NSW Governing Body for EP & Nitro
07-16-2007, 09:26 PM
#17
I think you're grabbing onto the wrong end of the Bull....
It's not up to ORRCA Qld to know who is in need and seek them out. You can be sure however, those AARCMCC Officials know with reasonable detail the insurance policies of ORRCA Qld already.
That's why I found it amusing to see comments like this posted:
It's not up to ORRCA Qld to know who is in need and seek them out. You can be sure however, those AARCMCC Officials know with reasonable detail the insurance policies of ORRCA Qld already.
That's why I found it amusing to see comments like this posted:
07-16-2007, 11:09 PM
#18
Tech Master
iTrader: (22)
Insurance
To the best of my knowledge you are right. ORRCA insurance covers injury to bystanders and damage to property. It does not cover racers/club members or ,I think, their gear.
The club I am in charges $50.00 / year including insurance.
Hope this helps.
The club I am in charges $50.00 / year including insurance.
Hope this helps.
07-17-2007, 12:55 AM
#19
Team Ash seems to match my vague recollection of the ORRCA policy 2-Bad. Fortunately as you said it's never been challenged and the insurer keeps allowing it to be renewed... wonder if they could still get a similar policy if they had to start fresh?
Like I said before I know what fastolfart went through when he made enquiries... it just didn't stack up or would have resulted in ridiculous controls on what clubs could or couldn't do, how their track was set up, etc...
Casino Kid (and others) Regarding qualifying have you read the latest changes that the clubs voted for? As posted the other night by fastolfart on the AARCMCC thread.
Like I said before I know what fastolfart went through when he made enquiries... it just didn't stack up or would have resulted in ridiculous controls on what clubs could or couldn't do, how their track was set up, etc...
Casino Kid (and others) Regarding qualifying have you read the latest changes that the clubs voted for? As posted the other night by fastolfart on the AARCMCC thread.
07-17-2007, 05:12 AM
#20
I think you're grabbing onto the wrong end of the Bull....
It's not up to ORRCA Qld to know who is in need and seek them out. You can be sure however, those AARCMCC Officials know with reasonable detail the insurance policies of ORRCA Qld already.
That's why I found it amusing to see comments like this posted:
It's not up to ORRCA Qld to know who is in need and seek them out. You can be sure however, those AARCMCC Officials know with reasonable detail the insurance policies of ORRCA Qld already.
That's why I found it amusing to see comments like this posted:
ORRCA Qld insurance as below;
Insured - ORRCA QLD incorporated
Class of Insurance - Public Liability
Location - Australia wide. (Oh, Chargers RC is an ORRCA club. PM me for membership forms
)Sum Insured - $10,000,000.
Racers gear should be covered under your car insurance (extra premium required) or your household contents insurance. We all have car/household insurance, don't we????
Should our membership forms require a statement similar to Go-kart tracks that you accept all risks and if you die, your next of kin can't sue the club?
My work social club has this attached to all planned events;
"Please Note: XXX takes no responsibility for any loss, injury or damage suffered by employees or others, arising out of or connected with social club activities and events."
07-17-2007, 06:16 PM
#21
you have seemed to have missed the point of the type of qualifying that i am referring to. This is not qualifying on the day of Titles (as per the new rules) this is a process over a period of time with a number of different venues that when implemented correctly will give you your seeding for titles so it is easer for the host club when setting up the race program.
Steven
07-17-2007, 08:44 PM
#22
vr01
you have seemed to have missed the point of the type of qualifying that i am referring to. This is not qualifying on the day of Titles (as per the new rules) this is a process over a period of time with a number of different venues that when implemented correctly will give you your seeding for titles so it is easer for the host club when setting up the race program.
Steven
you have seemed to have missed the point of the type of qualifying that i am referring to. This is not qualifying on the day of Titles (as per the new rules) this is a process over a period of time with a number of different venues that when implemented correctly will give you your seeding for titles so it is easer for the host club when setting up the race program.
