Da Groj

Just wanna throw this out there. +/-20 cars per run group, line up 15 cars down far left side of grid road, cycle thru 5 cars as a rolling grid for their 6(?) runs on right side of grid road, swap out to next 5 cars, repeat. This keeps the driver's concentration up, tire temps up and reduces times between runs. Dual driver cars would run 1 driver for all runs then swap to another driver for next "segment".

Just a thought.

"Sub-run-groups"? Interesting idea.

It wouldn't speed up the event any, and would be a bit of a hassle to implement, but it could work.

Potentially, we could run "larger run groups" that way. We could put 30 cars "on deck", with only 5 or 10 of them in the "active grid", and the rest on "stand-by". It could work.

You should try it when you chair the next event, Ed!

Might be worth experimenting with at Brooksville, where there's a bit of extra room to play with. Put some thought into it, and Phil and I might consider it for December.

Just get a co-driver. Same results with none of the hassles.

I actually prefer it the other way, I have trouble keeping tire temps down and don't like rushing around so much. And that is only cutting the group in half with a co-driver, cutting it into fourths or whatever as suggested, would suck.

I like having time between runs to go to the bathroom, get a drink, look at the scoreboard, wipe the sweat out of my eyes, spray water on tires, lift the hood up and let some heat out, stretch, ask competitors about lines and stuff, compare my times to others, make fun of Chuck Ray's times, check car for missing, leaking, or broken parts (90's Nissan), and ride with people.

Also you are going to have even more problems with weather and changing conditions, since all your runs will be completed in a 15-20 minute window and classes will need to be split across multiple sub run groups.

And using this to create larger run groups equals longer work groups.

Jeremy wrote:I like having time between runs to go to the bathroom, get a drink, look at the scoreboard, wipe the sweat out of my eyes, spray water on tires, lift the hood up and let some heat out, stretch, ask competitors about lines and stuff, compare my times to others, make fun of Chuck Ray's times, check car for missing, leaking, or broken parts (90's Nissan), and ride with people.

Yeah, it would sort of take away from the "social" aspect of autocross a little bit and make things feel a little rushed. Some people like that, but I suspect that most don't. (If you're going to spend all day at an autocross anyway, why rush through "the best part"?)

Also you are going to have even more problems with weather and changing conditions, since all your runs will be completed in a 15-20 minute window and classes will need to be split across multiple sub run groups.

Personally, I'd like to see us get out of this mindset. Fast is about "Fun" not "the ultimate in fair competition". But, it is a valid point.

And using this to create larger run groups equals longer work groups.

Yep, that could be a problem, too.

The simple truth is this: If we want to allow more entries, we're going to have to reduce our number of runs to keep it manageable. I don't think we want to do that, which is why we've been TRYING to keep our entry count close to 60. I think we may have finally reached the point where we need to set a hard cut-off at 75 entries no matter what. #76 doesn't get to register, sorry.

I just hate waiting five minutes or more between runs. I piss and socialize before and after my run group so I am always close by my car. Although I do like to check times between runs...

Like I said, it was just a thought.

Loren wrote:

Jeremy wrote:I like having time between runs....

Yeah, it would sort of take away from the "social" aspect of autocross a little bit and make things feel a little rushed. Some people like that, but I suspect that most don't. (If you're going to spend all day at an autocross anyway, why rush through "the best part"?)

buddy bodean wrote:I just hate waiting five minutes or more between runs.

There's a balance -- you can stretch out the gaps between runs to insanity (run with GCAC sometime). Five minutes between runs is long-recognized competition minimum between runs, based on letting the tires cool down. We're not strict about it (particularly with two-driver cars), but I think we hit that most of the time. More than fifteen minutes starts being a drag -- socializing is fine, but when it's time to drive, dammit, let's drive...B.S. later! Practically, with 20-25 cars in a group and releasing a car every 30 seconds or so, we're inside that 10-15 minute window.

[quote-"Loren"]Fast is about "Fun" not "the ultimate in fair competition".[/quote]
QYB -- you've been pushing in the opposite direction lately.

The simple truth is this: If we want to allow more entries, we're going to have to reduce our number of runs to keep it manageable. I don't think we want to do that, which is why we've been TRYING to keep our entry count close to 60. I think we may have finally reached the point where we need to set a hard cut-off at 75 entries no matter what.

It would really be nice to regularly be able to run four groups. That would allow everyone a break between running and working -- if you're looking to enhance the social aspects, that helps. It also opens up possibilities for spreading out the lunch period while shortening the amount of time we're stopped. Four groups is difficult to do with less than 80 people, though, unless we go back to splitting classes across groups to level them, and/or going back to everyone working during the run groups, regardless of pre- and post-event work. Of course, 80 people isn't going to happen at Brooksville, regardless.

