>>It then turns into a game of chicken - someone else will try it at 92%.
>You'll have to take it at 95% next time. They run it at 97%, they run 100%,
>you run 100%, but whoops, your 100% is less than their 100%, cones fly, WHAM!
>So much for the Mustang... <<
NO! Not the Mustang!!! =:-O
Again, I'm doing this to have fun. If 90% is my comfort level on that turn and
I'm getting beaten badly, so what? It's not like I've never lost before. I do
get your point, not everyone is as laid back as I am. Than again, someone is
always willing to spend $500 for a widget that gains them .1, I'm not.
>>When professional drivers hit a wall on the track, do they blame the course
>for putting a wall in front of them? I think not.<<
My point exactly!
>>If an "idiot driver" pulls a maneuver like this and spins wildly for 50'
>before coming to a safe stop, the experience would probably teach them that
>what they just did was a bad thing, and they wouldn't do it again. Both
>scenarios teach an important lesson. One of them doesn't cost them a car in
>the process.<<
I agree completely. That is what really good course design is about. My only
issue was with those that think if they damage their car it's someone else's
fault.
Cheers,
Tom
|