Forum topic of death: All at once run format

Ryan Holton · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:32 pm

JasonWatts wrote:

Here is my concern about lunch as Rodney pointed out. I was 1) about to be marked as MIA for my worker shift because I had no time to get back to my truck, put my helmet down and grab lunch. (I was one of the last to run in my heat).

That's still a problem with the 2+2 format. If you are working the next heat, you need to try and make sure you are not at the end of a heat you are running in. The grid worker should be able to help out if they are made aware of the situation.

David Spratte · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:34 pm

Splitting up competitors in the same class seems like a bad idea given how surface conditions can change even without the weather factor.

I wasn't there yesterday, but I have to wonder if a simple set of rules—guidelines—based on attendance wouldn't hurt:
1. At events with less than X number of drivers you run two groups with a 30 minute lunch.

2. If registration falls between X and Y you go with three groups and long enough breaks to swap workers. Get them called early and have them ready to go.

3. Events with over Y number of drivers you do AAO with four groups and worker changes on the fly. (Everyone should have at least one full heat between running and working.)

Obviously circumstances could slide the scale as needed. (98.423 second Laurinburg courses obviously need more worker stations.)

Regarding two drivers, I think it's totally reasonable if you need another minute or two to get the car prepped for the next driver to ask for it because you're in a heat with 5 other drivers. I've never had a grid worker at a THSCC event insist I go when they say.

I voted AAO. And if given the option of the combo platter I'd keep my vote the same. There's enough variables at an event to not have to guess on what format the club is running that day.

Now, that isn't to say I haven't appreciated the willingness to experiment. I do. Mostly because Karl was right: You have to actually test this stuff, in the wild, at actual events before you know.

Ryan Holton · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:35 pm

Vincent Keene wrote:

FWIW, I prefer the 2 + 2 format because I feel less rushed, and like Brice said, I have time to think about it in between.

I can't think of a better reason to get rid of the 2+2 format :twisted:

Keith Quistorff · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:56 pm

Dustin Fredrickson wrote:

FWIW, we wouldn't need a break with 4 groups, as there is always a break between when you run and work.

Run 1, Work 3, off 2+4.
Run 2, Work 4, off 1+3
Run 3, Work 1, off 2+4
Run 4, Work 2, off 1+3

Ryan Holton wrote:

Actually this was the 2nd in a row this year.

Good points. I forgot we ran the August event in the 4-heat AAO format, and it had neither of the issues I'm concerned about with the 3-heat AAO format we ran yesterday.

And, to be clear, I agree that the 3-heat format worked perfectly fine yesterday (except I arrived unprepared to go so long without eating). It wouldn't have worked so great if headcount was much higher or launch interval much longer. In those cases, I'm sure we would've opted for 4 heats (either AAO or 2-2) instead.

KendtEklund · **Joined:** Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:29 pm **Posts:** 1204

Ryan Holton wrote:

JasonWatts wrote:

Here is my concern about lunch as Rodney pointed out. I was 1) about to be marked as MIA for my worker shift because I had no time to get back to my truck, put my helmet down and grab lunch. (I was one of the last to run in my heat).

That's still a problem with the 2+2 format. If you are working the next heat, you need to try and make sure you are not at the end of a heat you are running in. The grid worker should be able to help out if they are made aware of the situation.

That right there seems to be the most confusing thing to communicate to newer folks at the sign-up table. It seems like no matter what we do in the 2+2 someone working on course gets screwed and works 1.5 run groups.

JasonWatts · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:51 pm

KendtEklund wrote:

Ryan Holton wrote:

JasonWatts wrote:

Here is my concern about lunch as Rodney pointed out. I was 1) about to be marked as MIA for my worker shift because I had no time to get back to my truck, put my helmet down and grab lunch. (I was one of the last to run in my heat).

That's still a problem with the 2+2 format. If you are working the next heat, you need to try and make sure you are not at the end of a heat you are running in. The grid worker should be able to help out if they are made aware of the situation.

That right there seems to be the most confusing thing to communicate to newer folks at the sign-up table. It seems like no matter what we do in the 2+2 someone working on course gets screwed and works 1.5 run groups.

I think what happens here is 3 people are working station 2, and two get sent out to relieve station 2. Thus the 3rd person waits for his replacement that never comes. Maybe holding a person at the start to clear the air way just long enough to announce on the raidion that all workers from the previous run should be coming in? I think the cost is 45 -60 seconds if done smoothly. Of course the person holding the radio on field will have to tell his fellow station works that the shift change is done.

JasonWatts · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:56 pm

I cant find the post that said I should have ran at the start of group b, but that is what I am referencing.

If I would have gone to the front, it would have fixed my issue, however if you recall, all of the second run group was working the 3rd heat. Thus, Who ever was at the end of group b would still have the same issue of very little time to get turned around.

reguardless, I think from lissening to what everyone else has said, no matter what, someone or something gets screwed somewhere along the lines.

Karl Shultz · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:05 pm

JasonWatts wrote:

I think what happens here is 3 people are working station 2, and two get sent out to relieve station 2. Thus the 3rd person waits for his replacement that never comes.

In this case, this third "old" worker should ask the two "fresh" workers if they have the station covered. If they do, then great, he can leave. If they don't, someone at that station should radio in and confirm that a third "fresh" worker is on their way to relieve the still-remaining "old" worker.

JasonWatts · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:44 pm

Karl Shultz wrote:

JasonWatts wrote:

I think what happens here is 3 people are working station 2, and two get sent out to relieve station 2. Thus the 3rd person waits for his replacement that never comes.

