<<<Consistently"??? Lesse. I know of 3 incidents, plus maybe 2 I
didn't
hear about. There were 200+ competitors. 200 * 12 runs is 2400. of
those _5_ had problems. That's 0.2%. I don't give a rat's behind
about
our difference of opinions on whether the course shoulda been changed
or
not, but let's please stop throwing words like "consistently" and
"unsafe"
around without any justification.>>>
I don't have any statistics because I am apparently not entitled to
view them, but IMHO, one incident at a Pro Solo is a lot. 3 or even 5
near incidents is totally out of control. Can you name another Pro
Solo where there was vehicle to vehicle contact, much less 3 to 5
close calls?
<<<You know, I followed up Mr. Sipe's post with my thoughts on this
hoping
that it would raise awareness of a 'new' issue with course designers
to
help make ProSolo a bit better. Now I just wish I'd not posted
anything
so that all the dumbasses that _haven't ever seen the site or the
courses
in question_ could've beat off in private.>>>
Now that was a mistake of the first order. Whether or not any of us
were present is totally immaterial.
And based on your comments as well as Mr. Meredith's I can safely come
to the conclusion that attitudes such as yours and his are the real
problem. If you want to hold events with greater risk (particularly
when vehicles can come into contact with each other) you had better
have an ambulance on site and require at least Solo I safety
equipment, because what you are advocating is definitely not
autocrossing. I caution you yet again that we are just one bad
incident away from losing this sport, particularly if it can be shown
that the danger was known about ahead of time.
Paul Foster
|