QUOTE(grantsfo @ Oct 9 2006, 07:05 AM)
I'm just suprized at the innuendos lobbed in this post without the original poster taking any accountbility. To me the calls by a few to artifically hold PCA regions together only masks the reality of more popular track day events/venues emerging. GGR hasnt reinvented itself in the face of stiff competition such as Track Masters and other organizations that have addressed the market more effectively. Appears other regions have done what their membership desires. Parts of GGR exhibit classic symptoms of failing organizations. They blame outside influences rather than looking inward for why things are going wrong and they stay the course even when they are sinking. hmmm that seems to be popular in US culture these days!
I can tell you I truly enjoy the low key nature of Track Master Racing events. Very few egos on the track, few politics, no time trail silliness, just lots of safe, fun track time with drivers who for the most part respect the rules.
Grant,
To me your comments represent in a nutshell the issues that I am seeing with our region. Thanks for bringing them up and I'd like to clarify. Since no one else in this thread other than myself brought up having the PCA regions work together for better track day positioning (fees, dates, etc), I want to clarify my position. I agree with most of what is being said, but since the majority of those making the comments here haven't run with GGR's TT series (Nathan, Grant, Trekkor, Rotten Robby), I am being lumped into a group that as you put it, hasn't re-invented itself. I am not defending Ken or commenting on his position, only my own.
Currently the new GGR TT administration IS re-inventing itself. But it takes time. There are little things, big things, just the normal issues to address given such a large group of people. But they are working at it. Everything that has been brought up here has been communicated to the GGR TT leaders by me personally over the course of this year and I have been told they have heard from others as well. These aren't new complaints. But the adminstration is new. Things like:
1. Modified Ground School or an evolution of such
2. Online registration
3. Placement of Time Trials within the weekend.
4. Allowing other brands of cars to run for PCA members.
It used to be that half of the grid of 100 to 120 cars would run for time in the TT. Actually, out of the 60 to 80 cars now showing up about half run for time, so the percentage seems to be consistent. For the half of us that run the TT, we don't find it silly at all. It's actually a great time sitting on grid, listening to the track announcer call out the times of the 4 to 5 cars out on timed runs. And during the run you are all alone in your sight line, which is a different experience from being with other cars. Not better, not worse, but different and very enjoyable for me.
But several of the time trialers have brought up moving the runs to the end of the second day instead of doing it at lunch and then resuming open track. And we have even spoken about doing away with the Timed runs, if that would help attendance. But since we have a say so in the way we would like the events to be put on, we are weighing in with our say for what we would like to keep the Time Trials, and are willing to modify how it is done.
If the sentiment from some is that the ground school is a waste of time, I disagree. I've been to it when Hank was the instructor, Gary took it over for a few years, and now John is conducting the classes. I found it to be very useful and informative. My wife and I were in a particularly interested class it seems, as almost everyone in that class still runs PCA events. But I do agree that the class requirements are too rigid. There should be a reasonable way to grant a school exemption for people with previous experience on the track, sort of like a reciprocal license program between POC, PCA, NASA, SCCA. For newbies to the track, why would there be an argument for not going to ground school? It ain't commute hour out there....
The rate of change is slow for GGR. Painfully slow. But they will change. It has to happen. My argument is with the PCA Zone 7 as a whole. From a financial and scheduling aspect they had it good. But the politics are leading to issues. My position is coming from Porsche Club of America. PCA car club is my rant, not TM, not NCRC. Those organizations are needed and wanted. I like running with different brands of cars. And as you have seen, several PCA members run with those clubs too.
I'm talking about scale within PCA. 2 years ago you could run 2 days at THill for $185 total and 2 days at Sears for $235 total. And compete in a Time Trial while getting excellent instruction and socializing in the paddock with a great group of people. TM, NCRC and the Viper Club put on a good show, and you pay for it. Sears is now ~$300 for a day through these clubs. Good guys, good show, but considerably more expensive. My point was and still is that the PCA regional boards are letting a good deal slip through there fingers due to their own internal political views. Geez, real world getting in the way of me being a boy racer!
