MOWOG2 raw results

[mikeDavis]

here are the raw results (hand entered) from MOWOG2. The penalties are shown, but the times are raw meaning that we haven't added the 2 seconds per cone to the times yet.

Group1, Run2:
time car penalty
01:05.9 65 0
01:05.0 303 0
01:09.4 59 0
01:00.9 419 1
01:10.2 472 0
01:00.3 78 0
01:01.2 110dnf
01:10.8 770dnf
01:05.3 85dnf
01:06.9 59 0
01:04.7 713 0
01:07.8 662 0
01:07.5 314dnf
01:07.7 472 0
01:08.4 318 0
01:00.6 110 1
01:04.7 67 0
01:05.5 59 1
01:03.1 369 1
no time 472 0
01:09.2 850 0
01:00.5 110dnf
01:02.8 780 0
01:02.7 281 2
1.08.596 260dnf
1.09.577 163 1
1.08.340 645 0
01:03.4 56 0
01:02.2 671 0
01:07.3 37 0
01:02.1 274dnf
01:02.8 303 0
01:06.0 861 2
00:58.4 419dnf
01:01.2 56 0
01:00.5 78 0
01:10.8 770 0
01:06.7 85dnf
01:03.5 713 1
01:06.8 662 0
01:05.5 861 0
01:05.8 314 0
01:04.9 274dnf
01:03.4 318dnf
01:00.9 56 0
01:04.0 67 0
01:04.6 369 0
01:03.3 861 0
01:00.1 850 0
01:02.3 780 0
01:05.5 281dnf
01:04.2 260 0
01:08.0 163 0
01:01.6 274 1
01:04.1 645 0
01:06.1 671dnf
00:59.8 37 0
01:04.6 303 0
00:59.6 419 1
00:59.4 78 0
01:09.0 770 0
01:10.5 85 0
00:44.0 713rerun
0 662rerun
0 314rerun
01:05.0 318dnf
01:04.2 67 0
01:01.6 369 0
00:59.9 850 0
01:01.8 780 0
01:03.7 260 0
01:07.6 163 1
01:06.4 645dnf
01:06.2 671 1
01:00.1 37 0
00:54.1 281dnf
00:40.0 317rerun
00:38.0 713rerun
00:38.0 662rerun
01:01.7 713 0
no time 314 0
no time 662 0


group2 run1:
time car penalty
01:01.6 11 dnf
01:05.4 333 1
00:55.9 99 1
01:07.1 265 no data
01:00.6 619 0
01:02.2 121 dnf
01:01.7 811 dnf
01:02.8 11 1
01:05.5 212 dnf
00:56.6 99 1
00:59.0 619 0
01:05.3 533 dnf
00:59.5 142 0
01:02.3 183 0
01:03.5 64 dnf
01:04.0 109 dnf
01:02.8 11 1
01:07.6 866 0
00:55.6 99 0
01:01.7 53 4
01:05.1 162 dnf
01:59.0 619 0
01:02.2 57 dnf
01:00.3 142 1
01:04.3 426 dnf
01:03.0 64 dnf
01:04.3 81 dnf
00:58.5 611 0
00:57.9 66 0
00:58.4 196 1
01:03.3 16 1
00:59.0 475 0
01:07.5 124 0
01:03.7 333 0
01:05.4 64 dnf
01:03.6 265 0
01:02.1 121 dnf
00:57.9 66 0
01:01.5 811 0
01:04.7 212 dnf
01:00.7 16 1
01:06.3 533 dnf
01:05.9 124 0
01:01.9 183 0
01:00.2 109 dnf
00:56.7 66 0
00:59.0 47 dnf
01:04.1 866 dnf
01:20.3 53 0
01:25.2 16 dnf
01:27.2 162 dnf
01:30.8 124 0
01:27.1 57 dnf
01:26.9 47 dnf
01:03.1 426 dnf
00:58.3 81 dnf
01:01.9 47 dnf
00:58.3 611 0
00:59.5 196 1
00:58.6 475 0
01:02.8 333 dnf
01:03.2 265 dnf
01:02.2 121 dnf
01:00.5 811 0
01:13.1 47 dnf
00:59.6 212 dnf
01:07.2 124 1
01:04.6 533 dnf
01:01.8 183 0
01:03.9 109 1
01:03.7 866 0
01:01.2 53 dnf
01:04.3 162 dnf
01:12.3 57 rr
01:17.1 426 1
00:57.9 81 0
00:57.0 611 1
00:58.0 196 0
00:58.7 475 0
00:58.5 619 0
01:00.5 53 dnf
01:02.5 162 dnf
01:01.9 57 dnf

