I'd like to hear what the parents of junior riders have to say about what junior classes should be and defined in the junior division.
Chris/Seraphim: Which kid is yours? I forget.
hehe...I am the kid (I am the rider).
My wife wants to have kids soon, but for the moment all I have is a retired racing greyhound
On a tight track, splitting out the novice and intermediates would make sense if there is enough time. Up in Monroe, it is completely unnecessary because our track is smooth and large. But in Portland, it's dangerous even when the classes are well separated out.
Personally, I believe that the class structure should first protect the safety of all riders, while fostering a relatively level playing field mechanically, and sharing as much with other organizations as possible so that other people can travel to your area to play.
Another possibility for getting more track time, do a practice, qualifying race, heat and a main...
I'd like to hear what the parents of junior riders have to say about what junior classes should be and defined in the junior division.
Chris/Seraphim: Which kid is yours? I forget.
I made that same assumption last year, thinking that some people should not have an opinion or say with regard to classes that our son was racing when in fact they had no kids of their own racing. The benefit in the input is paramount since several of these people know a lot about the mechanics of the bikes and how they perform in order to help propose a safe and competitive race environment.
It really does take everyone including the adult riders to keep the program moving forward. Initially when it was established/started there were just adult riders and OMRRA saw benefit in that. It is very agreeable that the kids do bring a huge revenue to the club with all the gate fees of the parents/grand parents etc. That really is a mute point though when talking about class structure.
I'm sure you will all find a way to create a structure that will allow your bike/rider to be maximized and get appropriate track time while maintaining healthy and fun competition.
I don't think that having 2 Novice classes for kids or adults is a good idea. If we are trying to get our kids ready for the "big bikes" eventually, they need to see that event in the big clubs, there is only one NOVICE group/class. I have not seen a single club anywhere in the US that has more than one single Novice class.
I like the way that the rules are looking for next year Mark. I know that this is just a draft, but its a great start. Like many others, I have my opinion and since you asked, here it is. Glad to see you get started this early as to try and not have the cluster that happened last year...
Novice Junior
Keep this class unchanged. If a parent wants to put their kid on a restricted class, this would be the class to put them in.
Junior Cag
Leave unchaged. Again, if a parent wants to put their kid on a restricted class, this would be the class to put them in.
Junior Production: Ages 5-12
For the most part, leave it unchanged but allow the 4.2s to run without a restrictor plate in this class.
Junior GP: Ages 5-12
Leave unchaged.
Junior GP Open: Ages 9-12
Leave unchaged. With the exception of changing the age.
If parents want to allow their kids to get ready for the bigger bikes, then we need to get them ready by allowing their talent to speak for them. Kids are amazing, they learn from each other and push each other to succeed just as much as adults do, only without all of the drama. As with big bikes, if you are a Novice you can only race in that class until you graduate from it. The incentive for the Novice is that once he/she is out of that class, then they can race more than just one class.
So far from what I can see, if you have a single bike (6.2), you should be able to race in three classes if you so want and can (unless restricted by age).
Again, these are just my thoughts. Once again, good job Mark. Keep it up mang! We'll see you at Monroe next!
Cheers,
mario
Last edited by kneedragger : 08-23-2005 at 07:08 PM.
I would like to see the Novice class divided into 2 sections; beginner and intermediate. We have several riders who are currently in the "in-between" stage, too fast in the general novice grid, and not quite fast enough for the gp or open class. If the idea behind changing the current class structure is to keep the riders safe, I believe this would be a good addition (based on my observations while being on a corner).
I also agree with this statement,however, when the intermediate kids who DO qualify to be in the jr production class becuase of their lap times...should be advanced. When starting the novice class, we had it in mind that all the novice kids would be on cags, thus not being the case here. The majority of the novice riders this year, I believe, were on 6.2 BMS's. Working together to have a new track next year with our own electric scoring will be way eaiser than parents lined up on the fence with stop watches.
