Rally sanctions

Started By: Kit Racette on 2003-01-23 03:52:51

From Kurt Rappold DVJC President, JCNA Awards Chairman

It has come to my attention that Dick Howe has rescinded our sanctioned Spring Rally due to the Arizona Challenge Championship. Our Spring Rally will be held May 2,3, and 4 in Millville NJ. Our sanction was submitted November 28, 2002 and approved on December 4, 2002. This will be the 10th year we have conducted the rally and the 12th year the rally has been held. We have engaged rally partners of San Marcos TX to lay out and run the really. Usually we see 15 jaguars and have scored some of the best rally scores in all of JCNA. Our scores are computer recorded to the nearest 100th of a second. Our Spring Rally has drawn 60+ cars, many of which utilize the N.E.O.C.R. to ôfield testö before the June Great American Race û Ralph Steinberg will drive the XXK120 in 2003 Great Race.

I will quote our fearless Rally ChairmanÆs last letter to me in July 2002. Doug Carr wrote:öWe must endeavor to maintain the momentum and interest by introducing more clubs into the Rally programö. The National Rally proposed by Doc Scadron for 2002 never happened but we have another opportunity in 2003 with the Great Race û Detroit to Dallas to Daytona by July 4th for the Firecracker ô400ö . Along the way we are scheduled to do laps at 5 Nascar tracks. I hope there is interest from the local clubs to hold æcruise nightsÆ and show up and participate during æshine timeÆ usually from 5 to 7 each night of the Rally.

As far as our Spring Rally goes, I think you boys and girls that write our Rule Book need to sit down and re-visit why a west coast event 1700 miles away can affect a local east coast event that has had the date scheduled for 10 years. Also why a club can only hold 2 rallies in one year? I know all organizations must have rules and I respect the BoardÆs authority to mandate rules but I also appeal to the common sense of each board member to act to re-instate the NEOCR Spring Sanction. And remove the limit on rallies that any club can sanction.

Submitted by Kit Racette

Co-editor the Purr


Kurt, Kit,

Participating in a National Rally like the great race is great... but if it's not announced VERY early, it's going to be tough to generate interest both for participation and for clubs to support this. there are many events in the spring/summer and clubs need to know ASAP. for instance, I'm sure we ( SFJC) and also the JAX and Orlando club, organize a fun drive for the rally's arrival in Daytona...

If you could put together a detailed anoucnement, with pictures of past Jaguar members participation, route, etc... I could put this up on the site. Most clubs plan their events 3 to 4 months in advance, and need to know soon...

What is the reasoning behind the 2 sansctioned rally per club per year ? Why don't you present the proposal at the AGM ( and lobby for it ahead of time... ). there is still time ! is there such a limit for slaloms ?

Pascal Gademer, SFJC
72 E-type 2+2
00 XKRCoupe
99 XJR


I was one who initially agreed that JCNA should not be sanctioning events that conflict with the Challenge Championship in order to promote support for that national event. However, every rule should have its exceptions, and the point that Kurt makes about the rally they has scheduled is a good one and a valid one for exception. Kurt and the Delaware club clearly submitted their request early. Not only that, this is not a purely club event that can be moved. I know several people who have done this rally in the past and say it is terrific.

I for one believe that JCNA should reinstate the sanction for the Delaware club's rally on May 2 and 3, 2002. Since the rally is being held on the East Coast, and entire continent away from the CC, there should be no conflict and neither the CC nor the rally will detract from the attendance at one another. Pulling the rug out from under Delaware at this point is unfair and will only result in disaffection from JCNA of some very dedicated members.

As far as Kurt's question as to why clubs are limited to 2 sanctioned events of any type in any given year, it was my understanding that this was to prevent one club from running 3 events that would qualify members for national points, like 3 concours, without having anyone outside that particular club ever seeing the cars. The idea being, I suppose, that this would level the playing field. While it makes sense with concours, it doesn't make sense, necessarily with rallys or slaloms, which are timed events that eliminate the subjective "human factor" that is so present in concours judging. By requiring a concours car to be scored at least once by another club avoids any particular club stacking the numbers.

I think there is something to be said about encouraging exchange between clubs. The limitation does that with concours and rallys. Not so with slalom, where a national time can be had at a single slalom event (no minimum number of events required for national standings). But like anything else, with slaloms, the more you do, the better you get. So limiting what one club can do in that sense levels the playing field as well.

Hopefully, whoever is ultimately responsible for authorizing sanctions will revisit the Delaware club's May event and re-grant them their sanction. It is impossible for them to reschedule that event and to deny them as sanction would penalize all the hard work they put into running it.

Steve Weinstein, JTC-NJ
'72 E-type 2+2
'89 XJS Coupe


I agree, there should be exceptions if an event can't be moved because it's part of another group, etc... Is that the case here ? what's the NEOCR that's mentioned in Kit's Email ?

re. not detracting because of the distance, maybe you are right. I was trying to prove my point and I searched the Franklin results to see how many cars came from the West Coast, at least officially entered in the concours. I could have save myself the typing of an SQL statement... 1... as in ONE.. SINGLE... LONELY....

