The Reido Rules Controversy thread

[Reido Rules]

I'm going to stick my neck out and be the only Touring car fan on the face of the earth toi say the following.

I think that the ETCC/BTCC joint rules for 2004 is a stupid idea.

I've been tight lipped about this for a while. So why have I finally broken? Having seen the ETCC car in the paddock at Donington, I just didn;t think that the car looked very racey. It's not Edenbridges result (they've done a great job with preparation etc.) but it will be a major let down if we ruin our series to let in about 5 or 6 sub-standard cars. today we had 18 tourers, and that's likely to go up anyway. I enjoy the whole pit stop concept, I like the BTCC's reasonably long races. So what's the cost of 6 extra cars? devolution! We lose pit stops, we shorten our races and penalise our own cars. What will stop Vauxhall, MG, Honda, and Proton building those cheap things for 2005? so we will be taking a step back. In some ETCC races nothing happens, partly because the cars are too similar, partly because there are no stop's to mix things up, and partly because there is little point to crossing Europe and doing 13laps! battles are over before they begin. I don't think I've ever enjoyed an ETCC race as much as a BTCC race. SO we lose what makes the BTCC special, continuous racing, the unexpected (which is heightened by pit stops) and any technical ability is seemingly handycapped.

We might get 3 races next year, but 13 lapsish?!?!?! WHY BOTHER.

I'd rather see 18 cars race full on for 25laps with the added excitement of the pitstops than 25 cars do 13 laps, with the unexpected removed.

ETCC cars look ponsey too! lets not devolve people!!!

[SPARK Msport]

I do agree with you, I too have found ETCC boring...watched them race on eurosport I think at Silverstone and it was way boring becasue the second Race had the Alfas out of the top 6, and I was looking forward to a great race, but within 2 laps they are 1,2 and 3 or whatever it was, the rest was BOORRRIINNG!

If we are two see 13 lap races, it reminds me of that stupid 10 minute race we saw back in 2001 that was scraped after 1 race. I hope we keep pit stops as they (quote from Cox) `brought the team's into it` made the race more of a `team effort` if you like.

We have just seen the race at Donginton...and im sure we all agree that was one hell of a great race! If ETCC are going to be taking over the BTCC with plastic cars and making US change the rules then why don't the BTCC go over to europe and re-design there rule book aswell?

[the_tsar]

I agree totally

[No. 1]

I agree that ETCC is not too good but I think you miss the point, BTCC will allow ETCC cars in next year, just as they allowed the production cars in, it did not deny us great racing. ETCC cars will be far better than the Varta/B&Q bollocqs stuff that seem to do one lap before breaking down.
I have never ever before seen a driver end a season with a minus point score as did one of the B & Q drivers did last year.... that was shameful for any team.

[SPARK Msport]

Gonna but the whole thing under water and say the ETCC and BTCC should be split into class's. Have 3 races during the weekend, 1 for BTCC with pit stops..etc like it is today, 1 for ETCC with there short boring race...etc like it is today and then a short sprint at the start of the day or the end where both BTCC and ETCC race against each other and bend a few bumpers. Thats the only idea that would please everyone. Because if we like the ETCC or not, its coming next year and sadly we can't do much about it.

[redshoes]

What's the big deal about ETCC only doing 13 laps. That's the distance they have chosen to run because that's what they wanted not because of any fuel tank restrictions.

FIA regs state a maximum of 100 litres, exactly the same as the curent Production cars. Tank size is NOT an issue here

[Reido Rules]

Well the excuse for shortened races is indeed tank sizes. So some idiot at Toca Tour needs to look at facts.

In 13laps you get no value for money, and there is little time for reliability to be a problem or really for the driver to work.

Let ETCC cars in if you must, but to Race our cars, use them as another class, our tourers are working fine, but next year they will have to run shed loads of ballast. So if an ETCC car becomes dominant, what will occur? politics and lots of it, and that will bore fans and ruin the series. Say a BMW comes over and wins, if will only be a paper champion because we all know the Vauxhall will probably be the better car, but it's a tank, with it's 80Kg of 'Gow Blocks'. In 2005 what happens? Vauxhall build a matchbox car so it doesn't have any ballast, and that's if they don't get ****ed off the politics and quit.

