World class pros or wealthy amateurs?

[KPC]

A difference of opinion soon became a hot potato of debate in the 2003 Drivers thread. Like so many threads it lost it’s way a little as too much was said and some of us wandered from the point to an extent, as you tend to do. But, as I say, it is such a hot potato that I think it needs reigning back in and deserving of a thread of it’s own – even a poll. While economics drive the BTCC and we shall get what we shall get, I would nevertheless be interested to learn the general consensus?

Before I go further let me make an analogy: What would the fans of a Division 1 football team think if their multimillion quid players were replaced with Sunday leaguers? No competition. But then the opponent teams go the same way. Competition yes, but is it the sport you know and love? If that’s the way it’s to be then it’s easier to nip up the local rec on a Sunday morning… if you still have the interest or motivation. Or think of it in terms of F1 becoming F3000.

I argued that there was little point in having wealthy amateur driver’s poodle around the BTCC well off the pace. They aren’t providing competition, more like out for a Sunday drive. Where, I said, is the enjoyment in that from a spectator/fan point of view? I don’t deny that they are racers and good luck to them if they can afford to indulge their whims (wouldn’t we all), but feel they should race at a level more suited to their ability, where they’d probably even get some silverware. Surely that would be more satisfying for them than watching the rest of the field vanish in front of their very eyes? I was supported in this opinion with comments such as, the BTCC is a championship that drivers aspire to and earn their stripes in lesser series.

This was countered with comments to the effect of that these drivers are having fun and can afford to indulge their desires. I countered this with the comment that even so, whatever the standard or level of racing, competition is the name of the game, not show boating.

Another very well observed view went on to state that the BTCC is experiencing a transition into a semi-professional series. The like of paid drivers like Thommo and Muller may soon be a thing of the past. Another said that it is not the fault of certain drivers if the only place they can find a drive is in the BTCC at present. I argued that if the BTCC does transform into the like of the saloon car championship, then is it truly the BTCC anymore?

Then an argument said that it is better to see a grid full of cars than half a grid and that if stronger drivers do come along in the future, that the back markers will be out qualified and denied a place on the grid. I argued that you do not need a full grid for good racing, so much flotsam just getting in the way. Quality not quantity. I was supported in this opinion by the idea that the wealthy amateurs are damaging the series reputation.

Others have said that these semi-pros/amatuers have winning personalities and so that makes it alright. How does that work? Sure, they may indeed be fun to be with people with shining personalities. But isn't that missing the point... BTCC isn't Dateline.

What has come out of this debate I feel, is the BTCC is very confused at the moment and possibly slowly but surely facing doom and gloom to those of us who enjoy it as the Division 1 of UK motorsport. It used to occasionally be the support race to F1. Now it is the support race to cart. Should that not be the other way round, in the UK at least? Most of us have been saying, be patient the series is still rebuilding itself… but into what I now wonder?

Any thoughts?

[Spaced Invader]

some good points there KPC.

the pay to drive in the BTCC has come around because of the current economical status of the sreies. many other top British motorsport sreies such as the GT had already imployed this tactic which did see some of the less able pay drivers being sluggish. and it isnt at all enjoyable seeing these drivers well off the pace.

i for one, as would all of us, would love to see a full grid of quality drivers but as this isnt going to happen so i would much prefer to see a lessened grid with quality drivers. but are manufacturers going to put there cars into a small but successful series? or a big series thats lacking competition but that has some drivers that are willing to less the teams financial bill by paying?

oh and your comparison of the div 1 football teams having sunday league players. i support Norwich at most of the time they play like sunday leaguers!!

[Craner Curves]

There just ain't no pleasing folks.

If I had the money, I'd rather pootle round at the back of a series I've always supported like the BTCC, than do a clubman's series which doesn't get as much exposure by TV/Radio and the written media/internet.

How are the as you put it 'wealthy amateurs' damaging the series reputation? Annie Templeton's doing no one any harm out there. She's a consistant finisher and a very courteous driver when it comes to being lapped. No harm whatsoever there.

[KPC]

I don't really want to get into this debate further, I've more than had my piece. The comments I made in opening this thread are a summary of many people's point of view, not just mine. I just wanted to put a load of opinions into the cooking pot to reign in a thread and so keep it tight for a while. I agree with some of the points raised, disagree with others, but you'll need a response from the original authors to comments such as the series reputation. By the way, I went out of my way not to mention names in this thread as I think I may of unintentionally upset a few of AT's friends in the previous thread - To mention AT is your presumption. There are others.

