2016 CMRA Rule Book Posted!

[jeremiah moreno]

I do understand. I also understand that if it is a 7 lap race then if you are a slower rider and only complete 5 laps you won't be credited for your race. This goes back to if you spent the money you should have a record for your race. That is not going to affect many racers but could keep a slower prov nov racer from having any points at all or technically completing races.
What is wrong with the way it has been? Why are we changing what works?

[Josh Henke]

What does a prov nov that slow care about points?

[Sean Brown]

Many people have a need to satisfy that sense of completion. There are also those rare instances where simply running the race and being consistent will earn an award at the end of the season. Sometimes the turtle beats the hare.

[Danny Dominguez]

I do understand. I also understand that if it is a 7 lap race then if you are a slower rider and only complete 5 laps you won't be credited for your race. This goes back to if you spent the money you should have a record for your race. That is not going to affect many racers but could keep a slower prov nov racer from having any points at all or technically completing races.
What is wrong with the way it has been? Why are we changing what works?

Jeremiah, your reading into this. Getting lapped isn't going to cause a 75% thingy....engine blowing, crashing, pulling in will be a problem with the 75% thingy. 1 reason for this change was way too many riders making poor unsafe decisions to get a lap while severely injured.

[Sean Brown]

It is even part of prov nov requirements to complete races. This may be a technicality but we are starting to set a double standard in my opinion.
If we say anybody is fast enough to race in the CMRA and everybody has a right to earn a championship no matter how many racers were in the class then why are we saying we won't give credit to somebody who pays their money and gets on the track to do their race.
What was wrong with the way it was? Why change what works?

[Sean Brown]

If the reason for it is safety of racers who are injured that doesn't change anything. Having a racer who is injured stay out on the track longer to complete more laps isn't making it safer. An injured racer is still a racer and is still going to try to save his season. It seems like it will be more unsafe if now he is going to be caught being lapped instead of just getting off the track at the second lap.

[Jesse Davis]

1. you need to clarify air cooled vs water cooled displacement limits in F2. and why not allow the 748.749 in lightweight twins also?
2. if you allow 125cc GP bikes in F4, you also need to allow MD250s or custom 250 4 strokes in GP frames.
3. Great job on the 75% race completion for points rule.
4. great job making big bike and lightweight endurance points the same across the board.

[jeremiah moreno]

Thanks Danny, for clearing things up for me. I was just seeking some clarity on why the rule was made.

[Danny Dominguez]

1. you need to clarify air cooled vs water cooled displacement limits in F2. and why not allow the 748.749 in lightweight twins also?
2. if you allow 125cc GP bikes in F4, you also need to allow MD250s or custom 250 4 strokes in GP frames.
3. Great job on the 75% race completion for points rule.
4. great job making big bike and lightweight endurance points the same across the board.

Good catch on the water vs air cool twin....as far as lt twin (my thots only so take it for what that's worth) is maybe due to some possible kawi or Suzuki contingency in the future.??maybe? I don't know

[Danny Dominguez]

If the reason for it is safety of racers who are injured that doesn't change anything. Having a racer who is injured stay out on the track longer to complete more laps isn't making it safer. An injured racer is still a racer and is still going to try to save his season. It seems like it will be more unsafe if now he is going to be caught being lapped instead of just getting off the track at the second lap.

"1 reason" Sean ..1 . uno, numero 1 .....