UK Grid Size League Tables

[Stacy]

Dear All,

I've had compiled an analysis of all the UK's series' and it's now available online at:

http://www.oddballracing.com/uk_moto...gue_tables.htm

After several years of the MSA Grid Committees I was surprised to note that we have over 100 club racing series in the UK, and only just over half of them put on grids of over 20 which was articulated as the requirement for MSA championship status some years ago.

Of course the MSA does not grant a permit for a series, but there are still commercial realities involved in their longevity, especially when we invest the sums we do, so grid numbers are still very relevant.

The top series is probably unsurprisingly the 750MC Stock Hatch and another surprise entry in the top 10 was the CSCC Swinging Sixties. Also the average grid across organizing clubs makes interesting reading..

Anyway, why have we done it? Mainly because the info doesn't seem to be readily available anywhere else, and so as a competitor you're left to your own devices to cut through the spin. Full grids are also a key to the longevity of the sport we know and love, and lots more besides.

If you can spot any errors please do PM me and I'll pass them on. We need it to be correct, warts and all. It will be updated regularly through the season (next planned is end of June).

Regards

Stacy

[Tim Falce]

Nice idea Stacy. How are these tables compiled? At an average of 27 is the Thoroughbred Sportscar + BCV8 Class A & B, these are both stand alone series and although we get BCV8s enter the Thoroughbred races they never figure separately in the results or tech regs. I think the Thoroughbreds averaged almost 27 cars on their own last year although the year before we just scraped in over the minimum required.
Also the Cannons TinTops only get 23 because they are amalgamated with another couple of series plus I didn't think they were a championship.

[Highside]

Very interesting study Stacy - must have taken a fair bit of work so hats off to you & all at the oddball statistical nerve centre.

Some quite warming success storys there, like very new championships & series with very heathy grids (despite the general doom and gloom), with some old favorites going well too.

However, there are also some quite distressing figures for championships that used to be incredably well supported.

What's the chance of the MSA following up on their threats to weild the axe / force amalgamations?

[Al Weyman]

Just what is the point of this chart?

Is it to pour salt into the wounds of clubs trying their damndest to resurrect series and championships in these bad times or is it to make it easier for the MSA kick those into touch thus effecting guys that have invested money in their cars as I find both of these reasons pointless? Or is it as a 'service' prehaps to prospective drivers to go to the best supported rounds because this can also have a negative effect as those better supported series and clubs start running into reserves.

I have always found what goes around in this game comes around as drivers can be very fical and what one year can be the greatest thing since the invention of the motorcar can next year be dead and unsupported and I see no practical use whatsoever for a chart like this.

[Mike Sheraton]

i am afraid that this chart is great for showing off how successfull a championship is, however have you thought about the consequences of this chart if it is taken seriously by other competitors, because as Al said, it will end up putting the smaller championships into dark and poor times whilst oversubscribing already packed championships causing a negative effect on both ends of the scale. Do you intend this to be taken seriously?, if so why, because of the effects it may have like i said above are not good of Motorsport, and if not why do it atall?

appoligies if i sound abit annoyed in this post, it is rather just a case of me feeling bad for the clubs that have seen better days and are in need of competitors, because everyone deserves a good race

[G.Walker]

When you have the Masters 70s touring car series with Batmobiles and Cologne Capris, rare valuable cars, you know you are not getting full grids.
When you have cheaper run cars, like stock hatch and production bmws you get the opposite, its not rocket science.
One thing this table does confirm is there are alot of championships in the UK, but average grid size only gives half the story!

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

Just what is the point of this chart?

Is it to pour salt into the wounds of clubs trying their damndest to resurrect series and championships in these bad times or is it to make it easier for the MSA kick those into touch thus effecting guys that have invested money in their cars as I find both of these reasons pointless? Or is it as a 'service' prehaps to prospective drivers to go to the best supported rounds because this can also have a negative effect as those better supported series and clubs start running into reserves.

I have always found what goes around in this game comes around as drivers can be very fical and what one year can be the greatest thing since the invention of the motorcar can next year be dead and unsupported and I see no practical use whatsoever for a chart like this.

Why so negative Al? the man is only trying to provide something that some people may want to see, no one is making you read it. As for the MSA kicking series into touch, where do you think the info will be coming from and if it isn't the MSA they know the stats anyway, that's how they already cull the championships that have low grids.

[Al Weyman]

I think our young friend above had his finger on the pulse, I aint saying no more you know my feelings about this enough said.

