A Racing Video, Why there are rules Options

[Brad Roberts]

For those of you from SD.. this is John Ball of "Ball Automotive Group" (the spinning car)


B

[DanT]

Rob,
Not to pick a fight, but why does it seem you always have it out for GGR events, be it AX or TT?
Have you personally participated in our TT/DE series?

Just wondering. Have we done you wrong in some way?

Zone 7 has too many regions trying to put on track events. That is why none of them are able to fill their grids. You can only slice a pie so thin. Too many folks wanting a piece and then no one wins.

[Trekkor]

As one who has very likely attended more track days with Trackmasters then any other club member here, I can say they run a very good event. Safety is very important to them.

The mandatory "download" session for novice and sometimes all skill groups have proved to be very useful. They offer instructors, many of whom are PCA members.

I just got home from Sears, so don't try to and make it seem like I'm anti- "other groups". Far from it, as I have not attended one track day with GGR yet. I have, however, done the ground school and will tell you that for a new driver, it is a reality check for what one might be getting into.

Choose wisely...That's what you need to do.


KT

[nine14cats]

My opinion is that if Zone 7 were so fucking smart, they'd actually try to work together instead of splintering in the different factions. But they have and it will continue. GGR, SVR (which piggy backs on TM, doesn't put on the show), CDS, PCA this, PCA that, I hate this guy, I want to wear shorts, why do I have to wear a helmet, etc....they should actually step back and think about what's happenning.

Without critical mass, the price breaks go away, the preferred track dates (i.e. weekends or non "rain" season days go away and it's a clusterfuck. Personalities getting in the way of business sense. I really wish the factions would get together and fill grids, but right now it won't happen.

TM and NCRC are non PCA clubs. But SVR splitting with GGR, GGR splitting within itself to become CDS, people within CDS wanting to start yet another track club...it becomes a BFM (big fucking mess).

All I know is the newest group running the GGR TT series is trying hard to make things work. Obviously the SVR guys feel screwed over pretty vehemently by the past regimes and they may have. But wait till you can't fill grids and the price gets to $400 track days....can't wait for that.

Very sad that the PCA's Zone 7 can't get their shit together and mend the fences.

As far as safety, I agree that if GGR needs more participation (which it does) that they should offer the ground school in different places within the zone (Sacramento being one of them). However, it sounds like the SVR folks have already decided that they wouldn't particpate even if it is offered. Again, sad.

I've run with all the groups running around here, for the most part, All are safe, some are safer or take the safety aspect a notch higher. My take on Ken's post was that it was aimed more at the other threads floating around that believe that safety requirements in general and with GGR in particular are a little too strict. I'm on the fence with that one. I actually believe the ground school is valuable. I've attended it and I've attended other seminars with other organizations. They are all valuable. But I believe there could be a relaxation on driving suits and such. I wear one, but that is a personal choice.

I do disagree with the folks that show up with flip flops and shorts and short sleeve shirts. It's a personal choice, but doesn't show much foresight.

It is my opinion that the Zone 7 clubs would be better served working together than turning their back on each other. But it is real life and PCA is no different than any other group of people. People sometimes don't get along. And they are in postions of power.

Too bad. I normally look forward to driving to get away from this type of bullshit. Not to be immersed in it yet again.

Bill P.

[DanT]

Well said Bill.
Up until 3 years ago. Zone 7 looked to GGR to put on the TT/DE series within the zone. Then factions within GGR decided they did not like the TT leadership and with some very questionable manuevers were able to replace the TT leadership. Participation immediatelly fell greatly. CDS was formed by the exiled parties and caused an even larger drop in GGR participation. Along with all this SVR decided they needed to put on driving events at the exact same tracks that GGR was trying to get dates at along with CDS. So now you have 3 competing regions within the zone all trying to get the same dates at the same tracks.
Guess what happened. None of them can fill grids....gee what a surprise.
2 years later....CDS is caput, and SVR has to piggyback on other groups events to get enough Porsches to fill a run session. And GGR is getting only ~80 cars per event instead of 120-150 from 3 years ago.
And now Diablo Region wants its piece of the shrinking pie....OK math wizzards what do you think is going to happen.
GGR track fees are rising rapidly....fewer drivers per event = higher $$$ per driver.
Not to mention all the tracks are feeling pretty special because they have all these groups fighting for the track days.....= raise the fees/day....
you get the idea.

Bill is right...the Zone rep should be getting the region presidents together to put a stop to all this before we lose the longest running PCA TT series in the western US.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif)

[ConeDodger]

Rob,
Not to pick a fight, but why does it seem you always have it out for GGR events, be it AX or TT?
Have you personally participated in our TT/DE series?

Just wondering. Have we done you wrong in some way?

Zone 7 has too many regions trying to put on track events. That is why none of them are able to fill their grids. You can only slice a pie so thin. Too many folks wanting a piece and then no one wins.

Dan,

Not true. I apologize if it seems that way. I do tend to get to the point and I am not terribly political. I don't want to spend so much time making sure nobody gets their tail stepped on that the point never comes out.

