No novice school, etc...

[islandmon]

"problem is, we can't support them any more! So, we're taking the novice school off of the agenda for now."

What does that mean: "we can't support them anymore" ?

[Jeremy]

What does that mean: "we can't support them anymore" ?

All of these new people are cutting into the club's social time.
Not really important anyway. No valuable members have ever come from a novice school.

[Native]

Jim,
We prefer to keep the events on the smaller side so as to keep the pace relatively relaxed and maintain the quality of the events without killing ourselves or anyone else to do so. Jeremy wants to have larger events that run at breakneck speed. The novice school usually brings in quite a few new regulars, and as it is we sell out at our current chosen (or mandated) limits pretty quickly. More new regulars en masse would only make that worse.

As for culling valuable members from the school, we also have a steady flow of novices without the school, and some have indeed become regulars and/or "valuable" club members.

[Jamie]

We prefer to keep the events on the smaller side so as to keep the pace relatively relaxed and maintain the quality of the events without killing ourselves or anyone else to do so. Jeremy wants to have larger events that run at breakneck speed.

Steve -- that's selling Jeremy a bit short. In fact, increasing the event size slightly could even open options to be a little less frantic, with a few changes.

Figure at SPC, we get a car off at least every 40 seconds (for a course with little overlap). That's 90 runs an hour, or for a 20-driver group, 4 runs each, plus some slack...might even get 5 runs apiece with a little better overlap. Allow 15-minutes for turnover -- so 20 drivers every 75 minutes. That opens up a path to letting people do half-days -- run two groups in the morning, break for an hour for lunch/coursewalk, and two more in the afternoon. That's 80-90 drivers in roughly the same time window we now run 60-70 now.

What would we have to change? We'd need to figure out how to keep continuity over the two groups -- most easily by keeping a core group there all day, but it's possible to have a morning and afternoon crew. We'd need to tighten up the drivers meeting to shorten the rambling 30+ minutes it now takes. We'd need to push lunch back 30-45 minutes. And we'd have to commit to 4, maybe 5 runs instead of 5, maybe 6.

That's just a 15-minute sketch. As a serious discussion, it's separate thread -- the main point is that there are ways to accomodate more drivers without increasing the stress level.

[Loren]

Steve and I have discussed the possibility of going to a dual half-day format. Two groups before lunch, Two groups after, essentially run as separate events. Sticking with our current 20-25 car groups, that would allow for 80-100 total entries, but never having to deal with more than 50 of them at one time.

Was thinking about experimenting with it at one event sometime this year and see how it goes.

It would be good for SPC. Wouldn't get us past our 70-person limit at Brooksville, though. (but, we might be able to actually CALL it two events and submit two lists... worth looking into)

If we do a split format, we wouldn't worry about lunch. Only a handful of people would carryover from morning to afternoon. Just be sure the morning group is done running by noon, clear them out and let the second group course-walk for half an hour before doing the afternoon driver's meeting. Something like that.

One side-effect of doing it this way: All of those people who wanted to be sure that a class always runs as a group in the same conditions and all that... that notion would go out the window. I wouldn't mind, though. I think the pros outweigh the cons. The "morning people" can show up early, run before lunch and have the rest of their day free. The "not-so-morning people" can sleep in, or go to church or whatever, show up at noon, and only have to spend 3-4 hours at an autocross rather than all freakin' day.

[impalanut]

Run in the morning in one car and run in the afternoon in another car?

[Native]

Run in the morning in one car and run in the afternoon in another car?

Pay 2 entry fees?

[Jeremy]

I've just noticed that it appears to be getting harder and harder to find someone to chair the events. That problem will get worse as you cut out the enthusiastic novices and rely on the old members. A lot of older members are flakey. They will show up to one or two events and then disappear for a while or forever.

There has always been a boom of registrations following a novice school, and I've never had a problem registering for an event. I think, just like the ban on walk-ups/entry cap at SPC, that you are fixing a problem that doesn't exist. I would just prefer to be witness to a "bad" event before changes are made and I haven't seen a "bad" event yet in my opinion.

[Dave-ROR]

I've just noticed that it appears to be getting harder and harder to find someone to chair the events. That problem will get worse as you cut out the enthusiastic novices and rely on the old members. A lot of older members are flakey. They will show up to one or two events and then disappear for a while or forever.