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by falcemob

Nice idea Stacy. How are these tables compiled? At an average of 27 is the Thoroughbred Sportscar + BCV8 Class A & B, these are both stand alone series and although we get BCV8s enter the Thoroughbred races they never figure separately in the results or tech regs. I think the Thoroughbreds averaged almost 27 cars on their own last year although the year before we just scraped in over the minimum required.
Also the Cannons TinTops only get 23 because they are amalgamated with another couple of series plus I didn't think they were a championship.

Hi,

I struggled with the BCV8's, so I'm more than happy to take advice on how to show them? If you're close enough to that action to have a view pls PM me and I'll make sure it goes into the next update.

I also included Series' as well as championships as it's still important from a competitors point of view to establish the viability. Again where a series is genuinely merged I've tried to show it, where it's simply hiding on the same 1/4 grid I haven't.. Happy to correct if you spot anything so again, please PM - I'm keen for this to be /right/.

Cheers

Stacy

[Tim Wilkinson]

I think you also need to find a way to show -

1. Championships / series that run heats and a final, and so appear to have larger grids when they are actually splitting these. Same applies to those that have the ability to buy extra grids, against those that don't have that option.

2. Where the championships race. For example, Combe saloons vs Semsec (or BARC Tintops) - both might max their grids, but the grid capacity is double at one circuit. That means the figures are skewed.

Grid size also doesn't show quality of racing, or opposition - especially useful when comparing class-based series. Statistics are all well and good, but need to be taken within a context - without that your figures offer spin in a different way.


This might not be the place to say it (and it's no comment on how this thread began), and mods feel free to edit or delete this part of my post, or move it to it's own thread, but....

I'm starting to get really peeved at nearly every thread I read in this forum having an element of "where i race is better than where you race" about it. It might not start off in that vein, but it usually ends up that way. It's tedious, and does the clubs or individuals involved no credit. There has to be a better way forward than constant sniping!

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by Mike Sheraton

however have you thought about the consequences of this chart if it is taken seriously by other competitors, because as Al said, it will end up putting the smaller championships into dark and poor times whilst oversubscribing already packed championships causing a negative effect on both ends of the scale. Do you intend this to be taken seriously?, if so why, because of the effects it may have like i said above are not good of Motorsport, and if not why do it atall?

appoligies if i sound abit annoyed in this post, it is rather just a case of me feeling bad for the clubs that have seen better days and are in need of competitors, because everyone deserves a good race

Mike, oh Mike..

A few years ago (while you were at school) the MSA stated that there were too many series running in the UK, and for the health of the sport they were incepting a Grid Size committee to force mergers between rival championships. They set the number at 15, then raised it to 17, then talked about raising the minimum number to 20.

So we should be clear, the premise of full grids being a good thing is not just mine, it's the view of the people than run our sport.

I cannot conceive, nor evidently can the MSA, why full grids would be bad for the UK racing scene. "Oversubscribed" grids can put on extra races to meet the demand, and the 750MC does this successfully as do the others who are in that enviable position.

Conversely poor grids lead to an ultimate demise, and therefore increased costs for the competitors longer term so yes, they should merge or die. If races don't pay their way, the sport we know and love will not continue.

The problem is, and you have given a wonderful example, that there are many fiefdoms in motorsport, and where we choose to race is in many cases factored by social circles, and these factors lead to a maintenance of the status quo. In reality it is very hard to merge series despite the MSA encouragement, and I talk from experience when Hugh Poston and I tried to merge Classic Thunder with Mod Prods some years ago. Only when their organizer finally disappeared could it be done.

So sad though it is, yes mergers should be forced or races closed. That's not my view, but the stated view of the organizers. The trouble is, it's not easy to achieve because of old loyalties, networks or fiefdoms. The MX5 series is a good tale if you want a read.

This challenge is in contrast to the stated objectives of the MSA but their input data was always confidential, and the outputs were quiet from 08 onwards. This list changes the former at least.

So yes it is a serious list, and feedback already both here and on email suggests I am not alone. There is no spin, no alternate agendas, no guff - just the facts. Yes it's important because as a competitor I can establish whether the series I am looking at is worth that significant investment.

The alternative is ignorance, and I'm not sure of the logic which would support that.

Stacy

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by Tim Wilkinson

I think you also need to find a way to show -

1. Championships / series that run heats and a final, and so appear to have larger grids when they are actually splitting these. Same applies to those that have the ability to buy extra grids, against those that don't have that option.

