Originally posted by Tim Chason:
The BOD anounced the new experts at the end of the season. Nancey even got a little frustrated after people keeped asking about the list. .6 or higher thats what we where told.
>>>Remember that the rulebook does not specify a specific index number, Tim. When .6 was discussed by the BoD and then presented on the BBS (which, by the way isn't the official method of communication because many of the members do not participate on it and we cannot mandate that they do), it was looked at again after weighing in more factors. The index number became more arbitrary and other factors became more relevant (see another posting of mine for a listing of some of those factors). Change happens. There's been a lot of discussion about the index number inside and outside of the BoD; it's always been a tool, a measuring stick, but other factors have always been considered for expert promotion. One thing is a constant, though, and that's riders not agreeing with a promotion, which is why there is an appeals process. It's been this way since I first opened a rulebook a million years ago and it's still around today.
[REPEATEDLY] Then almost a month later the list was changed.
>>>Where in the rulebook does it state that the BoD cannot reevaluate a previous decision, Tim? In business it happens all the time. I agree - and have agreed - that the list of promoted novices should have stated that it was a provisional list. Look up the word provisional and see what it means.
For some of us that didnt seat well. If I was told I would be expert from the start
>>>From the start of what? This is the part that is really ambiguous to me. Who said you would NOT be an expert? Not seeing your name on a provisional list is NOT the same thing as being told you are not promoted.
I would have felt alot different. What even made It more uncomfortable is the reasons. You cant honestly say lap times played a factor.
>>>Yes I can. I can honestly tell you that your lap times were a factor. One of many factors.
Look at my lap times on my 600, and how about Rogers lap times on a XR100. Then it was so freinds can race together and have more fun [img]/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/confused.gif[/img]
>>>This is a benefit, not a reason. The rationale here is that if you enjoy racing because of your friends around you on the track in a novice race, you should still be around these people in an expert race.
Then it was the novice class is gonna be more like a PROVNOV. I AGREE 100% that the current system needs to be changed.
>>>The system is just that - a system. In fact, it's a system of sub-systems. It is not simple; it is complex. It is not black or white; it is grey. It does not have clearly defined boundaries; it has fuzzy edges. Creating a system that establishes a clearly defined promotion marker (e.g. a person wins a c'ship so he/she is automatically promoted) is easier than incorporating the lower fringes of those to be promoted (e.g. how does one categorically place rider A on the bump list when his/her results are very similar to rider B and rider B is not bumped?). It becomes very difficult right about here.
However I dont feel moving a hole bunch of true novice riders to expert is the anwers.
>>>What is true novice, Tim? Is there a hard line drawn in the sand? I’ll bet that the definition you have of a novice is different than the definition many other members have. If you look up the definition of the word "novice", I think you'd find it is arbitrary, too. One definition of the word states that a novice is "a person who is new to the circumstances, work, etc., in which he or she is placed; beginner." Are you new to roadracing? If so, how is this determined? Is it time in the organization or specific number of races, results not withstanding? Is it some kind of general knowledge? Is it some kind of specific knowledge? Is it a specific lap time on a specific bike? Is it a comprehensive understanding of the safety standards the organization has outlined? Is it when a novice has finished ahead of an expert in a race? While you’re defining novice, Tim, I’d like you to define a true expert, too. And I’d like you to create a process whereby an expert can be classified as a novice again using, of course, very specific numbers and markers that make sense to all. Really. You do this and we’ll incorporate it into the rulebook.