group2 run 2:
Time Car Class Penalty
00:56.7 66asp 1
01:01.8 11sts 0
00:57.8 81ep 1
01:00.2 619dp 1
01:03.3 121ep dnf
00:59.4 142csp 0
01:05.0 162sts 6
01:01.9 47csp dnf
01:02.2 66asp 1
01:00.6 183esp 0
01:04.4 109cp 0
00:59.1 53csp 0
01:03.8 11sts 6
00:56.4 611esp 0
00:59.3 619dp 0
01:03.6 333csp 0
01:00.4 142csp dnf
01:04.3 426sts dnf
01:00.5 47csp dnf
00:58.6 66asp 0
01:00.6 811dsp 0
01:04.1 866bm dnf
00:58.5 619dp 1
01:03.3 57ep dnf
00:58.7 142csp dnf
01:01.8 11sts 0
00:58.5 196gs 1
00:44.8 47csp dnf
00:23.4 265dsp rr
00:07.0 99asp dnf
00:57.8 475dsp 0
00:57.4 81ep 2
01:02.6 121ep 1
01:08.3 162sts dnf
00:49.9 16dp 1
00:39.1 124csp 0
00:41.3 183esp 0
00:34.5 64csp 1
01:02.6 109cp 0
00:56.2 99asp 0
00:58.8 53csp 0
00:56.4 611esp 2
01:00.2 16dp dnf
01:04.1 333csp 1
01:05.2 124csp 0
01:03.1 426sts 0
01:05.0 64csp dnf
01:00.3 183esp 0
01:00.3 811dsp 0
00:55.3 99asp 1
01:01.5 866bm dnf
01:02.0 16dp 0
01:04.4 124csp 0
01:02.9 57ep dnf
01:05.6 64csp dnf
00:58.1 196gs 0
00:55.1 99asp 0
01:03.1 265dsp 0
00:57.5 475dsp 0
00:56.2 81ep 1
01:00.1 16dp 0
01:02.0 121ep 0
01:04.0 124csp 1
01:07.0 162sts 4
01:08.0 64csp 1
01:03.1 109cp 0
00:56.0 611esp 2
00:54.1 333csp rr
00:01.6 426sts rr
00:18.6 124csp rr
00:39.9 183esp rr
01:00.3 47csp dnf
00:59.5 811dsp 0
01:01.8 866bm dnf
01:02.8 124csp 0
00:57.6 196gs 2
00:59.9 183esp 0
01:02.2 265dsp dnf
00:57.8 475dsp 1
01:02.4 57ep dnf
01:00.2 426sts 3
01:01.8 333csp 2
01:02.2 265dsp dnf

I'm working on getting the car numbers in classes so people can see where they finished relative to the class.

Mike Davis

[mikeDavis]

the conversion to text ate the time format. I'm working on it...

Mike

[Ben Rogowski]

Thanks Mike. I understand all the frustration involved with getting these results done, but it would've been really nice to know that I DNF'ed all six runs the day of the event, or at least a couple days later. It's pretty hard to remember course layout two weeks after the event and to try and think where I was DNF'ing. I was of the opinion that the course was challenging, but I like the fact that I really need to look ahead to make sure I was on the right track. Obviously I wasn't looking in the right spot.

If we're going to have another course layout similar to Mowog2, I feel we need a finish marshall. I'll volunteer for the position. I'm pretty bummed that I didn't even one clean run at Mowog2, and I didn't even know until two weeks after the fact.

BR

[washburn]

Hi Ben...sorry you had tough time with the course. It's no fun, I know! (The following is not directed at you in any way.)

I just wanted to lend some perspective on the "club's" obligations in this type of thing. I know we are not "other clubs", but other clubs typically do not do this at all. While I do not feel it is the clubs *responsibility* to make sure you know you are DNF'ing, it IS the clubs responsibility to post written results within a certain period of time. You would then see "DNF's" and raise the question while you could still do something about it. You can easily have someone else watch you run to let you know where you are going off course.