As far as AX is concerned I simply pointed out my experience. It wasn't safe, workers were running from errant cars who were lost. Too many cones in places and too few in others. 25% of the first run group got DNF's, the course wasn't chalk marked, and the eventmaster had the gall to tell everyone in the DM that if they didn't like the course to keep it to themselves. I withdrew out of concern.
If you want me to drive 200 miles for an event you have to do better. Out of respect for the effort you put into GGR events and your sincerity here I have said that I will come back and try again to enjoy a GGR autocross.

It certainly seems to me that the criticism here is aimed at TM and SVR and others. That is my point.

I think I know enough about communication to know that when a person points out that GGR requires a ground school and it is good what they really mean is that the other organizations who don't are bad or unsafe. I am the one who pointed out that this is really about economics. If you want to solve that problem don't call the other clubs unsafe implicit or explicit. I don't even know if the gentleman from Gilroy is a GGR member. And I certainly don't know what he meant by the post as he has not clarified it even when Nathan asked him to. Others including you have tried to interpret for him but I just don't accept the interpretation. He said what he said and others jumped right in to point out that GGR does this or that leaving it unsaid but implied that others don't so they are unsafe.
My point is that if your real problem with this is economic ie: "(Y)ou can only slice the pie so thin" lets solve that problem but don't dare call the other clubs unsafe unless you want to be called out by these other clubs. Different is not always wrong. No separate six hour ground school in a city 100 miles from home does not mean that a club is unsafe. It may just mean they achieve safety in their own way. I have a couple brochures from schools like Jim Russel and such on my desk right now. They do their classroom the day of the school. Are they unsafe? Rhetorical question of course. They have operated successfully and safely for years.

[grantsfo]

None of those things would have really changed the outcome of this.

Ken's point (mine) is there have been some on this board suggesting that ground schools are a waste, and a street car is just fine on the track, not to mention, driver's suits and gloves.

The point is that stuff happens and anyone wanting to go on the track should take every opportunity to get themselves ready.

some on this board have suggested that GGRs requirements of ground schools and safety equipment is too much for a weekend on the track...not to mention they are too good for our licensing procedures....(two events with instruction)

nomex on (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/welder.gif)

oh. well, GGR is not the only group to do things safely -- although they seem one of the most professional, and certainly one of the safer.

Chris: the HANS device is a Head And Neck device designed to restrain the helmet/head, thus preventing basal skull fracture (common in car wrecks -- especially when the driver is well-restrained). The device is mandated in much of professional racing, and becoming very popular in the amateur ranks. It's saved a lot of lives in the past few years.

Dan and Ken, Not sure where either of you are coming from as I havent seen any anyone say that safety and rules are not paramount in track driving here? I have said the GGR Ground School is ineffecient and likely not best practice. Not sure I have ever seen somone say rules arent required? Do either of you really think GGR Ground School particpants pay attention during all day classroom instruction? ...and then retain those learnings for events weeks or months later? Tell you what, I'd feel less safe with GGR Novices than some other track groups I have run with. POC and Russell School that I have attended have much better applied in class room expereince where novices are taught safety in real time with careful oversight.

POC and Russell School for first time drivers have a weekend DE where students recieve class room instruction, then skid pad session with a skilled instructor, then course walk/drive with an instructor, then in car instruction (well at least in passenger cars), then mandatory download sessions, unsafe driving isnt tolerated. Even Track Masters has focus on safety similar to POC and other wel run events, but they also recognize that somone like me who has had safety basics including the GGR ground School didnt need to go though another all day school. They did require a full history of my driving and interiewed me and had somone who knew me vouch that I had basic track expereince before allowing me to drive in the Intermediate group. I can tell you safety is enforced and reviewed throughout Track Masters events and put into practice the same day. I'm an advocate for applied learning. Perhaps it is GGR that needs to embrace this best practice of applied learning for track events?

I respect your and Ken's position on safety and rules, it's just rather dogmatic to think GGR has a corner on safe well organized track day events. Given all the Porsches at Track Master Racing yesterday its sends a pretty clear message to me that a large number of drivers in the region dont agree with your assessment of non-PCA track day events.

Lets also be clear that the video above was of wheel to wheel racing in very fast cars by drivers who understood the risks they were taking. Not many of us here are driving at 10/10ths wheel to wheel in our 914's at 130 MPH plus without safety gear! Those who are racing are likely in a position to understand the risks involved, just as the drivers in this video do. The driver making contact took a calculated risk and lost - it was clear early on that the other car was losing control, watch the driver in the rear view camera he backed off much more quickly as he anticpated the spin. Didnt PCA just have an on track incident recently? Oh thats right it was some crazy guy that was blowing red flags, etc. Guess he was asleep during the ground school. Funny when that happens at GGR its a "nutter" and when it happens at other clubs its the organization not offering a safe venue.

[DanT]

Rob,
Not to pick a fight, but why does it seem you always have it out for GGR events, be it AX or TT?
Have you personally participated in our TT/DE series?

Just wondering. Have we done you wrong in some way?

Zone 7 has too many regions trying to put on track events. That is why none of them are able to fill their grids. You can only slice a pie so thin. Too many folks wanting a piece and then no one wins.

