Sure I can run 8 run groups in an event that has less than 200 participants.
But is it ideal to run 8 groups in a small event like that? If you don't
mind begging for volunteers and filling in for missing workers constantly.
I had no idea we had been running 8 run groups for 25 years. If the 8 run
groups worked for the kind of turnouts we had back in 1980, they can work
for any event. Hey, you guys had witnessed it working; what other proof do
you need?
BTW, I said nothing about radios. The only "evidence" I have that three is
safer than two is just my common sense. The cars are a lot faster than when
you used to autocross Katie. :) Seriously, the flagger should not be
running after cones and you need two people to run after cones that may not
have been hit right next to each other. The only way to provide hard
evidence is for someone to get seriously hurt and I don't think we can
afford to take that risk.
--Navid
>
> I'm trying to understand how, all of a sudden, you
> need 230+ people to make 8 run groups work. It worked
> in 1992 and for 25 other years. What changed? What
> evidence do you have shows that having seven radios on
> a course is safer than say three. Or none. Radios are
> a there for convenience and efficiency. It's hard
> screaming across the asphalt.
>
> If this is really about safety, it could be argued
> that there are too many radios on course. They could
> be a distraction. You could reduce that number,
> freeing up the hands of course workers. This would
> require that the radio workers and others pay more
> attention, but this would also increase safety.
>
> -Katie
|