So what do I do? pay £20-25 for 13lap BTCC races no with no drama, or go to Rockingham for £12 and watch two 60lap races (40-45mins each) with the drama of pit stops, and no bodged rules to falsify a grid and get a top music act thrown in? I'm sorry but even on a racing point you should care that the BTCC might only do 13laps because it's not value, why bother?

Let me put it to you like this. There is a shortage of plumbers in the UK, so do we start giving Monkeys tool kits and placing silly restrictions upon the humans so that the monkeys have a chance of getting some business? Will F1 be putting F3000 cars in and putting chunks of ballast in the F1 cars? So why on earth should we do it here, we will never know how much the 'Gow Blocks' will affect the BTCC cars performance at each circuit, so how can you declare a proper winner???

I'm begining to think that the only man with brains in British Motorsport is Ashley Pover!

[redshoes]

Missed this first time around but can I just pick you up on another point.

"today we had 18 tourers, and that's likely to go up anyway"
How is that figure likely to go up? The FIA rules taking off all over Europe - as well as the ETCC we have the Swedish championship using them, and the Italian, German and Danish series to follow next year. Can you honestly see another manufacturer wanting to built a BTCC only car when they could built an ETCC one and use/sell it in at least 5 different championships. Sorry, but that's just not going to happen.

[Craig]

Originally posted by Reido Rules
I'm begining to think that the only man with brains in British Motorsport is Ashley Pover!

That's the guy with £44m of debts, isn't it? hmmm... yeah obviously got brains then

Listen, give Alan Gow time to see what he comes up with before writing things off. I do not agree with everything he does, but I do believe he's the right man for the job. And, let's face it, he does have a small amount of experience of what works...!

[KA]

Originally posted by redshoes
Missed this first time around but can I just pick you up on another point.

"today we had 18 tourers, and that's likely to go up anyway"
How is that figure likely to go up? The FIA rules taking off all over Europe - as well as the ETCC we have the Swedish championship using them, and the Italian, German and Danish series to follow next year. Can you honestly see another manufacturer wanting to built a BTCC only car when they could built an ETCC one and use/sell it in at least 5 different championships. Sorry, but that's just not going to happen.

Spot on- in fact, given a few years, I can see the ETCC-spec cars becoming the backbone of the series- as you suggested, manufacturers are more likely to get involved if they can use the same basic car across a number of series, rather than having to develop a one-off for the UK- that's how the BTCC 2-litre rules in 1991 grew to be to be the worldwide Supertouring formula.....

If the ETCC regs become the dominant force in touring car racing in Europe, then we have to go with them, or the BTCC will end up a backwater with few manufacturers and small grids

[Chris Y]

Originally posted by Reido Rules
So what do I do? pay £20-25 for 13lap BTCC races no with no drama, or go to Rockingham for £12 and watch two 60lap races (40-45mins each) with the drama of pit stops, and no bodged rules to falsify a grid and get a top music act thrown in?

Here we go again

I'm sorry, but if you want to watch Stock cars turning left all the time at the same track every couple of weeks, with a supporting music act, then go right ahead. We won't stop you.

Personally, I prefer to have cars turn both directions, and with a little variety of tracks. And I'm not interested in any current 'pop' act.

Just because the current ETCC rules say 13 laps, doesn't mean the ETCC 'class' in 2004 will be like this. As Craig points out, Alan Gow is quite experienced in these matters, so wait and see what he's planning, before you start having a whinge. Either that or move to Rockingham and ignore the BTCC altogether.

[touringlegend]

Rather short sighted view Reido..

6 cars, yes maybe next year. But let me ask you, were Audi, SEAT, BMW all looking at running BTCC teams in the not too distant future before it was made known ETCC cars would be allowed to compete?

As KA said, I too can see ETCC spec cars becoming the backbone of the series, as Super 2000 is going to be the Touring Car formula of the future.

[Super Tourer]

Consolidation of the two series is the only way forward IMO.

As other posters have mentioned, new manufacturer entrants are unlikely in the BTCC without ETCC parity as pure numbers dictate that it's pointless for Alfa and Seat (for example) to build and develop seperate BTCC spec cars. Therefore, it would only take two of the current car makers to pull out, to put the BTCC on the back foot.

Super 2000 rules are the way forward for sustainable series IMO as the value for money is obvious.