Steven
07-20-2007, 01:13 PM
#23
jelly
having a seeding or grading system just means that when you are setting up your race program that you have drivers of or about the same ability in each heat. Now if you can tell us the top 50 drivers in Australia or any state in stock in order of ability you will be doing pretty good.
Steven.
having a seeding or grading system just means that when you are setting up your race program that you have drivers of or about the same ability in each heat. Now if you can tell us the top 50 drivers in Australia or any state in stock in order of ability you will be doing pretty good.
Steven.
07-20-2007, 07:12 PM
#24
jelly
having a seeding or grading system just means that when you are setting up your race program that you have drivers of or about the same ability in each heat. Now if you can tell us the top 50 drivers in Australia or any state in stock in order of ability you will be doing pretty good.
Steven.
having a seeding or grading system just means that when you are setting up your race program that you have drivers of or about the same ability in each heat. Now if you can tell us the top 50 drivers in Australia or any state in stock in order of ability you will be doing pretty good.
Steven.
Would you deny the Jovanovics from racing at electric titles even though they are mainly nitro racers?
07-21-2007, 06:11 AM
#25
Tech Addict
iTrader: (-1)
...
With the grading/seeding ,it helps with faster driver with faster drivers and slower drivers against the same its not defaulting any drivers just making the qualifying a lot more fairer..... imagine a newbie against the top 6 drivers at that event, it is not helping him and not helping the faster drivers......
It is commonsense to do this and i know a few events are already set up like this but a seeding on drivers would help.......
I have seen a faster driver in a qualifying heat who was laps ahead of the others and honestly being help up should of been around 4th qualifyer but ended up missing the a final due to this simple organisation......
The newbie is not going to like being abused or talked to about moving over or getting in road of other drivers but going to enjoy being in a heat with drivers of his same pace......
cheers russell.....
It is commonsense to do this and i know a few events are already set up like this but a seeding on drivers would help.......
I have seen a faster driver in a qualifying heat who was laps ahead of the others and honestly being help up should of been around 4th qualifyer but ended up missing the a final due to this simple organisation......
The newbie is not going to like being abused or talked to about moving over or getting in road of other drivers but going to enjoy being in a heat with drivers of his same pace......
cheers russell.....
07-21-2007, 07:00 AM
#26
I still don't see why there is a need for a "seeding" system of events. To me its unworkable and unmanagable for the clubs and drivers.
The new (electric) qualifying rules are relevent because they put the emphasis on consistency rather than one round wonder.
Common sense would also mean that a newbie wasn't put in with the top 6 drivers at a State or National titles.
So a faster driver was being held up, what were the race referees doing? If we are talking about an AARCMCC event (State or National Titles) then there are supposed to be race referees for Qualifying and Finals and part of their job is to manage situations such as you describe.
The rules allow for a regrade but also there is nothing stopping the race director from using common sense and moving individual drivers to a different heat if there is a huge disparity in times.
In my view, a seeding system will not fix any arguments for it that have been posted so far.
The new (electric) qualifying rules are relevent because they put the emphasis on consistency rather than one round wonder.
Common sense would also mean that a newbie wasn't put in with the top 6 drivers at a State or National titles.
So a faster driver was being held up, what were the race referees doing? If we are talking about an AARCMCC event (State or National Titles) then there are supposed to be race referees for Qualifying and Finals and part of their job is to manage situations such as you describe.
The rules allow for a regrade but also there is nothing stopping the race director from using common sense and moving individual drivers to a different heat if there is a huge disparity in times.
In my view, a seeding system will not fix any arguments for it that have been posted so far.
07-21-2007, 07:08 AM
#27
Any race director worth his salt is already seeding drivers based on their expected results from previous events.
In saying thati usually prefer ot be in the b group so that you are most likely marginally faster than the other cars. There is nothing worse than being caught behind someone who is a tenth slower than you and never makes mistakes.