I will quickly reply to your points though, then I'm gone. Personally I'd rather have a good old scrap with the kids go-karting on a seafront amusement park than be the subject of ridicule. What you're saying is appearing in a high profile event is about stardom.... as I said: Show boating.

[Chris Y]

I argued that there was little point in having wealthy amateur driver’s poodle around the BTCC well off the pace. They aren’t providing competition, more like out for a Sunday drive.

I think you're missing the point slightly here. Just because a driver is at the back of the field, doesn't mean it's down to their performance as a driver. A lot of these 'wealthy amateurs' are perhaps not wealthy enough to buy a car/drive which can keep up with the better-backed teams. Unlike football, racing is not just about the performance of the person, it's about the car and the team as well. An amateur driver in a fast car may do better than a pro driver in a slow car...

Also, you mention 'competition' - and that surely is where it's at. I remember a few years ago when Paula Cook was in the BTCC - probably not the quickest driver in the pack, but there was a race at Silverstone where Paula and Gwyndaf Evans (again, another 'amateur' when it comes to circuit racing) fought tooth and nail together. Every lap they were swapping positions, and it was a really good battle. It was entertaining. It didn't really matter whether that was a scrap for 1st place or last place.

Another thing - the same boredom can be achieved by a 'pro' driver being out in front all the time, with no one to race. Again, they are providing no 'competition', no action, no spectacle.

Another way to look at it - last year, I would have rather watched a good 'clubbie' meet, like Minis, 2CVs, Ford XRs, even Extreme Paint Drying, rather than the F1 Ferrari snoozeathon. F1 = pro drivers, clubbie meets = amateurs. Amateurs win hands down.. Why? Entertainment, competition, overtaking.

Bottom line - I don't care how famous or infamous the drivers are, it's about the racing on the track. Full stop.

[KPC]

Oh dear, I just can't keep my mouth shut.... I agree that it's not about famous names, I was thoroughly entertained by the deluge of rookies in 2001 and continue to be. As for, good car bad car/good driver/bad driver, I would say: Mark Fullalove/Norman Simon. AT/Tom Boardman. And I'm a big Boardman fan. Yes, a lights to flag front runner is dull also and we've had more than our fair share of that over the last two years.... or have we....? two years of down to the wire deciders.

Paula Cook and Gwndaff Evans - good point. But my arguement from the outset has been the right tool for the job... good close racing whether A/B/C/D class, TC or PC. It's about RACING. That's all I've ever tried to say. We may see a BTCC, which is the equivalent of the old C class pre 1991 with some excellent driving. But it will be a far cry from the ST days.

[Super Tourer]

The BTCC is just an barometer of the motorsport economy.

We have two works teams taking pay drivers in order to run three cars, something that would have been unheard of not long ago, and another that openly admits it cannot fund three cars.

Many car makers are looking at sinking profits, whilst Ford and Fiat/Alfa are facing heavy losses, motorsport is equally sinking down their spending scale.

However, lets say Audi wanted to enter the BTCC with their win at all costs approach, you can bet it would be with a multi car line up with the likes of Biela, Kristenson and Aiello behind the wheel, along with a bigger hospitality unit and smarter trucks than anyone else.

Seeing Audi in the BTCC (for example) BMW would want to wrestle their mantle and come in with a bigger team, another all star line up and so it goes on.

This is all it takes for the BTCC to become 'world class' again - will it happen? Who know's. Currently the economic climate means it isn't and car makers prefer to spend their money elsewhere, or not at all.

The BTCC is just a snapshot of the motor industry, you cannot make it 'world class' without the funding to pay top level drivers, hence the current works teams are not hiring the 'top liners' of old.

Whether it needs to be 'world class' or not is another matter, I suggest that water will find it's own level, and to use my example of Audi if they did re-enter the series they would choose one of their stable of star drivers, this may lead other entrants to think they need to do the same to win - then the semi-pro's and wealthy amateurs are squeezed out again.

Unless TOCA make a positive decision to make the BTCC attractive and viable for semi-pro's and amateurs, market forces will decide it's direction. Currently TOCA needs all the entry's it can get, but should a rush of interest from Audi/BMW/Alfa/Ford all wanting to run factory teams, will TOCA consider the interests of independent/production entries then? As they certainly could not co-exist.

it's a cycle.

[maplex]

Originally posted by Chris Y
I think you're missing the point slightly here. Just because a driver is at the back of the field, doesn't mean it's down to their performance as a driver. A lot of these 'wealthy amateurs' are perhaps not wealthy enough to buy a car/drive which can keep up with the better-backed teams. Unlike football, racing is not just about the performance of the person, it's about the car and the team as well. An amateur driver in a fast car may do better than a pro driver in a slow car...