I like paying $185 to race two days with my friends and run timed runs and sometimes have a shot a setting track records. I'm small peanuts...no illusions there. Put Craig Stanton in my car and he'd be 10 seconds a lap faster. But since the majority of us have equal skill sets, the lap times are close, so it's fun. And I don't want that taken away from me based on arguments that past boards and regimes had with each other 6 years ago and two board president's ago.
So what am I doing about it? My work schedule precludes me from serving on the boards at this point in my career. But it doen't preclude me from talking, e-mailing or participating in threads concerning my positions with the local club. When I hear the points being brought up here, I direct the TT Chairman to them. I also post to the GGR Online Community regularly. And I will sometimes disagree 180 degrees from the stated rules. But I try to work the issue. And our GGR TT Chairman, Andrew Forrest, is a good guy. I like what he is trying to do. But he needs help.
I know Grant, Dan and I are posters on the GGR community board. If you are so inclined, other's may want to. Or not. But your voice will be heard. Take for example Trekkor's Pelican gang of 8 to 10 drivers. That represents more than $3K of potential revenue for a typical 2 day event with GGR at Thill. If Trekkor and gang took a few moments to work with PCA, they'd probably find Andrew very interested in what they have to say as far as roadblocks to participation. Would they get what they want? I don't know. But I have to believe given the quality of people working the issue on both sides, positive things would come of that discussion.
One of the other issues I've been trying to figure out is how to help the PCA get through all of the issues in a a timely manner. By that I mean the motivations for organizations are not all the same. PCA-GGR and TM for example. They both are in existence to have fun on the track at it's simplest form. GGR is all volunteer, and I think they are behind the 8 ball on that one. TM or NCRC/ARC for example try to make a little money for their owners. This is a good thing. TM and NCRC are a business model, so customer satisfaction is part of that model in a business context.
GGR on the other hand, only went to an online community over the past year. And at the end of the day, since it's volunteer you can have all the best intentions but it won't drive your decision making like a real business will. The stakes just aren't as high. They are a volunteer car club and are at a disadvantage for it at this time. My opinion in that in the near future (next board elections or the one's after it) an updated viewpoint will present itself.
I've been fortunate to run with the PCA, Trackmasters, NCRC, CDS, BMW club, Lotus club, Viper club, Leadfoot Adventures etc. They are all good organizations, some more strict than other's at safety. But they are good. Speaking for myself, not anyone else, I'd rather see this thread turn into something positive, instead of "my TM is better than your GGR". I'm a little selfish in that the PCA still gets preferred dates and pricing based on the longstanding relationships with the local tracks. From a race dollar perspective it's good and I'd be upset to lose it based on the immaturity of a few people who are making policy at the board levels of the regions.
As you can see, I'm an advocate for making the TT series a success. There is room for several car clubs, but splitting with Zone 7 is quite frankly speaking, financial suicide. I'd like to appeal to people like myself, who like lapping and also running for time, but also to the lap day folks only as well. Case in point $235 for a single day at Thill (weekday or weekend, let's keep the day of the week out of it) versus $185 for two days with the option of timed runs. Still have fun with great people at great race tracks. If someone has time constraints or the TT doesn't interest them, even participating for one day with PCA would still be more cost effective than the single day with another club.
My position is that I want all the clubs to prosper as best they can. For us, the track junkies, the more successful the clubs, the more dates we have open to run based on our schedules. My beef is with the infighting going on between PCA regions. It's not in the best interests financially for the members in my opinion.
I just wanted to state my position. Not anyone else's. If you guys feel so inclined, let me know what you can do to help me make the GGR Time Trial series better. If not, that's okay too as everyone is busy. I'll see you out there when I run NCRC or TM. It is my belief that if you were to actually run with GGR, you'd have fun.
Bill P. (aka...."silly time trialer")....
P.S. above comment of "silly time trialer" meant as joke....