Dan,

Not true. I apologize if it seems that way. I do tend to get to the point and I am not terribly political. I don't want to spend so much time making sure nobody gets their tail stepped on that the point never comes out.

As far as AX is concerned I simply pointed out my experience. It wasn't safe, workers were running from errant cars who were lost. Too many cones in places and too few in others. 25% of the first run group got DNF's, the course wasn't chalk marked, and the eventmaster had the gall to tell everyone in the DM that if they didn't like the course to keep it to themselves. I withdrew out of concern.
If you want me to drive 200 miles for an event you have to do better. Out of respect for the effort you put into GGR events and your sincerity here I have said that I will come back and try again to enjoy a GGR autocross.

It certainly seems to me that the criticism here is aimed at TM and SVR and others. That is my point.

I think I know enough about communication to know that when a person points out that GGR requires a ground school and it is good what they really mean is that the other organizations who don't are bad or unsafe. I am the one who pointed out that this is really about economics. If you want to solve that problem don't call the other clubs unsafe implicit or explicit. I don't even know if the gentleman from Gilroy is a GGR member. And I certainly don't know what he meant by the post as he has not clarified it even when Nathan asked him to. Others including you have tried to interpret for him but I just don't accept the interpretation. He said what he said and others jumped right in to point out that GGR does this or that leaving it unsaid but implied that others don't so they are unsafe.
My point is that if your real problem with this is economic ie: "(Y)ou can only slice the pie so thin" lets solve that problem but don't dare call the other clubs unsafe unless you want to be called out by these other clubs. Different is not always wrong. No separate six hour ground school in a city 100 miles from home does not mean that a club is unsafe. It may just mean they achieve safety in their own way. I have a couple brochures from schools like Jim Russel and such on my desk right now. They do their classroom the day of the school. Are they unsafe? Rhetorical question of course. They have operated successfully and safely for years.

just a quick note on the red portion. This is a tongue in cheek statement that has been said at just about every AX I have ever attended in Norcal. It is supposed to be funny. If you like it let me know if you don't I dont want to know....or something along those lines. BillD is not the first to say it and probably won't be the last. I have heard it for the last 16 years more often than not. Sorry if you didn't take it in the way it was meant. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

They ran out of time to get it chalked....Yes the DNFs were high for that course. I know I had problems getting it memorized myself.

[Trekkor]

Yesterday at Sears was *sold out*.

There were at least 60 Porsche people running whom I have met from GGR, RR, LPR, SVR, PRC ect,...

The conditions in the morning were far from perfect.
Wet pavement and standing water in the rumble strips.

These factors were covered in the driver's meeting, as well as specifics on passing rules.
And repeated over the PA.

Too my knowledge there was only one incident all day. I guy lost his wheel on his Acura. He went off track out of the exit of the carousel into the mud, but avoided cars or walls. He was back out for his next session.

I first met Frederick from SVR at a Zone a/x at Stead ( out of Reno ) in '04.
He's always happy to see me and I the same.


KT

[Trekkor]

Yesterday I was back at Sears in the afternoon watching the NASA races and DE/TT's.

Try 60 cars in one DE run group doing 1:55-2:35 lap times...Oh, and the session was 15 minutes long (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohmy.gif)

Looked pretty frantic.


KT

[grantsfo]

Yesterday I was back at Sears in the afternoon watching the NASA races and DE/TT's.

Try 60 cars in one DE run group doing 1:55-2:35 lap times...Oh, and the session was 15 minutes long (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohmy.gif)

Looked pretty frantic.


KT

Wow! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

[ConeDodger]

Rob,
Not to pick a fight, but why does it seem you always have it out for GGR events, be it AX or TT?
Have you personally participated in our TT/DE series?

Just wondering. Have we done you wrong in some way?

Zone 7 has too many regions trying to put on track events. That is why none of them are able to fill their grids. You can only slice a pie so thin. Too many folks wanting a piece and then no one wins.

Dan,

Not true. I apologize if it seems that way. I do tend to get to the point and I am not terribly political. I don't want to spend so much time making sure nobody gets their tail stepped on that the point never comes out.

As far as AX is concerned I simply pointed out my experience. It wasn't safe, workers were running from errant cars who were lost. Too many cones in places and too few in others. 25% of the first run group got DNF's, the course wasn't chalk marked, and the eventmaster had the gall to tell everyone in the DM that if they didn't like the course to keep it to themselves. I withdrew out of concern.
If you want me to drive 200 miles for an event you have to do better. Out of respect for the effort you put into GGR events and your sincerity here I have said that I will come back and try again to enjoy a GGR autocross.

It certainly seems to me that the criticism here is aimed at TM and SVR and others. That is my point.

