-------------------- Begin Original Message --------------------
Message text written by "Talley, Brooks"
"Sender: brooks@frnk.com
John Kelly wrote:
> I think courses with "unclear areas" do a disservice to our
> members, especialy new people who have been known to DNF all
> three runs and go home disheartened. This is NOT the way to
> continue building a program, especially a financially
> successful one. Only the tobacco industry can get away with
> killing its customers.
>
> And, unclear areas are dangerous because it leaves
> the potential for a driver with foot on the floor to travel
> into another vehicle on course.
>>I think it's important to separate safety from making beginners feel
>>good. They can be realted, but they are not inseperable. I don't think
>>anyone wants a course that lends itself to people getting killed.
We are in agreement. The solution achieved long ago was to mark our courses
here in the San Francisco area on both sides with gypsum (or white powder
of some kind) and thus nobody gets lost at speed. Our friends elsewhere
continued to utilize gate-style courses with no markings. This latter type
of course has two results,
1) beginners who get lost do not return;
2) The club loses income;
3) People who can figure out an unmarked course gain a false sense
of security because they are beating people who got lost.
>>It also doesn't seem like we've got a problem with too few participants.
Pardon me for taking you into dark history, but in 1998 we were losing
money due to a lack of participants. Seven of our 16 main series events
that year were in the Central Valley and very poorly attended. That's when
the entry fee was raised from $20 to $25 to cover our costs.
Concurrent with the above, we allowed non-members to run at an
additional $10 charge.
Beginning in 1999 we began to have more events at Oakland, and 3
Com. And last year we regained use of Golden Gate Fields. Because we
allowed non-members, who seemingly were more than eager to pay all the
fees, we were literally over run with entries and our Volunteer leadership
was being run ragged. We also had a behavior problem, mostly by our paying
guests. That's when we went to the concept of "card-carrying" members. It
ain't perfect but solves a lot of problems.
>>I think it is just as much a disservice to our members to design every
>>single course to be beginner-friendly. It's only by challenging
>>ourselves that we improve. "Unclear" is in the eye of the beholder, but
>>I don't think that making the course "clear" should be our highest
>>priority (safety issues notwithstanding, of course).
Here's where we disagree, but only slightly. Our overall goal is to
get you to compete, hopefully against people who are faster than you.
That's how you learn to go faster. Having courses that do not scare away
beginners--and we do have a tremendous turnover--provides drivers with
competition. It ain't no fun to run in a class all by yourself. This
competition is what will make you quicker.
>>I had a blast at my first nationals this year, but man do I wish that
>>more SFR courses were nationals-style as far as layout, composition, and
>>speed. I was simply unprepared for the speed of some of the corners, as
>>well as unused to reading more challenging courses. I fisished #32 out
>>of 44 in my class, and was lucky to do that well!
I drove the National North course entirely in second gear and found it to
be greatly similar to the course we'd driven at Albany just before. Pat
drove the South course, also entirely in second gear. Thus I think the
speed levels this year were not much different than what we face at home.
That hasn't always been true and there has been a backlash against the
so-called "speed creep."
>>Then this weekend I had a great day at GGF. I felt very comfortable with
>>the course. Sure, partly because I drove the south course at nats, but
>>also because that experience taught me to look farther ahead, to be
>>comfortable with tossing the car around at higher speeds, and (most
>>importantly) to be patient sometimes and go a bit slower in one part to
>>set up a faster part better.
All of your previous experiences will help prepare you for the next
challenge.
>>To me, it seems that our local events should prepare people for
>>nationals, not the other way around. Surprise and challenge me here so
>>I stand a chance against real competition, please!
>>Cheers
>>-b"
Many of us believe that is precisely what is happening. It is my goal to
provide the venues where lots of people compete and the cream will rise to
the top.
We could get into a discussion about the outlook of our friends who
live in the middle west and their course design theories, but the reality
is those folks have come a long way since we began having National
championship meets.
--John Kelly.
|