Cal Club Autocross Forums

7.7-7.91 "a trophy shall be given, for a Second Place within 5% of the winner’s total and trophies to all others within 8% of the winner’s totals."

Must 3rd place be within 8% of 2nd's point total? or within 8% of 1st's total?

Michael Palero wrote:7.7-7.91 "a trophy shall be given, for a Second Place within 5% of the winner’s total and trophies to all others within 8% of the winner’s totals."

Must 3rd place be within 8% of 2nd's point total? or within 8% of 1st's total?

8% of First Place total.

Thanks rick&palero.

I think the rule should be modified. We should give trophies for those that have made the required amount. (10 this year)
Who's going to say no to rewarding participation at the small cost of a trophy?







What's your address to send the check to Rick?

Michael Smith wrote:Thanks rick&palero.

I think the rule should be modified. We should give trophies for those that have made the required amount. (10 this year)
Who's going to say no to rewarding participation at the small cost of a trophy?

It's initially like an event, takes x number of participants (or average per event for year end) per trophy. The percentage thing actually gives extra trophies if a person is consistently close to the top even if there are not enough average participants.

8% isn't that much.

And what happens when the 2nd place guy is 6% back and the 3rd place guy is 7% back... No 2nd place, but a 3rd place?

A typical competition rewards so many trophies per number of competitors. I don't get the percentage back thing. We do strange stuff in reaction to bad situations then get slapped around by the unintended consequences. The fix is the chairman carefully reviewing the results and awarding and extra trophy here and there when the situation warrants. I hope Mike will do that.

Is this a new rule?

Steve Ekstrand wrote:...A typical competition rewards so many trophies per number of competitors. I don't get the percentage back thing. We do strange stuff in reaction to bad situations then get slapped around by the unintended consequences. The fix is the chairman carefully reviewing the results and awarding and extra trophy here and there when the situation warrants. I hope Mike will do that.

To bring up an old argument: no, a typical competition awards 1st, 2nd & 3rd. I have never, and continue to not believe in giving everyone trophies; kids competitions? Of course - I'd like to see every jr. karter get an award this year, but the rest? I just don't get it. I got 4th overall - I don't see why I should get a trophy for that (yes, I qualify under the "8% rule").

Bill Schenker wrote:To bring up an old argument: no, a typical competition awards 1st, 2nd & 3rd. I have never, and continue to not believe in giving everyone trophies; kids competitions? Of course - I'd like to see every jr. karter get an award this year, but the rest? I just don't get it. I got 4th overall - I don't see why I should get a trophy for that (yes, I qualify under the "8% rule").

I'm not talking about overall and not to everyone either. I'm suggesting that those that have dedicated themselves to a class for the year and meet the required amount of events should be awarded regardless of percentage. Those drivers are what make the class live. If you look at each class, there are very few. This is a volunteer sport and the top drivers should appreciate their support.

Bill Schenker wrote:
To bring up an old argument: no, a typical competition awards 1st, 2nd & 3rd. I have never, and continue to not believe in giving everyone trophies; kids competitions? Of course - I'd like to see every jr. karter get an award this year, but the rest? I just don't get it. I got 4th overall - I don't see why I should get a trophy for that (yes, I qualify under the "8% rule").

We aren't that far apart Bill. The Olympics may award Gold, Silver, and Bronze, but that isn't the only way. SCCA National events awards based on number in class. The PGATour pays out points and dollars to those who make the cut (generally 70 and ties).

Imagine if you had an Olympic downhill and the top 20 guys were all within 4% of the winner. That would be a lot of medals. Participation alone isn't enough. But in LOCAL competition, if a top national player comes into open class and crushes it, its not nice to say nobody else in an active class gets a 2nd or 3rd place trophy because they aren't one of the top 3 guys in the whole country. The Olympics doesn't say, I'm sorry, you were more than 5% behind Franz Klammer, we are withholding the silver medal for these games.

I just read that rule, and to me it means that a certain number of trophies are guaranteed based on the average number of participants.
But more trophies can be awarded if there are additional people who are within 8% of the winner's score.

Steve's example seems valid: With average participation less than 5 drivers, if the 2nd place finisher has a score between 5% and 8%, and the 3rd place finisher is also within 8%, then there will be two trophies and they will go to the 1st and 3rd place finishers. According to the rules as they are written.

It seems odd to me that eligibility for the 1st place trophy is based not just on competing in half the events, but on the points scored at those events. A win at 50% of the events grants eligibility, but if the person doesn't win every event, they have to compete in additional events to be eligible. Is there a reason for the additional complexity?