...fair point, but driving ability is surly a main factor. After all, look what Will Hoy achieved in 1999 when he took over from Russell Spence.

[Tim Harvey Fan]

I completely disagree with you, KPC. Racing has to be made up of both the quick and the uncompetitive...not everybody can win all the time. Racing is so expensive, as you know, and there isn't one driver (even the really good ones) who would be currently involved in racing if they didn't have some sort of money to begin their careers with. There are very few drivers who have actually "made it" without money. Even Michael Schumacher has some money to begin his career. Therefore, almost any driver you see in racing is there because of money.

[Craner Curves]

I'm not saying anything more on this matter.

[Craner Curves]

I think in the case of the BTCC at the moment, quantity over quality matters. But we do have quality in it as well. Established quality and quality which is in the making. The likes of Howell, Turkington, Morrison, Pyper and others who starred in one make saloons and production class cars are coming to prominence. Rather like James Thompson did.

[TimD]

Originally posted by KPC
We may see a BTCC, which is the equivalent of the old C class pre 1991 with some excellent driving. But it will be a far cry from the ST days.

I kept coming back to these sentences, because they kept ringing bells with me. Is it not perhaps arguable that Super Touring, much as a large number of touring car fans lament it, was something of a side-track?

The whole history of the BTCC right up to circa 1995, was of cars that were little visually removed from the cars in the spectators' car park. Okay, we all know how much race engineering went into preparing one even before then, but the perception was that these were the cars driven by the man in the street. And it was part of the fun of spectating that the paying punters could actually imagine themselves behind the wheel of a racing car, because they were able to see people doing just that in a car they could identify with.

After all, John Cleland won the championship in a Vauxhall Astra GSi that actually leaned over into corners, so strict were the regulations as to preparation.

I would say that the era of the international superstars visiting the BTCC was not necessarily good for either competiton, nor continuity. A manufacturer would throw money at a campaign until success was achieved, and then they would by and large go on to pastures new. And the factory cars were so far removed from the privateers that it took a really exceptional job to take the race to them. Sheer weight of dollars saw to that.

For me, the heyday of the BTCC was in the eighties, where a good independent team could take a Rover SD1 or BMW 635, or later a Sierra Cosworth or BMW M3 E30, and have a reasonable chance of podiums if the car was prepared properly, without having to contend with a multi-millionaire factory effort. And to be honest, what were the stars of then, if not working men whose racing was at its most organised, a promotional tool, or more often a hobby. The ETCC was the place for the big factory efforts, and that's where the Stucks, Sopers and Walkinshaws played. The BTCC was the place to see Tim Harvey learning his craft, Geoff Kimber-Smith, Stuart Graham, Vince Woodman and Mike Smith.

If I have any long term hope for the BTCC, it's that it returns to some of those days. It's getting there. It's starting to work, and I suspect partly because we are gradually getting to accept less and less factory involvement in the division. Now, if we could just see something like the old capacity classes coming back, we could see some real fun once more.

Group 1 revival, anyone?

[Super Tourer]

Craner - the trouble is that in it's current limbo state, the likes of Howell, Turkington and Pyper have to raise funds to race - which isn't easy - they are totally dependent on finding the money to enter, no matter how good they are. This totally effects their continued participation, no matter how good they are, or deserving of a drive.

Thommo landed a factory drive which was the making of him. If he'd had to pay to continue in the BTCC the following year, it may have been a different story.

[KPC]

I think some of you are missing what I've meant... I have absolutely nothing against those who have a few quid to indulge their hobbies with, or whether they are famous or a nobody.

In a nutshell: Whatever the standard I do not feel there is any place for show boating. If a driver cannot make the grade within their own division then they are a waste of space.

Leading on from there, but a different point:

While semi-pro may be the future and I hope it does provide close exciting racing, as I'm sure it will, a proddy 306 just does not hold the sheer thrill and spectacle that a touring Astra does. BTCC has for many years been more than a club meeting. It will be a sad day if the last of the TC ex-works cars are bought up and then eventually retired off, never to be replaced.

[KA]

Originally posted by TimD
I kept coming back to these sentences, because they kept ringing bells with me. Is it not perhaps arguable that Super Touring, much as a large number of touring car fans lament it, was something of a side-track?

Tim- I've just been trying to work out how best to add to the debate in this thread, having participated in the earlier one, and I think you've just said exactly what I was thinking.....