In this case, this third "old" worker should ask the two "fresh" workers if they have the station covered. If they do, then great, he can leave. If they don't, someone at that station should radio in and confirm that a third "fresh" worker is on their way to relieve the still-remaining "old" worker.

Karl. In therory this works perfectly. However, both Jessie and I have been told wait for your relief. Someone will be sent out to relieve you. I have never take this literal, but this is one thing that what causes pepole to end up working for a group and a half. I still think it can be addresses with even better communication. I guess others still argue it's the workers lack of knowledge?

Karl Shultz · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 6:53 pm

JasonWatts wrote:

I guess others still argue it's the workers lack of knowledge?

Well, no, that's not what I said. What I was trying (unsuccessfully) to convey is that a third, "leftover" worker doesn't have to stay out indefinitely if his replacement doesn't show, and that the worker coordinators should be able to work something out. That's all.

Anyway, let's try and remain focused on the AAO versus Split run groups discussion. There are some great points being made.

Ryan Holton · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 7:05 pm

JasonWatts wrote:

I cant find the post that said I should have ran at the start of group b, but that is what I am referencing.

If I would have gone to the front, it would have fixed my issue, however if you recall, all of the second run group was working the 3rd heat. Thus, Who ever was at the end of group b would still have the same issue of very little time to get turned around.

reguardless, I think from lissening to what everyone else has said, no matter what, someone or something gets screwed somewhere along the lines.

True but I think this is not a AAO problem but a 3 heat problem. THAT'S the easy fix

Arthur McDonald · **Joined:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 1:54 am **Posts:** 2052

Karl Shultz wrote:

Rather than an "A" side and a "B" side, there is a single line. Two-driver cars were at the front, nearest to the bus. Single driver cars made up the rest of the grid. The grid was in a single line, two cars deep. The grid is supposed to move as follows:

1. Driver #1 for car X at the top of the two-driver area goes
2. Driver #1 for car Y directly behind the first car goes
3. Repeat until through the first drivers for each two-driver car
4. Now, make your way through all of the single driver cars in the same manner, one run per car, first car in a "column," then the second, then move to the next column
5. Reach 50% of the way through the one-driver portion of grid, then...
6. Return to the top of the two-driver area
7. Release driver #2 for car X
8. Release driver #2 for car Y
9. Return to the single-driver area, and release the final 50% of the single-driver cars

Here's a real world example, using a run group of 24 entrants:

1. 6 two-driver cars
2. 12 one-driver cars, with this part of the grid cut in half, six cars per "half"

In the above-described example, 11 runs pass before the next time a two-driver car is released. With the two drivers in these cars alternating, this gives us a total of 22 runs passing between runs for driver X in any two-driver car. The number of total runs that pass between runs for the single-driver cars? 23. The interval is, essentially, identical.

Well, that explains why Mitch Moore was running up and down the grid so much during my heat. Maybe we need two grid workers, both equipped with signal flags (or air horns!) to communicate.

I am starting to see the value of AAO. (Whatever you do, don't tell Dishman I said that) At both Sanford events this year, I managed to get the jitters before my afternoon runs, and made a mess of them. So in my feeble-minded years, maybe it's best to make all of my runs in a row. Also, I don't have to reinflate my tires before the 2nd set of runs.

Of course, the advantages of 2-2 still stand:
1) If you're totally lost in the morning runs, you have an intermediate heat to figure out where you went wrong, or at least have an hour+ to complain to everybody before you go out and screw up again.
2) If you suffer a mechanical failure, or just want to make a big adjustment, you can. In my pre-ABS days, I often found myself between heats rotating tires to move a flat spot to the rear.
3) Event officers can, depending on the progress of the event, opt for 3 or (gasp) 1 run in the afternoon heats.

Final thoughts:
A) The grid scheme above is one step short of being a proper 10-step progam.
B) Michael Czeiszperger, with his excellent grasp of the issues, is a strong contender for club prez in 2011.
C) Chuck B., when he said "that's the way THSCC used to do it", was referring to his early days in the Tarheel Surry & Carriage Club.

Donnie Barnes · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:10 pm

Arthur McDonald wrote:

I don't have to reinflate my tires before the 2nd set of runs.

Small hijack, but why would you do that?

I've known national champions who would bleed their tires during their first set of runs at a ProSolo and not inflate or touch their tires again after they equalized the first time FOR THE WEEKEND. Unless conditions changed dramatically from Saturday morning to Sunday morning, anyway.

At single day events where it's hotter in the afternoon (generally true), I've never added air. Bled a little more, sure. But never added. YMMV.

--Donnie

Andrew Jonell · **Joined:** Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:43 pm **Posts:** 1350

Arthur McDonald wrote:

Well, that explains why Mitch Moore was running up and down the grid so much during my heat. Maybe we need two grid workers, both equipped with signal flags (or air horns!) to communicate.

Yesterday the grid was small and tidy enough that "running" back and forth wasn't a hassle. I was given some help, but there was no real effective way to have one clipboard, two people, and three radios.

Aaron Buckley · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 10:08 pm

While I voted for AAO format, I found at the THSCC day of the combo 2 day with Triad that the run groups were too small to adequately get at least 5 minutes after your run to cool tires, check pressures, make adjustments etc, especially if you're alone. After feeling like I rushed out for my 2nd run, I checked my watch after parking in grid after my 2nd and 3rd runs. I got 2:45 in between my 2nd and 3rd run and 3:15 between my 3rd and 4th run. I feel like the fronts got overheated (and ended up cording on day 2 run 1). The SCCA requires a minimum of 5 minutes (not that we abide by their complete ruleset), but it is helpful guide.

That aside, I voted AAO as long as the run group is big enough to support 5+ minutes between runs. - AB

THSCC Forums

Forum topic of death: All at once run format

Who is online