it seems to me that we are fixing the wrong problem. there was a lot of
dead time yesterday on the course. i arrived about 11:15 and no cars ran
for about 10 minutes after i got there. when i worked in the 7th group,
there was confusion about when the group was over. it has also been
somewhat of a problem with people taking 4 or 5 runs because we dont have a
fast enough way to stop them. there are some people that will just keep
getting into line until they are tossed out.
this is, of course, partly due to the lack of a PA. i suspect we will get
used to dealing without it and the events will run more smoothly.
-james creasy
Slip Angle Cobrasports www.klio.net/cobra
BAPOC www.klio.net/probe
----- Original Message -----
From: Talley, Brooks <brooks@frnk.com>
To: <ba-autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2000 2:12 PM
Subject: RE: 2000 Winter Slush Series-revised
> >How to fix it? I unfortunately don't know. You can't
> >limit entries because then the afternoon people get
> >screwed. You could limit selling new memberships, but
> >if people can just sign up over the web it doesn't fix
> >the problem. You can raise prices which could help our
> >site fund, but that would exclude some people that make
> >good members of our club. We could require
> >pre-registration (even online) but that has it's own
> >problems (refunds, car breakage, weather, site
> >cancellations, etc.).
>
> Hmm... you could design courses that are symmetrical; the same running in
> either direction. Make the middle part wide enough for two cars to pass,
> and run twice as many cars (half in each direction).
>
> Not only would you get twice as many cars through in a given amount of
time,
> you'd reduce the number of entrants dramatically... and by the third run,
> there would be fewer cars than in the first run.
>
> In all seriousness, running cars closer together is the only thing I can
> think of. You could reduce red flags by gridding the cars in roughly the
> same order that they finished in the previous event (faster cars/drivers
out
> first). Or let people put themselves in fast/medium/slow groups. Sure,
it
> would never be perfect, but it would at least be better than a random
order.
>
> -b
|