- This topic has 45 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Plus, I don’t know if you know how this works, but we can’t use the same exact course that has already been used by other attendees or clubs. It would create an unfair advantage. You’d have to create them from scratch or change enough elements to make it different. That’s why we use one designer who has files on all previous designs and he doesn’t even compete.
Autox is always the same elements, the point is to make them flow. I can draw up a different course, but why waste time when you are going to look at it and say “we know how this is going to be, i like our courses better.” (which you clearly stated).
Wrong…I gave you my opinion which I clearly stated…but I’d like your best designs so we can potentially put it up for a vote (which I need to convince Dave and Jeff, and only if it passes safety rules first without changing the course much).
Edit: I’m trying hard to make you guys happy, but you guys are making it tough. No other folks who have attended so few of our events have made recommendations and feedback so difficult. The constant comparisons to other clubs is basically killing me right now. I am dying a slow death.
Are there people that runs more than just GGC events that prefer GGC courses over other clubs’ (except UFO)?
[quote=”justint5387″ post=1674]Are there people that runs more than just GGC events that prefer GGC courses over other clubs’ (except UFO)?[/quote]
UUGGGHHHHH
[quote=”dacat” post=1669]Edit: Also talk about broadening horizons, you don’t like our courses, you’ve said so yourself![/quote]
I run with almost all the local autox clubs. Not just GGC
[quote=”dacat” post=1672]Wrong…I gave you my opinion which I clearly stated…but I’d like your best designs so we can potentially put it up for a vote (which I need to convince Dave and Jeff, and only if it passes safety rules first without changing the course much).
Edit: I’m trying hard to make you guys happy, but you guys are making it tough. No other folks who have attended so few of our events have made recommendations and feedback so difficult. The constant comparisons to other clubs is basically killing me right now. I am dying a slow death.[/quote]
I am not sure how you can determine “best” designs, so you guys are implying these are your best courses to offer?
To be honest, what I’ve been reading is more of a opinion/discussion to get some flow (fun) into GGC courses. Using other clubs as an example to demonstrate what’s out there in terms of course design.
Why does it matter how many events we have attended? Shouldn’t it concern you how the feedbacks are flowing from experienced autocrossers just from the few events they have attended?
I havn’t jumped in on this thread mainly because I have no dog in the fight. Almost all courses are fun in my car 🙂
So before this gets too personal and not productive let me point out that each autocross group has its own style(s) of course design and event implementation. AAS is known for fast open courses and a family atmosphere. It is run by a core of dedicated people. SCCA has lots of variety of courses as they have many designers and they struggle with getting volunteers. BMW has a small group of dedicated people, they take very good care of new drivers and supply lunch.
Certainly we can form our own opinions about what kinds of courses we like and we can even try to encourage groups we like to design to our favorite style. In the end, We(the autocross community) benefit by having as many events as possible to attend and we have the choice of which ones to go to. The power of the market place will sort out the details in the number of attendees.
So, Thanks to all the people who make our events happen and please don’t let the detractors, the expressers of their opinions, keep you from your great work.
Mark[url=http://tigermack.zenfolio.com/p937591162/e683a6205][img]http://tigermack.zenfolio.com/img/s9/v96/p1748656645-4.jpg[/img][/url]
You guys need to come out to the AAS event this weekend to see what we’re talking about. We’ll down there for both days it’s that good.
Sheesh!
I go away for a couple of days and this forum erupts into a verbal firefight.
First of all let me second Jeff’s compliment to Mark. Well said and timely as well.
We all have opinions about various autocross layouts. I told Dave S. at the June event that I just knew he knew exactly what my biggest weakness was ( I have a lot, I know) and was deliberlly designing courses to embarass me;)Jack alluded to the fact that we don’t know what we don’t know regarding policies, legal and insurance opinions. After spending more than 30 years negotiating contracts with unions and dealing with insurance agents and lawyers
I do know that it is a convoluted and constantly counfounding experience. If there are two groups absolutely dedicated to making a hash out of things human do and attempting to suck all the joy out of various human activities
It is the legal and insurance industries.
At one of my first events with GGC, someone I was talking to (not one of the leadership people current or past) made what I thought was a very good summation of what these events truely mean. “If this was truely important and we were all professionals not just a bunch of guys out to have a good time we would be getting paid not paying for the priviledge”.
We have a uniquely open and friendly group led by people willing to sacrifice their own time so we can all have a bunch of fun with people with similar interests both in the activity and the particular marque.
We have a retired CHP officer up here who used to write a weekly column in which he ended each column with the phrase, “let’s all go out and enjoy the ride”.[quote=”Timstoy” post=1685]Sheesh!
I go away for a couple of days and this forum erupts into a verbal firefight.
First of all let me second Jeff’s compliment to Mark. Well said and timely as well.
We all have opinions about various autocross layouts. I told Dave S. at the June event that I just knew he knew exactly what my biggest weakness was ( I have a lot, I know) and was deliberlly designing courses to embarass me;)Jack alluded to the fact that we don’t know what we don’t know regarding policies, legal and insurance opinions. After spending more than 30 years negotiating contracts with unions and dealing with insurance agents and lawyers
I do know that it is a convoluted and constantly counfounding experience. If there are two groups absolutely dedicated to making a hash out of things human do and attempting to suck all the joy out of various human activities
It is the legal and insurance industries.