I think I know enough about communication to know that when a person points out that GGR requires a ground school and it is good what they really mean is that the other organizations who don't are bad or unsafe. I am the one who pointed out that this is really about economics. If you want to solve that problem don't call the other clubs unsafe implicit or explicit. I don't even know if the gentleman from Gilroy is a GGR member. And I certainly don't know what he meant by the post as he has not clarified it even when Nathan asked him to. Others including you have tried to interpret for him but I just don't accept the interpretation. He said what he said and others jumped right in to point out that GGR does this or that leaving it unsaid but implied that others don't so they are unsafe.
My point is that if your real problem with this is economic ie: "(Y)ou can only slice the pie so thin" lets solve that problem but don't dare call the other clubs unsafe unless you want to be called out by these other clubs. Different is not always wrong. No separate six hour ground school in a city 100 miles from home does not mean that a club is unsafe. It may just mean they achieve safety in their own way. I have a couple brochures from schools like Jim Russel and such on my desk right now. They do their classroom the day of the school. Are they unsafe? Rhetorical question of course. They have operated successfully and safely for years.

just a quick note on the red portion. This is a tongue in cheek statement that has been said at just about every AX I have ever attended in Norcal. It is supposed to be funny. If you like it let me know if you don't I dont want to know....or something along those lines. BillD is not the first to say it and probably won't be the last. I have heard it for the last 16 years more often than not. Sorry if you didn't take it in the way it was meant. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

They ran out of time to get it chalked....Yes the DNFs were high for that course. I know I had problems getting it memorized myself.

AX is a separate issue but to comment on what I said and your response, I knew BillD intended that as tongue in cheek but was pointing out how ironic that statement was. My biggest concern was with worker safety. They were running from errant cars and there were a lot of errant cars!
If I understand the situation correctly, people from "up" the ladder in GGR are futzing with the courses after the eventmaster and setup people finish. I bet that is frustrating.
As I said previously, I will come back to GGR events mostly because I appreciate your (you Dan, not GGR) hard work and persuasive dedicated nature. I can tell you really want the program to work.

As to the issue here at hand, I spoke to some of the SVR board informally about this today. It confirmed my impression that we are very happy with our piece of the pie. Our grids are full. TM, now that they have changed a procedure involving people signing up and then not paying or showing is filling their grids. Our relationship with them is very mutually beneficial. We feel our program and subsequently TM is a very safe operation. I would encourage GGR to evolve the program. Clearly, the "ground school" concept is not luring people from out of the Bay... As a graduate level teacher I can tell you with certainty and provide references that there are almost always multiple paths to a goal. Fun and safe can coexist by multiple methods.

Not to say this cannot change. We have new board members coming in. The likely president of the SVR region is a member of this non-club and a 914 owner. But our program is safe and beneficial to our region so I don't anticipate change will occur.

[grantsfo]

I'm just surprised at the innuendos lobbed in this post without the original poster taking any accountability. To me the calls by a few to artificially hold PCA regions together only masks the reality of more popular track day events/venues emerging. GGR hasn't reinvented itself in the face of stiff competition such as Track Masters and other organizations that have addressed the market more effectively. Appears other regions have done what their membership desires. Parts of GGR exhibit classic symptoms of failing organizations. They blame outside influences rather than looking inward for why things are going wrong and they stay the course even when they are sinking. ....hmmm that seems to be popular in US culture these days! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

I can tell you I truly enjoy the low key nature of Track Master Racing events. Very few egos on the track, few politics, no time trail silliness, just lots of safe, fun track time with drivers who for the most part respect the rules.

[Trekkor]

I can tell you I truly enjoy the low key nature of Track Master Racing events. Very few egos on the track, few politics, no time trial silliness, just lots of safe, fun track time with drivers who for the most part respect the rules.

Same here, except I really do want to TT with GGR.

When we ran with CDS in June it was clearly a well run group of drivers.

NASA seems to attract the "tuner" crowd.
You know, the guys who carbon fiber *everything* in an attempt to "save weight", even though they just like the way it looks and they still drive slow...

I watched a race on Saturday that had 5 seperate starts in one race.

First two were standing starts followed by three rolling.

Again, about 60 cars.

The 25 hours of Thunderhill is like that...1:50-2:30 laps times going the whole time. Nothing but passing and getting passed.


This last DE with TMR at Sears for me was "passing everyone except this one GT classed Porsche"...

I was flying. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)


KT

[nine14cats]

I'm just suprized at the innuendos lobbed in this post without the original poster taking any accountbility. To me the calls by a few to artifically hold PCA regions together only masks the reality of more popular track day events/venues emerging. GGR hasnt reinvented itself in the face of stiff competition such as Track Masters and other organizations that have addressed the market more effectively. Appears other regions have done what their membership desires. Parts of GGR exhibit classic symptoms of failing organizations. They blame outside influences rather than looking inward for why things are going wrong and they stay the course even when they are sinking. hmmm that seems to be popular in US culture these days! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

I can tell you I truly enjoy the low key nature of Track Master Racing events. Very few egos on the track, few politics, no time trail silliness, just lots of safe, fun track time with drivers who for the most part respect the rules.

Grant,

To me your comments represent in a nutshell the issues that I am seeing with our region. Thanks for bringing them up and I'd like to clarify. Since no one else in this thread other than myself brought up having the PCA regions work together for better track day positioning (fees, dates, etc), I want to clarify my position. I agree with most of what is being said, but since the majority of those making the comments here haven't run with GGR's TT series (Nathan, Grant, Trekkor, Rotten Robby), I am being lumped into a group that as you put it, hasn't re-invented itself. I am not defending Ken or commenting on his position, only my own.

