FV Meeting at Runoffs

[sabre1]

Wasn't there supposed to be a meeting at the runoffs for the FV group? Just curious if there was a meeting, and if so, what happened. Discussion of rule changes, etc.; I haven't seen any mention of it on this forum.

Thanks.

-Jim

[problemchild]

The CRB and BOD were in hiding. After totally ignoring the conclusions formed at the 2009 meeting, and prolonging the manifold situation for another 13 monthes, they announced there would be no 2010 meeting and no announcement about the final manifold rule until after the Runoffs.

Makes sense. Not much point in holding a meeting for driver input, if your going to let Gomburg and the committee do their own thing anyway,

[racing stuff]

Seems that I saw a sign with an arrow on it, pointing out towards turn 8-9, with CRB on it. Was it a case of being so remote, that no one could find them and voice their opinions, or did someone move the sign as a joke ?
Gomberg must have something on someone(s) in SCCA, he sure has had us eat a lot of $$$$ the last few years. Normally to the benefit of a business or two.

[Matt King]

The sign was pointing to the meeting room over by the karting course where the daily CRB "tent" meetings were held for all the classes. This is the same room where we had the FV meeting last year, but these meetings were the general all hands on deck Formula/Sports Racer mass sessions they have always had, not the same as the special FV only meeting we had last year. From what I heard, the new manifold rules will be based on the concept of maximum overall measurements that was discussed last year at that meeting.

[brian]

Matt is right and the manifold issue has been resolved with tons of input. The bends will now be an average measurement. While the conspiracy fanatics thought otherwise, maybe they were out of the country or something, it was published in the driver's packet and the locations and times were on the multiple schedules we received at registration.

[FV80]

Brian (Mac <G>),
Where did you get the info that the measurements *WILL* be an average in the bends?? Last I heard (I was AT the CRB meeting) was that it would be determined "some time in the future" and we would be notified via FasTrack. (as told by Dave G and Fred C and others at that meeting). The CRB would be meeting in October and their decision would be passed to the BOD for the Nov meeting and it was unlikely that we would have a definitive answer before the Dec FT.
Steve, FV80

[brian]

A member of the CRB told me that the average method would be recommended. Maybe I misunderstood since it's not offically been approved by the BOD. I understand that the majority of the engine builders recommended average. I was busy rebuilding my wounded car and didn't make the meeting.

[pillowmeto]

Can someone fill us in on who Dave Gomberg is and why he is important?

[Matt King]

He's a member of the CRB and a liaison to the Formula/Sports Racer subcommittee. My question is, who appoints these guys and are there any term limits!?

[Ed Womer]

Matt,

Dave is a DC region member and races a D sports car. He has been involved in racing for a long time and I think is a pretty good guy.

Ed

[Matt King]

I'm sure he is a good and well-meaning guy, but I still am interested to know the selection process for the members of these committees and boards. They wield an incredible amount of power in the club but at least to a rank and file member like me, it seems like a bit of a secret society.

[FV80]

Matt,
They are not quite as 'secret' as it seems. Dave occasionally even visits this board to see how the 'flow' is going - he also occasionally responds to questions that he has answers to. The BOD are elected members by the rank and file of each AREA (I think there are 10 AREAs now). The BOD appoints the CRB based on resume's submitted for empty spots. As best I know, there are no term limits to the CRB - they serve at the 'will' of the BOD and can be removed at any time if the BOD receives complaints. The CRB members are unpaid VOLUNTEERS - similar to CORNER WORKERS and most vacancies come from members who are just tired of it and resign from the position. MOST of them are either ACTIVE racers, or recently active and have a pretty good feel for 'how things are in the real world'. Below that is the (for us) Formula/Sports Racer Committee who are also unpaid VOLUNTEERS and serve at the whim of the CRB (I THINK). Members volunteer (or are sought out) for those positions and are simply CHOSEN to fill the position - I'm pretty sure that most of the F/SR members are active long time racers who have a great knowledge of one or more classes. FV Nat Champ Steve Oseth is currently on the F/SR and is a good example - Bruce Livermore is a prior member of that committee as well. Both of those are also members of the FV Ad Hoc Committee which is a VOLUNTEER group formed by Steve O back in '03 or so to provide CLASS SPECIFIC input for the F/SR and CRB Committee members when requested as well as try to provide a CLASS focal point for rules changes that might ... or might not... be needed for the active members of the class. There are several CLASS Committees in SCCA now, but the first one IIRC was the 'Small Prod' group started by Jim Creighton back in the dark ages (early 80's?) to help F/G/and H 'decide' for the CRB what should be done about their respective classes.

All of these guys are 'available' to the general membership via email - their contact info is (I think) posted on the SCCA site if you look around hard enough. ... I say ALL - meaning the BOD/CRB and F/SR Committee members - the "lower" committees are generally not tracked by SCCA and must be contacted by other means (like this board for the FV Committee - or via the FV website (formulaVee.us) or in response to any of the several emails per year that are sent out to all members of the FV registry. The FV Registry, BTW was created by the FV 'Committee' to try to get a handle on just HOW MANY FV racers there are and have a method to get INPUT when class rules questions come up.

Generally *ALL* of these guys/gals have a vested interest in making things better for the MAJORITY of the club as best as possible. That always means that SOMEONE(s) will not be happy, but they do their best under often TRYING circumstances.
Hope this addresses most of your concerns.
Steve, FV80
PS - I should add that often it is DIFFICULT to find people willing to serve on these Committees .. ALL of them. If you (or anyone else) are interested enough to spend the time required, feel free to contact a member of any of the non-elected Committees and put your name in the hat. HOWEVER, they are generally looking for people who have "been around long enough" to have a pretty good feel for the club and club racing in general. The CLASS specific Committees, however, will often welcome a newer member to get input from that perspective as well. The FV Committee has attempted to find someone 'newer', but no one has gone past the 'I think I'd like to do that' stage when they got more details of the TIME involved.

