Is Masters Too Big?

[terence]

That is exactly the problem Peter,These various series CLAIM that the cars are FIA compliant and yet they do not enforce the reg,s to that end.Many owners are allowed to use overbored engines,some/most are not in possesion of a spare legal engine for FIA sanctioned events,if they do ,invariably they can,t be bothered to change engines for the one event,the thinking being"They won,t check it anyway"!Just the reason for checking ,or being warned of the possibilty of being checked at an FIA event.

[johngee]

Originally Posted by zefarelly

it is, and I went, raced with U2TC which is as near a level playing field as I can find, clean race, ran its distance without intervention from Sir John and the crew in mission control. finished just above midfield and a had a great race

Maybe the driving standards, respect for flag signals and 'avoiding throwing it in the gravel traps' had something to do with our 'non interventionist policy'!

[rogerwills]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Seeing as I have only one whinge and I've already spoken to them about it I can't think of anything else to discuss.

But the old saw about FIA compatibility keeps coming out and nobody to my knowledge has actually approached them about it.

I hope they allow us (Group 1s) out on slicks next year (I know the Group 2 cars are planned to be so tyred). It would keep the speed differentials close and make for some fun races.

Masters have appointed a technical team and have issued a number of bulletins - weights of cars etc. I think they are moving in the right direction. Capacity checks on front running cars must be a simple and logical next step. Also taking a magnet to a couple of heads to see if they are steel or not.....

[terence]

Lets hope that is the case Roger!

[rogerwills]

Most of you will have seen that I (James, and probably a few others as well) contacted Masters to get the official policy on hospitality. Christopher Tate sent it to me today and I've posted it on that thread. But coming back to the whole Masters thing, I don't really understand why they cop so much flak on this board?

I don't work for Masters, own shares in them (maybe wish I did!), have a relationship with them (other than as a customer) or am in any other way affiliated with them. Lets make that clear. I'm just a punter like everyone else posting here and I enjoy my racing.

Every time I've dealt with Ron, Chris and the whole team they have been more than helpful.

There is a constant undertone on this board that they are only doing this to make money like some evil fat-cat capitalists. What is that all about? If a series or organiser doesn't make money they don't last. They disappear. And then what happens to our racing opportunities? They diminish.

To me the Masters team are not "suits" who only in this for business and who deserve to be villified. They are enthusiasts just as much as we all are and are organising some great events and facilitating some great racing for us.

Roger

[john ruston]

Roger-Many people do not share your view and have voted with their feet .For several Silverstone will be their last race so something must be wrong with the organisation.I had cars in their races last year and was not impressed with their attitude so have decided we do not do the races this year.HSCC were so much easier to race with.Ron has invested lots of money to set the thing up,if it works best of luck to him if not its his cash down the tube.I do not think it will effect historic racing one way or the other.You have seen new set ups starting race series this year some who have more entries than slots.Life will continue as now being proved with these newcomers.Any series needs a clear set of rules ,that is 80% of the problem with all these races.As far as I can see Ragbags FJ series is best regulated but even that has Lotus 22 's with different numbers of chassis tubes.Continuation cars mess up Historic racing,Over capacity cars all the things discussed so many times on so many threads Get that bit correct and the food ,jacket etc bit will look after itself

[terence]

I can agree with most of what you have said Roger,but I don,t think this thread is aimed at the Team,just the question of are they getting to big too soon.Yes they do put on excellent races at excellent venues,but there is still an underlying thing with a lot of competetors about the actual aim,s of Masters.You only have to look through the Race,s to see that nearly all events are Masters[at Spa Six Hours].Indeed someone has asked "Why are there not as many Single Seater Races at Spa this year?] elsewhere in another thread.Almost makes you wonder if they do not want single seater,s out there. I for one used to love see,ing the Historic F1s etc but are Masters now that big that they can now chose the events they put on?

[SZRacer]

Once again, reading this thread makes me somewhat irritated, particularly since Masters only 'sin' appears to be that it is a large organisation, and is open about being a commercial venture. I'm not saying they are perfect by any means! There is a certain amount of that curiously perverse British desire to always support the little guy, the amateur, and the unprofessional. John R., I respect your long experience in historic racing, and am curious for the reasons behind disenfranchisement with Masters.

I am not defending Masters, and like Roger have no shares in them, or any affiliation/connection whatsoever. I've also been historic racing for 10 years with HSCC, AMOC, Gentleman Drivers (both under Carol, and Masters), BARC etc.

I am however, the Gentleman Drivers series representative, and my raison d'etre in that capacity is to pass these comments on, and try to get a response!

Yes, sometimes Masters have been a little more heavy-handed than a true 'club' would have been, and maybe some of you feel that they could do things differently. If so, PLEASE SAY SO!! Either email them directly, call them, or even better, go through your series representative, and we will try to get things done!!

I don't think it's fair to damn someone without giving them a chance to respond or to rectify the situation. Of course, if no repsonse or action is forthcoming, then you have every right!