There has always been a boom of registrations following a novice school, and I've never had a problem registering for an event. I think, just like the ban on walk-ups/entry cap at SPC, that you are fixing a problem that doesn't exist. I would just prefer to be witness to a "bad" event before changes are made and I haven't seen a "bad" event yet in my opinion.

This all makes sense to me, and I rarely agree with Jeremy

<<< one of the flakey old people.

[Native]

I've just noticed that it appears to be getting harder and harder to find someone to chair the events.

Getting an event chair has always been difficult, especially around the holidays. It's nothing new.

That problem will get worse as you cut out the enthusiastic novices and rely on the old members. A lot of older members are flakey. They will show up to one or two events and then disappear for a while or forever.

Perhaps you could set an example for old members and pick an event to chair next year.

...fixing a problem that doesn't exist.

Proactivity is often seen as a good thing.

and I haven't seen a "bad" event yet in my opinion.

Thanks. We must be doing something right.

[Jeremy]

Proactivity is often seen as a good thing.

Except when you are being proactively lazy.

and I haven't seen a "bad" event yet in my opinion.

Thanks. We must be doing something right.

So why are you changing it?

2.jpg (66.75 KiB) Viewed 8660 times

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1231

[Native]

Except when you are being proactively lazy.

I don't understand how you find it necessary to resort to insults. And pretty predictably, at that.


The only thing we're changing is not having a novice school every year. The table you posted shows that 20% of the current active membership (who may or may not be "valuable" ) who bothered to respond to that survey (20% of 44 is about 8) came from novice schools - ever. Which is less than 2 per school.

[Jeremy]

It's 25%, there are two categories. Not going to bother with the weird math where you calculate 25% as being insignificant.

It wasn't an insult and I could say the same about you...

Yep.
Just used to Jeremy being an ass and wanting the opposite of whatever we actually do...

And honestly I don't care what you do with the club, I just offer my opinions which everyone misinterprets as being a jerk. Do whatever you want, doesn't affect me, I will keep racing and having a good time.

[Dave-ROR]

I do have to admit that I can't understand the reason for eliminating walk ups at SPC. There have been two events that I ended up being able to make at SPC but didn't bother because of the new no-walkup rule. It really makes absolutely no sense to me.

The school I always thought was good, for both brand new people and for newer people who just lacked experience. How many people became regulars doesn't seem to really matter.

Being proactive by improving things is seen as a good thing, it's whether or not the changes that have been made are positive or not that's in question. IMO, they aren't positive so in my opinion (and I'd guess Jeremy's) it's being proactively negative that's the problem. Replacing, say, the radios before they break is proactive and positive. Or replacing a working timing system with one that works better and/or is more reliable is proactive and positive. Limiting/removing walkups, novice schools, etc for no good reason isn't even really proactive, but let's say it is... it's proactive and negative.

Some of these changes have changed the tone of the organization. They aren't the main reasons I rarely show up anymore (mostly it's because of chump car and DEs) , but as I said, they HAVE been the sole reason a couple of times.

Honestly when I first read this thread the lack of a novice school was actually the very first thing I noticed. It's actually an event I look forward to every year because I like seeing new people get into the sport.

[yamaha731]

I love what you guy's do what ever you can do to make things easyer for the people running it do it

[twistedwankel]

For some time now I have toyed with the idea of reactivating SCCA but I couldn't find 6 "committed" people to help me every month for a whole year and SCCA wouldn't even give me a free membership for my trouble.

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!

What about "NOT RACERS"? Catchy title.

"North Of Tampa Racing Against Clowns Eating Real Shit?"

I don't know where I will ever find enough financing to fund a trailer, fill it with stuff, buy new cones, get insurance, get a contract with the Airport let alone anyone else, find people to store the trailer and haul it for me? Get people to show up? Hmmmm. Food?

Goal: The best "All You Can Eat" Autocross in the WORLD. That ought to do it.

