Glenn goes crazy - radical idea for the raceday schedule

[The GECCO]

So, a few years ago I had a rather radical idea for changing the MRA by eliminating all of the "niche" classes and getting back to the basics. It never took off, and I didn't really think it would. I just wanted to stimulate some outside the box thinking. Well, I'm at it again. In my opinion (worth exactly what you're paying to read it) the MRA has a few problems:

1) Running late way too often
2) Two many underpopulated classes, which makes for boring track time, both for the riders and the spectators
3) Racers aren't getting enough "bang for their buck" - too little track time each weekend
4) The limited number of rounds makes it difficult to recover points-wise from a bad weekend (somewhat addressed by the recent rules change)
5) Money! We all know that the club is having problems.

I have a suggestion that may solve a lot of these problems. The suggestion is based off of what I see in the car racing programs that also use the track. The SCCA, for instance, has approximately 1.4 million classes (I may be exaggerating a little, but not by much) and it simply isn't feasible for them to run each class individually, so they run "run groups" for practice, qualifying and racing. Each "run group" is made up of several different classes of cars that are generally compatible on the track together. So, in each "run group" there may be a half dozen different races going on, each scored separately. Additionally, they stay on schedule religiously by running races according to elapsed time, not lap count. Races simply cannot run long - if it's a 25 minute race, it's over in 25 minutes regardless of the number of laps completed.

I think the MRA should consider adopting a similar approach. Doing so will greatly increase the amount of track time each entrant will get, every event will be a double header which has a huge impact on the points chases, and it will allow the raceday to be scheduled much more efficiently. Additionally, it would get the riders more track time, enough that I don't think it would benefit the track to run motorcycle lapping on Fridays (we would run cars every Friday). The club could then charge for practice on Saturday and bank the extra $$, and the riders wouldn't feel they have to take Friday off to be competitive. Finally, there would be no guessing what time the program would be done at the end of the day.

So, here's a starting point for how each weekend would run:

Saturday:
Practice broken down by lap times, not by expert/novice
800-820 Slow (over 2:15)
820-840 Med (1:55 - 2:15)
840-900 Fast (under 1:55)
900-920 Slow
920-940 Med
940-1000 Fast
1000-1020 Slow
1020-1040 Med
1040-1100 Fast
1100-1120 Slow
1120-1140 Med
1140-1200 Fast

1200-100 Lunch

100-200 Superstreet

200-500 3hr endurance

That's right, instead of the traditional 30 minute endurance races we would have a 3 hour at every round (or a 2 hour and be done at 4:00, or ???), and no sprint races on Saturday. Why get rid of the 30 minute endurance? Keep reading...

On Sunday, we would go to the "run group" scenario. The run groups would look something like this:

Group 1
COLO
LOR
LWGP
MVGTU
NGTU

Group 2
MVGTO
MWSS
NGTO
250
STGTU

Group 3
AGTU
F40
HWSS
OSB
Thunderbike

Group 4
AGTO
HWSB
OSS
STGTO
MWSB

Group 5
RoR (combined)

Each group session would be 40 minutes long. 4 minutes for a warmup lap and gridding, 32 minutes for the race, and 4 minutes for cool down. The Sunday schedule would look like this:

800-820 Slow Practice
820-840 Medium Practice
840-900 Fast Practice

900-940 Group 1 race
940-1020 Group 2 race
1020-1100 Group 3 race
1100-1140 Group 4 race
1140-1220 Group 5 race

1220-100 Lunch

100-140 Group 1 race
140-220 Group 2 race
220-300 Group 3 race
300-340 Group 4 race
340-420 Group 5 race

Obviously, this could be tweaked. Lots of options.

But, think of this - a rider with a SS legal 600 could practice Saturday morning and/or run the 3 hour Saturday afternoon. Then on Sunday you could enter MWSS, MWSB and RoRU, and this gets you *SIX* 32 minute races. This would also allow each racer 14 opportunities (2 races per weekend * 7 weekends) to earn points for each class. This means that a single bad finish has minimal impact on your championship standings. A Novice coming in with a 600 running NGTU and AGTU would get four 32 minute races per Sunday. A Novice with a 1000 could do the same running NGTO and AGTO.