From your comments about the 80s, I'm guessing that like me you first saw the BTCC around that time, and I do think that gives us a slightly different perspective to younger fans who first discovered the series during the Super Touring years-

The current state of the BTCC, with a mix of top-class professionals, semi-pros and amateurs does bear a definite resemblance to what I remember from the 80s, and I'd argue that the peak of SuperTouring in the mid-90s was very much an exception to the rule, which came about due to a fairly unique set of circumstances, in that manufacturers threw huge support behind national touring car series, and the BTCC in particular, possibly because of the lack of alternative avenues for them to participate in outside F1 or rallying

If you think back to the early 90s, the ETCC had been gone for several years, and sportscar racing had prety much collapsed, so national touring car series became the chosen battleground for the manufacturers, bringing with them the big budgets and highly-paid top professional drivers, the kind of guys who a few years before would have been plying their trade in the ETC or World Sportscar series.

This raised the stakes so much that the semi-pro/amateur drivers were driven out of the series, and when the manufacturer teams- who are only there because it fits their marketing plans- began to leave, then the grids- and in some countries the actual series- collapsed.

The rebuilding of the BTCC which began in 2001 seems to be producing at presnet something more like the BTCC we first saw in the 80s with that mixture of drivers, but who knows where it's going to evolve to?

Probably it won't ever reach the heights that mid-90s Super Touring did,(and that may be no bad thing)those circumstances were possibly unique, but what it really needs to do is become suffuciently robust to survive current economic circumstances- personally, my big worry is that at present we don't have parity of regulations with the ETCC- to me it's no coincidence that the two biggest periods of growth in touring cars that I remember were in periods when a single set of regs was widely used

I don't think that what we've got at present has to be percieved as second-class compared to what we've had in the past- several people have commented on the presence of 'wealthy amateurs' in the series: an important factor about them is that very often they will support the series as long as they can find the budget to do so, unlike factory teams who are off as soon as their marketing strategy takes them in another direction- OK, you certainly don't want a grid full of slow amateurs out for a Sunday drive, but I've no problem with a there being a reasonable number of them out there, so long as they're sufficiently competent to be safe and not cause problems for the fast guys....

[mystery racer]

I know this isn't quite black and white, but lets face it guys, sports are popular, not only because of the actual event, but the stars that take part...

Imagine if the BTCC was to impose some sort of requirement to race in it (like F1). That would automatically get rid of people who shouldn't be racing in the "UK's top racing series"... More of the talent from lower levels would by default find it's way through and the demand for people with the talent would make them full professionals - in this case the demand would outstrip the supply. The fans would start to take more notice (we must not forget how well informed they are) and there may actually be some adoration for these drivers. This would increase media interest which in turn would get more fans interested...we would have real stars with interesting (and successful) racing backgrounds fighting it out every other weekend during the summer months. During all of this - manufacturers will be wanting to get involved...

Would it make for better racing? - probably not.

Is a premiership football match any more entertaining than some lower league game? - not always.

Do fans of premiership football get to see the best players in the country doing their job (Hence why they turn out 30,000+ almost twice a week to follow their club)? Yes.

Do fans of the BTCC (touted as the UK's top domestic championship) get to see the best drivers in the country doing their job? Err....can any of us actually say this is true (no disrespect to those currently competing!)

Now before I get you all on my back - I know motorsport is a different kettle of fish and even if my proposition was taken up - there would always be those who slip through the net. But I do hope you get my point...you can see close racing in all manor of things most weekends of the year by wealthy amatuers. But where is the top professional series in this country?

The fans aren't stupid...

[KA]

Originally posted by KPC

In a nutshell: Whatever the standard I do not feel there is any place for show boating. If a driver cannot make the grade within their own division then they are a waste of space.

I can see where you're coming from here up to a point- where I do maybe part company a little is that i don't mind there being a driver or two who are off the pace, so long as they are contributing to the action in some way- ie there's someone for them to race with- a good battle for last place can be just as entertaining as one for the lead

While semi-pro may be the future and I hope it does provide close exciting racing, as I'm sure it will, a proddy 306 just does not hold the sheer thrill and spectacle that a touring Astra does. BTCC has for many years been more than a club meeting. It will be a sad day if the last of the TC ex-works cars are bought up and then eventually retired off, never to be replaced.

I agree with you totally here- that's one reason I feel so strongly that we need parity of regs with the ETCC- if a semi-pro series is to be the future, then there needs to be a good supply of ex-works cars for those privateers and semi-pro teams to run. Either that or the regs need to be such that a good team can build a competitive car without factory support- maybe that would dictate Production being the way ahead, but if it is, then I'd certainly miss the Touring class cars.....