One way to reward participation is to have an award that is solely based on participation. For example, SFR gives a polo shirt to everyone who attends every event of the season.

My three year old grand daughter just got a participation trophy. They're a disservice to children IMO. What's the lesson we teach them by giving them a reward for losing?

Not everyone can win, a fact to which I am intimately familiar. As an adult do I want a reward for losing? Nope!

George Schilling wrote:My three year old grand daughter just got a participation trophy. They're a disservice to children IMO. What's the lesson we teach them by giving them a reward for losing?

Not everyone can win, a fact to which I am intimately familiar. As an adult do I want a reward for losing? Nope!

So what your saying is that we should only give trophies for first place.
Then we should figure out a better way to reward participation than loser trophies.

I would like to get a jacket some day.

Money to help pay for buy gas and tires is incentive. (solo bucks) I have enough 2nd place trophys thanks.

George Schilling wrote:My three year old grand daughter just got a participation trophy. They're a disservice to children IMO. What's the lesson we teach them by giving them a reward for losing?

Not everyone can win, a fact to which I am intimately familiar. As an adult do I want a reward for losing? Nope!

This is very true George

However, I don't think this discussion is purely about participation, I think participation is just one of the requirements.

1. Attend the required number of events
2. Award throphys base on existing rule for number of participants in class
3. Toss out the 5% / 8% rule.

My 2cents.

Michael Smith wrote:

George Schilling wrote:My three year old grand daughter just got a participation trophy. They're a disservice to children IMO. What's the lesson we teach them by giving them a reward for losing?

Not everyone can win, a fact to which I am intimately familiar. As an adult do I want a reward for losing? Nope!

So what your saying is that we should only give trophies for first place.
Then we should figure out a better way to reward participation than loser trophies.

I could quote the world famous stock car driver Ricky Bobby who said "If you ain't first, you're last". But I'm not that hardcore. I think what we do now is reasonable.

One of my pet peeves is how we (as a society) have decided to make everyone a winner by way of participation trophies for kids. This creates a false reality. Why work hard to be the best when all you have to do is show up and you win? But hey, studies show that American youth, while ranking just slightly above stupid in world education comparison studies, have the highest self-esteems in the world. Keep those trophies coming.

I cant disagree with you George or Ricky Bobby
Sorry. I tried for u Palero. I can visit the trophy shop tommorrow. Does it matter if it has a bowler or cheerleader?

We have lots of unclaimed trophies in the motorhome. Pretty cheap to replace the plaque on it. Help yourself...................

I vote Cheerleader.

I agree with Ron. Give 1st place trophies. For others who qualify, offer them a trophy if they want it or solo $$ if not. Nothing is a bigger waste of money than giving trophies to those people who don't care. (IE, straight to trash can)

George Schilling wrote:My three year old grand daughter just got a participation trophy. They're a disservice to children IMO. What's the lesson we teach them by giving them a reward for losing?

Not everyone can win, a fact to which I am intimately familiar. As an adult do I want a reward for losing? Nope!

2nd place is just the first loser.

This thread went sideways quickly

Without the rest of the participants in a class the class dies. I fail to see the logic of insulting everyone that didn't take first place in their respective class.

No need to call people losers and compare them to children. I'm proud of what ever position I end up with in my class, I won some, I lost a lot but gosh darn it I drag that tired, banged up E36 to every event, drove her as best as I could and had lots of fun.

One thing people should keep in mind - venting on the forums doesn't change the rules - it is just a way to vet out different point of views. If you have a suggestion on how something should change, you have to talk to our club rep and have him/her bring it up at a committee meeting.

The national SCCA standard for awards is to give a trophy for every three competitors (rounded up) up to 9 competitors, then one trophy for every four competitors (rounded up) over 9.

The current CSCC rules award a trophy for every 2.5 competitors, which is more than the national standard, and then has a provision to give even more trophies if people are close enough to the leader.

I don't think it's insulting to not give trophies to people who did not score enough points to place in a trophy position. This is a game that we choose to play, and there are rules to determine who "wins". What everyone gets out of it is the enjoyment of playing. Limiting the number of trophies makes the competition a little more interesting.

Considering the "within 8%" rule and it does make some sense. Consider a class where you have three really good drivers who are fighting it out all year, but nobody else runs in that class, for whatever reason. The competition isn't made any easier just because there aren't any casual competitors running in the class to boost the participation average, so you could consider that staying close enough to the leader to be within 8% of his/her score is an achievement that merits a trophy, even if it is essentially for "last place".