SCCAForums.com

This question came up recently with a local independent club I run with.  Two courses on different sites had a fairly large number of DNF's.  Both of these sites are relatively small and the courses were tight (1st gear in STi's!)  Run times were in the 30 second range.

I've read the online book by Roger.  It's a very good read from a driver's perspective, as well as that of an aspiring course designer.  However, I wonder if his DNF percentage goals are a bit lofty for smaller, tighter courses?

Our first event saw these percentages:

Overall DNF's:  16%

1st Run Novice DNF's:  20%  (Other Runs/Novice:  40%)

1st Run Open Class DNF's:  18%  (Other Runs/Open:  14%)

 

Our next event:

Overall DNF's:  25%

1st Run Novice DNF's:  33%  (Other Runs/Novice:  39%)

1st Run Open Class DNF's:  43%  (Other Runs/Open:  19%)

 

(I break the Novice group out as the sentiment is leaning toward placing responsibility on the shoulders of new drivers for the DNF percentage.)

I'm certainly no expert, and have limited experience (this is only my third season of Solo competition).  However, I have run with a few Regions (CCR, SCR, AR, and BRR) and 2 independent clubs.  To me, the percentages for the second event sound excessive and borderline for the first event.  Compared to Roger's standards of 10% on first runs and 1% on subsequent runs we are WAY off.

(Please note:  I am NOT complaining because I DNF'd at either of these events.  None of my runs at either event were DNF's.  My interest is for other drivers, especially those brand new to the sport.)

If these numbers are high, there are certainly many possiblile explanations.  I'm really not trying to diagnose the problem.  I want to know if there actually is a problem.  If so, then we can address ways to improve.

What do you consider acceptable percentages?  Does site size effect acceptable numbers?  Any ideas/suggestions for improvement?

Thanks!

todd owenby

---

Remember..."Civic" spelled backwards is "civiC"

Todd Owenby
1993 Civic Si HS
1989 Civic Si STS (IF I can find a BLOCK...)

Todd, these are one day series and one night series event correct?  Our last day series event we had 75 runs registered as DNF's out of 121 drivers at 5 runs per driver.  There was an outrageously high number of re-runs due to timing issues as well, so I cant even account for all the runs.  So that is 12% overall.  The breakdown of Novice to Open is tough to do because not everyone is going to register as Novice even if its their first event.  From some other research I am doing I wouldnt say that course size has much of anything to do with the %'s.  Per Roger's standards its actually 5% in first runs, 1 out of 20, then 1% or 1 out of 100 for the rest of the runs.  Many regions do this weekend after weekend.  My take on it is that it is a problem, especially for repeat DNF'ers if they are new to the whole thing.

Maybe try to break your Novice walks up into small groups of no more than 5-6 people.  We do these Novice walks and its a herd of people 15-20 deep with one guy talking over all the site noise of generators, cars driving by, other people walking the course and so on and its impossible for anyone to gain anything.  Be able to tell people where they got the DNF, I know for me personally I get frustrated when no one can tell me where I picked up a cone, let alone where I missed a gate.  Promote ride alongs for new people with an experienced driver.  If you cant provide everyone with a map of the course, at least try to have a map of the site that they can draw on themselves. 

---

Rob S.
116 FS 2008 Ford Mustang Bullitt

South Carolina Region

I have been club president and organizer for a long time and we also had to design courses on tight parking lot in certain years. My best advice to you would be to design courses that are more "flowing", no sea of cones but make more laps per run to make it last for a reasonable overall time....The only problem in doing so is that you can run only one car at the time, so if you have 100+ entrants it may be difficult....We had more like 40-50 entrants.

---

Michel Levesque

1985 Porsche 944 - ES

Having grown up on postage stamp lots back east (before moving to the land of expansive concrete: Texas), my experience is this:  most course designers use too many cones to "assist" the novice in not DNFing.  This generally achieves the opposite effect, which is to confuse those folks with the "sea of cones".

There is an art to the "less is more" approach, but careful attention can yield dramatic improvements. 

--Andy 

Less elements too.  Smaller lots make people want to cram in as much stuff as possible to make a 40 second course.  We did ont last year...ultra simple, pared down course with like 4 elements that ended up being 22 seconds.  I had reservations when I saw it, but it ended up being a great deal of fun and no one complained about a short course!!    Quality over quanity.

---

Patrick Washburn
STU Evo
www.winghats.com

Patrick Washburn:

Less elements too.  Smaller lots make people want to cram in as much stuff as possible to make a 40 second course.  We did ont last year...ultra simple, pared down course with like 4 elements that ended up being 22 seconds.  I had reservations when I saw it, but it ended up being a great deal of fun and no one complained about a short course!!    Quality over quanity.

Andy Hollis:

Having grown up on postage stamp lots back east (before moving to the land of expansive concrete: Texas), my experience is this:  most course designers use too many cones to "assist" the novice in not DNFing.  This generally achieves the opposite effect, which is to confuse those folks with the "sea of cones".

There is an art to the "less is more" approach, but careful attention can yield dramatic improvements.  

 

 

---

Jim Garry

Wow... 

TONS of great suggestions and ideas.  Thanks guys! 

Your responses confirm my suspicions on our percentages being high.  I will certainly pass these suggestions along to our Officers.  We already have a few changes to implement for our next event.  I simply hope we can offer a little more enjoyable product to our drivers.  It was disappointing to see some drivers DNF all (or most) of their runs.

