- This topic has 59 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
J.B.
It doesn’t sound like much of a negotiation. We, as the racers, pay $75 to become SKUSA or whatever members, pay $? to become CSC members , we pay $? to have the priviledge to run in each CSC and SKUSA events, we pay to practice for these events, and we pay for pit spaces. I see a trend here.
I believe we deserve to have a racer be a deciding factor in who or what organization we go with. I thought at the time I heard it at the SSGP that no racer would have a vote on any of the final decisions was ridiculous. I do not believe the track owners should have the final say so. It should be a 50:50 split. For every track owner, a racer should get a vote on the direction of the CSC.
Oh yeah one other thing, why do we have to pay to run in a second class? See above for what we have already paid, why should we have to pay more? Where does that money go? Do you need to be insured twice? The personnel are already there and the race is being ran anyways. Do we have to pay twice for the priviledge to race at a CSC track. It doesn’t slow down tech or give them more work. The first three or five go to tech anyways.
just some thoughts from a poor uneducated racer,
Tom
Tom, we have mixed feelings regarding SKUSA and their involvement in CSC. We have always believed that if you make the racers happy
(majority) that your events will be successful and continue to prosper..however, after last year and all the controversey with people cheating and bending the rules I think we need to look very seriously at a structured series with set rules that are clear with spec fuel and tires etc.. but the most important thing to me as a track owner is having a sanctioning body on the hook for some of the liability in the event we have a serious accident like Brad did. I don’t like the added costs that will come with SKUSA but if the racers are ok with it then we are to. I do like SKUSA’s new attitude and format focusing on the regional events and think they are headed in the right direction. What I do not want to see is the racers having to pick between CSC or SKUSA as that will just fragment the racers and ruin everything that has been done by all involved.. Jim is doing what he believes is the best thing for karting and his facility when it is completed. The bottom line is we are commited to promoting the best events possible and giving the racers a really good value for the money they spend.I’ll say this:
this forum is Too limited so send out a questionaire to the racers and find out what they want.
If anyone can make this work it is Jim Keesling. Straight up guy and doesn’t want to win a popularity contest to please everyone. Just for this reason I’d go with SKUSA.
But once again (Tom’s idea is good) Have them present to us what’s in it for us and the track owners…
JB, no one is asking you to, how did you phrase it, ?just lay down like a bunch of sheep and let them take over what so many of us have worked so hard to build?.
Jim presented it way differently than that. SKUSA can obviously see the success of what we are doing with the CSC. Why in the world would you expect them to change it all around? And? I am not ?suggesting? anything. I am one of those who have worked hard on the CSC, but whether or not I think this is the way to go or not is really not the issue here. The reason I brought it up was the fact that I thought the racers had a right to know that this was being discussed. It was brought up to the CSC board that this is an option. I thought ( and it might not matter to many what I think) that if it wasn?t made public, the decision would be made based mostly on history and even personal grudges, without the racers even having a chance to get all of the facts. It may turn out that the same decision is made in the end, but at least the karters have had some input. I do think that it is fair to mention the SKUSA history, and based on that, proceed with caution, but not just shut it down. Obviously some thought SKUSA was good enough to put the effort into before, and what says that can?t happen again.I am really sorry that you weren?t on the last call, JB, because you got the nomination of Jim for Race Director all wrong. Jim has no interest in that position. Jim will work with the track owners (and CSC organization if involved) to help things run smoothly from his position of Regional Director. So the argument of a SKUSA official in the management structure of CSC is not an issue?never was. Jim would be happy to talk to anyone with questions, Lord knows I had a few. Jim is out of town for a few days though.
WKA is really not even in the picture. It wasn?t like the CSC board (track owners) decided to look at a sanctioning body, and have narrowed it to SKUSA. Rather it was that SKUSA came into our region, and the decision is either to work together with SKUSA, or to continue CSC as it is. Jim did not need to bring the CSC into it at all, he very well could have just published a SKUSA schedule. It seems to me that even if you don?t embrace the full concept of what SKUSA could do for the CSC, surely you could see what effect having a second series in the region could do to the CSC. Maybe that?s not fair, but it is definitely one way to look at it.
As for the CSC charging a fee for membership and/or raising entry fees..the details have not been decided by the board. The racers want consistency, a race director, a tech director, written rules, etc. Those things can?t be provided at no cost. It isn?t as if the CSC made a bunch of money last year?there is a little bit left to go a long way toward next year.