IF we can spare the worker, having someone at the finish line telling you if you hit cones or DNF'd is a nice perk, but it is not standard issue stuff. It is certainly not official nor should you ever rely on the information. I say this because I've also heard comments at MOWOG 1 similar to "that guy didn't tell me I hit that cone....if I had know I would have done better". This is bunk. The only results that count are the official results...none other. The only one in control of hitting cones and DNF'ing is YOU. Having someone tell you as a favor by no means entitles you to official instant results on the fly. Maybe I'm wrong, but this is my experience, so standard disclaimers apply, yada yada....

Personally, I think the club should concentrate on getting all the timing equipment bugs solved so we can get quick and accurate results. That is the first obligation.

[mikeDavis]

here are the times formatted to thousands of a second. The penalties are still not added:

Group 1 run 2:
time car penalty
1:05.897 65 0
1:04.958 303 0
1:09.372 59 0
1:00.895 419 1
1:10.156 472 0
1:00.333 78 0
1:01.157 110dnf
1:10.832 770dnf
1:05.315 85dnf
1:06.863 59 0
1:04.723 713 0
1:07.806 662 0
1:07.514 314dnf
1:07.746 472 0
1:08.394 318 0
1:00.624 110 1
1:04.741 67 0
1:05.465 59 1
1:03.130 369 1
no time 472 0
1:09.186 850 0
1:00.512 110dnf
1:02.768 780 0
1:02.741 281 2
1.08.596 260dnf
1.09.577 163 1
1.08.340 645 0
1:03.429 56 0
1:02.212 671 0
1:07.274 37 0
1:02.092 274dnf
1:02.769 303 0
1:06.009 861 2
0:58.448 419dnf
1:01.223 56 0
1:00.497 78 0
1:10.769 770 0
1:06.661 85dnf
1:03.452 713 1
1:06.784 662 0
1:05.499 861 0
1:05.774 314 0
1:04.922 274dnf
1:03.373 318dnf
1:00.867 56 0
1:03.970 67 0
1:04.597 369 0
1:03.293 861 0
1:00.081 850 0
1:02.253 780 0
1:05.492 281dnf
1:04.228 260 0
1:07.961 163 0
1:01.642 274 1
1:04.069 645 0
1:06.094 671dnf
0:59.766 37 0
1:04.610 303 0
0:59.624 419 1
0:59.418 78 0
1:08.996 770 0
1:10.474 85 0
0:44.000 713rerun
0 662rerun
0 314rerun
1:05.022 318dnf
1:04.174 67 0
1:01.585 369 0
0:59.884 850 0
1:01.779 780 0
1:03.708 260 0
1:07.601 163 1
1:06.351 645dnf
1:06.225 671 1
1:00.071 37 0
0:54.125 281dnf
0:40.000 317rerun
0:38.000 713rerun
0:38.000 662rerun
1:01.652 713 0
no time 314 0
no time 662 0

group 2 run 1:
time car penalty
1:01.558 11dnf
1:05.404 333 1
0:55.878 99 1
1:07.122 265no data
1:00.593 619 0
1:02.246 121dnf
1:01.666 811dnf
1:02.801 11 1
1:05.455 212dnf
0:56.576 99 1
0:58.979 619 0
1:05.344 533dnf
0:59.545 142 0
1:02.313 183 0
1:03.530 64dnf
1:04.042 109dnf
1:02.806 11 1
1:07.583 866 0
0:55.606 99 0
1:01.743 53 4
1:05.077 162dnf
1:58.980 619 0
1:02.212 57dnf
1:00.282 142 1
1:04.350 426dnf
1:02.952 64dnf
1:04.257 81dnf
0:58.515 611 0
0:57.875 66 0
0:58.443 196 1
1:03.316 16 1
0:59.004 475 0
1:07.505 124 0
1:03.731 333 0
1:05.389 64dnf
1:03.586 265 0
1:02.089 121dnf
0:57.949 66 0
1:01.503 811 0
1:04.747 212dnf
1:00.661 16 1
1:06.321 533dnf
1:05.907 124 0
1:01.883 183 0
1:00.179 109dnf
0:56.701 66 0
0:58.970 47dnf
1:04.091 866dnf
1:20.265 53 0
1:25.186 16dnf
1:27.208 162dnf
1:30.839 124 0
1:27.119 57dnf
1:26.912 47dnf
1:03.122 426dnf
0:58.336 81dnf
1:01.931 47dnf
0:58.260 611 0
0:59.526 196 1
0:58.620 475 0
1:02.811 333dnf
1:03.150 265dnf
1:02.238 121dnf
1:00.506 811 0
1:13.106 47dnf
0:59.568 212dnf
1:07.153 124 1
1:04.620 533dnf
1:01.831 183 0
1:03.932 109 1
1:03.653 866 0
1:01.196 53dnf
1:04.301 162dnf
1:12.290 57rr
1:17.094 426 1
0:57.884 81 0
0:56.987 611 1
0:58.018 196 0
0:58.707 475 0
0:58.469 619 0
1:00.522 53dnf
1:02.522 162dnf
1:01.877 57dnf

