Course for July 5, 2009

[conebasher]

All the frustrations of RRX came rushing back as I designed this course. I think I addressed them all but am not sure about the placement of the stop box buckets or chute-I think it will have to wait for a test drive. Taking advantage of RRX strengths, there are many sweepers and few slaloms. I tried also to minimize the total cone count. Total cones including pointers, walls and stop box is about 135. For reference, the T&T and event course yesterday used 100 cones each. There are large gaps between elements and many gates were turned into a cone and pointer to allow much line selection. I would say that it should be fairly straightforward but after seeing all the DNF's on yesterdays course, I think some people would screw up a course consisting only of two optional pivot cones

[Corey]

Normal gates are less confusing for newbies than cones with pointers. I watched a lot of people slalom the lane change before turn 5 on Saturday... I had a hard time remembering which slaloms were optional and which weren't. Luckily Jeff was along for a ride on my first run to remind me! ;)The course looks pretty good at first glance, it's pretty standard for RRX. (That's not a bad thing, very different things at RRX usually end up being lame gimmicks) A test drive should reveal issues. It looks very fast heading from the East section towards the Chicago box by the South washroom. One more turn is needed to reduce the number of spins through/after the box and the dip. The car sitting on the start line is in a dangerous spot.If the police cars are between the tent and the North washroom and close to the pavement then the slalom will need to change as a Northbound car that spins at the third cone will end up there.Also the bumps may kill the North end design - the area West of the manhole covers was almost unuseable last year. They seem to put the high-vertical-energy rides in that area. Those rides tend to ripple the pavement more and more every year.

[conebasher]

Normal gates are less confusing for newbies than cones with pointers. I watched a lot of people slalom the lane change before turn 5 on Saturday... I had a hard time remembering which slaloms were optional and which weren't. Luckily Jeff was along for a ride on my first run to remind me!

True' date=' but you have indicated that you wanted more line selection and changing those to gates will limit that. Cones with pointers are pretty standard stuff and quite common at SCCA events so I think the newbs are going to have to get with the program. For the most part I have a gate then a cone/pointer then another gate to keep people from getting too off course. That being said, if the rest of the course design people think I should change them, I will.

The course looks pretty good at first glance' date=' it's pretty standard for RRX. (That's not a bad thing, very different things at RRX usually end up being lame gimmicks) A test drive should reveal issues. [/quote']I agree, I'm trying to adopt KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) with course designs. Less is more. However, I do want to give everybody a taste of what they may see elsewhere so sometimes there may be something "interesting" added.

It looks very fast heading from the East section towards the Chicago box by the South washroom. One more turn is needed to reduce the number of spins through/after the box and the dip. The car sitting on the start line is in a dangerous spot.

The precise location of the two double gates will control speed here and we'll adjust after a test drive. There's 150' between the last gate and the washroom' date=' and 250' to the cars waiting to run, plenty of room for even a sliding car to get stopped. The Chicago box is just east of the dip so cars will be going slow and in a straight line when going through it.

If the police cars are between the tent and the North washroom and close to the pavement then the slalom will need to change as a Northbound car that spins at the third cone will end up there.

yes' date=' there are so many variables and last minute changes at RRX that adjustments to the course are inevitable.

Also the bumps may kill the North end design - the area West of the manhole covers was almost unuseable last year. They seem to put the high-vertical-energy rides in that area. Those rides tend to ripple the pavement more and more every year.

Yes, the final design will be based on the location of the bumps. My map has the location of the bumps from last year but there may be new ones.

[Corey]

Just to confirm; you do want feedback on these advance designs, right?

True' date=' but you have indicated that you wanted more line selection and changing those to gates will limit that.[/quote']This is a bit off-topic, but...This sums up the fundamental difference in our opinions. I do not believe gate width affects line choice in any way. The gates/elements on either side do. By 'line selection' I mean sections where there are two or more lines that have a chance of being fast. The most pride I ever got as a course designer was when a large group of people were stopped at an element in course walks debating over which way was faster, and then most of them tried it both ways because they still weren't sure.Examples from Saturday's course:The first optional slalom on Saturday was almost like this but the offset of the middle cone was so great that you couldn't carry all of the extra speed you got by starting on the right. The middle slalom between turns 5 and 4 was close to a wash for speed so the obvious choice was to take the right side for a shorter distance coming in and going out over slightly higher speeds. Then the last slalom near turn two was a no-brainer as you eliminated one whole turn while only needing to drive another 6 or so feet (at 80+ km/hr) further to the angled finish line.An example of a turn with line choice was the final 'sweeper' on the West course at Nationals last year. Low HP/high grip cars could run it as a sweeper. Something with more power could make it two fairly long straights with two corners. I did kind of an ellipse to blend the two strategies a bit.

[conebasher]

So, what you're saying is that even with 3 optional slaloms and big gaps between elements, I still didn't provide line selection?

[Art]

This is a bit off-topic' date=' but...[/quote']As a bit of a counterpoint. If a course has zero line selection (as happened to the late run groups in Topeka because of where the sand was) but flows and is challenging, it will still be won by the person that can most precisely drive their car at the limit and will be considered successful. A course of this type can be broken down into two more subsets, 1) where the line is obvious to everyone (cones placed at apexes) 2) a hidden line correct line.I believe our priorities must be:

• Courses that fall well within the rules
• Courses that are not "painful"
• Courses that are challenging
• Courses that are fun
• Courses that don't favor a particular type of car

Beyond that every designer will have their own "fingerprint" and we need to not just accept, but embrace that. Now if we could only find 3 or 4 people willing to put their "fingerprint" on our courses. I'm sure Mark would appreciate a break every now and then.

[Corey]

I'm having difficulties expressing this in type. I'm not saying the courses have been bad by any means! Art's list is bang-on. The more of those points you can tick off the better. We've got all the low-hanging fruit already, I'm trying to point out the subtle differences I see between our local courses and National-tour style courses.This is a pretty minor final detail I'm working at here, it's certainly not a deal-breaker. That's not at all what I'm saying.

[Fast_Toys]

I'm having difficulties expressing this in type. I'm not saying the courses have been bad by any means! Art's list is bang-on.

I think I understand what you are saying Corey and I agree with Art's list too. Let me see if I can express what I think you are saying. "Although there are gaps and optional directions etc, the actual fast lines you can choose are often limited by the fact that the actual element is something like a narrow opening in a wall, a tight angled gate or a chute which force everyone to go through the element in basically the same manner even if how they got there is different".Here's an example to illustrate this point. Turn one at Gimli has a whole bunch of different ways you can go through it. You can early apex, late apex, take the shortest line, take the longest line etc. The turn is wide enough to allow any of these and you have a straight before that to set up. However, if I put a narrow angled 16 foot gate on the inside of that turn (effectively making it even narrower), now everyone of forced to go through that turn pretty much the same way regarless of how open it is before or after that turn.