Yes, it was rhetorical, and I was hoping others would jump in. As you state,
it's obvious more folks partake of autocross when it's close and convenient.
There are some who would rather travel to 'better' sites, because the
entries are lower, and there is more seat time. SFR has made a choice to not
be exclusive. :) We do the best we can under the conditions. I just get kind
of sensitive when folks start knocking a site that improves the more we use
it, GGF. It would be nice of the site management would repave it, but with
all the 'plans' for the site's development (as Tony T alluded to--if
Berkeley and Albany approve--a very big IF), they see no point in repaving
it. So we do what we can to make it the best that we can.
--Pat K
----------
>From: Glenn Ellingson <geewiz@mac.com>
>To: ba-autox@autox.team.net
>Subject: Re: Gravel at Golden Gate Fields
>Date: Mon, Jun 3, 2002, 10:35 AM
>
> On Monday, June 3, 2002, at 10:04 AM, Pat Kelly wrote:
>> I realize the search for the perfect surface leads us away from the
>> Bay
>> Area. So what would you have us do, stage everything at Atwater? Would you
>> be willing to travel to the eastern side of the Central Valley for run an
>> autocross every Sunday?
>> --Pat K
>
> Not sure if that was a rhetorical question, Pat, or if you wanted other
> people to jump in, but.... NO!
>
> :-)
>
> No site is perfect but I think the attendance figures show I am not alone
> in preferring nearby sites to large/well-surfaced/"better" non-local sites.
> The gravel at GGF is a pain, as is the irregularity of the surface at GGF,
> as are scheduling problems at the coliseum, etc...... no site will ever
> be perfect, but I am quite happy that we have the sites we do.
>
> In Florida we had the same issues; I assume most places do. It's hard to
> get everything you want in one site. In Tampa our choice was to schedule
> at the AFB (central location, wonderful huge concrete runways) and take a
> 50-50 chance the military will cancel the event on short notice, or to
> schedule at the fairgrounds where the "lot" was a set of 40-foot-wide
> asphalt strips with grass in between them and the "paddock" was muddy
> grass, or to put events a couple of hours out of town. The SFR does better
> despite much more population density.
>
> --Glenn Ellingson, miata pilot
>
>> ----------
>>> From: Joe <joe@bea.com>
>>> To: ba-autox@autox.team.net
>>> Subject: Gravel at Golden Gate Fields
>>> Date: Mon, Jun 3, 2002, 9:25 AM
>>>
>>
>>> Hi all.
>>>
>>> I just ran in an all-day autocross with the PCA at Golden Gate Fields
>>> yesterday and it was very irritating, almost to the point that I would
>>> skip events there. There is so much loose gravel all over the lot that
>>> the first group must have bead-blasted their undercarriages to clean
>>> a line. The 'line' was essentially point-to-point because with no
>>> traction
>>> that's the shortest way around. Even in the afternoon, this was a
>>> 'drive-a-stupid-line-as-fast-as-you-can' event because any
>>> attempt to vary put you into the drifts of displaced marbles. There was
>>> a typical thirty-paces slalom where the cleared 'line' was precisely
>>> straight from one side of one cone to the other side of the next cone.
>>>
>>> Have we ever paid someone to sweep a lot? I would gladly chip in
>>> for this, rather than be chipped away by the gravel.
>>> Joe Weinstein
|