2. Where the championships race. For example, Combe saloons vs Semsec (or BARC Tintops) - both might max their grids, but the grid capacity is double at one circuit. That means the figures are skewed.

Grid size also doesn't show quality of racing, or opposition - especially useful when comparing class-based series. Statistics are all well and good, but need to be taken within a context - without that your figures offer spin in a different way.


This might not be the place to say it (and it's no comment on how this thread began), and mods feel free to edit or delete this part of my post, or move it to it's own thread, but....

I'm starting to get really peeved at nearly every thread I read in this forum having an element of "where i race is better than where you race" about it. It might not start off in that vein, but it usually ends up that way. It's tedious, and does the clubs or individuals involved no credit. There has to be a better way forward than constant sniping!

Tim,

Thanks for the response.

Re: Point 1 - Yes, but I think beyond 30 cars we'd assume "rude health" so am not too concerned about specific placings beyond that?

Point 2 - Agreed, I'll have a column marked for "static/local series".

Point 3 - Agreed. I'll mark whether series are class based or not, beyond that competitors can do more detailed analysis themselves on site visits or whatever.

Point 4 - Damn straight..

You wil be aware this list has no spin - they are just numbers to the best of our ability..

S.

[Al Weyman]

The problem is, and you have given a wonderful example, that there are many fiefdoms in motorsport, and where we choose to race is in many cases factored by social circles, and these factors lead to a maintenance of the status quo. In reality it is very hard to merge series despite the MSA encouragement, and I talk from experience when Hugh Poston and I tried to merge Classic Thunder with Mod Prods some years ago. Only when their organizer finally disappeared could it be done.

Well you got that wrong for a start, it was a bloody disaster did you see the Classic Modified Thunder grids last year, I stood there at Thruxton with David Howard shaking his head as about 8 or 9 cars strung round the track but look at it this year after the sensible merger with Boss Fords and hard work by several guys involved, the thing is booming and thats in one year! ModProds as I said at the time and as the person that started the championship should have merged with pre-93 from day one which is why my good friend who was running it at the time was not interested as the majority did not want to run on slicks and virtually unlimited rules, the road tyres, steel panels and original glass basis of the formula should have told anyone they belonged in with Pre-93's.

Modprods and indeed Classic Thunder as Classic Modified Saloons has been renamed are good examples of championships being up one year and down in the weeds the next, at one time in ModProds we had three full grids with reserves at some tracks and remember this was just one championship, it fell away to virtually nothing. Thats why I think this chart is not really very useful as its very existance could bury a championship like Classic Thunder when redemption was so close.

[Mike Sheraton]

stacy your comments are very valid and also you have know your facts, however i find it a little offencive that you have brought my age into this with comments such as "while you were at school", because while i was not able to race it is not to say that i do not know any rules about motorsport and for the record i am still in school.

thankyou.

[diz]

Originally Posted by stacy

If you can spot any errors please do PM me and I'll pass them on. We need it to be correct, warts and all. It will be updated regularly through the season (next planned is end of June).

Regards

Stacy

Stacy,

For correction / clarification.

As the BRSCC Club Formula Ford NW Coordinator doesn't - or should I say won't - "do tenths", I'd like to correct the figures shown on his behalf.
I assume you are talking 2009 season to date.

In 82nd place you show
Formula Ford NW Pre-90 BRSCC 14
You show no record of Post89

For many years, the North West Formula Fords have required split grids to fit them all in. At one meeting in 2005 we peaked at 66 entries and averaged into the 50s' that year.

This year there have been four rounds.
The Post89 split has averaged 15 entries
The Pre90 split has averaged 22 entries
This totals an average entry - per round - of 37 entries.
This moves them up 76 positions in your table to sixth position, just behind our FF friends at Castle Combe.

[Stacy]

Thanks Diz,

It may well be that at the time of entry they had yet to race and thus had no entry, but either way please feel free to PM me and I'll make sure it's corrected.

Thanks again.

Stacy

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

ModProds as I said at the time and as the person that started the championship should have merged with pre-93 from day one which is why my good friend who was running it at the time was not interested.

Thats why I think this chart is not really very useful as its very existance could bury a championship like Classic Thunder when redemption was so close.

... Although funnily enough he did not want to merge with either Group 1 or Pre-93 at the time because "having read the regulations the cars were too modified and wouldn't fit" I think were his words at the time. Go figure.

