THSCC Forums

Building on what Chris Landi posted, I'm going to suggest we have the "Instructor" class. It is for those that understand what it takes to be fast, have the experience and training to teach others, but who for the life of them can't seem to implement it very well. Instructors would compete based not on their own finishing positions but those of the students they teach! I expect to do very well in instructor class next year.



Miles

Chris' comments about novice are why I think it would be cool to have novices run in open but receive points towards a year end trophy.

Adding a pax listing of novices to the results wouldn't materially change that. Actually, giving novice trophies at events _and_ calculating year end points for them would be even better -- they would get the benefit of running in class/socializing with their open competitors while still getting encouragement with trophies at every event.

--Kevin H.

_________________
2003 WRX (again!)

Honestly Scott I think most people are happy with the way the classes are. There are a few people who think it really sucks but for the most part people like our classing structure.

My .02 cents:

I don't think dropping TIR would improve our events that much in fact it would make it less fun for most TIR competitors while keeping things about the same for open class participants. I guess we would add a few trophy positions for open classes so folks who are now going home empty handed would be taking 2nd and 3rd place trophies but that is the only benefit I can see.

I think dropping NOV would hurt the fun factor for new people. I could be talked into running NOV's with open if we could find a way to do PAX results for them (not sure how easy that would be for our software folks to make happen). I also think if we could make a year long rookie/novice class work that would be good way to increase the fun for the noobs.

As far as PRO class goes. As an officer I think it helps the club by removing the seriously insane (like me and Tom) from the ranks of the more sane autocrossers. Before we had most of the fastest people in the club running PRO many people would pick a class based on where the fast people where not going to be. Personally not speaking as an officer I like the class since I get to compete against the best in the club but if PRO went away I'd still compare my PAX times to those people so I wouldn't really be upset if I had to run open.

Honestly I'm not sure what the big deal is over this whole classing thing??? We must not have to many other problems if this is the main thing we have to talk about.
Shawn

_________________
OK so I'm back in. Now which tire should I buy??

I'm not insane.

-Tom
<looks are the Subaru camber thread>....ok maybe a bit

I don't know that anybody said that classing was a big deal or that anybody is really unhappy. Scott asked for suggestions for 2005 with regards to class changes, so that's what people have responded to.

From what I can tell, the changes proposed here haven't been self serving to the people who proposed them, but have been made in good faith towards improving things overall for the club. We may not all agree on them, but I don't see any attempt to serve petty goals like "getting trophies" or avoiding the fast guys.

Mr. Pres, if you wanted to broaden the scope of things to include improvements in the club overall, you could post a parallel request with regards to club improvements or changes for 05 and I'm sure you would get a broader range of input. That would be an interesting thread.


The view from the bottom is that things are going well, but there is always room for improvement.

Miles
[/quote]

Comments from a Prep driver:

Scott (back on page 1) suggested combining all Mod and Prep classes, and combining SM/SM2.

---- Prep/Mod/SM Counter-Proposal 1:

- Combine AP/BP/CP/DP/EP/FP
- Combine DM/EM/SM/SM2
- Combine AM/BM/CM

I don't think throwing all the Preps and Mods together, as Scott originally suggested, would work very well. There is too much disparity in the class. Example: CCR at Kershaw where the top AM car was 12 seconds faster than the next car. Example: Triad at Dixie Classics where the FSAE was 4 seconds faster than the next car. Example: Any THSCC event where Rasmussen or Fry bring out their mod cars. Yes, I know much of this is driver. But I also know how much difference a car can make.

There have been numerous proposals involving factors (PAX, etc). Despite the fact that my class (DP) has the best pax-factor of any Prep class, I would still prefer to run heads-up time-versus-time with other prep cars, instead of running factor-versus-factor against the same cars. Yes, I know Kurt and a few others are faster than I am, but that's racing.


---- Prep/Mod/SM Counter-Proposal 2:

Leave the classes alone, but require a minimimum class size, and follow the bumping rules. The current minimum of 2 cars is, in my opinion, too low. I suggest 4 minimum. I could argue for higher numbers.

This could apply equally to ALL of the Open classes, not just Preps and Mods and SM/SM2. If a class is routinely too small, it gets bumped often. If a class is large enough to support itself, it gets left alone except the occasional bump-in from a nominally slower class. (I've been bumped many time. I find racing against faster cars to be much more fun than running alone.)


I chose to not comment on the TIR/NOV/PRO/LADIES/Stock/SP/etc consolidations, since I don't run in any of those classes. I do have opinions on each, but I defer to those with more direct involvement in those classes. (I am surprised by the lack of comment on combining various stock classes. See page 1, first post.)

