Save stock outboard - vote no on proposal 6

[daveracerdsh]

vote

The main thing is...make sure you vote

[propnuts]

I love the title of this thread

"Save Stock Outboard" by doing nothing, sounds like a hell of a plan. How's that been working out so far by the way?

[HydroKyle93R]

I see both sides of the argument. I can sympathize with either side and it makes voting on this somewhat difficult. Though I am mostly unaffected running mainly CSH and DSH, I am trying my best to have an objective, unbiased and respectful vote.

If Prop 6 is voted down, I can see how many racers in the B (15ccHR), 25, and 45ss would feel they still have a place to race. I agree with this side because I have personally seen strong classes of B's and 25's on the East Coast (not to leave out the mid-west, but I haven't been to a non-national stock race) and can see how these classes bring in revenue to the club and give racers a chance to do what they love, with what they choose to run. 45ss, though a seemingly redundant class, gives guys on the West Coast a chance to bring their rigs to our S-M-PRO-J races without having to cross over to OPC category. And gives them a chance at the I-OPC races to run that very class, with a nominal cross-over fee. Any way one looks at it, these classes are important and necessary for the survival of Stock racing in pockets of the country.

Now, if this prop was voted down, these racers would seemingly be safe, right? I feel that assumption is correct to an extent. Nearly every club has some sort of struggle, whether financial, structural, or any number of other common issues. If Prop 6 fails, it will not grant the SORC the ability to try a new, simplified program in hopes of either 1) prolonging the death of our beloved sport or 2) breathing potential new life into our dying sport. Both are synonymous, so don't debate the details lol. Getting back on track, with the failed proposition, we will continue to see the fading numbers in the B/25/45 classes, eventually becoming derelict classes, like DSR.. Without a chance to try a new program, where these classes will seemingly be included, as a whole we will never know if it was a step in the right direction. I think its important to get over the glory of HOC points for these classes, cause in reality, that's all ya get.

Okay, so what if Prop 6 passes? the 2014 season will see a new, simplified program. The Sutherland plan details an A/B/C/D class schedule that includes all existing production, and post-production motors. It details allowances for the 15 HR, the 25xs Merc, but leaves out the 45 guys. This plan is three seasons out and with collaboration from racers like you and me has the ability to create parody between the new boat/motor combinations. It even brings the Merc 15 into ASH, which in my mind is excellent. History proves that if a motor is given a chance under our rules, that it will eventually become even, if not surpass its predecessor, in this case the OMC A. The 15HR and 25xs guys will have three seasons to make the necessary changes to become compliant with the new class schedules.

On the other hand, there has been talk that if Prop 6 passes, that guys will hang up the towel and quit. I believe that this is a very real possibility that can hinder and possibly even seriously hurt some clubs. For example, TRORA, MHRA and SSOA might suffer from the lack of 25's and B's (I have no statistical data to back this up, but I feel I'm not too far from the truth) that refuse to show up though they still technically have a class to race. I feel strongly that hasty and sudden actions like these will indeed be the downfall of Stock Outboard racing. But when it comes down to it, people have the right to choose what they want to do. I suggest that anyone reading this post that chooses to do what I've discussed in this paragraph be the ones on the Parity Committees to give them a chance to stay competitive.

Remember, we are all here cause we love this sport. I will continue to devote my life to it, regardless of whether I have the physical, financial, or mental (lol) ability to race or have a class to run. I urge everyone that cares about Stock Outboard to vote wisely and seriously consider what is happening right now. It seems that this is not only a difficult time for the rest of the world, but to our tiny populous as well. If you feel that changes are unfair, be responsible and take initiative to make the changes fair and impartial. If you are in favor of changes, be responsible and take initiative to make sure your actions are not alienating your brothers. All we need is a little more cohesion and collaboration. Without that, and yes I understand getting everyone on the same page is difficult, we will die off and become only a memory for our children and our children's children to hear of. Let's do the best we can to make sure they have the same opportunity to race that we have right now.

Nighty night all.