Currently the new GGR TT administration IS re-inventing itself. But it takes time. There are little things, big things, just the normal issues to address given such a large group of people. But they are working at it. Everything that has been brought up here has been communicated to the GGR TT leaders by me personally over the course of this year and I have been told they have heard from others as well. These aren't new complaints. But the adminstration is new. Things like:

1. Modified Ground School or an evolution of such
2. Online registration
3. Placement of Time Trials within the weekend.
4. Allowing other brands of cars to run for PCA members.

It used to be that half of the grid of 100 to 120 cars would run for time in the TT. Actually, out of the 60 to 80 cars now showing up about half run for time, so the percentage seems to be consistent. For the half of us that run the TT, we don't find it silly at all. It's actually a great time sitting on grid, listening to the track announcer call out the times of the 4 to 5 cars out on timed runs. And during the run you are all alone in your sight line, which is a different experience from being with other cars. Not better, not worse, but different and very enjoyable for me.

But several of the time trialers have brought up moving the runs to the end of the second day instead of doing it at lunch and then resuming open track. And we have even spoken about doing away with the Timed runs, if that would help attendance. But since we have a say so in the way we would like the events to be put on, we are weighing in with our say for what we would like to keep the Time Trials, and are willing to modify how it is done.

If the sentiment from some is that the ground school is a waste of time, I disagree. I've been to it when Hank was the instructor, Gary took it over for a few years, and now John is conducting the classes. I found it to be very useful and informative. My wife and I were in a particularly interested class it seems, as almost everyone in that class still runs PCA events. But I do agree that the class requirements are too rigid. There should be a reasonable way to grant a school exemption for people with previous experience on the track, sort of like a reciprocal license program between POC, PCA, NASA, SCCA. For newbies to the track, why would there be an argument for not going to ground school? It ain't commute hour out there.... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

The rate of change is slow for GGR. Painfully slow. But they will change. It has to happen. My argument is with the PCA Zone 7 as a whole. From a financial and scheduling aspect they had it good. But the politics are leading to issues. My position is coming from Porsche Club of America. PCA car club is my rant, not TM, not NCRC. Those organizations are needed and wanted. I like running with different brands of cars. And as you have seen, several PCA members run with those clubs too.

I'm talking about scale within PCA. 2 years ago you could run 2 days at THill for $185 total and 2 days at Sears for $235 total. And compete in a Time Trial while getting excellent instruction and socializing in the paddock with a great group of people. TM, NCRC and the Viper Club put on a good show, and you pay for it. Sears is now ~$300 for a day through these clubs. Good guys, good show, but considerably more expensive. My point was and still is that the PCA regional boards are letting a good deal slip through there fingers due to their own internal political views. Geez, real world getting in the way of me being a boy racer! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/burnout.gif)

I like paying $185 to race two days with my friends and run timed runs and sometimes have a shot a setting track records. I'm small peanuts...no illusions there. Put Craig Stanton in my car and he'd be 10 seconds a lap faster. But since the majority of us have equal skill sets, the lap times are close, so it's fun. And I don't want that taken away from me based on arguments that past boards and regimes had with each other 6 years ago and two board president's ago.

So what am I doing about it? My work schedule precludes me from serving on the boards at this point in my career. But it doen't preclude me from talking, e-mailing or participating in threads concerning my positions with the local club. When I hear the points being brought up here, I direct the TT Chairman to them. I also post to the GGR Online Community regularly. And I will sometimes disagree 180 degrees from the stated rules. But I try to work the issue. And our GGR TT Chairman, Andrew Forrest, is a good guy. I like what he is trying to do. But he needs help.

I know Grant, Dan and I are posters on the GGR community board. If you are so inclined, other's may want to. Or not. But your voice will be heard. Take for example Trekkor's Pelican gang of 8 to 10 drivers. That represents more than $3K of potential revenue for a typical 2 day event with GGR at Thill. If Trekkor and gang took a few moments to work with PCA, they'd probably find Andrew very interested in what they have to say as far as roadblocks to participation. Would they get what they want? I don't know. But I have to believe given the quality of people working the issue on both sides, positive things would come of that discussion.

One of the other issues I've been trying to figure out is how to help the PCA get through all of the issues in a a timely manner. By that I mean the motivations for organizations are not all the same. PCA-GGR and TM for example. They both are in existence to have fun on the track at it's simplest form. GGR is all volunteer, and I think they are behind the 8 ball on that one. TM or NCRC/ARC for example try to make a little money for their owners. This is a good thing. TM and NCRC are a business model, so customer satisfaction is part of that model in a business context.

GGR on the other hand, only went to an online community over the past year. And at the end of the day, since it's volunteer you can have all the best intentions but it won't drive your decision making like a real business will. The stakes just aren't as high. They are a volunteer car club and are at a disadvantage for it at this time. My opinion in that in the near future (next board elections or the one's after it) an updated viewpoint will present itself.

