looking back at the 2007 CSC

[JoeT]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

Translations in Italics

voici mes points : Here are my points:

- Comme c'est un championnat Canadien, il faudrait utiliser les règlements Canadiens.
Since it's a Canadian Championship, it should use the Canadian Rules

- Le run order ne doit pas être modifié selon la température
Run orders should not be modified based on temperature

- Pas nécessaire d'avoir des instructeurs lors d'un CSC, ce sont généralement des participants d'expérience
Instructors should not be necessary since most competitors are experienced.

- Ne pas faire de différences entre les Québécois et les Ontariens, nottament pour le marshalling...
Dont make any difference between Quebecers and Ontarians, specifically for Marshalling.

- Lorsqu'une annonce est fait dans les paddock, s'assurer que tous les compétiteurs l'ont compris...
Announcements in the paddocks, this assures all the competitors understand.

En gros, ce sont mes points.
On a high level, those are my points.

[thgear]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

Nancy says, babel fish translates

voici mes points :

- Comme c'est un championnat Canadien, il faudrait utiliser les règlements Canadiens.
- Le run order ne doit pas être modifié selon la température
- Pas nécessaire d'avoir des instructeurs lors d'un CSC, ce sont généralement des participants d'expérience
- Ne pas faire de différences entre les Québécois et les Ontariens, nottament pour le marshalling...
- Lorsqu'une annonce est fait dans les paddock, s'assurer que tous les compétiteurs l'ont compris...

En gros, ce sont mes points.

Babel Fish Translation Help

In English:

here my points:

- As it is a Canadian championship, it would be necessary to use the Canadian payments.
- the run order should not be modified according to the temperature
- Not necessary to have instructors at the time of a CSC, they are generally participants of experiment
- not to make differences between the Inhabitants of Quebec and the Ontarians, nottament for the marshalling...
- When an advertisement is made in the bed, to make sure that all the candidates included/understood it... Approximately, they are my points.

1. - no idea,
2. - as was said, the run orders are mixed around when the experience of the organizers leads them to believe that at a current run order some cars WILL be faster, which WILL cause yellow flags, which WILL cause a slowdown in the event.
3. - this is something that was of the discussion during a solosprint meeting, do we or do we not allow newbies (and subsequently a need for instructors), i guess that could be a point for debate at a later time
4. - no idea
5. - i'm assuming this is with regards to the drivers meeting during the event? i believe that the standard phrase all organizers have concluded with, atleast i know i have, is "If you have any questions PLEASE COME and ask us for clarification", atleast at TMP this seemed to work as i had a ton of people asking for the explanation of various little things.

[dubya_rx]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

I am curious to hear input from observers and participants of this years CSC.
I am interested in knowing the official number of participants for the event too.
As an observer ( I showed up at 12pm Sunday) I heard and witnessed all sort of things that I thought couldn't happen.
Issues dealing with run groups, tech and car classification, rookie drivers at Mosport etc.

While I heard soley competitor sides of the stories (mainly from Quebec) I am curious to hear all GOOD and BAD issues.

The reason I ask this is because I probably will volunteer to help organise the 2008 CSC effort and I would like to apply things that went well and avoid things that went wrong.

This is not a pointing fingers post but moreover a learning process post.

I have linked this post to the main FSAQ forum to get their input too.

http://cadl.qc.ca/portail/index.php?...&p=17139#17139

Thanks

I'm also not clear on what the issues were. What mistakes were made?

The run groups were posted at the start of the day and never changed. Those are the rules correct?

The grid list is not an official document but a method to help with avoiding yellow flags and those slowing down the event. If it is raining, and a car does not have rain tires, it makes sense to me to grid them behind someone with rain tires. Is there a problem with that? Is there an advantage to being at the start or end of a grid?

I did not see any issues with timing over the weekend. It's not the slickest system out there, but it works. Can you point out deficiencies in the timing system?

The parke ferme system was set up according to the national rules. Was there a problem with that?

There were rookies at the event. Did that cause a problem for the event? I don't think so.

I think if you have specific issues, they need to be clearly stated otherwise they cannot be resolved. I saw your post on the FSAQ site, but have seen very little response. Was there any major issues, really?

Not trying to provoke anyone, but just trying to get everything in the open so any issues can be resolved.

[gkierst]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

I was told that organisers pushed to the front of the line all cars that were on rain tires, when the conditions got wet. I was told that several cars that were scheduled to run, but were on dry tires, were sent to the back of the line for later runs.... If this is true, it is not right.

I was always gridded according to my best lap time, as were those around me. I think you are getting and redistributing misinformation. If you know of any competitor who wasn't satisfied with something at the event, it would be best for you to direct them to the organizers.

As for the impound, I would support random impound checks at every Regional event. A competitor's self declared classification may never be verified otherwise. To me it would be worthwhile to have each competitor's interpretation of the rules subject to scrutiny. This approach could allow that in a manageable way as most regular competitors would be covered over the course of a season.

