June 2nd Championship post event discussion

[Mase]

I personally did not like the soft start.

The argument seems to be safety and fairness related, but honestly...has rocks flying into cars from spinning tires really been a concern? If so, then why did it take until now to fix it? I've attended all closed clubs this year and we've never had this soft start. How many cars have been damaged this year due to flying pebbles?

As far as fairness is concerned, the soft start doesn't make slow cars faster off the start, it makes fast cars slower. I don't believe that a course should be made to deliberately handicap a certain type of car. We all drive the car we have and we need to accept the fact that if our cars are slower off the start than the next guy's, then we've gotta make it up somewhere else. All cars are better or worse at different parts of the course...My car sucks in the sweepers, why can't we make a course with two 90 degree hard corners instead so that it's more fair for me?

Personally, I've never heard anybody say "This course is not fair, I'm going to complain that the cars with more power are beating me off the line!"

[SkinnyG]

Still waiting for a seconder to my motion that all non-green cars run at half-throttle only. (That would make the course more fair to me....)

Greg "Sentrifugal Sentra" Wellwood

[dnf]

I enjoyed the course yesterday despite struggling throughout the day. It was a nice change from the regular maps. IMHO, a lot of autox is about seeing who is better at adapting to changes. So a bit of creativity in course design is welcomed!

I believed last year at Vernon, they went with a similar kind of a angled start too. I'm not saying I welcome an angled start and we should do it more often, but again, a bit of change here and there once a while gives us opportunities to practice different things every event.

The scanner is definitely a good change, doesn't seem to like picking up the barcode from my helmet though.

[Audi200tq]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by G Wellwood:
Still waiting for a seconder to my motion that all non-green cars run at half-throttle only. (That would make the course more fair to me....)

Greg "Sentrifugal Sentra" Wellwood<hr></blockquote>

Funny, I heard it was ALL GREEN cars (and Integra Type Rs of any colour).

With regard to the 'soft' start (if that's what it's being called, I personally didn't mind it. And this is coming from the guy with probably the longest wheelbase car. What I liked about it:
- negates 6000 rmp cluch dumps (anybody looked at the replacement cost of a quattro clutch lately?)
- adds variation to our courses
- gives the spectators something fun to watch

Should all courses start like that? No. Should all courses start in a straight line? No. Adaptation to different courses (including start configuration) is the real challenge in our sport.

Oh, that and getting at least one clean run in!

[Prostrho]

I didn't really care for the angled start. I wouldn't mind it too much, but i prefer a straight line start more.

Otherwise the course is great. Although i DNFed twice (due to lack of course walk).

[Radio Flyer]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by fc-racer:


We'll try and have something ready for the next event.

<hr></blockquote>

I can draft something and pass it around for comments if you'd like?

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>

Having been the COT for a few events, how do you feel about moving tech to a monthly inspection instead of a per event inspection?

<hr></blockquote>

That works for regular competitors but new people or occasional ones might fall through the cracks.

Can the computer track the last time an individual's car was teched?

How would we know if a competitor changed cars mid way through the month?

How would we know if a competitor's tires had JUST a couple of chords showing from the last event? We need to address some of the possible exceptions.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>

Ed Smart also reminded us that the new Fastrack system eliminates the driver signature on the entry form so a new document (similar to our waiver) will be created for drivers to sign when they register.

<hr></blockquote>

If you check Section 6.2 of the GCR's, sub-section C (page 6-3) refers to the need to sign a declaration prior to being allowed to compete. Then sub-section E allows amendment of the requirement as long as the original principle is not altered. I wonder if Ed might accept a form which is signed once per per race season or when a new competitor is entered into the system. After all, each person who enters the site, competitor or not, signs the waver at each event. I don't know how this would affect the requirement as it applies to BCMA or the UBCSCC. I suspect it would NOT apply as the declaration would be specific to VCMC only. Maybe Johnny can comment on the possibility of the change before you go to Ed.

[swiftdb1]

Lot's of useful information about course design can be found here

http://www.ghg.net/cmjfsl/

Roger has designed many of the recent Nationals courses in Kansas.

Because BB is a narrow runway, there is a limit on what you can do to make a good course that has decent overlap to get all the cars 4 runs at a regional. Certainly there is more room for experimentation at closed clubs.

In general, a good course design must have good flow. One element should lead to another and it should not look like a "sea of cones" to the driver. Good courses should give the drivers the ability to drive different lines. This rewards the better drivers who can execute and find the fast lines. A good course should also not favor certain types of cars. There should be a good mix of technical elements and higher speed manoevers to allow the Miata's and ESP people to play.