[STEVE FRENCH]

I don't have a beef with it except with my main class of CSR. I really don't like 4 engines with 3 manufacturers in 1 class.

This is our largest runabout class and the proposal is to cram the sidewinder 20 and merc in it? Those two should continue to have their own class. Just based on that, I'll vote no.

I have no ax to grind concerning the merc or sidewinder. I am getting out of 25ssr with the restricted Yamato. My a$$ is just too big!

Combining this and that will not solve problems. We run mod, stock, sometimes pro at local races. Why? to cover the sanction fee and insurance. We've had to add all this stuff together to pay the bills and then usually lose money.

Numbers are down because of the economy. Racing will not bounce back until people have some funny money. This applies to all forms of racing. Nascar fan numbers are down, Indy spectators etc. The Woods brothers just won the Daytona 500 and they can't field a car but on a part time basis.

This is not the time to get cute on eliminating equipment. Maybe in a few years.

Tim

"This is not the time to get cute on eliminating equipment. Maybe in a few years."

Ditto..............

[G Stillwill]

Great post Kyle

[Brian10s]

[QUOTE=HydroKyle93R;178004] If Prop 6 fails, it will not grant the SORC the ability to try a new, simplified program in hopes of either 1) prolonging the death of our beloved sport or 2) breathing potential new life into our dying sport.

I suggest that anyone reading this post that chooses to do what I've discussed in this paragraph be the ones on the Parity Committees to give them a chance to stay competitive.QUOTE]

Kyle,
1st of all great post!! You have really hit on exactly some of the pros and cons of this vote.

2nd - I quoted 2 sentences out of your post that I feel really is the most important part of the vote. The only thing I have ever seen on Parity Committees is they are appointments by the Chairman with the Chairman also being a member of the committee. There is nothing on the SORC (our elected representatives) being able to confirm these appointments or even have a say on who is appointed. Also, it seems these committee serve at the whim of the Chairman. Now this is not a bash at Ed, but does this seem to anyone else like a democratic method of government? APBA is supposed to be a membership organization (in fact, it still is in large part to Ed and others a few years ago), so why would we give up our rights to elect representatives to guide the Stock Category for committees appointed by the Chairman, serving at the Chairman's feet and that the Chairman is 33% of the voting block, regardless of who that Chairman is currently.

Regardless of how you feel about the actual class combinations/ reductions plan, the choice we have to vote on is to either leave things as they are or create a Stock Outboard Czar who has more power than any elected body would have.

If this is correct, then 30 days prior to the Nationals, the Committee can make any rule they want to make any motor manufacture absolutely dominant and there is nothing the membership can do about it. Now this is worse case but does anyone see something that states it is impossible?

Is there something I missed in this proposal or that I have wrong?

[csh12M]

Just a few quick points for clarity

I have really wanted to stay out of this now that it is on the ballot, but a few points for clarity.

It was not the intention to eliminate 45SS, it was just left off of the table on the proposition because it has no change.

A committee, not a Czar was to be created to tweak all the details between now and 2014. The committee can and should define a process for parity to avoid sudden changes.

How we achieve parity within the SO is not defined. The Chairman just chose to do it with a limited committee. The SO Commission could make a motion to create a process as it sees fit.

I respect anyone decision to vote no. It is your choice on what you want the SO category to be. However, anyone who says "not now" you are fooling yourself. This won't even be feasible in another 5-6 years when we have lost another 15% of our membership. The choice then will be series racing or officially combining SO and MOD.

Thanks,
Dean

[Jeff Brewster 59s]

"Save Stock Outboard" by doing nothing, sounds like a hell of a plan. How's that been working out so far by the way?