W. Dean Furr
DP56 Spitfire

The major asset of this club IMHO is that it has bred a number of regionally/nationally competitive AXers. To continue with that strength I'd like to see a season long novice points competition, with even stronger instructional emphasis. One problem with combining Novice with open, or even running novice with it's coresponding class is that it makes it difficult to give/get instruction because the best people to instruct are also running at the same time. Maybe we should consider replacing the PRO class with an INSTRUCTOR Pax class and run them in the opposite heat their open class runs. Anyone who feels they are capable of the title/job of instructor can run in this class, the novices can see how they stack up against each other, can recognize them through the "I" designation after their class, and be afforded the opportunity to observe a top driver in a similar class car run during the heats they are not running, and the instructors would be available to ride along or take student riders with them without interfering with their own competition runs. To summarize this would have the benefit of encouraging instruction to grow skills quicker thus be more competitive with less discouragement, making instructors in similar cars/classes available to the students when they are not being distracted by their own runs (this would benefit the intermediate AXers as well as the novices), set the instructors out to be recognized by those looking for instruction, give a friendly rivalry class where the instructors can push each other to improve and take them out of the competition for the open trophies similar to the way PRO does now, and give a warmer welcome to newcomers. I might even go so far as to make it a requirement that novices have an instructor with them for their first X number of events.
Calling the current class "PRO" has always had a snob connotation to it that I never liked, keeps me personally from wanting to run there and would have discouraged me from looking there for instruction early on. Even had I thought it was OK as a novice to ask a PRO for help, I still wouldn't have been able to easily determine what class car they were driving, since they all say PRO.
Discuss, but spare the messenger please!

_________________
SPIN or WIN!
there's no glory for going slow.

The really insane people don't think they are insane. Catch 22

_________________
George Bright Member # 141
One of the youngest of the old farts.
Yes I voted against you joining the club.

Chuck Frank wrote:



This is possibly the best and most simple idea to implement for improving the novice experience I've heard yet. The simple change of requiring novices to have instructors ride with them for their first "x" number of runs or events would have a great positive impact over what we do now. If we required all novices to have an instructor with them for at least their morning runs, it would really help in so many ways.

We would put the burden on the experienced club members to look out for any novices that don't have instructors. I'm sure with some thinking on this, we could implement a system that made it easy to have this happen with minimal impact on the event. We have more than enough experienced drivers that would be willing to help out. Many of us do this now in an informal way, but we don't always get to everybody.

Making an instructor mandatory would solve the problem of the less vocal novice that wants help but is too intimidated to ask. And every novice would benefit from continuing to improve due to the instruction.

This one simple change would dramatically improve the experience of every novice that comes to a THSCC event probably would improve our retention rate. It would also ensure that the novices get to know personally at least one or two club members at each event.
I don't think it requires an instructor class or changes in run order/groups to implement this.

It just formalizes something that a few of us have been trying to make happen in an informal way.

Miles

I like the idea of the mandatory instructor. I got experienced autocrossers helping me from day one. Not just riding with me but explaining how it all works from when we show up on site to when we leave. It helped a lot. It is intimidating for some people getting started. This would save us the guess work of who needs more or less coaching.

Currently you're a Novice for 3 events unless you trophy out. So let's just say regardless of you trophying you must attend the Novice meeting for your first 3 events. At the meeting you will be assigned an instructor. So we can line up instructors and novices based on their run groups easily enough. Now the instructor and novice can tell each other what type of car and number on it and other basic details. Should not be a big problem finding each other and getting your cars in grid far enough apart to not mess up the flow.

Being an instructor does not count as a work assignment. Anyone that has more than X amount of events experience can help a new person so they don't feel frustrated or get into trouble.

Since it does happen very informally I have to agree that we just make it a formal policy.

Graham

_________________
http://www.greywinds.com

Making instructors mandatory would also help with the novice cowboys who think they know everything there is to know and go out and terrorize the cones and the course workers or get completely lost on all their runs and don't have a clue where they should have gone. Might expand this idea to include an email to all novice entries that the novice meeting will be held at 9:00 sharp so they can get at least one walkthru with their instructor.
I made a point to take advantage of the rider allowed to get an instructor to ride with me at every event I possibly could well after losing my "novice" status (right up to the present day as a matter of fact). If nothing else, it helps prevent practicing mistakes until they become bad habits.

_________________
SPIN or WIN!
there's no glory for going slow.