Other things to look out for at BB are the finish areas. You want to give drivers the opportunity to get on the gas but make sure they are reasonably straight. Spinning into the finish is not good and dangerous. Then there is the broken pavement in the middle. In general, I don't like to make people turn while in the broken section. Crossovers there are OK but I try to stay away from sweepers.

There are also many different ways to design a course and any crew that has worked with Cliff, Farzaan, Rob or myself can probably attest to that. Hope this gives an idea of what goes on in my mind when I do a course design. I think this might be a tech session one of these days...

Alex

[bcrx7]

personally i did not have any problems with the "soft start". I thought it was something new and interesting.

As for what alex said, I don't like the sweepers b/c we have had them for almost every single event this year. Is there another way we can design the course so we don't have a sweeper?

[cbeere]

I Personally don't care for angled starts like yesterday's course cause for front wheel drive cars especially, accelerating hard on a grippy surface like concrete, with your wheels turned could damage the CV joints. But whatever as long as the start isn't ridiculously tight.
I worked the backup timing book and I have a few sugestions.
The Binder that all the times are recorded in should have tab dividers for each class. That way it is alot easier to flip back and forth between the class pages while recording times.
Also is there any way to print out the names of the drivers in each class before the run group starts? Ideally you could print out a page for each class that would include spaces to record the times and penalties for each run. That way it would be alot less hectic for the first session where you have to start a new page for whatever class each driver is in, write his/her name and car number, and then the time. But even if you just had a print-out of the drivers and classes, before the cars started you might be able to start writing down the info on the scoring sheets and get a little further ahead.
Outside of that, I commend the VCMC in once again running an efficient event, and pushing the technology envelope in the never ending quest for event supremacy!!!!!!!!!!

Chris B

[Neon Racer]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by G Wellwood:
Still waiting for a seconder to my motion that all non-green cars run at half-throttle only. (That would make the course more fair to me....)

Greg "Sentrifugal Sentra" Wellwood<hr></blockquote>

I like this idea...seconded!

[fc-racer]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by cbeere:
Outside of that, I commend the VCMC in once again running an efficient event, and pushing the technology envelope in the never ending quest for event supremacy!!!!!!!!!!

Chris B
<hr></blockquote>

I'm sure you meant "event efficiency"

The binder idea is excellent. We'll have it implemented at the next Champ event, we'll print out the drivers in their run groups and have them in the binder before the start. The recorder then only has to enter times.

fc-racer

[Mike-L]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by fc-racer:



...The next event should be pretty much paperless with no run cards and no printing required at registration. The only paper used will be for results after each group has completed a run. I wonder how many trees we'll save over the duration of a year or over several years?...

fc-racer<hr></blockquote>

I'd like to see results printed more often, since there is no reader board or hand-posting of times. If there were interim "unofficial" results printed mid-group for each run, you'd be able to tell somewhat what was going on and where people stood compared to others in a class. At a minimum, I'd like to see results printed out after each run. Maybe they were, but it seemed like they weren't printed until sometime after the run group was over, when everyone had gone to their work assignment.

--Mike

[Ahme]

i liked the soft start .. only becoz i drive auto
and i wish the CACC rule book is the same as SCCA one.. now i am in ES.. makes me 3 sec behind every driver.. i know driver is the biggest factor.. but i worked my way from 3 sec behind to 1.5 sec behind from HS.. now its 3 sec again.. but what the hell.. i will try my best.. since its the rule..

[ June 03, 2002: Message edited by: Jan ]</p>

[fc-racer]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Mike-L:
I'd like to see results printed more often, since there is no reader board or hand-posting of times. If there were interim "unofficial" results printed mid-group for each run, you'd be able to tell somewhat what was going on and where people stood compared to others in a class. At a minimum, I'd like to see results printed out after each run. Maybe they were, but it seemed like they weren't printed until sometime after the run group was over, when everyone had gone to their work assignment.

--Mike<hr></blockquote>

Hi Mike,

The results were printed and posted after each group had completed one run. So in a two run heat, the results were printed twice. From what you've written above, I believe that is sufficient. Perhaps we can post them in a more visible area than the crowded timing/scoring area.

fc-racer

[Cliffy]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by fc-racer:
Perhaps we can post them in a more visible area than the crowded timing/scoring area.

fc-racer<hr></blockquote>

Maybe Pat Ma still knows the whereabouts ofthe scoreboard we used to have.

As for the binder. I can dig up some tabbed dividers that we can pre-arrange in the book just after the software determines run groups.

-c.