--- Dan Wolford wrote:
> We run on some really great courses here, but are we
> stuck with only one style of design? Sometimes,
> why not have a very tight slalom, or a true chicago
> box? Mix things up, not every course has to be
> flat out, and not every course has to be tight, but
> some variability would be good.
The problem is the variation in car size. AAS courses
are designed for big cars with power, and in an
underpowered car they aren't really all that fun
because there isn't much to do. Tighter courses may
be fun in a Miata, but way too much work to be fun in
a Camaro, Mustang or Corvette. Since we don't have
time to pre-run the course, and we don't have people
who want to do it for us and get no points, we have to
just lay it out and run it. I feel like I would
rather err on the side of "too open" as opposed to
"too tight" because the greater number of people will
be happy that way. Some of the other course designers
in the Region give us the tighter courses...
> How about a slalom
> where the decision to enter on the right or left is
> optional - let the driver decide the best line.
I used to design courses with these. John Kelly
convinced me to not have optional slaloms somewhere
around 20 years ago. (that day is marked on a
calendar somewhere!) There is the "clean line vs.
dirty line" arguement. There is also the opinion
(it's mine, and John Kelly's among others)that there
should be one course. How you drive it, how wide you
take corners, where you apex,etc. is certainly a part
of the equation. Deciding which side of a series of
pylons to drive on isn't a part of autocrossing to me.
Charlie
__________________________________
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
|