[KA]

Originally posted by mystery racer
[B.


Do fans of the BTCC (touted as the UK's top domestic championship) get to see the best drivers in the country doing their job? Err....can any of us actually say this is true (no disrespect to those currently competing!)

[/B]

It's an interesting thought- mind you, I think you could ask the same question of almost any race series and get a similar answer- are the 20 guys we saw on the Australian GP grid at the weekend the 20 best drivers in the world?- probably not.....

[Super Tourer]

To sum this up Bernie Ecclestone said the two most important drivers in F1 were Michael Schumacher and Pedro Diniz. Schumacher because he was the fastest and Diniz because he was the richest.....

[kmchow]

Ideally, it would be nice if everyone accepted quality instead of quantity. In reality and all fairness, you probably need a mixture of both. You could look at the extremes with 8 top works cars with 8 top drivers. The racing is close and tight, but in the end, the 8 cars barely take up a 1/3 of the starting grid. 8 cars is depressing. The NATCC average 8-10 cars in it's short life.

Alternatively, you could have 20+ cars with mediocre drivers and mediocre cars. You have drivers spinning out, stalling and you have cars breaking down. That is also depressing.

The BTCC, like many racing series, is in "safe limp home mode" right now. It is barely staying alive. I sincerely hope that the economic situations improve such that more Works cars will appear.

[mystery racer]

Ahh yes - I see your point "KA", but even our "pay drivers" in F1 this year have a great racing background (Justin Wilson - F3000 champ, Ralph Firman - Formula Nippon champ for example). Whilst this is is an exception, you can be sure of a 90% quality grid of drivers most years in F1...

Sounds a bit better than "finished 14th in club series x" making up half the grid!...

[kmchow]

It's been debated before, but if organizers or perhaps manufacturers can force(??) a set of common rules--like ST was--on the world, it would help the situation immensely.

[Craig]

"World class pros or wealthy amateurs?"

Erm, why do we need to have one or the other? Surely there's space on the grid for both?

Have you ever been to Le Mans? One of the best parts of that experience is the real mix of cars and drivers on track. From the multi-million Pound efforts from teams such as Audi right through to those rich enthusiasts who have got a handful of people together to help them run a customer Porsche.

I really, and I mean really, don't understand why people would rather see 8 or 10 top cars and drivers (remember just how boring 2000 was?) than 8 or 10 top drivers as well as the same number of enthusiastic amateurs... makes no sense to me whatsoever?! :confused:

[redshoes]

Originally posted by mystery racer
More of the talent from lower levels would by default find it's way through and the demand for people with the talent would make them full professionals - in this case the demand would outstrip the supply.

But who is going to pay all these new professionals? With maybe a couple of exceptions the 'wealthy amateurs' we are talking about are not taking works seats. There is already plenty of talent at lower levels but unless there is a sudden influx of new works teams or sponsorship that talent has got no where to go. Get rid of the amateurs and you will simply remove cars from the grid.

One thing has puzzled me in this discusion. It's only really been during the Supoer touring era that we saw a grid of highly paid professional. For years prior to that amateurs were always part and parcel of the series. Why does it make such a big difference now.

[KPC]

Moving on... The likes of JBQ/Batchelor have thrown money at the BTCC and we should be indebted to them. Whether I'm a shallow TC fan rather than a PC fan, I have still been rewarded with the likes of Graves driving as a result. I don't quite recall who it was Cates was sparring with at Silverstone last year, but the two cars looked like modern art sculptures by the end of the race. This is my brass tacks point:

Good racing, whatever the level. What I fear, however, is racing being second to sponsor's interests. Are we seeing this? It doesn't matter where the sponsorship comes from to the fan, it puts cars on grids. They keep our sport alive with their sponsorship, but they are also, let's not forget, advertising. So how far should the balance go? Now, I know I sound like a broken record with me show boating theme and I'm sure my comment will get a few, "I totally disagree with you," replies as usual, but what we may end up with if any old bod with a few quid and no pre-series qualifications is allowed to enter a desperately flagging series, is little more than glamourised advertising in favour of sport. Thank you JBQ for your contribution, but as I said earlier: tools for the job. I'm not an airline pilot and so would not try to fly a jumbo jet. But say I was Richard Branson. I'd know the best place to fly planes was from a boardroom. There has to be a certain pre-requisite for qualification into the series otherwise, I feel, it is lost as the premier racing event in the UK.