RULES

Dustin Fredrickson · **Posted:** Tue Sep 04, 2007 11:39 am

steve remchak wrote:

i could be completely wrong, but if you all were to schedule this thang with more than 5 weeks notice you might get a better turnout. but hey i am not an autoX'er.

Um, yeah. I'll assume "y'all" here really means "To the person responsible for getting this together....", which was HSCC this year. While I understand your point, THSCC quite literally did everything we could to urge this on well, well, well in advance.

Back to our normally scheduled bantering...

RobLupella · **Posted:** Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:38 pm

Donnie Barnes wrote:

Paying for class wins would definitely do more for participation than FTS, FTSP, etc. I actually think upping entry fees enough to do that and maybe even pay up to the first three trophy positions for *one* event per year would be worthwhile, assuming you could do it for $20 or $25 more and no more than that. You'd want to make each class have some reasonable minimum level of participation, too, like five or six entries. So in essence you'd pay *every* trophy position up to three based on the formula we use now for trophies anyway.

I honestly think *that* would drive participation at that one big event per year. I'd still have it for Pro as well, and maybe even still up the amounts there to encourage some serious participation there. Even those who felt they had no chance at money would want to be at that event just to *see* it, I think. But maybe that's me being overzealous, I don't know. I got chills watching the final runs in SuperStock at Nationals last year. That was some intense competition.

--Donnie

I think Walter would run it every year if they had Hooters girls to give out the trophies :lol:

To borrow from another post, I think that if the event was promoted as a "special" event, sponsors were recruited with real prizes, and there was some public good the event would get a better following. As Jim said, look at the Jimmy V event where Wes and his crew did such a good job organizing. If someone would treat the NCAC as a "labor of love" then maybe that would start increasing participation. It doesn't help that there has been so much inter and intra company infighting the last two years.

MartynWheeler · **Joined:** Mon Jan 02, 2006 9:30 pm **Posts:** 303

scottjohnson wrote:

Based on the LACK of complaining about this year's club clup rules, I'm inclined to believe that they are about as good as we can get.

That annoyed me. Seriously. Rant starts here and continues to the end of the post (and is then out of my system. I'm not carrying ill feeling outside this post)

I did not complain solely out of respect and consideration for those involved in this year's event. The last thing they needed with the short time available was everyone bitching at them. Our representative indicated just that, and I respected that.

This year's Club Cup rules sucked ass.

Why didn't we just put ten drivers in the FSAE? Don't have to be the best ones, if the other clubs didn't have a comparable car then the difference in Raw would have still dominated. Why give the cup to the club who fields most AM cars? That's what we in essence decided to do this year.

If I formed a car club with ten members and we all chipped in to field an AM car for the NCAC, I don't think it should be able to win. This year's NCAC philosophy says we should.

Last year's Club Cup rules were just fine. It encouraged competition at all levels, encouraged larger classes, encourages participation. I don't know why the NCAC clubs decided to break it this year.

You know, Highlands is indeed the smallest. Small clubs have a harder time in large scale competition, that's how it goes. My great respect for Highlands is for what they achieve despite their small size. If they put in a good showing at the NCAC and come fourth, I sincerely respect what they've done given the size of their club.

If we skew the Club Cup to try to cancel out the competitive advantages of larger clubs -- larger resources, larger participation -- then that respect goes out the window.

This year's club cup may have the right name on it, but I'm not half as proud of it as I was last year.

Hey, here's an idea: let's award the Club Cup based on the PAX of the highest placing club member in the SCCA Nationals. That really does eliminate size as an advantage, right?

Kevin Allen · **Joined:** Thu Aug 28, 2003 6:42 pm **Posts:** 3479

If you're going to give out prizes, do a random drawing after the event, or maybe Saturday night or whatever. Then anybody could win. That would contribute more toward pulling in the "average" autoxers than giving prizes to the guys who are going to kick their asses. But if you want to draw in both groups, give prize money to the class winnARs, too.

They do the random drawing thing at the Subaru challenges, and it's a lot of fun. They don't give out prizes for winning the autox, though. And they usually get around 100 or 120ish people competing. Not because of the prizes, though - it's because of all the other fun stuff that goes on during the weekend. Don't forget about the social side of autox & get caught up in trying to run a super-serious "professional" autox and NCAC will be a lot more interesting to a lot more people.

Donnie Barnes · **Posted:** Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:08 pm

Kevin Allen wrote:

If you're going to give out prizes, do a random drawing after the event, or maybe Saturday night or whatever. Then anybody could win. That would contribute more toward pulling in the "average" autoxers than giving prizes to the guys who are going to kick their asses. But if you want to draw in both groups, give prize money to the class winnARs, too.

They do the random drawing thing at the Subaru challenges, and it's a lot of fun. They don't give out prizes for winning the autox, though. And they usually get around 100 or 120ish people competing. Not because of the prizes, though - it's because of all the other fun stuff that goes on during the weekend. Don't forget about the social side of autox & get caught up in trying to run a super-serious "professional" autox and NCAC will be a lot more interesting to a lot more people.

You know, it's funny that you mention the random drawing idea, because that occurred to me earlier today, too. Even thought that one "fun" way to make it random was to give out a prize to whoever has a total time with the stuff to the right of the decimal point closest to some randomly selected number kept in an envelope until the event is over or something. I couldn't think of any more interesting ways to make the random something a bit more fun than *just* random, but even drawing names out of a hat is probably good enough.

In ProSolo they offer up money for the first perfect reaction time. We could have a bounty on the first person to have a run that ends in exactly .000 (which would obviously be dumb luck, which is pretty much the point). Problem with that is it might not get won, but it's still something fun to throw out there.

For the record, I think fun and super serious can go hand in hand. One doesn't have to detract from the other, so in my perfect world the prizes would be there for the winners, too. But I do agree that random is very good.

--Donnie

THSCC Forums

NCAC CUP RULES

Who is online