At one of my first events with GGC, someone I was talking to (not one of the leadership people current or past) made what I thought was a very good summation of what these events truely mean. “If this was truely important and we were all professionals not just a bunch of guys out to have a good time we would be getting paid not paying for the priviledge”.
We have a uniquely open and friendly group led by people willing to sacrifice their own time so we can all have a bunch of fun with people with similar interests both in the activity and the particular marque.
We have a retired CHP officer up here who used to write a weekly column in which he ended each column with the phrase, “let’s all go out and enjoy the ride”.[/quote]I get your point. I personally don’t find courses with slow turns and tight slaloms enjoyable. You may have noticed competitors who were not competing for points in a class deliberately taking the slalom “2 on the left, 2 on the right.” They were enjoying the ride, didn’t care about DNFs. I don’t think a course should force them to do that to have fun, and it shouldn’t force those of us running for points to drive a tedious course. I enjoy competition and close finishes within a class. I would like to have that and enjoyable courses at the same time. At the last event I had good competition in Gonzo, but a course that I didn’t enjoy a whole lot. The next day at LPR PCA, I ran in “Fun” because I don’t have a class to run in, but the enjoyable course made the day much more fun for me.
The point has been made by several GGC organizers, both in person and on the forum, that GGC’s courses are a good product that people enjoy. Let me put it this way. The 2002tii was a great car in the early ’70’s, as were tight courses with tight slaloms. BMWs and courses have evolved. If no one ever let you drive an E30, E36 or E46 M3, or a 1M, you might think the tii was a great car today. And if there were enough people out there who had not been exposed to better machines, you might be able to continue to sell all the tiis you could produce today. This is the case with GGC’s courses. They are similar to the courses I saw in Northern Ca. in the ’80’s. Those of us who would like to see change have been exposed to concepts that we consider more enjoyable, just as I enjoy my STX 325is more than I would enjoy a 2002 prepped to similar levels. If you set your sights low (100 cars is low) and can fill up the event every time with people who enjoy your events, you are happy with your financial bottom line, and you satisfy your insurers despite the fact that you expose workers more than other clubs, then continue to do things the same way.
On the other hand, you’ll lose some of your more experienced competitors to other series. Despite the contentious atmosphere on this post, we are BMW enthusiasts who would really like an enjoyable place to compete with our BMWs, and we think we have some ideas that will make things better. Northern California is, I believe, unique in the number of autocross options from which the competitor can choose. SCCA SFR, SCCA Fresno, SCCA Sacramento, AAS, UFO, GGLC, PCA LPR, PCA GGR, PCA Redwood, PCA Sac Valley, Empire Sports Car Association, and GGC. TWELVE clubs putting on events, unless I missed someone. I would personally rank GGC somewhere in the middle, and only that high based on the personalities of the organizers. Course only, about 9th. We can do better.
Scheduling has made it difficult for me this year. San Diego Tour vs. Round 1, a broken car for Round 2, Packwood, WA vs. Round 4. I have to decide whether to run with SCCA at Crows Landing or go to Round 5. I’ll probably choose Round 5, then Round 6 (no conflicts at this point) so I’m eligible for the TDS.
That’s just one guy’s opinion. One guy who has autocrossed since 1974, designed countless courses, run with over 30 clubs from Illinois to California and served several clubs in many capacities. I think we should all calm down, leave personalities out of it, and concentrate on working together to make GGC a better club for more BMW owners.
Charlie Davis
[quote=”CharlieDavis” post=1690]
You may have noticed competitors who were not competing for points in a class deliberately taking the slalom “2 on the left, 2 on the right.” They were enjoying the ride, didn’t care about DNFs. I don’t think a course should force them to do that to have fun, and it shouldn’t force those of us running for points to drive a tedious course.[/quote]You brought it up, so I’m going to address it. My comments may be blunt and are not directed at you specifically. I probably won’t chime in again either – I was hoping this thread would just die.
Those weren’t competitors and [i]they [/i]weren’t just skipping slaloms. This “i’ll drive the course I want rather than the one that was given to me” behavior was unsafe and demonstrated a complete disregard for others. Several people approached me to share their disapproval during and after the last run group. That reflects badly on us and I won’t tolerate it. A $50 registration fee is not a ticket to entitlement town. Check the attitude at the gate or don’t come in.
That course was posted ahead of time and anyone who didn’t like it could have cancelled and stayed home. I’ve got my eyes on many places out in cyberspace and I saw crap-talking about it days before the event took place. You won’t see me talking crap about another club and I don’t appreciate others doing it to us.
DNFs happen, but if they are selfishly intentional, I will eject the driver immediately and they will not be welcomed back. Simple. I sincerely hope I don’t need to repeat those words during the attendee meeting.
Everyone has some good points, in the end, it is about variety. If we run AAS course, lower power cars will never win and if we run tight courses, high power cars will, well, could still win. I have run AAS courses, fast, more like a mini track, but I had not chance (Even with my 335i all set up) to compete with the HP that was in the same class. A 335i verses a vet? I only beat 1 vet (out of 5) and it was because it was his first Autocross.
Some months are power course, some are mini courses, some in the middle. That is the variety.
We also had a submit your courses design and pick one a few years ago, maybe we should do one of those. But if we do all AAS, power courses, I will loose interest. And I will loose to James every time. :pinch:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.