I dont think we should make three diffrent classes that require three diffrent bikes for the jr. riders. I, even as a dealer, think thats a bad idea. This sport isnt going to grow if that is the case.
Mario, I dissagree with the age change to the Jr. Open class. I think that it should be left as is. The reason for this is safety. Putting little kids, no matter how good they ride, on larger machines is a for recipe disaster as we saw in Stockton. Its simply too much power for kids. The only way I think kids under 10 should be able to compete in the jr open class is on the lower class legal bikes.
Chris, for the adults....I agree that the adults are just as important as the kids but honestly I didnt give a frank about the adult classes untill I had my neice and nephew in your class. (sorry, just being honest) Going to the meetings and looking at all the data, your right, the club would suffer with out the adult riders and I think it would seriously take away from the comradere in the pits. (who else would bring the supersoakers) The only change I personally would like to see in the Sr. Classes is in the open class here as well, adult riders (13 and up) should also be allowed to ride in the open class on bikes that are legal in classes for their age group. ie: joey and shonie who ride with the adults should be able to ride in the open class on their super production legal bikes. (as per discussed with other adult riders)
Cant wait for Monroe on the 11th. Hear that Mario will be joining us this time, WOOO HOOO!
The majority of the novice riders this year, I believe, were on 6.2 BMS's. Working together to have a new track next year with our own electric scoring will be way eaiser than parents lined up on the fence with stop watches.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that only 1 or 2 of the novice riders are riding the 6.2 BMS.
AND....when did the electonic scoring system become a topic discussed by the "pocketbike community"?? This is the first time I've personally heard anything about OMRRA thinking of this option. Isn't it your duty as the "Liaison" to let us in the "community" know of possible opportunities and then get feedback in time to present the "communities" opinion to the board. After hearing about this I did some investigation.....and found that if electronic scoring did happen, it would be the "communities" financial responsibility. I, for one, am not willing to make this investment.
I also would have appreciated knowing of the OMRRA representation in Vancouver this past Saturday. It would seem that if the pocketbike program was being highlighted, the "community" would have been notified by our "Liaison" so any and all could participate.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that only 1 or 2 of the novice riders are riding the 6.2 BMS.
AND....when did the electonic scoring system become a topic discussed by the "pocketbike community"?? This is the first time I've personally heard anything about OMRRA thinking of this option. Isn't it your duty as the "Liaison" to let us in the "community" know of possible opportunities and then get feedback in time to present the "communities" opinion to the board. After hearing about this I did some investigation.....and found that if electronic scoring did happen, it would be the "communities" financial responsibility. I, for one, am not willing to make this investment.
I also would have appreciated knowing of the OMRRA representation in Vancouver this past Saturday. It would seem that if the pocketbike program was being highlighted, the "community" would have been notified by our "Liaison" so any and all could participate.
#45 Peter Lenz, #95 Garett Bean, #24 Justin Carey are on 6.2's, YOUR son is on a 4.2 BMS as well as Nico Fotes...Robert Linse was also in the Novice class on a 4.2 BMS. I simply ment that we didnt expect this many imported bikes in the novice class.
The event last weekend did not go through OMRRA, it was not sponsored by OMRRA so I, "as the pocketbike laison" was not responsible for letting everyone know. I was approched personally by the Clark County Sheriff's department about this demo ride. I dont feel obligated to let everyone know my business ventures.
As for the scoring, it has been talked about (in the meeting where you were present) that we are shooting for a new track at PIR, it was later discussed in the geek and board meetings that we might possibly get electronic scoring for this track, the only cost would be the transponder...which is your choice to buy or not to buy. I simply would enjoy knowing lap times of riders and for the kids to know their exact lap times as well, so that they can improve.
Last edited by NWMotorsports : 08-24-2005 at 12:05 AM.
Big Mario, if we can run three classes on the 6.2 then all is well. The series II restriction I saw, well not good. Just want seat time without having to get multiple bikes. I still think a double-header would be a good way to do it as well. give everyone two mains, just like MX.
