Columbus Area Spring/Summer Points Series

[dkingston]

Oakes would be fine. Warmer weather would be better there. I would schedule it sometime in june/july?


- David

[Frank Rizzo]

Originally Posted by dkingston

Oakes would be fine. Warmer weather would be better there. I would schedule it sometime in june/july?


- David

Thanks Dave. Maybe June 27 or July 18.
I'm getting excited about this whole thing.

[holycaveman]

Originally Posted by dkingston

The progressive system is horrible, IMHO.

Impossible for all courses to be set up "progressive." There is a reason why USRCCA doesn't do it that way.

Just my 1.5 cents.


- David

Do the math Dave. Progressive is a much more accurate way.

You have to give it a chance first.

On the normal rcc rules, any newb can win with one good run. On the progressive system it takes an average from all courses.

We have proven this. And other clubs use this.

However if you think you will have a better chance with the old way then by all means go for it


And that goes for you too Josh!! LOL



No seriously guys,
I vote for progressive, but I will be fine otherwise.



Really I could care less, I just hate being beat by someone who gets lucky. Burns my ..............

[holycaveman]

6/20akron
7/18columbus
8/15akron
9/26columbus

These are the new scaler comp dates(proposed). Which will be fine, except the 7/18. But since there are throwaways, I am cool with it!!

[Frank Rizzo]

Originally Posted by holycaveman

No seriously guys,
I vote for progressive,

Thats 3 old shool and 2 progressive.
Rob ... anyone else speak up if you want to be heard.

[roborg5000]

Originally Posted by EeePee

Yeah I think April 4th is the Tennessee trip?

I can go either way with the progressive points or not. It might do us some good to stick to what is Nationally recognized though?

I spoke with Tom about this as well.

You guys know I have no problem with the Prog system
It makes better drivers!!!
That said for the guys attending our events that have studied USRCCA rules may not agree. This is the standard and maybe we should stick to it for now.

We have 2 women already complaining

Originally Posted by Frank Rizzo

thats 3 for no progressive and one for progressive.
As stated else where I want to wrap this up by sunday and majority will have their way.
By the amount of people posting it looks like the neys will have it.
I'll be fine either way I just want this to be fun.

Sorry Bob I told told the other night Im not getting my instant thread updates all the time for some reason! And Im horrible at checking them

Dates are whatever for me right now.

The 4th is defiantly out for (4) of us.

[Frank Rizzo]

Originally Posted by holycaveman

Do the math Dave. Progressive is a much more accurate way.

You have to give it a chance first.

On the normal rcc rules, any newb can win with one good run. On the progressive system it takes an average from all courses.

I agree totaly. The RCC rules have worked out in my favor but I couldn't understand how I won that night.
I couldn't pass gate one in the first two of three courses and, like Tom said, got lucky in the third and took the night. Not to mention I was still a noob and sucked at driving....doesn't sound fair does it. I do not like to win like that because I didnt win a flawed rule did.

Not all courses are going to be perfectly progressive in lay out. Regardless, this system will help create the fairest playing field where good driving is rewarded and not good luck.

[Frank Rizzo]

OK the score is 4 rcc 2 progressive.

[crawlerbug]

I like the progressive scoring but it is the only one i have used so my opinion is a little bias.

[mchester]

I prefer the Progressive system even though I can see how the standard system might work in my favor as a Newb. I'd rather improve my driving than get a lucky win now and then...

[Frank Rizzo]

OK we now have 4 for progressive and 4 not.

[EeePee]

And I bet no one else will vote because... they're not on the internet!

We'll have to ask them in person.

[Frank Rizzo]

I would like to bring this to a close tonight as well as the dates.
I dont want a ton of changes on the fly. You know if its not done ahead of time people think someone is gettin over. It may be a coin toss at the end???
I need to talk to Tom. I thionk the first date might be best at his place due to the rainy season.

[EeePee]

We need some 20 point per gate score sheets.

[holycaveman]

Originally Posted by EeePee

We need some 20 point per gate score sheets.

I will make some score sheets for us that are professional.. Once everyone descides what the rules/points are.

This is one I threw to gether quickly for the scalers at NOSTR.




Of course ours can say what you want. Summer comp points series, whatever.

[Frank Rizzo]

Originally Posted by EeePee

We need some 20 point per gate score sheets.

We can get that together but.... I think if we do that the progressive sytem again proves better. It gives a reason to make the gate instead of just loosing a single progress point. It keeps strategic driving in the game.

[EeePee]

Originally Posted by holycaveman

that are professional.

I'll be the judge of that.

[dkingston]

Originally Posted by Frank Rizzo

We can get that together but.... I think if we do that the progressive sytem again proves better. It gives a reason to make the gate instead of just loosing a single progress point. It keeps strategic driving in the game.

Can you explain what you mean?


- David

[Frank Rizzo]

I think that there should be an incentive to drive well. I think that the people who are able to make the gate should have a bit stronger reward for doing so than a single point. If driver A racks up 20 points or even less in some cases he can give up on that gate and take a pass. Driver B Tries and makes the gate but racks up 19 points doing so while driving well enough to avoid further points. The pay off should better for driver B than a single point. He actualy drove the course and did not place himself further by doing less. If 20 then repo to thenext gate without progressive the repo to next gate should also include a touch you are in fact moving it by hand.
Better drivers should end up on top not someone who gives up at an oportune time.
I hope this makes sense its hard for me to find the correct words to describe my thoughts.
I'm not trying to be an ass but it seems like alot of hand holding.

[dkingston]

Originally Posted by Frank Rizzo

I think that there should be an incentive to drive well. I think that the people who are able to make the gate should have a bit stronger reward for doing so than a single point. If driver A racks up 20 points or even less in some cases he can give up on that gate and take a pass. Driver B Tries and makes the gate but racks up 19 points doing so while driving well enough to avoid further points. The pay off should better for driver B than a single point. He actualy drove the course and did not place himself further by doing less. If 20 then repo to thenext gate without progressive the repo to next gate should also include a touch you are in fact moving it by hand.
Better drivers should end up on top not someone who gives up at an oportune time.
I hope this makes sense its hard for me to find the correct words to describe my thoughts.
I'm not trying to be an ass but it seems like alot of hand holding.

ok, that is what I thought you meant.

Progressive scoring ONLY rewards consistently if all gates get progressively more difficult. If they don't, your argument is far less valid (IMHO).

The real issue in setting up a progressive course is; since different types of rigs (MOA vs. Shafty) have different strengths, any given gate could sometimes be either progressively harder or not (depending on the rig).

I am just offering my .02 and will play by whatever rules you decide. Still, it shouldn't go un-noticed that our sanctioning body has chosen NOT to do progressive for a (or several) reasons.


- David