Politics vs. Performance

Today was the long-awaited preliminary announcement of the unified ALMS – Grand-Am class structure for 2014. I never expected a comprehensive announcement that would include regulations, but I was disappointed and saddened by what came out today. Besides reading the announcement, I followed the Q&A at the associated press conference live on radiolemans.com (RLM) and participated in RLM's on-line forum. In this post I will be discussing the prototypes primarily: LMP2, LMPC and DP. The announced class structure reflects a bias of political considerations over performance.

My first disappointment was that, as feared, the intent is to combine LMP2 and DP into a single class and balance their performance (BoP). This is just wrong. It reflects a political stance on the part of Grand-Am that, no matter what , “their” DP cars must be in the top class, no matter that they are far slower on all 4 tracks that both series competed on in 2012 (see table). Why? Based on both performance and differing regulations, these two cars are in fact in two separate classes and should have been treated that way. There would be plenty of opportunity to rectify both cars in 2015 when regulations could be re-written to unify them into a single class in subsequent years. BoP should only ever be used within one class, not to force two classes to compete as one. Properly designed regulations should eliminate BoP altogether in a perfect world.

Table 1. Fastest Race Laps 2012

The inclusion of LMPC as a “second” prototype class was unexpected. I am sure this was done to preserve car-count in the prototype classes and I have no problem with that as a short-term strategy. That class has produced great racing in the ALMS for the last 4 years. Given that LMPC is to be included, the DPs and the LMPCs are nearer in performance than DP and LMP2, so I have to wonder on what basis, other than politics, that DP and LMPC weren't combined if they needed to combine two cars into one class. Of course the LMPC is still faster than the DP, but at least they would only have to use BoP on one chassis/engine combination against the DPs which are already balanced against one another. By not doing this the new series has made their jobs harder, for merely political reasons.

I have difficulty seeing a reason other than politics for slowing down two other classes (LMP2, LMPC) to allow DPs to run in the "top" class. Perhaps the intent is to better guarantee Grand-Am teams and sponsors that a DP will win overall? Where would that leave ALMS LMP2 teams?

Since the merger was first announced there has been a concern that too many classes would somehow confuse the fans. I don't see it. I know that ALMS fans enjoy multi-class racing and have done so for 15 years. Many ALMS fans also follow Grand-Am, so what is the evidence that this is a problem? This concern is one excuse for combining LMP2 with DP and I don't buy it. Multi-class racing came about to give more variety to larger fields of competitors, combining classes is just wrong.

There was a question asked at the press conference about tires. They answer was vague but the message seemed to have been suggesting that Continental might be the sole tire supplier. If this is so, that would be a huge change for all the ALMS teams, none of whom run Continentals. Another question was asked about alternative fuels, a major feature in the ALMS. The answer suggested that Sunoco would likely continue as the sole fuel supplier, alternative fuels or not. Both of these answers made it obvious, if it weren't already, that this “merger” is really largely a takeover of ALMS by Grand-Am.

One issue not addressed by the press conference at all was driver qualifications. The current LMP2 class is a Pro-Am driver class, there must be at least one “Bronze” or “Silver” (amateur) driver for each car as determined by the ACO. The GTC cars may only have at most one “Gold” or “Platinum” (professional) driver for each car as determined by the ACO. No amount of BoP will get around those regulations, it will have to be addressed directly.

The announcement of the merger last September has made life for the competing teams in both the ALMS and Grand-Am much harder. They could make no concrete plans for 2014, and getting and keeping sponsorship for 2013 was problematic.  The bankruptcy of Lola had already had a negative impact on the LMP2 class, in the U.S. As well as in Europe. This situation has thrown doubt about participation in the ALMS LMP2 class for 2013. Come 2014, there may be no LMP2 cars to worry about. This too is, at least partially, a consequence of politics. It would have been better to have organized a sensible class structure and had draft regulations ready prior to announcing the “merger”.

I plan to follow the 2013 endurance sports car season closely, (ALMS, ELMS, Grand-Am, WEC) as always. In 2014 it will take more than a good “show” to keep me interested in North American sports car racing. I am far from alone in feeling this way. I would hate to see U.S. endurance racing lose a significant portion of their fan base. My interest in racing has been driven by automotive technology. So far I don't see technology advancing in this new series. I'm with Patrick Dempsey, I don't want to see the prototypes “dumbed-down”.