NATS 2016 rules

[rosco]

So I feel this is a rather pointless argument.

This debate is over a rule that we can all agree does not exist in a national level as from what I can see there is no national rule book or rule guidelines to adhere to.

After being actively involved in other forms of motorsport on a participant and race director level where there are national events held individually or part of a series. The track has their local rules for non-national events and adheres to the governing body or association’s rules for national events. Typically they are both very similar but may differ slightly to suit the local tracks customer base.

Some of you may not class this hobby as a form or motorsport but many of us do. The thousands of dollars we spend to participate in this form of motorsport is real hard earned cash. Being the competitive sport that it is, creates real emotion and reactions.

Every other form of motorsport has a big emphasis on qualifying. People spend money for R&D to go fast. We all want the Top qualifier position. Take Drag Racing for example. If there is an odd number of cars. Top qualifier gets a bye into the second round, thus an advantage of qualifying fast. If there is an even number, say 16 cars. The top 8 race the bottom 8. The top 8 have Lane choice over their opponents. This is designed in such a way that the top 8 cars will be the ones fighting for the final. In other forms such as circuit racing like Formula 1, V8 Supercars and Nascar. Qualifying quick is an advantage. You get track position and as many of the top motorsport engineers say, track position is key!

Rick, I personally don’t agree with the snake (not that it has or would stop me from racing at an event where it is used) and even more so the version you have proposed. You are requesting ABBAABBAA. So in the event you have 9 cars the top qualifier is punished because they will be in a 5 car race, yet second and third are only in a 4 car race. If you were going to use the Snake it should be done in such a way that the Top Qualifier is not punished. It should either be equal or an advantage to be top qualifier. You say that this doesn’t make it easy for new comers to the sport to get into. That is why there are entry level classes. By the time someone decides they want to race 27L or Opens, they are already committed to the sport. You know just as well as I do that no one has rocked up to a slot car track and said I want to go straight to the fast stuff and spend in excess of $1000 without at least racing some other form of car before, whether it be a sedan or a wing car. I am open to how tracks run these classes. Yes I will voice my opinion if it is asked on the day like it previously has happened but really don’t care if the track decides on one way or another. As a Racer I will look at whichever way the track chooses and will try and qualify in such a way that I have the best chance. This doesn’t always work out, but that’s part of the gamble.

Since I started competitively racing and travelling in 2013, I have never understood the reactions about how race meetings are run. The track owner has the right to run the race however he/she likes and I don’t know if I can recall a race that I have been to where we have not stood around and argued about how the race should be run. At the end of the day we all still race no matter the outcome of how the track owner decides to run the race.

The only way these types of situations will be resolved is with a national rule book. However, this will never work without a compromise from all track owners and racers. Without knowing for sure, I assume that is why the Australian Slot Car Racing Association website was created back in 2008/09.
From my opinion the only way this sport can move forward to attracting more racers is with a defined rule book/guideline for national events.

That's my thoughts anyway.

Ross

[il cavalino]

Hi Ross,

From discussions over the past couple of years apparently there are a set of Nationals Rules, I recall a discussion with Carl a couple of years ago and recently with Stumpy. Whilst it is assumed that these will be followed by the Nats host track the problem being it left up to the track owner as we have no National Body.

Numerous attempts have been made over the years to set up a body but each time it gets put into the "too hard" box.

27 Lite being a relatively new class to this country I am sure that there are no actual Australian Rules, and probably no rules for O.M.O. in these two classes we have followed the U.S. rules and up until 2015 seeding by the "snake" or "ABBAA" was part of these rules. I might add that any seeding in all classes is also done by the "snake" method.

27 Lite is a unique class born in the U.S. brought about by the need for a cost effective class that limits chassis, motors, and I believe an integral part of the appeal is that you only have to race in one race and the seeding of driver via the "snake" means that every "race" has a mix of fast , slow and medium speed cars.

By changing the seeding to "Fast/Slow I wonder how long before we relax the motor restrictions, start running qualifying set ups, etc and end up back at the "open 27" class that 27 lite has replaced.

Geoff

[rosco]

Thanks Geoff,

I have never seen those rules and have only vaguely heard them mentioned from time to time and was under the impression the track owner could choose to ignore them should they wish to.

Do you recall the reasons as to why it gets put in the “too hard” box each time? Is it the fact that no one has the time? Or there is always too much backlash when trying to come up with rules to be agreed on by the track owners/racers?

As for the snake being used in all other classes, that’s correct but it is done with ABBABABA, so in the event of an even number of racers it is an even split with numbers and when an odd number of racers the top qualifier is in the race with the least number of drivers. I have no problem with that seeding for classes such as sedans where I feel it is not as critical to qualify fastest.