As far as number of runs, we still should be shooting for turning a group over in an hour, especially in the hotter weather, then tailor the number of runs accordingly. That gives a 20-car group on a 30-second interval 6 runs; a 25-car group 5 runs. If the course doesn't allow 30-second intervals, or the group size gets larger, cut the number of runs. Deliberately planning for 80-90 minute run groups means a few delays push actual time close to two hours. Even in cooler weather, standing out on a course station for two hours is less than fun. If running a bazillion runs is really important, cut the competition runs back to 3-4, then do fun runs for whoever wants to stay -- those need nothing more than a running clock, a starter, and a few people to rove around resetting cones as they get to them.

I'll throw my 2 cents in for keeping the run groups more "casual." Feeling as if I can't walk away from my car for a minute isn't fun to me. Like Jeremy said, having a little time for "stuff" is preferable.

I'm all for letting as many folks enter as possible, but not at the expense of the event itself...I suspect one reason folks keep coming is because things are a bit relaxed, within the obvious organization. That's quite comfortable for people.

As for number of run groups and number of runs and such - not so concerned about the groups, but I think we need to target 5 as an absolute minimum number of runs for any regular event, with 6 preferred.

I'll back Steve up. 6 runs is our "standard", 5 is acceptable. I think our days of 7-8 runs are mostly behind us as long as our entries stay in the vicinity of 60 or more drivers.

We could get away with doing 4 run groups with 60 drivers. What we'd have to give up is the notion that every work station requires 2 (or 3) workers. An experienced worker is capable of working a not-too-busy station solo.

If we're still taxed for workers, we may need to look at NOT letting so many people out of their normal work assignment for various other things. Perhaps doing event credit instead of worker credit. (the club generally has money at this point, so that wouldn't hurt us as long as we're careful with it)

Personally, I'd love to see 4 groups of 15-18 cars at every event. 15 cars, 6 runs, 30-second interval = 45 minutes. Good stuff. It's the slow shift to 20+ car grids that have been making it hard to maintain 6+ runs without running long on time for workers.

Loren wrote:We could get away with doing 4 run groups with 60 drivers. What we'd have to give up is the notion that every work station requires 2 (or 3) workers. An experienced worker is capable of working a not-too-busy station solo.

Too many "ifs" there -- many times, we don't have a surplus of experienced workers, and fewer experienced enough I'd put 'em out on a station alone. Plus we generally have few enough stations that it's impractical to cover the ground with only one person, particularly at Brooksville, where we have the fewest entrants. It's certainly possible to run one person in timing if they're on the ball. Grid and start are one-man positions by nature.

Two pairs of hands in registration helps at SPC, but at Brooksville, one person can easily hold down the gate. Tech could be a one-man job; it just might take a bit longer. We really could get away with one event chair, too -- more often, the second person has been either backup or learning the ropes.

If we're still taxed for workers, we may need to look at NOT letting so many people out of their normal work assignment for various other things.

That would give us back about 10 people, most of them experienced -- no small benefit.

Personally, I'd love to see 4 groups of 15-18 cars at every event. 15 cars, 6 runs, 30-second interval = 45 minutes. Good stuff.

Cut timing down to one person, have everyone except the event chair (who needs to be available) working the run groups, and that's not difficult. 50 people could cover four groups -- even at Brooksville it's rare to have more than 5-6 no-shows from 60 entrants.

We need both co-chairs and co-timing people. Those are positions where we really need people to be learning the ropes.

Would have to discuss with Steve and see how it fits our budget, but I could see doing something like a 50% event credit for all of the pre and post-event stuff that we currently give worker credit for.

That is... assuming that event credits aren't too much of a pain in the butt to deal with.

I also wouldn't object to going to pre-reg only for SPC with a limit of 70. I think we'd fill it more often than not, and with a handful of no-shows, we'd have a workable number of entries... without all the last-minute on-site registration hassles. It used to be to our benefit to allow walk-ups. I don't think we really "need" it now. Just like we've abandoned dropping event notices on other forums, we just don't need to stress about brining in new people right now. We've regularly got plenty of them.

Jamie wrote: As far as number of runs, we still should be shooting for turning a group over in an hour, especially in the hotter weather, then tailor the number of runs accordingly. That gives a 20-car group on a 30-second interval 6 runs; a 25-car group 5 runs. If the course doesn't allow 30-second intervals, or the group size gets larger, cut the number of runs. Deliberately planning for 80-90 minute run groups means a few delays push actual time close to two hours. Even in cooler weather, standing out on a course station for two hours is less than fun. If running a bazillion runs is really important, cut the competition runs back to 3-4, then do fun runs for whoever wants to stay -- those need nothing more than a running clock, a starter, and a few people to rove around resetting cones as they get to them.