So, are the percentages suggested by Roger a pretty good benchmark?  Anyone use any other guidelines? 

Thanks! 

---

Remember..."Civic" spelled backwards is "civiC"

Todd Owenby
1993 Civic Si HS
1989 Civic Si STS (IF I can find a BLOCK...)

Here are some stats from the morning run groups from the last Atlanta points event:

run1: 46 cars, 1:24 total time, 188 total runs, 4 reruns, 8 DNFs (4.26%)
run2: 43 cars, 1:06 total time, 172 total runs, 0 reruns, 11 DNFs (6.40%)
run3: 54 cars, 1:39 total time, 231 total runs, 15 reruns, 21 DNFs (9.09%)

It was raining pretty hard for the 3rd run group, so the numbers are a bit higher than expected for it.  The course was a ~50 sec course, designed with a less is more approach.

For the previous 2 events:

run1: 242 runs, 19 DNFs (7.85%)
run2: 222 runs, 6 DNFs (2.70%)
run3: 242 runs, 8 DNFs (3.31%)

run1: 221 runs, 18 DNFs (8.14%)
run2: 235 runs, 25 DNFs (10.64%)
run3: 223 runs, 26 DNFs (11.66%)

I think that the DNF percentage will be largely related to the course design.  We had a ~70-80 sec course for our first event of the year at a large 6 flags lot, and the numbers were much higher:

run1: 152 runs, 40 DNFs (26.3%)
run2: 200 runs, 37 DNFs (18.5%)
run3: 227 runs, 40 DNFs (17.6%)

There was a non-optional slalom that a significant number of people thought was optional, so about 1/2 of the DNFs were from that.

---

89/189 STS/STX '89 Civic Si

Cone Dodger 66:

So, are the percentages suggested by Roger a pretty good benchmark?  Anyone use any other guidelines? 

 

I've always thought the percentages that Roger suggests are a little on the low side.  Novices will always find a way to go off course.  They are good numbers to strive for, but are optimistic for all but National events.  

BTW, our region used to have a two-timed-runs rule.  If you did not get two timed runs, we would let you keep running (with instruction of course) until you did.  Later solo chairs got rid of it because it slowed down the event. 
 

---

Rob Leone

'07 Solstice GXP in AS
'87 Toyota Corolla in EP
ex - '91 MR2 Turbo in SM2 <- If you can't set a good example, serve as a horrible warning.

SpyderVenom:

Cone Dodger 66:

So, are the percentages suggested by Roger a pretty good benchmark?  Anyone use any other guidelines? 

I've always thought the percentages that Roger suggests are a little on the low side.  Novices will always find a way to go off course.  They are good numbers to strive for, but are optimistic for all but National events.  

BTW, our region used to have a two-timed-runs rule.  If you did not get two timed runs, we would let you keep running (with instruction of course) until you did.  Later solo chairs got rid of it because it slowed down the event.

As for novices, Atlanta Region has been trying a new Novice program this year, where the Novices get 6 runs with an instructor, and cones/dnfs are not scored.  They are also not put into the event results.  I think that it has been working out rather well so far.  Novices are run in the afternoon, which keeps the morning running like clockwork, with mostly experienced drivers running in open classes.

---

89/189 STS/STX '89 Civic Si

More excellent suggestions...I like the "two timed run" (w/instruction) rule for novices.  However, I can see that being a problem for some of our events.  I'll forward that one, too.

Brian, nice stats from your events.  I'm guessing you guys must track DNF's.  Great info and a nice benchmark.  I'm guessing 10-15% is close to an average. 

I like the new program you guys are doing, too.  That's like a mini Novice School each event.  Instructed runs (in my opinion) are priceless.  Kudos, too, on you guys' DDP. 

Personally, I like to see everyone have a strong novice program.  Clubs and Regions have turnover.  Some of these new drivers will become leaders for the future.  I think it's up to us (as a club or Region) to provide the safest and most enjoyable Solo experience we can for newbies, as well as all drivers.  DNF's are no fun for anyone. 

(steps off soapbox)  :P

Anyway, more great suggestions!  Thanks!

 

 

---

Remember..."Civic" spelled backwards is "civiC"

Todd Owenby
1993 Civic Si HS
1989 Civic Si STS (IF I can find a BLOCK...)

I am a member of Houston SCCA and have taken Roger's course design class twice. In my experience there are some gems in Roger's design slides that course designers need to think about every time they design courses.

1. Don't make the distance between gates the same as the gate width. The Louisiana Southwest Divisional was an example of this. Even walking the course this was obvious. The usual problem is that gates are spaced too close together.  Fewer gates reduces the visual clutter, the work load, and DNFs.

2. Create recurring patterns that the drivers learn. When placing lay down pointers to ensure that no one misses a turn, we always place them three of them spaced about 4 feet apart pointing in the direction that the driver needs to look.

 3. After course setup, we walk through making sure the course is correct and also look for any place that might create confusion. It doesn't look the same as it does on paper. Then we have a course run through in a car, usually the safety steward and the course designer. They look for any visual confusion and problems such as light pole dangers for people that get a little off course.

You can find several years worth of maps at the Houston site http://www.houscca.com/solo/courses.asp

If we had that many DNFs there would be a long discussion of what the problem was afterwards and at the next committee meeting. It takes time to grow an organization as experienced and competent as the crew in Houston. Committee members will often report on any overheard comments.