In saying thati usually prefer ot be in the b group so that you are most likely marginally faster than the other cars. There is nothing worse than being caught behind someone who is a tenth slower than you and never makes mistakes.
07-21-2007, 07:18 AM
#28
2 points raised so far,
1/ seed the drivers on past results, and put a top line driver who has not previously run in with the slower drivers.
2/ preset the heats to what the club knows about the driving level of the drivers entered for the meeting.
Two very strong arguments that will annoy some of the drivers along the course of a meeting.
Boy, the others just beat me in on this, but the job of the race referee is to notify the slower drivers that a faster car is on the track. In Australia, the referees "when doing their jobs" let the slower cometitors know in advance of the faster car aproaching. IFMAR give the slower driver 2 corners before penalising the slower drivers for hindering the progress of the faster car.
1/ seed the drivers on past results, and put a top line driver who has not previously run in with the slower drivers.
2/ preset the heats to what the club knows about the driving level of the drivers entered for the meeting.
Two very strong arguments that will annoy some of the drivers along the course of a meeting.
he newbie is not going to like being abused or talked to about moving over or getting in road of other drivers but going to enjoy being in a heat with drivers of his same pace......
07-21-2007, 07:23 PM
#29
Now if you can tell us the top 50 drivers in Australia or any state in stock in order of ability you will be doing pretty good.and how these rankings where worked out.
I still don't see why there is a need for a "seeding" system of events. To me its unworkable and unmanagable for the clubs and drivers. Has this format been run at any time over the years and as for as unworkable and unmanageable that comes back to those people that are not willing to give new ideas a go and not work around the teething problems.
Any race director worth his salt is already seeding drivers based on their expected results from previous events.
In saying thati usually prefer ot be in the b group so that you are most likely marginally faster than the other cars. There is nothing worse than being caught behind someone who is a tenth slower than you and never makes mistakes. now come on if you are an A finalist driver go with the best.
I think this is a stupid idea. Any idea of having a grading system to run at a state or national championship will scare new drivers away, leaving the "same old boys" to run races. with having a grading system the new drivers would know that they would be running against drivers of similar ability. And how many new drivers turn up each year to state and national titles.
Would you deny the Jovanovics from racing at electric titles even though they are mainly nitro racers?
No driver would be turned away, but they would have to take their position in a lesser qualifying heat, unless the numbers to big and then those who have qualified through the system would take their place before the one off racers.
Steven
I still don't see why there is a need for a "seeding" system of events. To me its unworkable and unmanagable for the clubs and drivers. Has this format been run at any time over the years and as for as unworkable and unmanageable that comes back to those people that are not willing to give new ideas a go and not work around the teething problems.
Any race director worth his salt is already seeding drivers based on their expected results from previous events.
In saying thati usually prefer ot be in the b group so that you are most likely marginally faster than the other cars. There is nothing worse than being caught behind someone who is a tenth slower than you and never makes mistakes. now come on if you are an A finalist driver go with the best.
I think this is a stupid idea. Any idea of having a grading system to run at a state or national championship will scare new drivers away, leaving the "same old boys" to run races. with having a grading system the new drivers would know that they would be running against drivers of similar ability. And how many new drivers turn up each year to state and national titles.
Would you deny the Jovanovics from racing at electric titles even though they are mainly nitro racers?
No driver would be turned away, but they would have to take their position in a lesser qualifying heat, unless the numbers to big and then those who have qualified through the system would take their place before the one off racers.
Steven
07-22-2007, 03:03 AM
#30
that comes back to those people that are not willing to give new ideas a go and not work around the teething problems.
1. What's the rationale behind it?
2. What are you trying to fix? - It's not clear to me what you are trying fix... or if there is actually anything to fix?
3. How is your idea going to fix whatever it is? - Haven't seen anything here... see point 2.
4. How is it going to work? Again haven't seen anything here...
5. Where has it been tried? What problems were encountered?
Unless you can answer all of the above then your idea isn't ready to become a rule... yes it sounds harsh but it is the only way to get workable rules.