+1 on this. I went to an event in Tavares Sunday on an almost identical sized police training lot to SPC. They did two varied laps (like Jamie has designed) ranging from a low of 50 seconds mod to a high of 62 novice. Street tire classes were 55-57 seconds each run. Someone actually measured it at 0.52 miles long. They limited it to 4 consequtive competition runs but with the great amount of actual seat time it was awesome!! They had time for fun runs after trophies too. Tires were warm after the first run on a cool day. Given a choice between a much longer/smoother bi- directional course and alot of short little sprints with 8 runs. I much prefer the fewer long runs. When it takes about 45 seconds between cars you have plenty of time to adjust tires, mess with competitors minds and twice as long to pee yourself while on course driving.

**Also you really cannot walk a course too many times.

I just want to toss this out there before someone tries to run with it: We won't be doing post-event fun-runs. It's just not something that we want to do for a variety of reasons. If you want that sort of thing, you need to run with the smaller clubs that only get 20-30 entries and have a lot more extra time than we do.

Jeremy wrote:Just get a co-driver. Same results with none of the hassles.

I actually prefer it the other way, I have trouble keeping tire temps down and don't like rushing around so much. And that is only cutting the group in half with a co-driver, cutting it into fourths or whatever as suggested, would suck.

I like having time between runs to go to the bathroom, get a drink, look at the scoreboard, wipe the sweat out of my eyes, spray water on tires, lift the hood up and let some heat out, stretch, ask competitors about lines and stuff, compare my times to others, make fun of Chuck Ray's times, check car for missing, leaking, or broken parts (90's Nissan), and ride with people.

Also you are going to have even more problems with weather and changing conditions, since all your runs will be completed in a 15-20 minute window and classes will need to be split across multiple sub run groups.

And using this to create larger run groups equals longer work groups.

True dat!

Native wrote:I'll throw my 2 cents in for keeping the run groups more "casual." Feeling as if I can't walk away from my car for a minute isn't fun to me. Like Jeremy said, having a little time for "stuff" is preferable.

I'm all for letting as many folks enter as possible, but not at the expense of the event itself...I suspect one reason folks keep coming is because things are a bit relaxed, within the obvious organization. That's quite comfortable for people.

As for number of run groups and number of runs and such - not so concerned about the groups, but I think we need to target 5 as an absolute minimum number of runs for any regular event, with 6 preferred.

True dat, as well!

Loren wrote:I just want to toss this out there before someone tries to run with it: We won't be doing post-event fun-runs. It's just not something that we want to do for a variety of reasons. If you want that sort of thing, you need to run with the smaller clubs that only get 20-30 entries and have a lot more extra time than we do.

Oh I got your back on this one. Can anyone tell I'm a little excited about racin this weekend. I'm feeling silly!

nc4me wrote:Can anyone tell I'm a little excited about racin this weekend. I'm feeling silly!

Gonna change your name to Chris Jones.

Single worker work stations flies in the face of every notion of safety. Remember that workers at the station spot for each other. It is difficult to call on the radio,set cones, watch for the car number and watch for the next car, especially in hot weather. Worker stations should be the priority for the events. I find the idea of letting people out of course work by doing other jobs is not really appropriate, with a few exceptions. People showing up way early for set up and registration would be my limit. This would insure enough course workers to run four run groups, which I think is ideal to allow people to socialize, have time to get their cars ready, help other drivers, etc. I reluctantly worked single person stations at Brookesville for a SCCA event and it is not the right way to run an event.

Loren wrote:Would have to discuss with Steve and see how it fits our budget, but I could see doing something like a 50% event credit for all of the pre and post-event stuff that we currently give worker credit for.

Kinda squats on the idea that autocross is run by a large cooperative group of volunteers. If we need more workers during the day, I prefer the idea of paring back on such as B'ville registration (sorry, John), tech, and an event co-chair can give up an hour to work and still learn ropes. I think we need to keep two people in timing - even one "on the ball" is still gonna get overwhelmed - one garbled radio call can take 2 start-finishes to fix sometimes - 2 people is better there. And maybe I'm wrong, but it seems we more often have "spare" workers as opposed to not enough...

As for eliminating walkups at SPC, well, Loren and I don't agree on that one. It sure would make the entire process easier, but a lot of those walkups are first-timers who otherwise might not give it a try...

Oh yeah, I meant to mention that a co-chair can definitely fill in for a regular worker session if needed. That's not going to hinder their "learning process".

I don't work registration, but it seems a lot like more and more of our walk-ups are "regulars" who either didn't register because the event filled up early, they missed the deadline, or they were just being non-committal. Are there really that many walk-up first timers?

If there are, maybe we could compromise on walk-ups and allow a limited number and ONLY if they are truly a first-timer? Going that route, we could allow a first-timer walk-up entry at ANY time as long as we had someone handy to shadow them, which would be cool.

I still think that anyone who's run with us should know to pre-register... and, yes, it makes life easier for everyone involved.