[Ed Womer]

Matt King,

I was actually responding to the post before yours but like Stevan said these are volinteer positions and Dave is probably trying his best to help and he does come to this site to provide info and answer questions.

Ed

[Matt King]

Thanks for the explanation ,Steve. And Ed, I agree that Dave does a great job at being visible on this and other forums, engaging in discussion, and generally casting sunshine on the work of the CRB. If only more members followed his lead!

[problemchild]

Dave Gomburg may be a great guy. Unfortunately, he seems to be friendly with people in FV that have strong views about FV that are not shared by most of the community.

Since the FV committee has accomplished nothing in their time, I suggest that they all resign and FV act without a specific committee. FV can operate in the basic style that individual members can submit rule proposals and the CRB and BOD can deal with it. This will force the CRB to actually research and communicate with the FV community rather than get Dave Gomburg's input via the committee.

As far back as I can remember, and I may be wrong, our FV committee has never endorsed or supported any proposal introduced independantly by a FV member. Worse, they stated there opposition to those proposals. This was the case 7 years ago when I proposed a minimum weight increase and last year when Smazzy proposed a similiar idea. We all saw how they organized a campaign to combat the member support about the intake manifold measuring method. Let the people decide!

I have done everything I could to support the committee, including submitting technical and financial input. It upsets me that they make such a personal commitment that is so unappreciated. I think that all, including Gomburg, are good people, who are trying to do the right thing. Unfortunately, with the contribution from our favorite intake manifold customizer, the whole situation is damaged to a point of no return. For that reason, it is time to end the whole FV committee idea. Thanks! Goodbye!

[FV80]

... people in FV that have strong views about FV that are not shared by most of the community.
... Thanks! Goodbye!

Talk about people with strong views NOT shared by most of the community....

I hope that you new people can ignore Greg's rants. The rest of us already know what to do with his posts.
Steve, FV80
PS. Greg - I will ignore EVERYTHING else you have to post on this subject.

[sabre1]

I would like to thank the committee once again for the time and effort they put in on our behalf. Thankfully their skins are thicker than mine as I wouldn't waste my time on a group that appears as thankless as some of the Vee drivers appear to be. It is unfortunate that it is far easier to condemn the work of others than to make a positive contribution towards the betterment of the class. Requesting rule changes and cash donations ARE a good thing but that does not give you the right to trash the people doing the work when you don't get what you want. The FV committee is looking after ALL the Vee racers across the country, regional and national, and I believe they are doing their best for everyone's benefit. The CRB and the F/SR committee are doing likewise.

-Jim

PS: When the manifold rules are announced, what do you want to bet that regardless of whether the bend dimensions are averaged or a maximum diameter, there will be numerous negative comments? And who will be blamed then? Maybe the Vee drivers that wrote to the CRB to express their preference...

[problemchild]

This response to my and Steve's comments is exactly why we don't need the committee. Nobody gives a crap about what they are doing. If they were needed and wanted, the response would have been overwhelming.

Note that Steve does not correct my summary of the committee's lack of success or opposition to individual member input. If you had a department in your company that had not successfully completed a project in 8 years, had lost the respect of customers, and was actively interfering with other departments ..... how long would that department exist?

I wish the committee had been successful. It has not been. Let the volunteers race their cars and stop "fighting windmills". Yes it is harsh but it is true.

Eliminate the personal and volunteer aspects. If this committee was your accountant or lawyer ..... would they still be working for you? If this committee was your engine-builder or tire-supplier .... would you still be doing business with them? Looking only at performance, this committee has been ineffective and shows no sign of changing that form.

BTW,
I was opposed to spec intake manifolds.
I was in favor of averaging measurements on spec manifolds
I am in favor of anything that reduces costs in FV.
I believe FV needs to be more inclusive.
I have accepted that the FV community favors the "status quo" over "evolution" and have supported that position for about the past 5 years.
I always put the "good of the class" before what is "best for me personally".
I shape my political commentary to the concerns of the common FV people I know.

[brian]

Oh God, this is going to be a long winter.

[neilcox]

I am a common FV person that Greg does not know and totally disagree with his viewpoint about the committee and what is correct for FV

Thank you to the committee for stepping up and helping us through the occasional darkness and for keeping the sky from falling upon our helmets.

Neil Cox
Protoform P3
NEOKLA RE
MIDIV Executive Committee Chairman
Interchange Lurker

[72jeff]

If these high dollar manifolds are deemed legal, I'm out.

[pillowmeto]

Steve,

Thank you for the through explanation of the system and the people involved.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From what I have seen of the Ad Hoc Committee (and I had had the opportunity to talk to a few of them multiple times on a few issues) I am very pleased with their work. The job is not easy, and their attempts at keeping our situation stable seems absurdly difficult. We (rank and file members) always seem to have an idea that would make our lives or the class better, but often fail to recognize or consider the effects it would have on people in other areas or other competition levels. I know this has been the case with many of the ideas I brought up in casual conversation with members of the AHC.

While the system does give the appearance of a non-challengeable insider group ruling, I have found, in every occasion, that all members in the system and answers are only an email away.

Thank you (the AD Hoc, CRB, and F/SR for doing what you do and thank you for making competitor feedback a major factor in your decision making (when they reply). Though I may not agree with every ruling, you guys have done a wonderful job in keeping our class stable and giving us a reasonably inexpensive place to race open wheel cars.

-Matt Hayes
WDCR FV #49