Anyway, back to the thread.

The facts of the matter seem to be:

1. There are too many championships/series operating in the UK, and as a consequence too many meetings. This dilutes competitors, marshalls, the "show", and spectators alike to the detriment of all.

2. The MSA are/were trying to address this but are evidently struggling to do so. Their requests for voluntary mergers and closures have largely gone unheard.

3. There is too much tribalism at play on here and in general, and not enough of a wider UK view. Perhaps some of the responses so far prove this wonderfully.

4. Poor grids will result in a) closure, or b) huge entry fees to be commercially viable. Neither of these is good for a prospective competitor building or buying a car. They should be merged before this happens.

5. This list won't "bury" anybody, poor grids bury them. We can view stock exchange listings when buying shares, but get wobbly when figures are published here - and yet I'd wager most peoples motorsport investment is larger than their share investment..

These are just numbers, no more, and should not be feared. If this list causes the 20 cars in the garage to be drawn out and entered to save a championship then great, but if they aren't coming out then action should be taken and I'm afraid the current system (MSA/clubs/drivers saying where they are is "brill") fuels the status quo.

Next update end of June..

S.

[Stacy]

Originally Posted by G.Walker

When you have the Masters 70s touring car series with Batmobiles and Cologne Capris, rare valuable cars, you know you are not getting full grids.
When you have cheaper run cars, like stock hatch and production bmws you get the opposite, its not rocket science.
One thing this table does confirm is there are alot of championships in the UK, but average grid size only gives half the story!

Indeed, it is not rocket science.

As you say there are a lot of championships, many, including the MSA, say too many. Therefore if there is a need to drive some especially rare vehicles around then in the interests of the wider sport perhaps they should either a) do it in Classic Thunder, or b) do it on a track day.

The choice to do it alone is presumably done largely on social dynamics.

Stacy.

[Chris Y]

A good list there Stacy, and a credit to your hard work.

However the results are, how shall we say, a little too focussed on the present. There are a few championships on the list that I noted were doing very well last year, but not so well this year. Of course this could be a transient, temporary thing, or it could spell imminent doom for that particular championship, but perhaps some historical figures (where possible) would shed a bit more light?

Then people could see the championships that are constantly underachieving, versus those that are just going through a 'rough patch'.

[Stacy]

I can't claim credit for all of it Chris, although I did moot it while standing in front of a BBQ a few months ago, it's a group effort. It would have to be, as it's a fair amount of work..

Certainly the list can be maintained moving forward so our historical base can be achieved over time, but in the short term I think that rather than asking the guys to start again from 2007 the solution might be to ask anyone who wishes to comment on a championship to explain such things to do so - and we can have it added to the list in the appropriate row.

In reality though how long does a rough patch last, and those rough patches have a habit of becoming rougher rather than the reverse.

Finally, and this is really the point, the music has to stop at some time if we are to distill the UK scene into something with more long term viability, rough patch or not where's the harm in making that call if you stand above the fiefdoms and take a more holistic view?

S.

[Matt Speakman]

An interesting thing to compile this, don't quite understand the negativity floated on here from the numbers found - there's nothing personal, its merely numbers/statistics!!

The hope would be that it could provoke people to get their car out of the garage & enterred in a race or more. But could it provoke people enough to get their car out of the garage? In the current climate perhaps not, but the world is full of surprises...

[50-SIX]

Don't know what dates the figures are based on but the 15 stated for Formula Ford GB is inaccurate, if they are based on 2009. At the first two rounds the grid has been 23/24 for both.

[Stacy]

The figures are based on published timesheets this year, so if that's the case then I presume we have a naming issue with the multitude of Fford series.

Either way please can you PM me with the details of the rounds and series you are referring to and I'll make sure it gets clarified in the next edition.

Many thanks

Stacy

[SWCRacing]

Only comments that I have is that I believe the MSA minimum number 18, not 20. This was raised a couple of years ago from 15
Also, where do the championships with 45+ grid averages race? Spa?? Silverstone GP? Think your figures at the higher end are misleading

[Stacy]

20 was the stated target communicated to clubs when I was an active Comp Sec, it just seems a reasonable number on which to colour chart.

The series' showing more than the grid capacity run multiple races to accomodate the entries, so no I don't think it can be argued as misleading - eg Stock Hatch has a long way to fall (through multi races) before it ends up sub 20.

S.