group 2 run 2:
Time Car Class Penalty
0:56.744 66asp 1
1:01.769 11sts 0
0:57.753 81ep 1
1:00.168 619dp 1
1:03.348 121ep dnf
0:59.360 142csp 0
1:05.037 162sts 6
1:01.884 47csp dnf
1:02.202 66asp 1
1:00.602 183esp 0
1:04.359 109cp 0
0:59.134 53csp 0
1:03.820 11sts 6
0:56.449 611esp 0
0:59.326 619dp 0
1:03.583 333csp 0
1:00.365 142csp dnf
1:04.291 426sts dnf
1:00.527 47csp dnf
0:58.610 66asp 0
1:00.551 811dsp 0
1:04.079 866bm dnf
0:58.518 619dp 1
1:03.270 57ep dnf
0:58.669 142csp dnf
1:01.799 11sts 0
0:58.455 196gs 1
0:44.797 47csp dnf
0:23.390 265dsp rr
0:07.048 99asp dnf
0:57.801 475dsp 0
0:57.365 81ep 2
1:02.579 121ep 1
1:08.280 162sts dnf
0:49.881 16dp 1
0:39.139 124csp 0
0:41.315 183esp 0
0:34.478 64csp 1
1:02.595 109cp 0
0:56.177 99asp 0
0:58.824 53csp 0
0:56.414 611esp 2
1:00.179 16dp dnf
1:04.086 333csp 1
1:05.185 124csp 0
1:03.120 426sts 0
1:05.043 64csp dnf
1:00.325 183esp 0
1:00.331 811dsp 0
0:55.299 99asp 1
1:01.547 866bm dnf
1:02.001 16dp 0
1:04.381 124csp 0
1:02.913 57ep dnf
1:05.554 64csp dnf
0:58.084 196gs 0
0:55.133 99asp 0
1:03.127 265dsp 0
0:57.524 475dsp 0
0:56.166 81ep 1
1:00.131 16dp 0
1:01.978 121ep 0
1:03.964 124csp 1
1:07.017 162sts 4
1:07.967 64csp 1
1:03.136 109cp 0
0:55.980 611esp 2
0:54.060 333csp rr
0:01.644 426sts rr
0:18.627 124csp rr
0:39.910 183esp rr
1:00.310 47csp dnf
0:59.527 811dsp 0
1:01.788 866bm dnf
1:02.805 124csp 0
0:57.618 196gs 2
0:59.923 183esp 0
1:02.230 265dsp dnf
0:57.846 475dsp 1
1:02.390 57ep dnf
1:00.234 426sts 3
1:01.816 333csp 2
1:02.203 265dsp dnf

I'll work on class order next.

Mike

[Ben Rogowski]

Pat, you've got a lot more experience than I do, especially with other clubs. The only place I've run other than a MAC event is with the SCCA in lacrosse. Last time I was in Lacrosse, I had one DNF out of six runs. i found out about it that day. I didn't DNF after I found out about it. By no means is a finish marshall the only way to solve the problem. If it's uncommon to have a finish marshall, then it's probably not even the best way. I'm not a total green horn, but I've got less than 15 autocrosses under my belt. I don't DNF that much. I DNF'ed all six runs at MOWOG 2. I was confused in a couple parts of the course. I walked the course three times. I got out of my car to watch others got through the course during my own run group. I watched the other run group go through the course as I picked cones.

