Our math says that the current Challenge rules were published in December 2013. To keep things sane, we said that we'd freeze the rules for three years. That means that 2016 is the final year of those three.
At this year's Challenge we'll again host a town hall meeting, with the big discussion involving any rule changes--and if any are necessary, too. If you have an opinion, come join us.
We'll post reminders as the event gets closer. Just wanted to put this on the radar.
Thanks.
3rd year already?!?!?!
The following comments are intended to be productive and not intended to create any hard feelings.
The 2014 town hall meeting was successful. The 2015 meeting seamed to have been dominated by first timers talking with little willingness to listen. Should there be a discussion with a multi-year participants committee before or after the meeting? The simpler rule set were well received and certainly helped the attendance. The discussion leading to that end were productive.
In reply to David S. Wallens:
Is there a question you are trying to ask, or issue you are trying to address, or do you just want to have a meeting?
In reply to wheels777:
I grew up in the deep south where younglings are to be seen not heard. So last year I sat there and didn't say anything.
I didn't say much last year (my first) as well - but more because by the time I had an opinion there was already a lot of noise and I didn't want to overcomplicate.
I think there is still ambiguity around the 'production based' rules, but I think the rule itself is important. I don't want to have a shifter cart challenge. Also, I didn't understand the "buy any car you want, then spend only $2000 modding it" class idea at all. I don't get how there would be competition in a class like that other than who buys the best car to start.
Keep a good agenda and follow it (like you did), and do not be afraid to say "thank you for that suggestion we will evaluate it at a later date".
I do quite like the rules in their current state.
Stampie wrote: In reply to wheels777: I grew up in the deep south where younglings are to be seen not heard. So last year I sat there and didn't say anything.
I grew up in the North, we had the same rule.
My comment should not be interpreted as a slam to all first timers. It is directed to some folks who don't get it and want everyone to do things their way. That's why a bunch of folks walked away during the meeting. Have no doubt, you were appreciated before, during and after the meeting.
I'm technically a second timer though my attendance is trending towards once a decade.... I think the rules for the last three years have been great. Clear .... Concise... And (IMHO) very competitive. This is not to say I think there is no place for change, but there is a reason this event is so great and i would hate to see that get overlooked.
Overall I like the rules, but I most likely will not be there this year. I did compete in 13&14 and have plans for 17. I would value a chance to speak here on the forum as an "absentee voter".
I think its really easy to get overly concerned with what might happen when thinking about rules and then writing rules to prevent it. A shifter cart might do well, probably not (it would only drag race so-so and suck in the parque expose) but it doesn't matter much because no one is trying to bring one. Why spend all your time worrying about someone gaming the system? People have been worrying for years about someone building the perfect something to cheat the rules and it hasn't happened yet. A locost didn't do it, a zamboni didn't do it, a nascar truck didn't do it, etc... The competition is varied enough and difficult enough that there is no easy button/cheat to winning the thing. If someone finds or builds some kit car, or Kart, or fsae car, or beer powered slingshot that can't be beat, then worry about it and make rules accordingly, but until then just sit back and enjoy watching everyone try.
To be honest, we're not looking to make any changes--and haven't identified anything that needs changing. We appreciate the communication and feedback, though. If someone has feedback, just letting the world know that the time to speak up is on the horizon.
David S. Wallens wrote: To be honest, we're not looking to make any changes--and haven't identified anything that needs changing. We appreciate the communication and feedback, though. If someone has feedback, just letting the world know that the time to speak up is on the horizon.
I was hoping that was the case. The current rules do work.
A tweak on the non-performance adding safety parts may be in order. I don't know if the broken balancer would have been updated to an SFI unit ( I don't know if one is even available for their engine). But if it had, an injury could have been avoided, and it would not been a performance adder. And before the topic starts, the current cage/bar rule works.
Stampie wrote: In reply to wheels777: I grew up in the deep south where younglings are to be seen not heard. So last year I sat there and didn't say anything.
You can always tell a Milford man.
You'll need to log in to post.