What's the downside? I can think of a few things, none of which are deal breakers in my opinion:
- It would obviously have an impact on guys like Moham that like to run every freaking class we have. The opportunity to do that would be limited somewhat depending on how the grouping was done, but at the end of the day I think even someone like Moham would see an increase in the amount of track time he gets each weekend. With the proper bike selection you could run in every group and do TEN 32 minute races on Sunday. Talk about Iron Man!
- There would be more traffic and speed differential. I imagine a lot of people will argue that it's unsafe. However, I don't see it being any worse than our current 30 minute endurance races, and certainly not worse than the 4 hour. It also wouldn't be worse than the traffic at larger clubs like WERA and AFM that have huge grids and where every race is Experts in the first wave and Novices in the second. Currently, most of our races are only "races" until the first time the pack reaches turn 4. By then the field has sorted itself out and the riders are doing nothing more than turning laps until the finish. Makes for boring racing, both for the rider and the spectator. At the end of the day, the riders will adjust to the increased traffic and race accordingly.
- Obviously gridding strategy would have to be discussed, there are several different ways this could be approached. There may be scoring issues with having several separate races going on at once, but obviously the other clubs have figured this out so it's not insurmountable. Plus, we already have a few combined races going on now and it's not a problem.

So, that's my idea. As I said before, I didn't expect my previous idea to be considered seriously, but this is something I think the membership should discuss and the board should seriously consider.

[jplracing]

Glenn

I do like the idea of your "schedule" but it seems to me the race days run late more due to crashes/red flags/track clean up etc... Unfortunately, I don't see your schedule (or any other changes to the schedule) positively affecting how late the day goes as the extent of the crash/injuries are unknowns and hard to plan for.

On a side note I do like the 3 hour endurance (in a team event) every weekend idea.

[The GECCO]

Glenn

I do like the idea of your "schedule" but it seems to me the race days run late more due to crashes/red flags/track clean up etc... Unfortunately, I don't see your schedule (or any other changes to the schedule) positively affecting how late the day goes as the extent of the crash/injuries are unknowns and hard to plan for.

On a side note I do like the 3 hour endurance (in a team event) every weekend idea.

Yeah, I should have explained better. The race is 32 minutes long, but the clock doesn't stop for red flags. If there's a crash in group 1 that goes past 9:40 am, then that race is considered complete. Likewise, if the group 1 crash causes group 2 to start late, group 2 is still done at 10:20. You CAN'T run late. Do some people get screwed? Yup, but life ain't fair and so far the only people getting screwed are the workers and we can see where that's gotten us.

[mkdiehl]

I like people thinking about other ideas for the race weekend....I too don't like the fact that some of the races are determined after one lap....or that some have 5 starters. I agree that it cuts down on spectator involvement.

It is easy for me to say since I am on a 600, but I also think that there are too many classes...obviously just my opinion if someone asked.

Glen, I don't know how much thought you put into the groupings but I would suspect a little. That said, if I were to race MWSS, F40, and MWSB that would be 2 straight hours of racing (TWICE A DAY). There is something to be said about track time, but I am positive I wouldn't be competitive and would probably be dangerous by the end of that second hour. Your schedule gives no time for breaks between races, fueling, etc.

Probably a little early to start bashing your idea.....but that concern comes to mind.

Looking forward to the discussion/ideas.

matt

[jplracing]

Glenn

I do like the idea of your "schedule" but it seems to me the race days run late more due to crashes/red flags/track clean up etc... Unfortunately, I don't see your schedule (or any other changes to the schedule) positively affecting how late the day goes as the extent of the crash/injuries are unknowns and hard to plan for.

On a side note I do like the 3 hour endurance (in a team event) every weekend idea.

Yeah, I should have explained better. The race is 32 minutes long, but the clock doesn't stop for red flags. If there's a crash in group 1 that goes past 9:40 am, then that race is considered complete. Likewise, if the group 1 crash causes group 2 to start late, group 2 is still done at 10:20. You CAN'T run late. Do some people get screwed? Yup, but life ain't fair and so far the only people getting screwed are the workers and we can see where that's gotten us.

So if a crash happens at 10:10am that requires a helicopter and we assume that the delay is roughly an hour, then group 2 would be cut short, Group 3 wouldn't get to race, and Group 4 would be cut short?

Personally I think that is too extreme.

[The GECCO]

Glen, I don't know how much thought you put into the groupings but I would suspect a little.

Honestly, not a HUGE amount. With more thought and input from others I'm sure it could be refined and made better.

That said, if I were to race MWSS, F40, and MWSB that would be 2 straight hours of racing (TWICE A DAY). There is something to be said about track time, but I am positive I wouldn't be competitive and would probably be dangerous by the end of that second hour. Your schedule gives no time for breaks between races, fueling, etc.