Tony,
No, it does not say by "doing nothing". There is a plan and it begins once this proposal is defeated by the membership.
Jeff
p.s I still have the same "verizon" phone number 330-842-2119

[ram95]

In Detroit, on the first day I voted NO on Sutherlands proposal. He had months to put it together, the SORC had 22 minutes to digest it. The 2nd day, I voted yes to what I figured was going to be a group of people (Commissioners, racers, etc) brought together to carefully consider ALL the various angles to this "Idea" of making things better. I don't race the classes being focused on (but my boy might). So, I'm not intimately familiar with all the "angles" which need to be calmly discussed by the people who do. Right now, looking at the number of people on this site, we do not have enough member input. Out there in the 'membership' we do have folks who have something valuable to add and who would like to be heard, but they need to be coaxed. Out there we have folks who are just 'tired' of what they see as the same-old/same-old. Out there we have some folks whose mind says "don't confuse me with the facts... my mind is made up". Then we have the good folks who take their valuable time to post here, or just as importantly read what is being posted.

To me, the ballot proposal is premature. To me, the idea was to get stuff out on the table and sort it out, getting more of the membership involved. To me, it was important to get moving on the 'fact finding - brainstorming' action during this season. Including informing the general (SO/MO) membership and get feedback. And, the feedback would actually be given a fair evaluation etc.

Although premature (in my mind) this ballot has served to get members attention. I just wish more would click on this site and speak their mind. So, should the ballot fail, it should not be viewed as having done "nothing", rather that the work has just begun.

Kyle's post was excellent. And others have been as well. Some are wordy (yeah I hear ya!!) and some are brief and concise. All are worth reading if we're going to make some adjustments based on reality and not some visionary's view that the earth is actually flat.

Alex

[Jeff Brewster 59s]

Excellent posts guys!

Well thought out posts is what makes our sport and Hydroracer great.
Negative one liners do nothing to help us at all.
Dean, even if your proposal does not pass, you will be credited (IMHO) with getting the thought process started.
Have a great St. Patrick's day!!!

[csh2z]

I'd like to remind everybody that this discussion is strictly about the APBA Stock Outboard category. One of our goals should be to make S.O. grow enough to support itself with S.O. only races in every region in the country. So when thinking about our class structure we must do " what is best for Stock Outboard". As far as Mod is concerned, they need to do what is best for Mod. Jeff, the thought process on this issue goes back quite a few years.

[Jeff Brewster 59s]

I am sorry John, I forgot to mention you and the previous steering committee also.

[csh2z]

I'm not looking for accolades but thanks anyway. I just want to see Stock Outboard become the best it can be. Great competition on a level playing field, a class defined by its motor and good people enjoying the company of each other.

[Matt Dagostino]

One big happy family?

I respect anyone decision to vote no. It is your choice on what you want the SO category to be. However, anyone who says "not now" you are fooling yourself. This won't even be feasible in another 5-6 years when we have lost another 15% of our membership. The choice then will be series racing or officially combining SO and MOD.
Thanks,
Dean

It's funny but in reality Stock and MOD are combined now..........many many Stock drivers run MOD classes and vice versa. When the race weekend rolls around it is funny how we are all one big happy family but when the National Meeting rolls around it is "us against them", politics in it's purist form. When the decision was made 20 years ago to run joint Stock/MOD National Championships the mold was set in place, and we unofficially merged and this format actually works great on race weekends.

Having a combined Stock/MOD division would add numbers and would truly 'give everyone a place to race'.........food for thought.

Cleaning up our Stock Outboard national class structure certainly is one issue needing addressing but i tend to look at kneel down racers as one group of passionate racers.......come on down to Jesup, Ga in a few weeks and see how well Stocks and MODS mesh.

[propnuts]

I wholeheartedly disagree

To me, the ballot proposal is premature. To me, the idea was to get stuff out on the table and sort it out, getting more of the membership involved. To me, it was important to get moving on the 'fact finding - brainstorming' action during this season. Including informing the general (SO/MO) membership and get feedback. And, the feedback would actually be given a fair evaluation etc.

Although premature (in my mind) this ballot has served to get members attention.

You can calll this proposal a lot of things, but premature would not be one of them. This is meant to address a problem that has been identified and ongoing for about 15 years now. This has been "brainstormed" to death IMO. To paraphrase, if not now, when? If not us, who?