ESU = Qualifying

[StuartV666]

Some of you are probably already groaning to see me popping up in this thread. I have harped on this same subject many times. Props to jryer for his many excellent points. Maybe this year will be the time we can finally get this change implemented.

To address some concerns that were raised (about having a practice session designated as qualifying):

- put a transponder on every bike. There aren't THAT many people with multiple bikes, so there shouldn't be an issue of not having enough transponders. If this is truly a problem, charge people with multiple bikes an extra $5 per bike. We already pay more for our first entry than for the rest. I view that extra as covering overhead expenses like the transponder. I don't see a problem with paying a bit more if I need to use multiple transponders during the weekend.

- give the tech inspectors bigger tech stickers. When they put the sticker on the bike, have them look at the transponder and write the transponder ID on the sticker that they put on the bike. That will let any official who inspects the bike (e.g. when it is going on or off the track) tell whether the right transponder is on the right bike without having to have a list to refer to. Bikes can be randomly spot-checked at any time - waiting at pit out, coming in off the track, even sitting in their pit area - certainly during any post-race inspection of the top finishers. A bike should never have the wrong transponder mounted on it.

- to those who keep saying, "why not grid based on points?" or "what's wrong with rewarding the good customers, who have more points because they race with us often, by gridding on points?" The answer is SAFETY!! How many times do I have to say that? The SAFEST grid is the one where the fastest guys start at the front! It is not as safe *as it could be* to have a grid where some fast guy (or multiple fast guys) shows up for one race midway through the season (maybe there's good contingency money that weekend) and is gridded at the very back.

Like jryer said, what's the worst thing that will happen? Somebody will be gridded a bit further ahead on the grid than they really should be? Like I've been saying for years, BIG WHUP! The overall grid will still be much more fair and safer (than it is with the current system OR by gridding on points).

Here's an example that I'm SURE will happen: A rider has one bike - a 600. They run it in MW SS, MW SB and MW GP. They have two sets of wheels. They run DOTs on one set for SS and the other set with slicks for the other classes. In their qualifying session, they run slicks and the time they turn is used to set their grid position for the SS race (as well as SB and GP). Again, I say BIG WHUP. It's still WAY better overall AND SAFER than gridding by pre-entry or by points.

The biggest reason I can see for CCS to NOT do this is that is takes away everybody's incentive to pre-enter mega-early. Which means CCS doesn't get a big pile of money at the beginning of the season that they can sit on and earn interest off of (or whatever they do with it). I don't begrudge CCS that - except insofar as the current system compromises rider safety.

[Mongo]

Gridding by points is unsafe? You are an amazing amazing person there stuart.  Always amazes me how some people can be around this sport for as long as you have yet still have absolutely no clue what they're talking about.

[Super Dave]

And road america had more individual rider entries than CCS had transponders.  This also happened at Barber at least once.

[roadracer162]

Many points have been voiced and all seem legitimate. I don't believe there is one perfect way for our club racing. As a club memeber I will race with whatever rules are in play for that year and love it.

Grid by points dangerous? Yeah in certain situations it could be but maybe not as prevalent as the grid by entry. There have been occasion here in Florida where the slowest guy has the most points purely from being at every race. Hypothetically he would be at the front and everyone would have to go around him. It could be the same if that person pre-enters first.

Safety? There are so many occasions where the LW F40 group come up on slower traffic gridded in front at the start of the race and this happens in both the Ex and AM groups. There was a F40 race in 2005 at Homestead where there were several red flags. The first restart had the riders grid in position on track. That was great for me because that moved me from the back row to the 3rd or 4th row.

Pre-entry money? At least in the Florida region I know that Henry doesn't deposit my entry check until after the weekend. No revenues for him until after the race is done.

Too many classes? That could be so but it sure is nice that I have a place to run my old FZR even though I am not at the front of the pack. I do believe in a tiered system where an Am beginner rider starts racing on a smaller bike and not a big bike. I know we are all adults and grown-ups and all but man it is scary watching some of those practice sessions and race at times. Are there so many new guys with 1000cc bikes that are clamoring to race why we have to have that class for AM? I believe leave the big bikes for Experts and if there is an Am that can handle it, then he should be moved to expert status.

Mark



In summation I beleive that getting around a slower rider is part of racing either in qualifying or the actual race itself. Is it more dangerous-could be but my take of this club racing is that it is my hobby and not my profession.

Grid by points-I like it just as in Daytona.

Grid by qualify time- Makes sense to me but I know in some other regions there is barely anytime for practice. Daytona is 3 laps per session equating to 6 total laps of practice-not really practice.