Having said all this, a note of caution. If we get too many car makes involved, their influence over the series becomes stronger. It's important that the organisers run the series, not the entrants - as we have seen in sportscar racing over the years, manufacturers have effectively dictated the agenda by pulling out if the rules do not favour their car or lobbying for a rule change to suit their car.

We need to be sure that the BTCC retains it's identity and autonomy.

[KA]

Originally posted by Reido Rules
I'm going to stick my neck out and be the only Touring car fan on the face of the earth toi say the following.

I think that the ETCC/BTCC joint rules for 2004 is a stupid idea.

I've been tight lipped about this for a while. So why have I finally broken? Having seen the ETCC car in the paddock at Donington, I just didn;t think that the car looked very racey. It's not Edenbridges result (they've done a great job with preparation etc.) but it will be a major let down if we ruin our series to let in about 5 or 6 sub-standard cars.....

....ETCC cars look ponsey too! lets not devolve people!!!

Can I stick my neck out here and say I actually prefer the look of the ETCC cars (and probably be the only touring car fan on the face of the earth etc...)- I think it's because they look much more like the touring cars I've been used to watching right through Group A and Supertouring than the current BTCC cars do- that almost GT-sized wing on the back of the BTCC cars has always looked fairly ridiculous to me....

[KA]

Originally posted by Super Tourer

Having said all this, a note of caution. If we get too many car makes involved, their influence over the series becomes stronger. It's important that the organisers run the series, not the entrants - as we have seen in sportscar racing over the years, manufacturers have effectively dictated the agenda by pulling out if the rules do not favour their car or lobbying for a rule change to suit their car.

Definitely agree with you there- and to make sure this doesn't happen it doesn't really matter whether the rules are BTCC, ETCC Super Production or Aussie V8 -what matters is that the organisers of the championship actually enforce the regs consistently and don't fold under pressure from individual manufacturers or teams wanting rule changes to suit their own ends.

[SPARK Msport]

i'll be honest, i'll see how it goes next year...this time next year we will all have different views, like in F1 1 year ago when they had there rule changes. Some people right them off before they start - some becasue they know things others dont, some becasue they like what we have now, and others coz they dont like a change.

I'll give ETCC a chance, rules havent been confirmed so it might not be 13 laps...could be 15 or 16, who knows?!?!? I'm sure Alan is doing the right thing, like hes said before, he wants more cars and manufactures on the grid - maybe this is the way forward if we take 2 steps back.

[runnyhunny]

My views are mixed.

As I suspect we all agree, it would be good to see:

a) a single-class format
b) more cars

in 2004. However, the signs are that no-one wants to build any new 'BTC Touring' cars. Sad, but that's the way it is.

Lots of 'Super 2000' (ETCC) cars exist, and more are being built, so they seem sensible. Yes, I know that the bodywork isn't as much fun, and they cost more (since they don't have 'control parts').

However, those things are a small price to pay for points (a) & (b) above, don't you think?

My only concern is with how TOCA arrange the weights for equalizing the two types of car. I honestly believe, as with FWD vs. RWD, that it's impossible. The whole area is a giant can of worms.

If I get a chance to speak to Alan Gow or, ideally, Peter Riches, at Oulton Park, then I will!

[Reido Rules]

Originally posted by Craig Antill
That's the guy with £44m of debts, isn't it? hmmm... yeah obviously got brains then

Ashley Pover has only recently inherited Rockingham, neraly all of that £44million occured in David Grace's leadership. Pover has boosted attendances and lets not forget that he is working with a series with no history, and no origional fan base, at a new facility, that was poorly managed for a good few years. If he has a debt of a similar size in two years time I will accept that you might have a point, but now your point is totally missinformed on Ashley.

Alan Gow the man that was Ousted before because things weren't working, obvioussly the man for the job. I would have let richard West have at least another 12months, because he was gradually building our series, he kept the BTCC going when Gow's policies were close to knocking it out.

Merge but have different Classes, why should we compromise our cars??? Succeed to be punished is always something that I've hated, and it looks like our teams will be getting that. I really (at least I'm being honest here) hope that en ETCC spec car never wins a race!