Regarding their perceived 'elitism', well, yes, my race entry fees are around the £500 mark, but that is for 90 minutes of racing, at top events, with usually 30-40mins. of practice thrown in. I pay a third of that for a 15 min. race and 15 minute practice with the AMOC, at Snetterton, with no hospitality thrown in. You can do the maths!

Once again, and I believe the other thread regarding hospitality (where Roger and myself managed to get clarification and a response) demonstrates this, PLEASE DO FEED BACK!! To myself or the representative of your series (Chris jolly, Stuart Imber, Frank Lyons et al), and let us take up your beef for you.

This goes as much for general issues as technical issues, although from what i understand from John Quenby, there will be a lot more policing of technical issues going forward, and they are taking the steps to implement this.

Personally, I am interested to see how Masters might 'streamline' and better integrate Top Hat into Masters. There is a certain amount of cross-over at the moment, although I guess it allows people to do more than one race with one car (saloons especially)

Regards,

James

[zefarelly]

this thread is wandering all over the place, as many before it have, HAving been at a Sussex circuit all day it makes an interesting read catching up . . .

I don't think Masters is too big, but they're not all things to all men in the same way as the HSCC seem to be, but its early days. Equally, just as you get comfortable with your existing series, something changes . . . . The HSCC are pretty good with continuity. I use the HSCC as a reference as they're the nearest obvious comparisson

My opinion of Top HAt saloons started to change toward the end of last season with the huge increase in V8's, wayward driving standards and total lack of respect for any regulations. all three together have directly caused interrupted and stopped races on virtually every outing in the last year, as well as considerable damage/ increased risk of damage to cars

Lots of people have mentioned this, politely and directly to JT, and under MAsters I'm sure others too. Its pretty obvious that Top Hat grids have changed considerably, and they're now more NAscar than European saloon car. I know efforts where made and words said, but was it enough? to my mind it was not

as for this forum vs talking to people, I think most of us are intelligent enough to both, and It has been commented that this is banal by people who read but don't post. Personally I find it on the whole a positive and constructive forum. . . . even occaisionally to those who are above posting themselves! We have attracted some attention, caused a few debates, ruffled a few feathers, and ultimately instigated a few changes, hopefully for the better, I'm certainly not aware we've made anything worse for anyone.

MAsters isn't too big, but its pulling in different directions and trying to be/do too much, like a crap restaurant, simplify the menu and do less better and it should flourish.

[rogerwills]

On my wish list for Top Hat / Masters is more events for mid-engined sports racers. When they merged, a decision was taken that Cloth Cap would only be GT cars. Having just purchased an Elva Mk 7, it meant I had one less opportunity to race it. As a result I've made decisions a couple of times this season to withdraw from Master events and race instead at either HSCC (Guards Trophy) or with PMO (Dijon, Paul Ricard, etc) where the car has a good race.

This has been compounded on one or 2 occasions where small engine cars have been excluded in preference for the large engined cars (such as the combined SRM/WSM race at the Silverstone Classic).

So if there is a change for next year to the line-up from Masters, please, more for mid-engined sports racers! And don't exclude small engined cars - they can be quick, entertaining and pay the same entry money as their larger bretheren!

Roger

[Peter Mallett]

Not having more than the one car, my only gripe is that we don't have the whole Masters package at each weekend, although granted Mallory would be a little crowded!

I think the early fears of the costs etc. have been put to bed. Although events have been lost, others like Chimay, have been added so perhaps a more stable calendar for next year?

I have no idea why people are "voting with their feet" but I do know that at Silverstone we had technical scrutineering and this is being implemented at all events.

[rogerwills]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Not having more than the one car, my only gripe is that we don't have the whole Masters package at each weekend, although granted Mallory would be a little crowded!

I think the early fears of the costs etc. have been put to bed. Although events have been lost, others like Chimay, have been added so perhaps a more stable calendar for next year?

I suspect some of this was merging Top Hat into Masters where I'm sure there was some cross over on events that had been committed. I suspect 2008 will be more indicative of the way forward.

[Peter Mallett]

Yes Roger it does seem logical so maybe the events are just suffering from bad timing of the merger.

Got to admit though that I am looking forward to next year when things will be a bit more stable. The one thing I have found with Masters is the approachability, and indeed they're honest enough to tell you if you are being daft.

FWIW, I mailed Rachel today to ask if there was to be a rep for 70's saloons.

[zefarelly]

looking for a part time Job Peter ?

[Peter Mallett]

Eau Contraire. I can't do it from here unfortunately.

[terence]

So the feeling is that Masters is not too big ,just a little understaffed.I fully agree that they do get us into some of the best venues,that they do seem a bit expensive,[But bang for buck,considering the venues] not overly so,as long as the hospitallity is up to expectation,s as well. All in all they chose a pretty tough choice of series to take over,as far as Julius,and Carrol are concerned that is!All things considered,a pretty reasonable job so far. ??