In the current system if you when a F7 Championship you get moved to expert [img]/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/confused.gif[/img] Under the current system Jake Chapman should be expert. Whats wrong with this picture.I never expected to poduim racing. So to win a third over all on my motard was a real suprise [img]/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/eek.gif[/img]
>>>We’re you surprised at how competitive you were, or were you surprised how slow the rest of the pack was? Did you actually “win” third place overall, or can it be considered a non-accomplishment because you didn’t expect to do as well as you did by some de facto set of standards relative to the motard class only? And are you saying that you might be considered an expert in one class, but not in another because you don’t have experience on that particular bike and are not competitive? This is very interesting. With this in mind, do you feel that it is reasonable (let alone possible) to have riders within club roadracing broken out into categories, say, whereby one can theoretically win a 600cc championship as a novice yet make a case for remaining a novice because that person now wants to contest a 750cc class and has never ridden a 750 before? How about me? I haven’t won a 600cc race in about 15 years and haven’t been on the podium of a 600cc race since about ’99. I haven’t raced a new 600 in several years. Can I be considered a novice in a 600cc class because I can make a case for not having ridden the bike before? If not, why?
I stoped racing my 600 because I felt uncomfortable running in the back with guys half my age with nothing to loose. So it was well know I was waiting to race the over 40 novice in 07.
>>>Well known? To whom? I didn’t know you were planning on racing F40 novice. I never saw it published in a newsletter, I never received an email personally to me regarding the subject, and I didn’t see one of those big black and white “Public Notice” signs on your front lawn. Are you saying that the most, if not all of the CMRA knew your intentions to race F40 novice in 2007, even those that don’t pit next to you or read your postings on the BBS?
It was my opinon that the over 40 would be a much safer class to run mid pack because we all have to go to work on Monday. When I was told I would not be moved to expert I made decisions on what bikes to purchase for the over 40 novice class.
>>>Is racing F40 expert more dangerous in your opinion than racing “mid-pack” in F40 novice? If so, how? Ronnie Lunsford is one of the most conservative and safest racers I know. He’s also fast. He has to go to work on Monday (okay, Tuesday). Maybe what your real issue here is “I don’t have much of a chance to win F40 expert; F40 novice would be easier.”
So when the BOD [CHANGED!!!!!] there decition It upset me. If you cant see why that would upset me I dont guess we are even in the same ball park [img]/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif[/img] I race because its in my blood not because I expect to win.
>>>Then being an expert shouldn’t bother you.
At least as a novice I stand some what of a chance to see the lead riders.
>>>I thought racing was in your blood…so what does seeing the lead riders have to do with anything?
For exzample at Oak hill when the top riders crashed out and I got a win [img]/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif[/img] Nobody knows there was only 6 riders and I was loosing 2 to 4 seconds a lap. All they see is the first place plaque [img]/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif[/img] and of course the story I tell about everybody crashing [img]/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif[/img] I dont like being called a problem memeber if I disagree with a change that was made after the fact.
>>>After the fact…?
The last time I check the club was owned by the memebers,
>>>Check again, Tim. Neither the rulebook nor the by-laws state the club is owned by the members. The rulebook states “Today the spirit of its founders continues in the operation of the CMRA as a not-for-profit organization, run by and for the membership. The CMRA is managed by a Board of Directors, which is elected by popular vote of the CMRA members.” This means that a panel consisting of CMRA members is elected to govern the operations of the CMRA; it does not mean that 700 members sit around some big camp fire singing “Kum ba yah”, holding hands and talking racing. That’d be great, but, as a businessman, I don’t have to explain to you why this never works, do I?
So I thought I had a voice but I guess That was wrong to.
>>>C’mon, Tim! You have a voice, and you use it often. And you are being heard, too, but you are feeling pissed because every time you bring something up, it seems to go the opposite direction. If you are whining because you are not getting your way, then I am sorry that does not seem to working out for you. But if you are making suggestions as to how to improve things, take note that the BoD is hearing everything you say and you do have many valid concerns and suggestions that we considered and are still considering. Really.
I have a hard time getting in line especially when I dont know where the line is going!!!!!
>>>Brandon Boyd says “Isn't it strange that the man standing in front of me doesn't have a clue why he's waiting or what he's waiting for? Maybe it’s me but I'm sick of wasting energy, maybe if I look in my heart, I can find a back a door.”
TIIIMMMMY
