HAVOCDEAN@aol.com <Dean Sapp> wrote:
> If I would have "lost" it and hit someone else, I would have blamed "ME"
> and no one else. I have designed and set up dozens of courses plus Pro
Solo
> courses over the years and NEVER felt in any way that those courses were
> unsafe.
> Lets give the guy a break!!!!!!
I don't think anyone here is blaming Dan for anything Dean; I walked the
course about two dozen times and never saw anything that looked like a
problem. And even later on, when Rick's tracks were there in plain view, it
was hard to believe they started where they did and finished where they
did.
In my mind, there's no question that the course was more dangerous than the
assumed norm in that section. But I also think it was a freak thing that
could not have been predicted. I *certainly* have no bone to pick with Dan.
Where I'm finding myself a little uncomfortable is that we got a warning
about the hidden dangerous nature of the course very early on: Larry and
Rick's near-miss happened first thing Saturday morning. With 20/20
hindsight, the course should have been fixed _right then_. Yes, that'd suck
for the relatively few people who had runs in the books, but oh well. While
there is certainly an assumed risk in this sport, that risk does not
include car to car contact - or at the least, the potential for car to car
contact is to be minimised, and so when it has been demonstrated that a
portion of the course is increasing that risk beyond the established norm,
then the course should be changed - competitor inconvenience be dammed!
Where I think things fell down was that there had to be 50 licenced Safety
Stewards present at that event (including me) and none of us had the parts
to step forward and do our job. I confess to feeling a little "not my
responsibility" because my certification is barely a month old, but the
truth of it is that that little line on my licence that says "Safety
Steward" means that it _is_ my responsibility, as it is of every other SSS
present at the site, to take action when an unsafe condition presents
itself.
To be honest, I'm caught between Linhoff and mAs on this one. Eric is right
- when an abnormally unsafe condition presents itself, then you fix it.
Period. But I'm also with Mark, in that there is a certain level of
"unsafe" that is inherent to the sport, and that the job of the SSS is to
minimise risks, not eliminate them. Solo, especially ProSolo, is not
tiddlywinks or lawn bowling, and sometimes shit is going to happen. We do
all we can to reasonably prevent it, and we do all we can to minimise the
consequences when it does happen, but we cannot *absolutely prevent*
incidents from happening, and so there's no need for witch hunts when one
does occur.
DG
I posted on this yesterday, but it never showed up....
|