Mark and other official OMRRA folks, I would like to know if and when a rule meeting is going to happen.
Jeanette, I assumed the same thing Jen (Colton's mom) did about it being an OMRRA event. Pics being on the OMRRA site and it having a OMRRA banner implied that. Mistaken assumption it sounds like. It would have been fun to take the kids down the street, and showed off for the civilians. Maybe next time...
Big Mario, if we can run three classes on the 6.2 then all is well. The series II restriction I saw, well not good. Just want seat time without having to get multiple bikes. I still think a double-header would be a good way to do it as well. give everyone two mains, just like MX.
Mark and other official OMRRA folks, I would like to know if and when a rule meeting is going to happen.
Jeanette, I assumed the same thing Jen (Colton's mom) did about it being an OMRRA event. Pics being on the OMRRA site and it having a OMRRA banner implied that. Mistaken assumption it sounds like. It would have been fun to take the kids down the street, and showed off for the civilians. Maybe next time...
Had I been approaced that way, I would have loved to have every one come, they were kind of reluctant to have as many racers as they did because it was NOT a race. Kids were out there who had never been on a pb before and they were not as organized in race format. Believe me, when I hear of something where these ....meaning ALL of the pb kids and adults can strut their stuff...I will share with EVERYONE!
Had I been approaced that way, I would have loved to have every one come, they were kind of reluctant to have as many racers as they did because it was NOT a race. Kids were out there who had never been on a pb before and they were not as organized in race format. Believe me, when I hear of something where these ....meaning ALL of the pb kids and adults can strut their stuff...I will share with EVERYONE!
Janette; It sounds like a good event. Bringing awareness of our sport to outsiders will help the sport grow. As far as the OMRRA issue is concerned, I would Thank You for trying to attract some attention to our club and mabee a new rider or two if we are lucky. I dont understand why other members feel that criticism of your work is appropriate.
Shawn Hill
Janette; It sounds like a good event. Bringing awareness of our sport to outsiders will help the sport grow. As far as the OMRRA issue is concerned, I would Thank You for trying to attract some attention to our club and mabee a new rider or two if we are lucky. I dont understand why other members feel that criticism of your work is appropriate.
Shawn Hill
First I'd like to say that as much as I'd love to address and respond to each and every one of the great (and not-so-great) comments, the scope of all the different issues being brought up here makes that impossible for me to do. So please forgive me if you don't see me saying anything about something you may have written. But just because I don't mention it doesn't mean I'm not reading and listening to what everyone is saying. And if I do mention something any of you had posted and I say that I don't feel it's good, please accept that it is not personal, it's just my opinion, so take it for what it's worth
General comments about some of the stuff I've read:
Something was said about OMRRA being lax on pipes. Truth is, it's not that OMRRA is lax on pipes, it's that we have a way (for better or worse) to NOT CARE what pipe is on what bike. Long before anyone else in the country even saw it coming (probably even before many of you even knew what a Pocketbike was) OMRRA was having serious issues about pipes. We saw a problem that was only going to get more confused and convoluted as time went on, and the way OMRRA decided to deal with it was... restrictors! I dont like them much either, and I don't much like how we've become such a restrictor based organization. But truth be told, as imperfect as that all is, its still about the best way we've found to keep things as equal on the track as possible.
As far as novice class, I read a couple places that "we" didn't expect anything much more than cags to be in that class. Well this is one time I am not part of "we". The way it was written for last year, EVERY new omrra racer is required to run novice. Seems very short-sighted if anyone really thought that every new rider we had show up would be on a cag. And then we also have the riders in the "not-so-new-but-skillwise-they-be-better-in-novice situation. I had first brought up the idea of a separate "slow" and "fast" novice group quit a few months ago. Since that time I've sorta changed my direction in thinking on that. I still totally feel that sometimes there will be situations where we need to keep the slower and the faster novice racers separate for safety reasons, but the Race Director already has the right to do that as he sees fit. If you all remember back to the last PIR race, I split the novice into two classes. That week it was the right thing to do, next race it may or may not be. I really feel things like this are best left up to the trust you put in a Race Director to run good racing. Trying to set stuff like that in stone by making more rules and classes only makes thing much more complicated than they need to be.