[Peter Mallett]

As has been said, I think next year will be the making of the series. I know some of the people there do take note of what is being said on here and so I think they deserve a pat on the back for taking action where it needs action.

I do get a bit annoyed with the constant harping about non FIA compatible cars because when all is said and done, if you know a car is illegal you can protest it. Relying on the scrutes to pick up on everything is a bit like asking the government to stop your neighbours cows from farting. Oh wait!

If you want to race at good events, with good grids then its as much a responsibilty of the driver as the management. Encourage others to come and race and the series (all of them) will prosper.

Constant complaints will only succeed in turning people away.

And Terry, the cost thing has been done to death and as you say the conclusion is that the value for money is as good as you'll get anywhere else, based on the quality of the events.

That Silverstone meeting was fantastic, it just needed a few spactators to give it more of an atmosphere, but being a closed meeeting they couldn't publicise it, but next year?

As far as I know there will be a lot of Group 2 cars out next year (not particularly good for me) but it does demonstrate that there are people out there who want to enter, which cannot be a bad thing.

[terence]

Absolutly,the non compliant thing with FIA as you said has been done to death,but one thing I think it does show ,is that IF all the cars WERE legal,we would see quite a few more entrys in all events.the simple thing is that most Racers just want a level playing field.It will ultimatly keep everyones prep/build cost,s down,therefore [in therory] give more money for race entrys!The major problem with protesting is that people do not want to rock the boat and just put up with things as they are,thats why they voice their feelings on here. As for Masters,let,s hope they do make the changes proposed because it would be a shame to lose them!

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by terence bower

one thing I think it does show ,is that IF all the cars WERE legal,we would see quite a few more entrys in all events.

I think that's debatable. Basically you are suggesting that unless someone proves beyond doubt that a car is legal App K), the FIA diehards will refuse to race.

I see it differently, you can only influence from participation so even if you are suspiscious of a car, get on the grid and if you really feel strongly pay your money.

Don't forget the FIA Historic Touring Cars aren't racing this year (or at least I haven't heard about them) due to lack of entries. Yet all of these cars are apparenetly FIA legal. Hmmm.

[terence]

No,what I,m going by is the fact that there have been quite a few comments made ,not only on here,that people vote with thier feet,If they think that there are a lot of bent car,s,in any series,they will not be competetive,"then why bother" racing in that series.

[Peter Mallett]

I agree but leaving for another series will only serve to reduce the opportunities to race. So enter, protest and influence. Just walking away is not the answer.

I appreciate it doesn't really impact me because I run to the old RACMSA Group "1.5" regs , but suggesting that U2TC (for example) or any other series is better due to scrutineering, really doesn't hack it because scrutes can only see what they're pointed at.

Masters has stated that, where it applies, FIA AppK will be imposed. Are they supposed to walk around every car and tear it down to determine the "legality"?

Clearly that is unreasonable, but they do listen to queries and take appropriate action when they are aware of something.

The protest system is there for everyone and yes it can be disruptive but only to those who are actually bending the rules. However no protest, no clarification, no result.

Frankly if someone has to cheat to beat me and we both know it, then that someone has lost.

[terence]

Yes ,I can agree on that Peter,I appreciate that Scrut,s can only see what,s outside and that it is upto individuals SHOULD protest as and when,BUT,most just grin and bear it,or,as you suggest ,just go and play elsewhere.No.that isnt the answer,and yes,if more were protested ,perhap,s the rest would understand that "Thier" rules are not the one,s that should be adhered to.Unfortunatly ,do we have to put it Human Nature then.Now,where is that "Ideal World".

[GBRM]

I think it also against the spirit of "gentlemenness" to protest, yes there is no reason why you shouldn't and if you severly cheated out of something then why not, but then the stiff upper lip kicks in and you just take it.

From my popint of view as someone who has just started competing in Historics this year I would portest someone if I felt they had beaten me unfairly and squarely but then I remember the 25+ years of going racing with my Dad and his many years previosuly and he said he would never protest someone (he would question the eligibility of a car before a race but never afterwards). Okay, maybe he didn't need to as he would be near the front anyway, but it was still against the spirit of the "sport" in his books and now that has passed on to me but we'll see if my conscience gets the better of me!!

I agree the FIA "thing" has been done to death but something needs to be done about it to stop the whispers and clandestine meetings!!

[Peter Mallett]

Which is my point. Put up or shut up. But giving in by going somewhere else just moves the problem around.

[johngee]

May I suggest that the same is true of driving standards. Observer's reports and CCTV sometimes only tell part of the story regarding contact or other bad behaviour and rumblings/gossip/'noises off' do NOT help us address those issues.
Wingeing to all and sundry in the paddock, or worse still to the press, does not help Clerks of the Course do the job they should be doing. Sometimes, you guys need to stick your head above the parapet, however 'ungentlemanly' that may seem.