I've been fortunate to run with the PCA, Trackmasters, NCRC, CDS, BMW club, Lotus club, Viper club, Leadfoot Adventures etc. They are all good organizations, some more strict than other's at safety. But they are good. Speaking for myself, not anyone else, I'd rather see this thread turn into something positive, instead of "my TM is better than your GGR". I'm a little selfish in that the PCA still gets preferred dates and pricing based on the longstanding relationships with the local tracks. From a race dollar perspective it's good and I'd be upset to lose it based on the immaturity of a few people who are making policy at the board levels of the regions.

As you can see, I'm an advocate for making the TT series a success. There is room for several car clubs, but splitting with Zone 7 is quite frankly speaking, financial suicide. I'd like to appeal to people like myself, who like lapping and also running for time, but also to the lap day folks only as well. Case in point $235 for a single day at Thill (weekday or weekend, let's keep the day of the week out of it) versus $185 for two days with the option of timed runs. Still have fun with great people at great race tracks. If someone has time constraints or the TT doesn't interest them, even participating for one day with PCA would still be more cost effective than the single day with another club.

My position is that I want all the clubs to prosper as best they can. For us, the track junkies, the more successful the clubs, the more dates we have open to run based on our schedules. My beef is with the infighting going on between PCA regions. It's not in the best interests financially for the members in my opinion.

I just wanted to state my position. Not anyone else's. If you guys feel so inclined, let me know what you can do to help me make the GGR Time Trial series better. If not, that's okay too as everyone is busy. I'll see you out there when I run NCRC or TM. It is my belief that if you were to actually run with GGR, you'd have fun.

Bill P. (aka...."silly time trialer").... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/piratenanner.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/poke.gif)

P.S. above comment of "silly time trialer" meant as joke.... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beer.gif)

[KenH]

The original point was to show that even experienced driver can have problems.

If one is going to put their car on the racetrack they should take advantage of all the instruction and help available.

In the past there have been negative discussions about the formality of various programs designed to get "you" on the track. These programs are designed for one thing – to keep you safe.

I only hope that inexperienced drivers do not get the idea all they need is a couple of laps with an instructor to be safe on the track.

Ken

[ConeDodger]

I'm just suprized at the innuendos lobbed in this post without the original poster taking any accountbility. To me the calls by a few to artifically hold PCA regions together only masks the reality of more popular track day events/venues emerging. GGR hasnt reinvented itself in the face of stiff competition such as Track Masters and other organizations that have addressed the market more effectively. Appears other regions have done what their membership desires. Parts of GGR exhibit classic symptoms of failing organizations. They blame outside influences rather than looking inward for why things are going wrong and they stay the course even when they are sinking. hmmm that seems to be popular in US culture these days! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

I can tell you I truly enjoy the low key nature of Track Master Racing events. Very few egos on the track, few politics, no time trail silliness, just lots of safe, fun track time with drivers who for the most part respect the rules.

Grant,

To me your comments represent in a nutshell the issues that I am seeing with our region. Thanks for bringing them up and I'd like to clarify. Since no one else in this thread other than myself brought up having the PCA regions work together for better track day positioning (fees, dates, etc), I want to clarify my position. I agree with most of what is being said, but since the majority of those making the comments here haven't run with GGR's TT series (Nathan, Grant, Trekkor, Rotten Robby), I am being lumped into a group that as you put it, hasn't re-invented itself. I am not defending Ken or commenting on his position, only my own.

Currently the new GGR TT administration IS re-inventing itself. But it takes time. There are little things, big things, just the normal issues to address given such a large group of people. But they are working at it. Everything that has been brought up here has been communicated to the GGR TT leaders by me personally over the course of this year and I have been told they have heard from others as well. These aren't new complaints. But the adminstration is new. Things like:

1. Modified Ground School or an evolution of such
2. Online registration
3. Placement of Time Trials within the weekend.
4. Allowing other brands of cars to run for PCA members.

It used to be that half of the grid of 100 to 120 cars would run for time in the TT. Actually, out of the 60 to 80 cars now showing up about half run for time, so the percentage seems to be consistent. For the half of us that run the TT, we don't find it silly at all. It's actually a great time sitting on grid, listening to the track announcer call out the times of the 4 to 5 cars out on timed runs. And during the run you are all alone in your sight line, which is a different experience from being with other cars. Not better, not worse, but different and very enjoyable for me.

But several of the time trialers have brought up moving the runs to the end of the second day instead of doing it at lunch and then resuming open track. And we have even spoken about doing away with the Timed runs, if that would help attendance. But since we have a say so in the way we would like the events to be put on, we are weighing in with our say for what we would like to keep the Time Trials, and are willing to modify how it is done.

If the sentiment from some is that the ground school is a waste of time, I disagree. I've been to it when Hank was the instructor, Gary took it over for a few years, and now John is conducting the classes. I found it to be very useful and informative. My wife and I were in a particularly interested class it seems, as almost everyone in that class still runs PCA events. But I do agree that the class requirements are too rigid. There should be a reasonable way to grant a school exemption for people with previous experience on the track, sort of like a reciprocal license program between POC, PCA, NASA, SCCA. For newbies to the track, why would there be an argument for not going to ground school? It ain't commute hour out there.... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

The rate of change is slow for GGR. Painfully slow. But they will change. It has to happen. My argument is with the PCA Zone 7 as a whole. From a financial and scheduling aspect they had it good. But the politics are leading to issues. My position is coming from Porsche Club of America. PCA car club is my rant, not TM, not NCRC. Those organizations are needed and wanted. I like running with different brands of cars. And as you have seen, several PCA members run with those clubs too.