Grid numbers don't necessarily get the fans through the gates! Proper race cars do, a good show does and value for money. If the BTCC wants to increase spectator numbers they should look at making it an attractive family weekend, something that will allow you to persuade the Mrs that going racing will be good for everyone. We don't have that and we don't look like getting it. ASCAR has now got that. The fact that Rockingham has achieved 40,000+ on numerous occassions this year, surely shows that. I would rather go and see hardcore race cars, with big roaring engines and big wings, not done up production cars.

[Craig]

You really don't understand the inner workings of the BTCC and other touring car series, do you? I think Gow was bought back at precisely the right time - where were things heading before he came back and announced ETCC cars would be accepted? I think that West had a fair chance but the circumtances just weren't in his favour unfortunately.

The reason that Gow was replaced previously was that he sold his company (TOCA) to BMP and chose to step down - he was not 'ousted'! I am not going to sit here and sing his praises like some of the lickers did with Mr West as that's not my place but give the guy a chance for crying out loud!

Yes Rockingham has got big crowds this year but that is what happens when you fill it full of kids who are not interested in racing or, in the case of F3, give away 40,000 freebie tickets!! Sure the guy has got people through the doors but that fact alone does not mean he has not got a £44m white elephant on his hands. Yes, I know he bought into it after some of the debt were already there, but what does that say? Obviously a sane man...

[100%VauxhallFan]

Don't you just love watching people back tracking from what they have said, because they are too weak to stick to their guns? It's fab!

[Super Tourer]

Having being involved with the BTCC during Alan Gow's tenure and sat the other side of the table from him on several occasions, I totally agree he is the right person the lead the BTCC in todays climate. He has the flair and guile to get people on side, whilst at the same time speaking his mind on other issues, which will make for a 'no where you stand series' - which is exactly what we need.

Admitting ETCC spec cars, undoubtedly spells the end for BTC rules within the next 2 years , by which time Vauxhall will be looking to swap to a newer model, will they build a BTC car or an ETCC car which gives GM the channce to race Opels in Europe on a shared cost basis....?

Even MG looked at the ETCC route over the winter, so if they commit for longer they are surely bound to build an ETCC car.

The immediate issue is how the two sets of cars are regulated on an equivalence basis, after that natural progression will IMO see teams only build super 2000 spec cars.

On the Rockingham issue, I am sure a lot of that £44M is write downs on the 1st year/18 months and goes to show the costs of staging a 'world class' event like CART and why they were so keen to drop the series.

If we say that it was a venue really built solely for CART racing, then it could be termed a financial white elephant. However the new management seem to have a more buisness like approach to it, realising it has to be a 7 day a week operation with racing as just part of the business, not THE business.

Arguably it produced one of the best BTCC races of the year so far, but filling 50,000 seats was never going to be easy, so I think it will evolve into a motorsport business centre, that also holds races - which AP says will make it profitable.

[KPC]

We'll see what we see. It's taken three years for the series to get interesting again so I'd be surprised if Alan Gow would kill it dead at this stage. I've made it very clear in daze gone by that I am no fan of the proddy class and, when last year it looked like the tourers had died a death for 2003, I was responsible for some threads that were just as heated as this one. But I'm glad to say I was pleasantly surprised at what we got this year. So, as with everything in life, let's just see what we get before going off the rails as it ain't over til the fat lady sings. Some hybrid thing 'll probably be the order of the day and it could be good, could be sh*te?

[SPARK Msport]

the worrying thing is that the ETCC will kill of what is the BTCC as said before. ETCC spec cars are being used world-wide and soon the within the next few years I wouldnt be surprised if most of the BTCC teams build and run ETCC cars spelling the end to the BTCC as it goes into yet another new form of racing. The BTCC this year has done very well with what its got and I can't see things getting any worse. 2000 has been seen and done with after the BTCC almost died of death. Now its turning more european and more open or more cars and more drivers. We might be writing this off now, but maybe the ETCC is something the BTCC needs? Alan Gow might not be off his head, im willing to give the ETCC a chance and see what it can do for the BTCC. Time will tell if this was a good move.

[touringlegend]

BTCC will always be here (well hopefully!)

I really can't see there being much difference to be honest. Lap times between ETCC spec and BTCC machinery is similar, all we are going to notice visually is the absence of a huge rear wing on the ETCC cars.

It'll provide good racing if all the cars are competitive - thats what I want.

[Neil Adams]

the btcc drivers make will make the racing great regardless of what rules their cars are running under