Then how about adding some dates to the already very small schedule? 10
events could somewhat easily be morphed into a 14-16 event series, thus
allowing more people an opportunity to join in. Then the 3/4 doesn't sound
so bad, not that it was that bad in the first place. And also a 14-16 maybe
even 20 event series would be viewed by the potential and current sponsors
as getting alot more for their money.
MK
on 5/27/03 4:00 PM, Ghsharp@aol.com at Ghsharp@aol.com wrote:
>
> I certainly agree with Andy's suggestion to make your opinions known to
> Howard and Tasha. Just as a point of additional information, I believe when
> the change was made (for the '01 ProSolo season, IIRC) to 2 out of 3 events
> for points instead of the previous 3 out of 4, the reasoning was to increase
> entry numbers. There were a lot of complaints at the time that having to
> travel to a minimum of 3 events was a real hardship for some people,
> depending on where they lived and how close those 3 events might be.
>
> As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for.......now the newfound
> popularity of the series and increased entry numbers are biting us in the
> backside. If we go back to 3 out of 4 events for points, we won't really know
>
> if that will negatively affect attendance, and by how much, until we're
> already
> into next season. As a long-time Pro participant, I'd really like to see the
> 3/4 points setup return, as I think it's a fairer way to determine season-end
> champions. It helps to offset the inequalities that can come into play when
> certain classes are more closely contested in one part of the country than
> another. Having said that, I realize that from the organizers' point of view
> there are several other things that will have to be factored into the
> decision.
>
> GH
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|