The course was not overly challenging, but I got confused, and I obviously was doing something wrong. I don't know where... and I doubt I'll figure it out. It's one course and one day, but I'm still deep into my learning phase. It's difficult and frustrating to learn without feedback. I don't want to be a baby about this. it wouldn't be any fun if it wasn't challenging, but it's also not any fun to DNF all six runs. I'm more than open to ideas to improve myself. I don't know what more I could've done in this scenario to alleviate my off course excursions.

BR

[washburn]

Wish I could have been there so I could see what your talking about. Sounds like you were doing all the right things...seems odd to me. Like I said, I feel bad you found out something was wrong too late. The guys who are doing the timing are working hard to figure out the solutions to getting teh results up fast. They showed up Sunday when they could have had the day off, so I know they care a lot about getting it right.

I guess I would just suggest to anyone having a hard time finding the course, or even if they are looking for the best way to handle a particular section, ask for an instructor ride along. I'm not exactly sure about the rules, but I think we offer it this year.

[Drew]

Regarding Ben's and Pat's posts on end of run feedback, I lean more to Ben's thoughts on this. Pat, while I don't dispute that officially the club doesn't have a responsibility to tell a driver if he or she had a DNF, I think it only makes sense to do so. When a driver gets a penalty for hitting a cone, they often are aware of that, because they can hear the car strike the cone. However, a driver getting a DNF as a result of not understanding the course will quite possibly be totally unaware that they went off course. A driver certainly shouldn't be searching in their mirror to see if a course worker is signaling a DNF. Without a finish marshall, there's no way to know in a timely manner if one totally screwed up their run.

On a course where multiple drivers are getting repeated DNFs, as was the case at St. Cloud, I think the EM should at a minimum call a brief break in the action and point out the apparent problem to the group. Something on the order of, "We've observed that a lot of drivers have been going to the left of the third gate and have been receiving DNFs. Take a closer look at that part of the course before your next run."

I don't believe autocrossing at the local club level needs to be a cold-hearted, no feedback experience.

My $.02.

Drew Baumbach

[washburn]

Good points. I particularly agree that if something was noticed, the event could have been halted for a couple minutes to clear it up. We have in the past said "hey, run over and tell that guy where he's going off". Happens sometimes. Courses can also be changed, such as adding more pointers to help out.

There are two reasons I would remain opposed to "end of run" marshals: 1) People might tend to become reliant on them as the official word, and if this person is wrong it may be construed as reason to protest the results. ie: "I did NOT get a cone on that run...the end of run marshal did tell me, so he didn't see one!." I've already heard this. 2) There is no substitute for course walking and run strategy. I fear it may encourage a more relaxed attitude towards making sure you know where the course goes. This is not just a matter of competition...it is also a safety thing. Every competitor has an *abligation* to know exactly where the course goes for the safety of their fellow course workers. (Ever work a corner and have an off course car "chasing" you?)

I agree that at local events, it is a nice thing to have, but not if the above things become the norm. EM's do need to be watchfull of multiple DNF's.

[fitz]

Originally posted by washburn


Good points. I particularly agree that if something was noticed, the event could have been halted for a couple minutes to clear it up. We have in the past said "hey, run over and tell that guy where he's going off". Happens sometimes. Courses can also be changed, such as adding more pointers to help out.

There are two reasons I would remain opposed to "end of run" marshals: 1) People might tend to become reliant on them as the official word, and if this person is wrong it may be construed as reason to protest the results. ie: "I did NOT get a cone on that run...the end of run marshal did tell me, so he didn't see one!." I've already heard this. 2) There is no substitute for course walking and run strategy. I fear it may encourage a more relaxed attitude towards making sure you know where the course goes. This is not just a matter of competition...it is also a safety thing. Every competitor has an *abligation* to know exactly where the course goes for the safety of their fellow course workers. (Ever work a corner and have an off course car "chasing" you?)

I agree that at local events, it is a nice thing to have, but not if the above things become the norm. EM's do need to be watchfull of multiple DNF's.

