Racing at Pueblo

[T Baggins]

Once was fun but arbitrarily deciding to do it again mid season......?

Avoiding a part of the track which is severely damaged and capable of "causing crashes" is hardly arbitrary in my opinion.

Also, understand that "simply hitting your line and avoiding the pot-hole" is much easier when you're in the lead vs when you're in a pack of bikes. If you weren't so dang fast now on your 600 you'd know what I'm talking about.

IIRC, people DID crash in T8 "because" of the degradation of the surface, or took crazy-weird lines to avoid the worst areas - which is totally sketchy 'cause riders aren't consistent thru the turn and you never know what the other guy is gonna do. This creates "lines of convergence" and ultimately crashes.

After our last round at HPR I suggested to Glenn and the CAMA Board that they CLOSE the West portion of the track IMMEDIATELY and get the contractor back in to fix the shoddy work. That way it would have time to adequately set up by Fall and we'd be good-to-go again by Winter. The cars are less disturbed by the damage, so there was limited support.

If you guys want to do a show of hands at the meeting tonight then I'm fine with that. If there is support for full-course then I'll do an e-mail blast and direct people to a poll online to be sure we've adequately heard the membership.

Part of the job of the Board of Directors is to do our best to ensure the success of our riders and their race programs, as well as their safety. Making (allowing?) racers run on damaged asphalt (when there is a viable alternative to avoid it) seems short-sighted at best......

[mkdiehl]

Ahhhh....part of the problem of responding to forums when you are in a meeting at work is that you forget your thought process....

I had meant to put in my post above the question of "were there crashes at T8 as a result of the damage?"

Tony has suggested there were. If that is the case then I do see his point.

I do remember unsuccessfully trying to pass Dara there......

I should never question the President......glad we live in America were the penalty for such isn't as severe.

[T Baggins]

Based on discussions with Glenn and Mike from HPR last night, it sounds like they will have made meaningful repairs to the damaged area in Turns 6 & 8 and they believe the surface will be markedly better. Not perfect, but way better.

Also, based on the feedback from riders at the General Meeting I will do an e-mail blast to members this morning asking them to chime in on their preference for the next round.

That said, if the repairs aren't good, or don't hold - I believe it wise to run the North course.

Also, it was interesting that NOBODY voted to run FULL Course Only 4 times a year. And it was basically 50/50 between guys who wanted to run 3:1 Full/North vs 2:2 Full/North.

It was also suggested that we "could" safely run the WEST Loop and so this is something we should look into. If it is viable, maybe we run it at Round 6 if we run full course at Round 5?

2013 - maybe 2 FULL, 1 North, 1 West?

Poll and New Forum Topic to follow...

[T Baggins]

I should never question the President......glad we live in America were the penalty for such isn't as severe.

It is FINE to question the President... but it's usually a waste of keystrokes since I'm generally right anwyay. :shock: :shock: :lol: :lol: :lol:

:wink:


ps - Jen - Put Matt at the back of the grid next round please... :twisted:

[polar x]

Also, it was interesting that NOBODY voted to run FULL Course Only 4 times a year. And it was basically 50/50 between guys who wanted to run 3:1 Full/North vs 2:2 Full/North.

It was also suggested that we "could" safely run the WEST Loop and so this is something we should look into. If it is viable, maybe we run it at Round 6 if we run full course at Round 5?

2013 - maybe 2 FULL, 1 North, 1 West?

Poll and New Forum Topic to follow...

No different than the voting for 30 and 45 min endurance races. It was decided to alternate them....When it came time to alternate them only a couple of us wanted to run the longer 45 min stints :roll: So that went the way of the dodo bird..... :? :? You know what will happen with this to. :evil: No body likes change. I would schedule it so that we get a "new" track with each race. 3 new tracks at the same place...how freaking awesume is that!!! Miller does it. riders dont get a choice. We should do the same. Full, east, west courses....deal with it. For the record, I loved the new course. It was fun as hell and gave us something new to experience.

Change is good, that was proven with the new president and the succesfull direction this club has gone even with the loss of rider membership in this shit economy. Tony....just do it 8) 8)

[T Baggins]

Change is good, that was proven with the new president...

MRA, not USA - right? :lol:

Just checking. :lol: :lol:

[polar x]

Change is good, that was proven with the new president...

MRA, not USA - right? :lol:

Just checking. :lol: :lol:

absolutely F#$KI%G right!!!!!!!!!! Bakercare RULES!!!!! Obamalama screws :evil:

Carry on 8) 8)

[JWinter]

I like the idea of running different configurations at HPR, it changes the dynamics of the weekend. For me it opens up different race tactics than the full course. I would rather take full advantage of what HPR has to offer and remember we are helping pay for it. I would rather go to PPIR and PMP only one time a season and do 5 rounds at HPR (3 full, 1 north, and 1 west course).

I'm not sure I follow others perspective about running the shorter course configurations? Why is it a problem to run more laps on a shorter course? If this was a bad thing than why go to PPIR? PPIR is a relatively short course with not many turns? How about La Junta? We raced that track that had what 5 turns maybe?

I for one am very thankful for the track options we have and really thankful that we have partial ownership of a track.