Grid by entry- doesn't bother me but has some of the same problems that both previous ideas have.

[r1owner]

There was a F40 race in 2005 at Homestead where there were several red flags. The first restart had the riders grid in position on track. That was great for me because that moved me from the back row to the 3rd or 4th row.

You have more than 3 rows in an F40 race?

I don't think the qualifying thing is going to work.  The only way I could see it working was if the software had the capability to do it for them.  Otherwise, they'd have to look at all the practice times to set the grid up, then enter them.  With the way it's currently set up, I think they start entering riders when they sign up in morning and setting the grids then. 

I could be wrong, but I just don't think they have time to sift through all the times then enter the competitors into the system.

[roadracer162]

You have more than 3 rows in an F40 race?

I don't think the qualifying thing is going to work.  The only way I could see it working was if the software had the capability to do it for them.  Otherwise, they'd have to look at all the practice times to set the grid up, then enter them.  With the way it's currently set up, I think they start entering riders when they sign up in morning and setting the grids then. 

I could be wrong, but I just don't think they have time to sift through all the times then enter the competitors into the system.

I agree with the time factor with the current system.

We do have more than 3 rows but of course we have the HW F40 and the LW F40 racing in the same race but within their respective classes. In 2005 I was an Am. This is my second year as Ex.

Mark

[r1owner]

Whoops!  Meant to put a smilie after my 3 rows comment!  :)

[roadracer162]

Whoops!  Meant to put a smilie after my 3 rows comment!  :)

Yeah I know it, lots of old guys in Florida, afterall it is the retirement state.

[StuartV666]

Gridding by points is unsafe? You are an amazing amazing person there stuart.  Always amazes me how some people can be around this sport for as long as you have yet still have absolutely no clue what they're talking about.

It always amazes me how people can read one thing and then claim that it said something else. For example, reading:

"The SAFEST grid is the one where the fastest guys start at the front! It is not as safe *as it could be*"

And turning that into saying that I said gridding by points is unsafe. THAT is amazing.

It IS a good job, though, of directing attention away from the true point that I did make on that subject, along with all the other points I made, and thereby avoiding making up a good rationalization for not doing what jryer proposed and I chimed in on.

Kind of like a few years ago when I was proposing putting transponders on all the bikes at WERA races and you explained in detail how that couldn't be done. And then the next season (or was it two seasons later?), after CCS started doing it, all of a sudden WERA was doing it, too.

Mongo, if I was a shareholder in WERA, Inc., you would be my absolute favorite person! Keep up the good work.

[Mongo]

Ha!  you have an interesting memory.  WERA and CCS started using electronic scoring on all bikes across the board at the same time, just using different systems. 

When you say the biggest reason to do this is safety you are trying to use the safety buzzword to get people to do what YOU want because YOU like it not because it's a better method.  You are indeed insinuating that the other methods are not safe. 

Your points have been refuted by people who actually know what they're talking about, but hey - don't let that stop you from being right and the rest of us being stick in the muds who just can't see the vision of the future the great Stewey has.

There is only one shareholder in WERA and she's glad you choose not to race with us too :D

[StuartV666]

Uhhhhh, Mongo? ALL of motorcycle racing is unsafe. The object is to do what we can to make it as safe as we can. If you are saying that gridding by qualifying is not as safe as gridding by points, I think you're the only one in this conversation that has said that. In which case, please explain why.

If we can all agree that gridding by qualifying is safER than gridding by points, then why would we not TRY to implement that?

Other than Mongo, it seems like everybody else agrees that gridding by qualifying would be safer and more fair. The objections boil down to discussions of logistics. Reasons it can't be done like "not enough transponders" or "no way to prevent cheating". Jryer, myself, and others have suggested solutions to those issues. So, how about some discussion of that, instead of re-hashing the obvious?

[StuartV666]

Ha!  you have an interesting memory.  WERA and CCS started using electronic scoring on all bikes across the board at the same time, just using different systems. 

Really?

My memory seems to jibe with this thread (from 2002):

http://forums.13x.com/showthread.php?t=7026&page=2&highlight=qualifying

where you said, in part, "Transponders are great but extremely expensive ... you really expect me to be able to come up with a quarter of a million dollars for transponders ... it's just not feasible."

And then, a year later, this thread also seems to jibe with my memory:

http://forums.13x.com/showthread.php?t=31011&highlight=qualifying

which says that CCS went live with transponders at regionals on July 1, 2003, while you were still buying transponders to have enough just to use at WERA Nationals.