MOWOG 1 this year was the first I can recall us using a Finish Marshall, and it already triggered a situation just as Pat describes, with a competitor using the Finish Marshall as evidence in a protest.

Once the timing bugs get worked out we will have printouts of times available within minutes after each group finishes running. This should give a suffiecient heads-up to those who can't seem to find the course.

I am in full agreedance with Pat's point #2 BTW. I find it hard to comprehend how some people can drive a course sight-unseen and get it clean while others consistently DNF run after run after having walked the course. I would suggest the lack of a finish marshall is not the real problem here.

[Bernardus]

Gotta say, though, there's an awful lot of DNFs at MOWOG2. I'm not in a position to criticize any course design as I have no knowledge on the matter, but I wonder if all those DNFs (and not just by newbies too!) tells us something about the course design... :p

Also, what's so wrong with the finish marshall anyway? If they seem to encourage protest, well just say that the finish marshall is just there for your information, he can make mistakes (especially given the time constraint he's working with) and in no way his words are 'official' or 'final'. But they're very nice to have, and I'd love to see a finish marshall in all our future events!

[washburn]

Cool by me. I just thought the qualifications should be made so there is no mis-understandings. Maybe that can be my job! :D

[Ben Rogowski]

Originally posted by fitzI am in full agreedance with Pat's point #2 BTW. I find it hard to comprehend how some people can drive a course sight-unseen and get it clean while others consistently DNF run after run after having walked the course. I would suggest the lack of a finish marshall is not the real problem here.

What would you suggest the real problem is?

[Drew]

Originally posted by fitz


MOWOG 1 this year was the first I can recall us using a Finish Marshall, and it already triggered a situation just as Pat describes, with a competitor using the Finish Marshall as evidence in a protest.

Once the timing bugs get worked out we will have printouts of times available within minutes after each group finishes running. This should give a suffiecient heads-up to those who can't seem to find the course.

I am in full agreedance with Pat's point #2 BTW. I find it hard to comprehend how some people can drive a course sight-unseen and get it clean while others consistently DNF run after run after having walked the course. I would suggest the lack of a finish marshall is not the real problem here.


I wasn't aware that someone used a finish marshall's comment as evidence in a protest. However, I don't see a problem there that we can't deal with. If a finish marshall's comments don't constitute "official" results (which they shouldn't), we simply shouldn't allow that as evidence in a protest. Were the comments accepted as valid evidence in that case? I only suggest that a finish marshall is useful to provide unofficial, but helpful, information to the driver in a timely fashion. I fail to see how that would tarnish the competitiveness of the event any more than interim printouts of run times and penalties.

Since a run group may take three runs before any printouts of times are posted (if they are posted), a driver will get quicker feedback from the finish marshall's comments than they will by waiting for a printout to be posted. And if there are only two run groups, as at St. Cloud, do you want people hanging around for the printout to be posted when they're supposed to be getting to their work stations?

Finally, with regard to your last comment, the lack of a finish marshall may not be the real problem with regard to drivers failing to follow the course after walking it. But the lack of a finish marshall to let drivers know they went of course on the run they just finished will compound whatever the problem is.

Drew Baumbach

[fitz]

Originally posted by Bernardus


Gotta say, though, there's an awful lot of DNFs at MOWOG2. I'm not in a position to criticize any course design as I have no knowledge on the matter, but I wonder if all those DNFs (and not just by newbies too!) tells us something about the course design... :p

Also, what's so wrong with the finish marshall anyway? If they seem to encourage protest, well just say that the finish marshall is just there for your information, he can make mistakes (especially given the time constraint he's working with) and in no way his words are 'official' or 'final'. But they're very nice to have, and I'd love to see a finish marshall in all our future events!

The fact remians that there were several people (myself included) who ran the course blind (no course walk) with no trouble at all. As courses go, it was a pretty simple one. Also keep in mind, not all the DNF's were due to getting lost on the course. Quite a few were due to people losing control of thier vehicle. It seems to be the same few people who consistently couldn't find the course.

[washburn]

Originally posted by Drew Baumbach


I wasn't aware that someone used a finish marshall's comment as evidence in a protest.