Rules alone are a huge issue. We were lucky last year in running under other organizations? rules. That is not legal. If they want to push the issue, neither is simply copying them into our own book. These organizations, WKA and SKUSA, are aware that we exist, and they are not going to let anyone continue to use their rules without approval or consequences.
OK, enough. I am working on a questionaire…. it seems we all agree that is the only way to have a true gauge to what the racers want. Track owners, please email me the questions as you would like them to appear on the survey.
-angie
angie
JB, Thanks for the kind words but this is not about what happened in the past but what we are going to do for the future.
No matter which organization the racers and track owners decide to play ball with the fact still remains that we have to have our own infrastructure in place. Brad laid it on the line quite succintly. CSC has to have it’s OWN race director,tech person ,track personnel and timing and scoring crew. No other organization is going to provide them to us. They will only be piggy-backing on our resources.
The monies paid to the “new” SKUSA only means at the end of the season the top 10 in each class will be “invited ” to participate in an end of year race w/ the lucky qualifiers from the other regions.
Didn’t need an invitation in the past to run Supernats. just pay your money and go.
We will still have to run their races for them during the regular CSC season.
Maybe that is appealling to some. Instead of the old system of trying to afford to travel all over the U.S. in the Pro Moto tour.
If our racers are willing to fork out that kind of money why not use it to benefit our program first.
Infusing $40 or $50 a person into CSC at the beginning of the season as dues or registration or whatever you want to call it would give us a decent nest egg for putting the crew together for our series.
That doesn’t address who would fill those positions but it sure would be a nicer carrot to wave in front of them than relying on our present method and hopefully provide the consistency being called for now.Rusty
Another racer’s opinion….
I feel that SKUSA and Jim Keesling are a postive for karting in CO. With that being said, the CSC does not really need or want any external influence.
1. Classes which are not sanctioned by SKUSA do not likely have any interest in paying $75 for no return.
2. Classes which are sanctioned by SKUSA may have participants which are not interested in competing in the year-end SKUSA championships.
3. Classes which are sanctioned by SKUSA my have participants which ARE interested in competing in the year-end SKUSA chapmionships without having to travel to all the pro-tour races… If you have not had the pleasure to travel to these races, trust me, the new system will be a much easier (less $$$) way to go after a national championship.
I can see the heading go something like this…..
“Colorado Sprint Championships sanctioned by SKUSA”
SKUSA could simply “piggy-back” the CSC, and entrants which choose to be involved could sign for the season membership and pay whatever $$ extra per race to go after SKUSA points. Those that aren’t interested can continue as before with the CSC. SKUSA would have minimal influence as to how the races are run, unless other races are put on outside of the CSC umbrelly (i.e. Denver GP, CO spring street race, etc.) Pretty simple as I see it….
I spent some time last year trying to get an undestanding about the Karting community and what it would take to get in to the sport.
Everyone (Racers) are great, for most of us Racing is a Sport, however when it comes to Track Owners, their perpective changes as this is a business and there seems to be a lack on consistency between making the events succesful and maintaning the profit center operational.Therefore Getting some consistency across the board is great, but we need to understand what are the options, what is the difference between SKUSA and STARS or WKF and IKF. What are they bringing to the table to make CSC better.
And another thing…
I for one if I was a track operator would NOT want to have what happened @ IMI happen again in regaurds to liability and lawsuits. Regaurdless of my thoughts (at this time) pertaining to National Sactioning, for liability alone I would side with what the track owners want. How many frivilous lawsuits are the track owners going to absorb (or their insurance carriers) before they have to shut down. I like to race and compete and if there aren’t any tracks to do this then we defeat the whole purpose.
For this reason whatever the track owners decide should have more weight to the decision, IMHO.
:cheers:
:loony:Mike,
IMI is a bad example. It was only a matter of time before something like that occurred there. I am amazed it didn’t happen sooner! When you mix little kids, rentals, 4-cyle, 80cc, 100cc, 125cc on the track at once bad things are bound to happen. I would never let either of my son’s on the track at IMI with how the non-race day track time is operated. It is dangerous especially for the little kids. They go so slow. I do not know another way to state it. I think J.B. has it correct at his track with regard to non-race day track time.