I'm talking about scale within PCA. 2 years ago you could run 2 days at THill for $185 total and 2 days at Sears for $235 total. And compete in a Time Trial while getting excellent instruction and socializing in the paddock with a great group of people. TM, NCRC and the Viper Club put on a good show, and you pay for it. Sears is now ~$300 for a day through these clubs. Good guys, good show, but considerably more expensive. My point was and still is that the PCA regional boards are letting a good deal slip through there fingers due to their own internal political views. Geez, real world getting in the way of me being a boy racer! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/burnout.gif)

I like paying $185 to race two days with my friends and run timed runs and sometimes have a shot a setting track records. I'm small peanuts...no illusions there. Put Craig Stanton in my car and he'd be 10 seconds a lap faster. But since the majority of us have equal skill sets, the lap times are close, so it's fun. And I don't want that taken away from me based on arguments that past boards and regimes had with each other 6 years ago and two board president's ago.

So what am I doing about it? My work schedule precludes me from serving on the boards at this point in my career. But it doen't preclude me from talking, e-mailing or participating in threads concerning my positions with the local club. When I hear the points being brought up here, I direct the TT Chairman to them. I also post to the GGR Online Community regularly. And I will sometimes disagree 180 degrees from the stated rules. But I try to work the issue. And our GGR TT Chairman, Andrew Forrest, is a good guy. I like what he is trying to do. But he needs help.

I know Grant, Dan and I are posters on the GGR community board. If you are so inclined, other's may want to. Or not. But your voice will be heard. Take for example Trekkor's Pelican gang of 8 to 10 drivers. That represents more than $3K of potential revenue for a typical 2 day event with GGR at Thill. If Trekkor and gang took a few moments to work with PCA, they'd probably find Andrew very interested in what they have to say as far as roadblocks to participation. Would they get what they want? I don't know. But I have to believe given the quality of people working the issue on both sides, positive things would come of that discussion.

One of the other issues I've been trying to figure out is how to help the PCA get through all of the issues in a a timely manner. By that I mean the motivations for organizations are not all the same. PCA-GGR and TM for example. They both are in existence to have fun on the track at it's simplest form. GGR is all volunteer, and I think they are behind the 8 ball on that one. TM or NCRC/ARC for example try to make a little money for their owners. This is a good thing. TM and NCRC are a business model, so customer satisfaction is part of that model in a business context.

GGR on the other hand, only went to an online community over the past year. And at the end of the day, since it's volunteer you can have all the best intentions but it won't drive your decision making like a real business will. The stakes just aren't as high. They are a volunteer car club and are at a disadvantage for it at this time. My opinion in that in the near future (next board elections or the one's after it) an updated viewpoint will present itself.

I've been fortunate to run with the PCA, Trackmasters, NCRC, CDS, BMW club, Lotus club, Viper club, etc. They are all good organizations, some more strict than other's at safety. But they are good. Speaking for myself, not anyone else, I'd rather see this thread turn into something positive, instead of "my TM is better than your GGR". I'm a little selfish in that the PCA still gets preferred dates and pricing based on the longstanding relationships with the local tracks. From a race dollar perspective it's good and I'd be upset to lose it based on the immaturity of a few people who are making policy at the board levels of the regions.

As you can see, I'm an advocate for making the TT series a success. There is room for several car clubs, but splitting with Zone 7 is quite frankly speaking, financial suicide. I'd like to appeal to people like myself, who like lapping and also running for time, but also to the lap day folks only as well. Case in point $235 for a single day at Thill (weekday or weekend, let's keep the day of the week out of it) versus $185 for two days with the option of timed runs. Still have fun with great people at great race tracks. If someone has time constraints or the TT doesn't interest them, even participating for one day with PCA would still be more cost effective than the single day with another club.

My position is that I want all the clubs to prosper as best they can. For us, the track junkies, the more successfull the clubs, the more dates we have open to run based on our schedules. My beef is with the infighting going on between PCA regions. It's not in the best interests financially for the members in my opinion.

I just wanted to state my position. Not anyone else's. If you guys feel so inclined, let me know what you can do to help me make the GGR Time Trial series better. If not, that's okay too as everyone is busy. I'll see you out there when I run NCRC or TM. It is my belief that if you were to actually run with GGR, you'd have fun.

Bill P. (aka...."silly time trialer").... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/piratenanner.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/poke.gif)

P.S. above comment of "silly time trialer" meant as joke.... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beer.gif)

Bill,
I have no problem with the GGR model for track days or TT. Because of the Ground School requirement it doesn't work for me or many others I have spoken to. No problem, I have safe alternatives. My comments on evolution were meant to suggest that GGR has a way to make their program more attractive to me and others in my region who might be interested in another track group option.

