Workers, Workers, Workers

Judi Westerfield · **Posted:** Thu Sep 11, 2008 9:25 am

Don't you love that familiar sound?

Seriously, it looks like we are going to have a low turn out at one of our longest sites. Kevin and Marcus, please keep this in mind when designing the course so we don't have some ungodly amount of workers stations with a multitude of cones that will be impossible to man. I'd appreciate anyone who is willing to work twice to help make the event run smooth. Please let me know Sunday morning when you are signing up if you can help out twice. Thanks everyone again for your hard work!

Wes Eargle · **Joined:** Mon Oct 27, 2003 9:47 am **Posts:** 3683

There's a good chance that we'll be doing three run groups instead of four.

Graham Jagger · **Joined:** Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:53 am **Posts:** 1718

Wes Eargle wrote:

There's a good chance that we'll be doing three run groups instead of four.

3 run groups instead of people doing double shifts seems a lot more practical and sensible. You can still have a big course with less cones. Not much point going to L'burg for small course. That is G'ville is for.

MarcusMcRae · **Posted:** Thu Sep 11, 2008 3:02 pm

Judi Westerfield wrote:

Don't you love that familiar sound?

Seriously, it looks like we are going to have a low turn out at one of our longest sites. Kevin and Marcus, please keep this in mind when designing the course so we don't have some ungodly amount of workers stations with a multitude of cones that will be impossible to man. I'd appreciate anyone who is willing to work twice to help make the event run smooth. Please let me know Sunday morning when you are signing up if you can help out twice. Thanks everyone again for your hard work!

Fewer kones=less time needed for set up=more time to eat yummy mexican food.

RobLupella · **Posted:** Thu Sep 11, 2008 3:35 pm

MarcusMcRae wrote:

Judi Westerfield wrote:

Don't you love that familiar sound?

Seriously, it looks like we are going to have a low turn out at one of our longest sites. Kevin and Marcus, please keep this in mind when designing the course so we don't have some ungodly amount of workers stations with a multitude of cones that will be impossible to man. I'd appreciate anyone who is willing to work twice to help make the event run smooth. Please let me know Sunday morning when you are signing up if you can help out twice. Thanks everyone again for your hard work!

Fewer kones=less time needed for set up=more time to eat yummy mexican food.

yummy is in the eye....er...stomach of the beholder. I smell a course with big sweeping turns and big slaloms

. ECTA meets THSCC ;-)

BriceJohnson · **Joined:** Thu Apr 13, 2006 7:33 am **Posts:** 2230

Big sweeping turns sounds fun to me.

Rob, don't be surprised if a worker mysteriously calls you in for "having gained an unfair advantage by cutting a slalom" and 25 seconds somehow being added to your time.

:poke:

Gwen Habenicht · **Posted:** Thu Sep 11, 2008 4:54 pm

Wes Eargle wrote:

There's a good chance that we'll be doing three run groups instead of four.

Sounds good to me. 5 runs, do all runs in your heat?

Wes Eargle · **Joined:** Mon Oct 27, 2003 9:47 am **Posts:** 3683

We make no final determinations about numbers of runs before we see the number of participants, length of course and overlap. Not to mention weather or other unforeseen events.

If it were up to me, we'd always do three competition runs all in the same group and then open up for fun runs :shrug:

Michael Westerfield · **Posted:** Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:54 pm

Wes Eargle wrote:

If it were up to me, we'd always do three competition runs all in the same group and then open up for fun runs :shrug:

Sounds like something the SCCA would do....

Booo!

Stephen Westerfield · **Posted:** Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:14 am

Wes Eargle wrote:

If it were up to me, we'd always do three competition runs all in the same group and then open up for fun runs :shrug:

This weekend Wes and I are going to Roshambo to determine quantity of official runs. President goes first.

Bernie Baake · **Posted:** Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:07 am

Wes Eargle wrote:

If it were up to me, we'd always do three competition runs all in the same group and then open up for fun runs :shrug:

If it were up to me I'd always have five runs, and if time permits fun runs after that. If I'm going to burn up rubber I want it to be in competition not for grab-ass. JMHO

Wes Eargle · **Joined:** Mon Oct 27, 2003 9:47 am **Posts:** 3683

Having odd numbers of runs, when not all done in the same heat, does not provide equity in work assignments.

Gwen Habenicht · **Posted:** Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:47 am

Wes Eargle wrote:

Having odd numbers of runs, when not all done in the same heat, does not provide equity in work assignments.

This statement has merit. 4 run groups might do better having 4 runs + fun runs. If T&T and the VPs thought a 5th run was doable, the morning heats would be better from the standpoint of heat and stamina. I still think that if we divided into 3 groups, 1 running, 1 resting,1 working, 5 runs is better if time is going to permit. My reasoning is that there’s always an outcry for 5 runs, so the majority of drivers must want that. Also, we travel a good distance and often have motel bills just to “go real quick” for about 4 minutes. 5 minutes would be better. Lastly, for me, at least, most of the fun is from competing and trying to better my time against others. Fun runs will never give me the same rush. So, for my $800 for a set of tires (and, yes, I know I’m getting off cheap!) I want to compete.

Stephen Westerfield · **Posted:** Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:53 am

Gwen Baake wrote:

Wes Eargle wrote:

Having odd numbers of runs, when not all done in the same heat, does not provide equity in work assignments.

This statement has merit. 4 run groups might do better having 4 runs + fun runs. If T&T and the VPs thought a 5th run was doable, the morning heats would be better from the standpoint of heat and stamina. I still think that if we divided into 3 groups, 1 running, 1 resting,1 working, 5 runs is better if time is going to permit. My reasoning is that there’s always an outcry for 5 runs, so the majority of drivers must want that. Also, we travel a good distance and often have motel bills just to “go real quick” for about 4 minutes. 5 minutes would be better. Lastly, for me, at least, most of the fun is from competing and trying to better my time against others. Fun runs will never give me the same rush. So, for my $800 for a set of tires (and, yes, I know I’m getting off cheap!) I want to compete.

I think Gwen is spot on with what the membership wants, as long as they realize some folks are going to have to work longer to get in the 3 run heats. I don't doubt folks are willing to do that though.

The key is going to be course design....in Laurinburg....with minimal workers. I have no doubts Marcus and Kevin can figure something out to give us a long course with minimal cone carnage.

Bernie Baake · **Posted:** Fri Sep 12, 2008 10:21 am

Wes Eargle wrote:

Having odd numbers of runs, when not all done in the same heat, does not provide equity in work assignments.

Equity in work assignments has never been a priority before, at least not while I was work co-ordinator. However thats an easy problem to solve, simply alternate the worker assignments every other event. This requires the WC to keep track, event to event.

THSCC Forums

Workers, Workers, Workers

Who is online