I understand that 27L is unique and is all about cost effectiveness. I like the fact that there is only one race. No matter which race you are in you have to bring your Ferrari to the tech bench and race with the best of what you have. There is no uncertainty about should I put a qualifying setup in and then change it afterwards. You bring you’re “A” game and weather you show it all in qualifying is up to you.

I think the 27L rules are great how they are and I don’t believe the “Fast/Slow” will change the minds of anyone about having an Open 27 class. You have spec rules for chassis and motor for the class. Keep them tight and see who the best builders and drivers are, if someone wants to go above and beyond and find ways to improve their setups so be it, as long as it’s within in the rules. Otherwise tell them to wait a few hours and Opens will be on and race then.

Ross

[CAB77]

I have never seen the snake rule written in any rule book here in Australia. I'm not saying it's not but it certainly hasn't been at any Nats before. Then we discuss it before Qual at every race we go to.

So we go by the USRA when it suits some and now it doesn't we don't?? It worked there because they have huge fields. I feel that our smaller fields make it not work.

Some give and take on this is needed by all parties. I dislike snake as it is written ABBAA as races consisting of 9 and 13 entries gives the top qualifier the extra man in his race. Plus the 2nd fastest guy is punished. It would be like getting P2 at Monaco but starting on the 2nd row of the grid.

I understand why most of you don't like Slow and the Fast race format but in saying that I would like qualifying to matter.

I would understand this sort of reaction if I had allowed multi mag motors and aluminium chassis as this is against the spirit of the rules. I just wanted to make the rules clear that we race under. I'm a flexible guy maybe some others need to reach middle ground.

So here is my compromise. Top 2 in 2nd race. Bottom 2 in first race. In between will be BABABA this will only work for 16 entries. Over that will be AAB….CBACBA……..BCC . If you can follow that. This will always make qualifying matter. You can’t just sit out and be in the last race. It will still mix the field up as you guys want. It will also reward the guys who make an effort and qualify.

I race to race. I have been in my fair share of slow races. I have also won a couple and still not been on the podium. Did that deter me. Hell NO. I won a race. A win is a win. Some people the best they can hope for is a win against the slow guys. It's all experience and lead me to try harder. I wanted to earn the right to race with the fast guys. We all do this for different aspects of the sport.

[Garry J]

Adrian,

It should be your call. Also stating how things will be done well in advance leaves no room for discussion on the day.

But, your logic is not perfect as demonstrated by the race at Muddies, fast qualifiers don't necessarily make good racers.

[CAB77]

Hi Garry

That was a point I was trying to make earlier. Qualifying time has nothing to do with a good race car or driving ability. So it still leaves the racing up to chance. To me qualifying is all about track position. So you could be in the 2nd race with a good time and still be in the slow race with heaps of carnage and track calls. So to me this whole debate is trivial.

[FC RACING]

Geoff you are correct we did discuss a set of national rules with inclusions for for spray Glue racing ie 27 lite and i did write the set of rules i placed a copy of these rules on the counter at this years Nats with the proposals for next years Nats in them is a format for Racing of 27 lite and O.M.O. and the format is A main
Qualifyers 1-8 B Main 9-16
I think that a next years Nats after 27 Lite we vote on which format to race these classes by.
if any one wants a copy of those rules no one bothered to look at Raceworld world e-mail me at
thunderdome01@dodo.com.au and i will send you a copy

[Bruce]

Hi Adrian,

I know I don't take racing as seriously as most people who race
27s and OMO so to me your compromise sounds ok.
I race to have some fun and if I ever get a podium that is the icing on the cake.
See you at the Nats at Easter.

Mr Wilson GGR

[slowhk]

I'd like to thank everyone for their opinions on the above subject, I feel it's good to put a discussion out in the open so everyone can have their say. I am happy with Adrian's compromise with the Racing Format if everyone else agrees to run that at this years Nats and a discussion needs to be had at this years Nats regarding Race Format in the future to keep the best 2 classes alive. So now it time to end what I have started as it's getting out of control. Adrian has decided on a good compromise to keep all racers happy for the 2016 Nats. So it time to go Racing Rick lol

[CAB77]

Ok I'll get my web guy to update the rules. I would like to have a discussion after 27 lite is complete. There will be time. I'll have a suggestion box for all things we would like to discuss.

[ozproducts]

so if i dont race opens i can race group F. Thats good because thats the speed car i can see now
Wayne

[lindsayb]

Just like to add where this has now gone in the U.S - we have 2 motors - one high timed ballistic qualifier for the first bracket - and then our race motor and race gearing that gets changed after the first bracket.