As far a JR Production, if most of you feel we should allow series II bikes in that class then we can sure do it!
As to SR. Production, (chris this is for you ) I don't see anything in either our current rules or the proposed rules that would disallow your Gianini 6.2 from running that class. If it's only the issue of restrictor plate that makes you not run it, my feeling is get over it. You like to always refer to what other groups are doing, so I'll add here that even AZPRA uses restrictors on the series II in this class. You yourself say that your 6.2 can run with a DM10 all day long. I know for fact that my 6.2 elite (as true to real 6.2 proddy as you can get I'd think) can NOT run anywhere close to a DM10... for more than a few feet anyway! So it seems to me that restrictors are the best we can do in an ATTEMPT to keep that field somewhat equal. Wierder still is that when I look again at what we've got written for that class, I don't see any reason why my GRC 8.5 cant run in it either! The "proddy" class is a REALLY tough class to narrow down word-wise. Anybody that wants to offer up some better working to clarify that class please feel free to do so!!!!
OMRRA is about the youth racers, but welcomes, encourages and supports the adult racer too! It's in no way a them-vs-us kinda deal, and I think it's suckie that was even brought up as a (non-) issue in this tread!
About Rules and meeting and such: my "plan" is to have a proposal (with options as offered up on this thread) at the race on the 17th. Early evening we will all meet and work together and hash this out in a good friendly face-to-face.
I think this is gettin long and PBP has limit size, so I'll leave further comments for another time. As much as I'm sure everyone is enjoying reading this tread and it's many faces, lets please try to keep it on the boring topic of class structure. Ideally if anyone has idea on class structure they want to offer up, it would be ideal if you would take the time to try and write it out as completely as possible. Basic rough idea's are always easy, and usually sound really nice. It's only when you start working out the actual details of it that the devil shows up
Ok my turn
I get to give some input as one of the two racers with OMMRA that are parents of racers. Although I am really suprised that other parents/tuners of junior racers are not out there racing pb's as well and yes I do have a racing background of MX/road and drag racing big bikes.
First off BIG thanks to Mark for getting this going so early and communicating with other orgs around the country to get next season dialed in.
Second big thanks to Janette for helping promote the sport in such a positive manner and get more press for OMRRA and pb racing.
On the rules for junior riders I feel that they are well represented. Junior production is a 4.2 class, series 1, single reed,17.5 restrictor . This is how other main orgs including ******** and many others clarify this class. Following other orgs is the way to grow this club.
I would like to see the Jr GP Open to be:
8-12yo, air or water-cooled series II, 17.5mm restrictor, series 1, single reed, no restrictor.
As for the adults the rules seem fine for a rough draft
Maybe one day/year we will actually see the 4 stroke motors and bikes arrive . Taking way too long.
I was approched personally by the Clark County Sheriff's department about this demo ride.
We attended a similar ride earlier this year. These rides are for the Novice riders in the community to get some experience riding with other people on a track. The track is not usually large enough to support passing and high speeds, unlike an OMRRA sponsored event. The focus at these events is on safety, skill building and promotion of the sport in a controlled environment. Also they are to promote awareness of local laws regarding the operation of pocket bikes, scooters, Go-karts and other motorized toy operations. This information is provided by the local Attorney Generals Office and Local Police Departments. The rides are some times covered by the local TV News and Papers.
All pocket bike participants are informed of the fact that there are racing events in Oregon (OMRRA) and Washington (NWMRL) and are encouraged to attend.
Just wanted to remind everyone about the benifit carwash tomorrow at the Les Schwab off Lombard at 10am. Brad will be coming out to this as will some of the big bike riders and other volunteers. Please come help show your support for Brad.
(I am the rider).
. Taking way too long.