Irregardless of my opinion, the track owners are in the end responsible for what occurs on their track. If they can not, at minimum, always, always, always make absolutely sure that karts enter and depart the track in the corect direction then they should be forced to shut down. There will always be that one person who doesn’t know the rules or just isn’t bright enough to follow or understand them.
One last thing Mike, if all the tracks shut down I will build my own so don’t you worry. 😀
This may be an unpopular thing to say but so what,
Tom
Tom
The accident was over four years ago, on a race day and was caused by a father moving a barrier and sending his son on the track the wrong way. This lawsuit has been settled and is over. I will not be shut down and I don’t know where this rumor has started. I can be sued by someone falling in the parking lot just as easy as a accident on the track, its the American way of doing things when someone gets a lawyer involved.
As far as the CSC races we will have a tech person, race director, spec fuel, spec tires, complete written rules, etc… This will happen with or without any sanctioning. All of the races were run with insurance last year and will be this year, with or without sanctioning. Sanctioning has nothing to do with them taking responsibilty for an accident, that is what insurance companies do.
Who was the tech director that let 3 80’s go race two different CSC races with P1 boxes? With or without a sanctioning body, this cannot happen again.
Brad,
I obviously do not have the correct story of what occurred. I am in no way pointing a finger at anyone. I’m simply saying we all, including myself, need to take responsibilty for our actions. It is the unfortunate few who do not that ruin it for the rest of us.
Tom
PS–> As far as the CSC, I personally have not had a single problem with the rules or the tech at any of the tracks. If SKUSA can piggyback on the CSC races fine if not then I hope they do not schedule races on the same dates.
I find this amusing that on the “I was wrong” and “rules” thread almost everybody wanted a outside party for lack of a better discription, to give them rules and a feeling of belonging and legitamacy. Now the nay sayers come in and say how we don’t need them and we can do it ourselves, I say B.S. it wasn’t done and it probably won’t be. It is just a way to keep it away from somebody or something that might have some influence over what has been happening. And to say that people shouldn’t have to join both groups is weak at best, it’s 75 bucks once a year that’s nothing compared to what is spent on one practice or race day. So when it comes down to it there is already a SKUSA region here, why not piggy back on that and support it rather than bring in WKA,IKF,or KART and let them further splinter the available karters, makes sense to me.
Tunner, do you pay for your own entry fees and dues?
I am sure it wouldn’t bother most all shifter pilots to have to join Shifter Kart USA. Now ask them to join WKA or IKF and not even have a kart that qualifies for use in either. That is what you are asking of all us Briggs karters to do. Plus you are saying we are weak at beast for not doing so.
You also say that a different santioning body other than SKUSA would be splintering or fragmenting available karters.
Me being a die hard briggs racer for years could have the same view against SKUSA as you do agianst the other bodies.
Maybe your definition of an available karters is one that can afford to race a shifter, a national, and pay you to tune it.
Well I define available karters as local people that think they might like to be involved. For the most part with type of customer the first step isn’t buying and racing a shifter or even a TAG.
I am shure there are many TAG and shifter people that think there class is the fewture of karting, and see no need for my type of classes. I am here to tell you that you are leaving the majority of fewture karters behind with your narrow minded thoughts.When it comes down to it there is also allready a WKA region here too.
As a Racer that payed and raced the CSC races for the two years that it has existed, it is nice to know that we do have some kind of insurance covering these events. The year before CSC was born I attended 40 plus races at our local tracks. Every race had some sort of tech. They also had track workers, race directors, much of everthing a track needs to put on a race.
Why is it that all the sudden the tracks aren’t willing to do the job of putting on a race? Craig Mansfield and I were the first to try and join the colorado racers togather as we raced them 40 plus races in 2002. Each track with its 15 race series is what fragmented the karters. The tracks are going to run there races. We as racers only need to orginize togather as to when and where we are going to go to race. We don’t need no reps telling the racer what they can do for us. It is the reps job of selling his service to each track. Then the racer can deside which track is more appealing to go to. Really CSC shouldn’t be involved in writting or enforcing the rules. It’s main purpose should be orginizing the dates and places so we all can be at the same track on the same day, in order to race that tracks rules a policies. If a track can’t provide the things we as racers need to race there, we shouldn’t be there.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.