Greg

[thgear]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

Food for thought, TLC ran an event in 2007 @ ASE. 53 actual competitors, 3 times runs of 4 laps, 2 -20 minute warm ups for each competitor in the AM, finished by 4:30pm....this was a club event running transponders.
Imagine what 6 clubs pooling the resources can accomplish?

socialism! alas we live in north america

transponders are good
also updating our timing system FROM ****ING DOS would be an improvement! (altho hopefuly steps area already in place to have windows based system for next year)
analgomation (spelling?) i think would be a great idea

but we need a committee to come together and try and work all this out.

but finding the right people is going to be hard, alot of the experienced solosprint competitiors are leaving the field, we're going through some hard times right now

[bbqman]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

others have disagreed with me but i believe that the nature of Solosprint organization in terms of actual "on track" time (ie, the "solo timed runs") prohibits the accomodation of large groups of people

the more people show up, the more people have to pray that no one crashes or anything of the sort.

if this was formula 1 where when soemone crashes their car and there are no debris on the road, the race goes on! we usualy stop the event for until stuff gets cleared up.

honestly Carl, you organized the St.Eustache event, would you really want 100 people to show up and race? i know i had shaky feet at the TMP event, and it didnt even rain that day.

Well Serge, I always believe bigger is better as far as Solo events are concerned. Proper preparation and enough experienced staff is key in pulling off a big event.

I cant remember off hand in 2005 with HADA, but 75 comes to mind and the CSC at ASE was well into the 70s too.

Things that we cannot control are crashes and I agree they affect the outcome of an event, but as a competitor it is hard to criticize , if it is the competitors slowing the event.

Food for thought, TLC ran an event in 2007 @ ASE. 53 actual competitors, 3 times runs of 4 laps, 2 -20 minute warm ups for each competitor in the AM, finished by 4:30pm....this was a club event running transponders.
Imagine what 6 clubs pooling the resources can accomplish?

[thgear]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

others have disagreed with me but i believe that the nature of Solosprint organization in terms of actual "on track" time (ie, the "solo timed runs") prohibits the accomodation of large groups of people

the more people show up, the more people have to pray that no one crashes or anything of the sort.

if this was formula 1 where when soemone crashes their car and there are no debris on the road, the race goes on! we usualy stop the event for until stuff gets cleared up.

honestly Carl, you organized the St.Eustache event, would you really want 100 people to show up and race? i know i had shaky feet at the TMP event, and it didnt even rain that day.

[bbqman]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

keep in mind Mosport is not shannonville, and Mosport is not St.Eustache

i was not at the event because i do not have a car worthy enough to drive it, and personaly, i dont want to run mosport in a unprepared car.

i'm sure there are enough competitiors that just dont want to be there.


also, why is 51 a low number? "nationals" is supposed to be the best from the best, not random riff raff comming out to test their new shiny ferrari or whatever.

did we lose money on the nationals, last i checked the accounting was not in the read for this event.

I agree that the tracks are not the same, however the typical costs to run the event are.
You are right that the nationals should be the best of the best, but until our competitor pool triples, we will have to accomodate the new and up-and-coming drivers.
Some people that I have spoke to said that they didnt go because there was not allure.....not sure if they meant competition wise or # wise...

I can tell you for sure that one of the reasons I have not driven to the west coast for a CAC is for the lack of numbers and competition.

[thgear]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

For the run order, I agree what is posted in the sups or on the morning of the first day, are what should be used, no matter the conditions.

I was told that organisers pushed to the front of the line all cars that were on rain tires, when the conditions got wet. I was told that several cars that were scheduled to run, but were on dry tires, were sent to the back of the line for later runs.... If this is true, it is not right.

As for tech inspection, once the event has ended, or started for that matter, the only inspection for compliance can be made by a competitor verifying that a car is classes properly.
It is not up to the organisers (even less the ASN) to spot check cars for legality, this is the sole responsibility of the competitors. The tech inspector CAN disqualify a car that shows up to grid,with an obvious rules" violation...ie Race slicks on a non mod car, aftermarket-turbo on a car carrying no pips...etc.

If this is not the way everyone percieves the rules, they need to be clarified.

you'll be suprised how many people actualy read the rules, and read deep.

[bbqman]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

You get reruns when you get a yellow flag, or timing feels that you were held up somehow (even if no flag is thrown). I assure you noone got extra laps because they bought us beer the previous night.

As for the Saturday run group order, it was NOT changed, and that is perhaps the issue the Z group has. Personally, I feel it was the right decision ... the run order was posted, and the organizer stuck to it, instead of changing at the last minute. If it HAD changed, maybe the X or Y group would be the ones complaining, and saying "why was the order changed from what was posted?"

Saturday was a crappy day ... no doubt about it. It was however, no worse than our DDT event, where weather also wrecked havoc with our runs. It happens ... not much we can do about it. Sunday was a great day on the other hand, and I think everyone had a great time.

