Maybe it would be best to create more visually challenging courses so that
the concept of a 'nationals style' course becomes more routine than the
exception.
Just a thought.
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Kevin Stevens wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2001 Smokerbros@aol.com wrote:
>
> > As you may have noticed, the course had a different look. Hopefully those
> > who have been to previous National Championships will agree with me that it
> > had a "Nationals Look" to it.
> >
> > 23 people posted 1 or more DNFs. Fortunately only 2 had all 3 runs as DNFs.
> > I'd love to know whether they had walked the course, where their DNFs
> > occured, etc. 17 of the 23 DNFed only their 1st run. I'd also like to know
> > how many of the other 6 found the course the first time, and got lost on a
> > subsequent run and why.
> >
> > Do we want more courses like this?
> >
> > CHD
>
> Charlie - I suspect most of the DNFs were in one place. After the back
> two-cone slalom (nice element), when you turned into the left-hander to
> come back, where the course went was suddenly very confusing. There was
> one pointered cone in front of you, then you had to quickly look left and
> pick up ANOTHER single, pointered cone to get the line into the following
> right-hander. I almost DNFed my first run, and was lost again as I went
> through a second run as a passenger. Subsequently I started looking at
> the inside cones, which were regularly marked, and didn't have any more
> trouble.
>
> It wasn't obvious during course walk that that place would be "visually
> difficult", at least to me.
>
> I liked the course flow, it would have been nice to incorporate that
> offset in the last straight we discussed to make it more interesting, but
> it was too late by then.
>
> Hope this helps!
>
> KeS
>
---
*******************************************
*New & Improved: http://www.speedtoys.com *
*******************************************
|