True. If the club wanted to go this way there are a couple solutions that the members could choose from. You could build in breaks by keeping the session lengths at 40 min, but ending the races 5-10 min sooner. Or, the somewhat tongue in cheek reply/solution would be "then don't race F40"

Perhaps another solution would be to shorten the sessions to 30 min and create a 6th group. Then the grouping could be structured with the intent of making so that the majority of the racers on a 600 would be inclined to race groups 1, 3 and 5, and the guys on a different type of bike would be inclined to race 2, 4 and 6. Believe me, I'm not saying that the solution I posted is beyond refinement, I just think it's a good place to start.

[The GECCO]

So if a crash happens at 10:10am that requires a helicopter and we assume that the delay is roughly an hour, then group 2 would be cut short, Group 3 wouldn't get to race, and Group 4 would be cut short?

Personally I think that is too extreme.

Maybe, but remember that there is a second round of races in the afternoon and the chances of the same group getting screwed twice in the same day is rather slim.

Or perhaps a policy that any group (like group 3 in your example) that gets cut completely would get a minimum length race (say, 15 min) at the END of the day at the discretion of the board/track marshal.

[mkdiehl]

.....more than happy to practice all day Saturday and race two classes (4 races) on Sunday. But I am not sure how the club would adjust entry fees accordingly...? At current rate it would seem that I would be paying less than the $250 RYAO pricing....maybe not. That was part of my point, not that I made it clear.

I like how Utah does it with the practice on Sat and racing on Sunday as well.

[The GECCO]

.....more than happy to practice all day Saturday and race two classes (4 races) on Sunday. But I am not sure how the club would adjust entry fees accordingly...? At current rate it would seem that I would be paying less than the $250 RYAO pricing....maybe not. That was part of my point, not that I made it clear.

I like how Utah does it with the practice on Sat and racing on Sunday as well.

No doubt the pricing structure would have to be adjusted accordingly and would require a fair amount of analysis, especially considering what would need to be done about folding in the pricing for Saturday practice.

But, all things being equal, if you enter a single sprint race now it costs $140 and you get a 7 lap (or roughly 14 minute) race. Under the new system the same one race entry would get you as much as 64 minutes of racing. I would think that most people would be willing to accept a small increase in cost for the additional track time. Even if we could assume that the pricing stayed the same and the members all entered the same number of races (ie, the clubs racing revenue stayed the same) the club would also see the additional practice revenue and be money ahead. But, this is a VERY simplistic look at what would need to be a complicated discussion.

[The GECCO]

In response to Matt's concern, I put a bit more thought into the grouping and created a 6th group. The main idea was to *try* to have combinations that would give *most* people a chance to not do a lot of back-to-back racing. For instance, *most* of the RoR competitors will also run in OSS, OSB, STGTO, MWSS, MWSB. This scheme would put those competitors running groups 2, 4, 6. Likewise, a Novice on a 600 would run AGTU, NGTU, NGTO which is groups 1, 3, 5. A Ninja 250 rider would run in groups 3 and 5. It'll never be perfect, but it could come close.

Group 1
AGTU
F40
MVGTO
Thunder

Group 2
AGTO
HWSB
MWSS
OSB

Group 3
MVGTU
NGTU
P250
STGTU

Group 4
HWSS
MWSB
OSS
STGTO

Group 5
COLO
LOR
LWGP
NGTO

Group 6
ROR

This would put us with the following schedule (35 minute sessions, 27 minute races)
8:00 9:00 Practice as before

9:00 9:35 Group 1
9:35 10:10 Group 2
10:10 10:45 Group 3
10:45 11:20 Group 4
11:20 11:55 Group 5
11:55 12:30 Group 6

12:30 1:30 lunch

1:30 2:05 Group 1
2:05 2:40 Group 2
2:40 3:15 Group 3
3:15 3:50 Group 4
3:50 4:25 Group 5
4:25 5:00 Group 6

[PremiumBlend]

1140-1200 Fast

1200-100 Lunch

100-200 Superstreet

200-500 3hr endurance

That's right, instead of the traditional 30 minute endurance races we would have a 3 hour at every round (or a 2 hour and be done at 4:00, or ???), and no sprint races on Saturday. Why get rid of the 30 minute endurance? Keep reading...

I like where your head is at, but I personally feel there should be a minimum lap count to at least accurately score a race. Say maybe 8 laps or something. In another post you said if a race has a crash and at 9:40 (or whatever time the race is over) the race is done no matter what so the schedule is followed, then the other racers get screwed that weren't able to finish. I think this idea can be modified a bit.