SHOCKING ! I don't have the data for Colorado Springs but I suspect that there were few east coast cars there as well... I remember a few but probably most of the atetndance was central and west.

That is something that will need to seriously considered for future locations... and the data from Phoenix will have to be looked at...

the 1 event rule makes sense for Concours, but not for rally where there is little room for interpretation... just like slalom, the clock doesnt' lie...

Pascal Gademer, SFJC


It is my understanding that this rally is, in fact, part of another organization's event. They do the Delaware club rally in conjunction with this event, where the rally is set up and run by an organization that knows how to run them (NEOCR, I assume).

If this is the event I'm thinking about, it is run out of Wheatin Village in Millville, New Jersey. It is always run the first weekend in May. My friends Steve and Judy Ferring do this one every years and have been trying to get Carol and me to join them since we took the 3rd in the rally at the CC in Franklin two years ago (beginner's dumb luck).

Because this is NOT a Delaware club only event, they can't move the date. Period. JCNA should understand this situation and grant Delaware its sanction for this event.

Steve Weinstein, JTC-NJ
'72 E-type 2+2
'89 XJS Coupe


absolutely, but I don't think that was made clear, it's probably one of these situation that would have never come up if this has been explained early on... and this is why the JCNA rules leave the door open for possible exceptions...

Pascal Gademer
72 E-type 2+2
00 XKRCoupe
99 XJR

Rallys are darn hard events to put on. It takes a lot of planning and a lot of people to work it. No club should have unreasonable obstacles put in their way especially by the parent organization.

On the topic of how many scantioned events a club can hold; to build a program you must have a lot of opportunities for people to participate. The more rallys and slaloms the better. However, the rule to keep a person from participating in only their clubs events is a good one. But this could be amended to the best three times, only two of which could be from their home club. If only two times are submitted they must be from two different clubs. There are always people who will take advantage and this would make it a little more difficult for them but at the same time would encourage a lot of growth in the programs. Perhaps this topic should have more discussion as another way to build an active membership.

L D Young
Gray Ghost

I feel sanctioning should be given to Delaware who have an annual event they attend which is great for PR in its own way among other local Clubs and non-Jaguar owners too. We should encourage joint events with more that just Jaguars, though enticing members from other local Jaguar Clubs is a challenging task in itself. Delaware has a good thing and certainly an exception would not be difficult to make in this case.

The intent to prevent scheduling conflicts for national events is to maximize participation, correct? We can't expect a big percentage to be travelling across country from Delaware and the immediate local Clubs for the week long event in Phoenix, no matter how prestigious or important an event it is.

I've met people who are two and three times my age (I'm 26) that live 2 hours by automobile north of London who have never been there in their entire lives. Keep this example in mind while continuing to read.

When deciding what is fair across the organization, we should keep in mind the likes of Mexico City and the clubs separated by great distances. We can't expect Mexico City to travel to San Diego to obtain that third rally in order to compete nationally. Again, some people just don't have the time, the stamina, the resources, ability to resolve scheduling conflicts, and/or the desire to do so.

Being a part of SW04, we have a tough time providing a balanced event calendar that includes rally, slalom, overnight trips, day trips, tech sessions, concours, judges training, board meetings, brunch/lunch/dinner, social events, annual events like the Christmas Party, non-Jaguar non-JOC events that are interesting, and the list goes on.

The phrase too much of a good thing can definitely apply here. While Delaware, and Los Angeles, and perhaps others may want to rally every month if they could (I know I would), and they can just without sanctioning, we must keep in mind there are those Clubs which find running more then 1 rally (sanctioned or not) stretchs overall event participation and the membership thin.

We should continue to encourage those who like to rally to participate in the events of other Clubs. But, I believe the rule making it mandatory at least one rally participated in is sanctioned/organized through another Club to count nationally, while a sound ideal, is not fair to all of the affiliate Clubs across the organization.

Before we raise the limit of how many sanctioned rallys that count for national points, we must examine exactly how many of our Clubs are meeting the current 2 sanctioned rallys per year. I'm willing to bet less then 50%.

Two sanctioned rallys per Club which count for national points and three scores allowed to count nationally, of which the third ONLY must/and would naturally be acquired outside of your Club, sounds very fair. If the rules are changed, then let them begin at the beginning of a year. If its for 2003, then this should be decided fairly quickly. Some Clubs have already decided their event calendars for the first half of 2003 if not longer.

Whatever rules are decided, they must be enforced. Case in point, Delaware has four reported rallys for 2002 and all four counted in the national standings, which I believe violates the current rules. If the rally rules are changed, they must not apply to 2002 to be fair to all who. The current results for 2002 need to be amending.

Sunny Garofalo
'97 XJ6, '76 XJ12L
Webmaster, Los Angeles Jaguar Owner's Club