Please don't think I am a soldier in any battle between the regions. I have no problem with GGR. I was simply pointing out that when Ken made his post which is so self-evident as to not need posting (sorry Ken but your point was so obvious that many of us, me, Nathan, and Grant thought their was something hidden) and others jumped in to say that GGR is safe because of the Ground School the implicit meaning was that other groups including SVR and TM are not. At that point I must defend SVR. If there is infighting I am not aware of it. I know about GGR being concerned about our track effort. I know that the suggestion was made to hold the Ground School in the Sacramento area to make GGR events more attractive to SVR track enthusiasts. I know that we heard nothing more...

For me the track is a way to improve my skills with the car. I could care less about track records so TT events are not appealing.

The politics within the Zone are not something I am aware of. What we are doing in SVR is working for us. Do we need improvement? Yes. We are struggling to get autocross sites that are in the area our autocross-enthusiast members are located. We are not unaware that we get very little participation from GGR and other regions. It is always nice to see and get a lesson from Larry Sharp but it would be nice to see more support. Our lots might be small and maybe it is hot but I have never heard a single participant leave the event and say wow, that sucked. We put on a pretty good event with really nice courses.

We operate under your rules which frankly are a little strange in many cases. Just one example is the points that get added to autocross cars for having a non-stock spoiler. These devices are not in play at autocross speed and the points contribute to putting four cylinder 914's in the same class as six cylinder cars with 2-3 times the HP. Yes, the 914 fairs pretty well. But the rule seems odd. We don't complain about the rules because someone had to do it... We thank GGR for that.

We are hosting the last Zone event of the year and two events have been canceled and yet we are hearing comments that people will not come because they already have their class wrapped up. Hmmm. I thought we did this because we liked doing it. The point is if you want support you have to support. I have been to an event in every region that held an autocross this year. I have towed a trailer and stayed in hotels. I do it because I like doing it. But will I drive two plus hours to sit in a classroom and then drive two plus hours home? No, sorry. I enjoyed your traffic while I was in grad school. Now I avoid the Bay area. Nothing personal, there are so many wonderful things going on in the Bay that I am missing out on but I choose not to spend my life sitting still in a car.

My suggestion would be to put the Ground School on DVD with a pre and post test. Require instruction on track until the instructor signs off on the student. This is an opportunity for GGR to be the leader they have clearly been in the past.

I don't think the sky is falling. This is an opportunity for positive change.

[grantsfo]

Bill P. (aka...."silly time trialer").... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/piratenanner.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/poke.gif)

P.S. above comment of "silly time trialer" meant as joke.... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beer.gif)

.....I'm just poking fun when I say things like that too. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/happy11.gif) Truly I like it all! If GGR leadership makes it easier for me to show up and run I will. If not, there are plenty of other ways for me to enjoy track driving. Some may not like my approach but I'm willing to pay for convenience. My sense is there are a few other busy people in the Bay Area that share a similar view to me and are willing to pay for venue and convenience. If that means spending $300 to go to Laguna Seca on a day that works for me I'll pay for it. I'd spend $50 to $75 on gas to go to one of those cheaper tracks, then there is a matter of my time (several hours of driving isnt trival to somone who commutes several hours a day to work everyday)

The thing that makes me laugh is that I attended the freak'n GGR Ground School and endured the smell of nasty greasy pizza all day. I drove the 3 hour round trip to the class too. I can say compared to other classroom briefings I have attended GGR Ground School rated a solid B+ on content. Gary was a great instructor too. The GGR school does drag on and on however. And I do think that not immediately applying learnings is a mistake. The school that I attended during POC DE about 4 years ago rated an A. The cool thing was talking about car dynamics in the POC classroom and then immediately going to a skid pad with an instructor. That was the best! Both Skip Barber (I sat in on my wife's classroom instruction) and Jim Russell rated about an A- for me. I cant really comment on Track Masters as I didnt enter as a true novice.

[nine14cats]

Hi Rob,

Like pretty much everyone else, my work schedule often dictates what events I run. That's why with TM, NCRC, GGR, SVR I want them all to be successful as it affords me maximum opportunity to play.

I agree with your most recent post, and I'm hoping the Time Trial series can appeal to folks who like track days and still retain the TT opportunities. Basically make it easy to cross pollenate, if you will.

And I agree with you on the new points system. I understand the arguments for implementing the system as it addresses many of the late model cars that didn't show up in the old classifcations. But I did not support the adoption of the new rules. You can run in a point system scheme in NASA, SCCA, etc or lap with TM and NCRC against different cars. In PCA, the old system let us run against similar model types (e.e. 914's, 911's. 944's to make it simple). Several folks I have talked to miss that part of the classifications. And to make it doubly curious, the folks that implemented the new points class system no longer run their cars in PCA...... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

It would have been more effective to fight and / or modify if the other regions DID NOT adopt the points system. But GGR has mass and this was evidence of that mass, maybe not in the most constructive way.

Life goes on. Higher track prices, arguments on what is safe and what isn't, and possibly the death of Time Trials in Zone 7....ahhh...real life.

Bill P.

[Trekkor]

Like I said before. I will try to run with GGR DE/TT series next season.

Good posts , Bill. Thanks for taking the time.


KT