Drew Baumbach


There was not a formal protest I'm aware of. Sorry if I in any way implied there was. ( I think I mentioned that someone protested the results (verbally), but I did not mean a protest was filed. Oops!) My intended message was that there was some dissatisfaction as it as "presumed" that the finish mashal was official. It therefore created some unhappyness. Unhappyness = bad for club. That's all.

I'm not totally against the idea...when properly qualified it can be a helpful thing as Drew suggests. I certainly would not mind if there was someone there doing that. I just don't think it is a necessity in order to complete the course correctly. Mark made a good point about the nature of the DNF also...we are assuming all are due to getting lost.

BTW, I see a note from Mark being quoted, but I do not see the original. How does that work?

[Bernardus]

I saw a car that DNF'ed all the time on a run, all at the same spot! I wonder if he knows he's dnf'ing at all. A finish marshall would help that guy immensely. It's just nice to have, especially on a difficult course.

I can't really fault Mark & Jeremy for making a challenging course. Hey, challenging is good, right? Surely there'll be criticism too if the course was too simple/easy. But when so many people got so many DNFs they got frustated, so naturally they complain. The addition of a finish marshall at MOWOG2 would reduce that frustation level immensely. What's the point of frustating people unneccessarily? People do this for fun. It's like designing a difficult test/exam but not provide information on how people can pass it. Saying that the test/exam maker can pass the test with their eyes closed provides little comfort to people who can't pass it despite trying hard.

Maybe I sounded like I'm complaining too much. I'm not. I just want to offer an opinion that it could perhaps be made a lot less frustating to many participants with a few very minor changes.

Just my .02 cents.

Bernardus (who dnf'ed only a few times and and attributed it to his sheer dumbness and really isn't complaining)

[fitz]

Originally posted by washburn



Originally posted by Drew Baumbach


I wasn't aware that someone used a finish marshall's comment as evidence in a protest.

Drew Baumbach


There was not a formal protest I'm aware of. Sorry if I in any way implied there was. ( I think I mentioned that someone protested the results (verbally), but I did not mean a protest was filed. Oops!) My intended message was that there was some dissatisfaction as it as "presumed" that the finish mashal was official. It therefore created some unhappyness. Unhappyness = bad for club. That's all.

I'm not totally against the idea...when properly qualified it can be a helpful thing as Drew suggests. I certainly would not mind if there was someone there doing that. I just don't think it is a necessity in order to complete the course correctly. Mark made a good point about the nature of the DNF also...we are assuming all are due to getting lost.

BTW, I see a note from Mark being quoted, but I do not see the original. How does that work?

There was in fact an inquiry made after MOWOG 1 about filing a protest based on information the competitor was given by the finish marshall. In the end the protest was never filed.

I don't like the finish marshall idea for several reasons.

1. If the finish marshall's word is unofficial and can't be relied on, why have one?
2. It's yet another position that we have to take time during the drivers meeting to fill and reduced the body count at other necessary positions.
3. When the problems get worked out with the timing hardware and times once again get posted promptly, those folks who consistently DNF will know about it soon enough, making the finish marshall irrelevant.

[Ben Rogowski]

Originally posted by Bernardus


I saw a car that DNF'ed all the time on a run, all at the same spot! I wonder if he knows he's dnf'ing at all. A finish marshall would help that guy immensely. It's just nice to have, especially on a difficult course.

Bernardus, was it a red Audi that you saw DNF'ing at the same spot all six times? If I'd known I was DNF'ing on the first three runs I would've made some adjustments for the second group of runs. I'm not advocating a finish marshall. I'm advocating some form of feedback that happens sooner than unofficial results posted three weeks after the event. Were times posted anywhere at MOWOG2? If they were, it wasn't well publicized. Knowing what happened in the first set of runs would've helped me immensely in the second group of runs.

I know that some MOWOG 2 DNF's were from loss of control Mark, but that wasn't the case in my scenario.

[Bob Fogt]

One other function of the finish marshall that I haven't seen discussed here: If the person in this position is radio-equipped, he can tell the driver right then if a rerun is warranted due to timing problems or some such. (Not that that ever happens at our events:-) How many times have we seen this: Timing yells out to whoever is standing nearby, "Tell number XX that he gets a rerun!!" "What?" "Tell number XX that he gets a rerun!" "Numb er XX?" "Yes!" "The red Toyota?" "Yes!" "Hey, you get a rerun!" "What?" "You get a rerun!" (The car is now back in its paddock space.) "I got a rerun?" "Yes!" By which time the next run group is up and this person has to run out of his normal group.