During the endurance race 3 hour block, instead of a 3 hour race, make it a 1 hour or 1.5 hour race which still at least double or triple the 30 minute race giving racers more track time who race endurance and more bang for their buck. In the event a race is cut short due to an accident from an earlier race and the minimum number of laps were not completed to accurately judge position for points then the 2 hr or 1.5 hr open block at the end of the day is considered "make up" time.

In the event there is more "make up" racing then time allowed, that race can be carried over to the following race event. I understand it could be at a different track, but it still gives people that track time and maximizes both race time and bang for their buck.

Just a thought.

[gsnyder828]

Glenn,

I like the idea. I'd have to seriously reassess my tire budget with that much track time :shock: , but I think the schedule has great potential.

[The GECCO]

1140-1200 Fast

1200-100 Lunch

100-200 Superstreet

200-500 3hr endurance

That's right, instead of the traditional 30 minute endurance races we would have a 3 hour at every round (or a 2 hour and be done at 4:00, or ???), and no sprint races on Saturday. Why get rid of the 30 minute endurance? Keep reading...

I like where your head is at, but I personally feel there should be a minimum lap count to at least accurately score a race. Say maybe 8 laps or something. In another post you said if a race has a crash and at 9:40 (or whatever time the race is over) the race is done no matter what so the schedule is followed, then the other racers get screwed that weren't able to finish. I think this idea can be modified a bit.

During the endurance race 3 hour block, instead of a 3 hour race, make it a 1 hour or 1.5 hour race which still at least double or triple the 30 minute race giving racers more track time who race endurance and more bang for their buck. In the event a race is cut short due to an accident from an earlier race and the minimum number of laps were not completed to accurately judge position for points then the 2 hr or 1.5 hr open block at the end of the day is considered "make up" time.

In the event there is more "make up" racing then time allowed, that race can be carried over to the following race event. I understand it could be at a different track, but it still gives people that track time and maximizes both race time and bang for their buck.

Just a thought.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but the "run group" races that would be done strictly on time are on Sunday, and the time you're suggesting to use for "make up" is on Saturday, so the "make up" would always be at the next event?

[PremiumBlend]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but the "run group" races that would be done strictly on time are on Sunday, and the time you're suggesting to use for "make up" is on Saturday, so the "make up" would always be at the next event?

No, you understood correctly. I was thinking endurance races were on Sunday for some reason while I was typing that post so yes, all make-up heats would be the following weekend if a make-up race was needed. And if there was a minimum lap count established, during that "make-up" race... the full race wouldn't necessarily need to be raced, only the minimum lap count. This would strictly be a vote for the masses at this point. If the group would rather have a full race as a make-up or just satisfy the minimum lap count, which could cut races from 27 minutes to say 15 or so.

[Jon]

Maybe we can talk about it for next year as the rules, schedule and etc are already done for this one. Besides we're all going to go over a fiscal cliff and none of us are going to have any $$ left to race LoL.

[LMsports]

I like that this is being discussed. I too think something has to be done about the common club racing schedule as I think that for "clubs" to survive we can't keep doing what worked 15 years ago when the grids were larger and there weren't track days. I enjoyed the AMA experience I had where I felt I had good track time in practice and qualifying and then had a race that really meant something to build up to. So practice on Saturday, using practice times for race qualifying. Best lap time in practice is the time used for gridding. Sunday, one larger race, for each displacement (lightweight, middleweight, unlimited, 250, etc). So less classes, one race that means something that is longer in duration (20 laps maybe depending on distance) and a larger entry fee to make up for lack of classes. Build it up for the spectators, build it up for the competitors.

[rforsythe]

I like where your head is at, but I personally feel there should be a minimum lap count to at least accurately score a race. Say maybe 8 laps or something.

FWIW, we've "accurately scored" races with as few as 3 laps, when they were shortened for whatever reason. At that point it's a balls out heat race, but hey that can be amusing too. :twisted:

I need to spend more time processing Glenn's proposal, but it's intriguing at first glance. One of the more annoying parts of the MRA day is never definitively knowing when my race will be or whether we'll be out there until sunset turning laps. Having played both sides I can tell you it's exponentially harder on the crew than the racers as well. It's also hard to get spectators to show up, who may not have the entire day to blow at the track, but want to support a given rider. "I'll be on the track sometime between 1 and 3pm" is not helpful to them.

I think after this is refined a bit more, perhaps communicating it to the membership via email and asking for feedback at a general meeting would be wise. But, I think this has some legitimate potential.