The tech inspections (I assume you mean impound) were simply a spot check of car classifications, and were performed by me personally. I don't think anything unfair was done here ... most cars checked were fine, and others that were not were cleared up. if there was an issue with this, I'd like to know what it was.

For the run order, I agree what is posted in the sups or on the morning of the first day, are what should be used, no matter the conditions.

I was told that organisers pushed to the front of the line all cars that were on rain tires, when the conditions got wet. I was told that several cars that were scheduled to run, but were on dry tires, were sent to the back of the line for later runs.... If this is true, it is not right.

As for tech inspection, once the event has ended, or started for that matter, the only inspection for compliance can be made by a competitor verifying that a car is classes properly.
It is not up to the organisers (even less the ASN) to spot check cars for legality, this is the sole responsibility of the competitors. The tech inspector CAN disqualify a car that shows up to grid,with an obvious rules" violation...ie Race slicks on a non mod car, aftermarket-turbo on a car carrying no pips...etc.

If this is not the way everyone percieves the rules, they need to be clarified.

[thgear]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

Again, I feel that a CSC should be more than a glorified regional event and I

Serge- If it helps you understand my motives, pretend that we are organising another event similar to this one in 2008- but we want it to be bigger and better- and I am one of the volunteers organising.....

cheers

much better!

[bbqman]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

Carl, i dont understand the point of your initial post, and the tone of your latest post

even though i wasnt at this years nationals, i can say with confidence that the event ran like any other event.

with the exception of that one time the timing equipment was left at the CASC office, all of the events i have ever been to, including the one that i organized myself, had on average the same amount of screwups and suprises, yet everyone pulled together and had a great event.

unless you are trying to voice the complains of our eastern brethren, i dont understand what it is that you are trying to dig at?

I explained the point of my original post in the post itself. Serge- if it is still not clear, please call me or PM me and I will re-explain it.

Unlike you Serge, I have been to past nationals and I DID observe this last one too.

What I am trying to get to is the plain facts about the event.
Again, I feel that a CSC should be more than a glorified regional event and I want to be part of a successful 2008 CSC. In order to accomplish this, we need to fix mistakes and amplify the successes.
No where in my comments am I trying to belittle the event organisers, in fact I have no problem giving credit where credit is due.

Serge- If it helps you understand my motives, pretend that we are organising another event similar to this one in 2008- but we want it to be bigger and better- and I am one of the volunteers organising.....

cheers

[thgear]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

I am not too good at double quoting, so I will do it 1 at a time.

What I am trying to accomplish in this thread is finding solutions so that CSC in 2008 exists or is even worth considering holding. You must agree that 51 entries for a national is not what this event is suppose to be about.

Before assuming anything, I am asking questions. We agree 51 is low for a nationals right? Why?
Is it because of the holiday weekend? Is it becuase it is late in the season.
May be a combination of both.

My inquiry has nothing to do with what the CADL contingent may have expected. 4 sessions is great, I was just commenting that it is easy to run 4 sessions when half the field is packed up. Nothing more. I also realize that red flags play a big part in the lost time.

keep in mind Mosport is not shannonville, and Mosport is not St.Eustache

i was not at the event because i do not have a car worthy enough to drive it, and personaly, i dont want to run mosport in a unprepared car.

i'm sure there are enough competitiors that just dont want to be there.


also, why is 51 a low number? "nationals" is supposed to be the best from the best, not random riff raff comming out to test their new shiny ferrari or whatever.

did we lose money on the nationals, last i checked the accounting was not in the read for this event.

[bbqman]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

Some folks packed up early to have Thanksgiving dinner with their families, so you can opt to have it on a non-Holiday weekend if you prefer.

I don't understand the inquiry... Were the Quebec folks complaining to you that there were four sessions on the Sunday? It's not impossible to get four runs on the big track when things run without red flags.

I am not too good at double quoting, so I will do it 1 at a time.

What I am trying to accomplish in this thread is finding solutions so that CSC in 2008 exists or is even worth considering holding. You must agree that 51 entries for a national is not what this event is suppose to be about.

Before assuming anything, I am asking questions. We agree 51 is low for a nationals right? Why?
Is it because of the holiday weekend? Is it becuase it is late in the season.
May be a combination of both.

My inquiry has nothing to do with what the CADL contingent may have expected. 4 sessions is great, I was just commenting that it is easy to run 4 sessions when half the field is packed up. Nothing more. I also realize that red flags play a big part in the lost time.

[Slowpoke]

Re: looking back at the 2007 CSC

BTW, it's normal for us in the Ontario series to NOT do the same run order on Saturday as Sunday because of complaints of benefit to one run group over another. The rain could just of easily hit harder in the later day than earlier and X Group would have gotten hosed. The slightly randomized order TAC created for Saturday gave mixed breaks to minimize grid changes.

Once a run order is posted, it should stay that way unless there is a safety or unanimous reason for change, which there wasn't.