Just stop them at the finish line, tell 'em whether they DNF'd or have a rerun coming, and send them out of the way of the next oncoming car. No need to tutor them on their slalom technique or inform them WHERE they DNF'd, just let them know. Five seconds, tops. Nothing said at that position has any bearing on the final results, it's intended as helpful information and nothing more. Not necessary, of course, that we do this, but a niceness if there are people enough to handle one extra position.

Bob

[fitz]

Originally posted by Bob Fogt


One other function of the finish marshall that I haven't seen discussed here: If the person in this position is radio-equipped, he can tell the driver right then if a rerun is warranted due to timing problems or some such.

Just stop them at the finish line, tell 'em whether they DNF'd or have a rerun coming, and send them out of the way of the next oncoming car. No need to tutor them on their slalom technique or inform them WHERE they DNF'd, just let them know. Five seconds, tops. Nothing said at that position has any bearing on the final results, it's intended as helpful information and nothing more. Not necessary, of course, that we do this, but a niceness if there are people enough to handle one extra position.

Bob

This is the only really useful reason I can think of to have a Finish Marshall, but then, most re-runs occur due to timing problems which are not discovered until several cars have run through with faulty times. The Finish Marshall is not all that much help in these circumstances.

[JoelDirn]

These are still unofficial times, but for those interested, I've formatted results from Mowog 2 and added penalties to the times.

Mowog2.xls (http://www.joeld.net/mowog2.xls)

[Dave Keillor]

There is a relatively simple solution to repeated DNFs that I saw practiced last week at "another" club. When people were observed having trouble with the course, someone took the time to tell them about it and/or an instructor offered to ride with them. No finish marshall was needed. Just members helping members.

Dave

[Bernardus]

That sure is a good idea, and would be better than a finish marshall. But that would depend on the generosity of these experienced people. Can we rely on that?

[Dave Keillor]

Originally posted by Bernardus


That sure is a good idea, and would be better than a finish marshall. But that would depend on the generosity of these experienced people. Can we rely on that?


I don't know, Bernardus, but I would hope so. This "other" club did have an announcer who, after observing the repeated off-course excursions, requested (over the PA) for someone to tell the offender where they went wrong. However, members also took the initiative on their own to talk to the person and/or offer to ride with them (this club has no restrictions on participants over 18 as passengers).

I see no reason why a more experienced member couldn't, after observing a driver's confusion, go over and tell him/her where they were going wrong. A course that seems perfectly clear during the walk-though can become confusing to some drivers in the heat of competition. This is especially true with novice drivers who haven't learned how to look ahead. What's wrong with helping these folks out a little rather than implying they're somehow defective if they can't figure out the course when others can?

On the subject of courses, a challenging course doesn't need to be confusing and you don't need a sea of cones to make a course that's not confusing. An example is the Evolution school course. When I first saw it, I didn't think I'd ever be able to do a clean run. But after a few walk-throughs, it was a piece of cake. There weren't a lot of cones which made it very easy to look ahead to the next section without being confused by extraneous cones.

I wasn't at the St.Cloud event, but the event at the "other" club I ran last week had lots of DNFs which, in my opinion, were caused by having too many cones in a certain area which obscured one of the gates. Experienced drivers who knew how to look ahead had no problems, but the less experienced arrived at a sea of cones and got confused. Maybe during the novice walks, someone could give some hints about where to be looking at certain points in the course.

Bottom line in this, I think, is that the best way to keep the new people coming back is to help them finish the course, whether it's a finish marshall, experienced people helping novices, or both. It's darned frustrating to go home with a pile of DNFs.

Dave

[washburn]

Good points Dave. It's not a matter of not wanting to help someone out. It's not always easy to notice. I know if I saw lots-io-DNF's, I would say something, but I don't watch everyone run all the time. I don't think anyone is withholding help, most would be happy to do so.

As for DNF's, I thought there would be a few last Sunday, but there were very, very few. Asking the question to those who were there:

How much do you think the following helped you learn the course:
1) Lines around the course.
2) Morning group walk-through.

Did these things help?