"NOT RACERS" watch for it soon on http://www.com

[Native]

I agree the novice school is good and it is nice to see new folks get involved in the sport. Read on:

Applying a "fix" to an existing problem while working on more of a "solution" is hardly negative. As it is, every event, Loren and I get emails from people trying to get in after the event is sold out. Every event. Adding more potential entrants after a novice school would only make that existing problem worse. So, obviously, we see skipping the novice school, this time, as a positive thing for the club as a whole. In the meantime, as Jamie suggested and to which Loren responded, we've been discussing ways to accommodate more people while maintaining quality. If you feel quality, or "tone" of events has changed, I'm sorry to hear that. We're looking at it.

As for eliminating walkups at SPC:
PROS:
Consistency in procedure between event sites
Streamlines registration process at the event
Reduces paperwork for registration at the event
Reduces amount of money that must change hands at the event
Does away with having to wait to figure out run/work assignments
Does away with delaying events because of walkups who show at the last minute and thus further delay figuring out run/work assignments
Does away with having to enter walkups into timing computer, which can delay event
Makes ordering lunch easier, as we know better how many to feed
All of the above makes less work for the precious volunteers who do the associated jobs and makes the pre-event process run more smoothly and quickly for all.

CONS:
Makes it more difficult for 8-10 people to participate

[buddy bodean]

For some time now..."NOT RACERS" watch for it soon on http://www.com

Doug, it must be lonely there in Dougtropolis...or they have REALLY good bars there.

[Dave-ROR]

As for eliminating walkups at SPC:
PROS:
Consistency in procedure between event sites
Streamlines registration process at the event
Reduces paperwork for registration at the event
Reduces amount of money that must change hands at the event
Does away with having to wait to figure out run/work assignments
Does away with delaying events because of walkups who show at the last minute and thus further delay figuring out run/work assignments
Does away with having to enter walkups into timing computer, which can delay event
Makes ordering lunch easier, as we know better how many to feed
All of the above makes less work for the precious volunteers who do the associated jobs and makes the pre-event process run more smoothly and quickly for all.

CONS:
Makes it more difficult for 8-10 people to participate

Removed the first part from the quote, but there wasn't a problem to fix. If people don't register early enough at a venue that requires it (ie brooksville), too bad, otherwise, show up before 9AM.

For the list, I can see the consistency part. Streamlines reg, eh, maybe if everyone brings in the pre-filled school form, collecting money really isn't that difficult or time consuming, I've done it a number of times at SPC. Paperwork, same thing. Last time I did registration the majority still filled out the form on site, an extra 10 people really made no difference and sometimes the walkups brought pre-filled forms too just in case. Money changing hands is a problem? Most groups like having money change hands. I'll let Jamie chime in on the run groups, I'm sure it does add a little work there, but it's not like changes don't occur from the no-shows anyways. Every event I did registration at was never delayed due to walk ups. Excessive course setup times, late arrivals of staff/volunteers, extremely long novice walks (which is fine, just saying), longer than usual drivers meetings (questions, etc), slow movers getting to grid/out to work the course/etc all have 100x more impact than walkups. Since most walkups get there early to get on the list, I really don't see there being a rush of them at 9AM or later - and never have at any of the events I was at. Timing computer entries can *easily* happen during the drivers meeting, novice walk, etc - and have in the past. I can see the lunch arguement, I've been without lunch at events before but it wasn't a big deal. Having been one of those volunteers at one time, walkups never bothered me or made my life difficult in the least.

IMO these are all reasons/excuses for laziness, not improvements.

Not trying to be an ass either btw but I just wish the best for the club and IMO these changes don't make it better.

[Loren]

I don't know about you guys, but I've been running this club in one form or another for 10 years, and Steve has been at it for about 6 years. We've got THE strongest autocross program in the area (note that I didn't say anything egotistical like "the best"... just the facts, it IS the strongest), so as Steve said, we must be doing something right.

Is there something wrong with being "lazy" and saving ourselves some work? If it weren't for a little bit of well-engineered "laziness", I'm sure we'd be in the same boat as the CFR-West SCCA group... terminal organizer burn-out and nobody willing to pick up the pieces.

No novice school is not necessarily a "permanent" thing. We're just not doing it THIS year for reasons mentioned. Our club still VERY much supports novices without doing a school. We typically have 5-10 first-timers at every event, especially those at SPC. And we take very good care of them.