Cal Club Autocross Forums

Jesus Saucedo wrote:My head is spinning from reading that ^

Hey Doug, were you on that "limitless" drug when you wrote that?

Ritalin is a beautiful thing

Sean Fenstermacher wrote:While a simple vanity, point card numbers can and should be used as a reward for continual contribution and participation to the region's events. For new members, the thought of eventually getting their favorite number can possibly be a good motivator for participation and involvement. Veteran members should be motivated to keep their number through their continual participation.

Again, if you don't show up why do you need the number?

Having the bar set at a minimum of 6 point events over a course of consecutive 24 months is very reasonable and easily auditable by simply looking at the year end point summaries.

That sounds reasonable to me. Ask your club rep to bring it up at the meeting tomorrow.

As part of the discussion process, it would be good to know just how many numbers are being held by those competing in the minimum number of events.

Sean Fenstermacher wrote:............. the thought of eventually getting their favorite number can possibly be a good motivator for participation and involvement.

One point I would like to make is, "You can't expect to get your favorite number. It may happen but your favorite number could be 7, as an example, and that number is not up for grabs. You could get a number that works out for your needs however.

Doug Teulie wrote:

Sean Fenstermacher wrote:............. the thought of eventually getting their favorite number can possibly be a good motivator for participation and involvement.

One point I would like to make is, "You can't expect to get your favorite number. It may happen but your favorite number could be 7, as an example, and that number is not up for grabs. You could get a number that works out for your needs however.

Most people are happy just getting a two-digit.

KJ Christopher wrote:As part of the discussion process, it would be good to know just how many numbers are being held by those competing in the minimum number of events.

Let me do a quick analysis using the past year's event results.

Rick Brown wrote:

James Yom wrote:There is something that they do in Chicago region that I think is really kewl. For the numbers 1-20, they are awarded to the people that are the top 20 in pax for the season. So, like year end class points where we take our best 9 events, we'll take the best 9 events of all competitors and figure out who the top 20 in pax is each year. I think this is way better, as it increases competitiveness and instead of just being about luck to get a certain number, its earned. If you were #1 in the club, so should be your number.

Good for those people that make magnetic numbers, too. ;)

It should be optional. Many people have numbers than have some particular significance and would probably prefer to keep it.

The regions that do that already have that covered: you have your usual saved points card number, but earning a top 20 number allows you to run either your Top 20 number or your saved club number. For example, if Tom Berry is usually number 74, but won top pax in the club for the year, he could run number 1 for 2016, and his #74 is saved for him to returm to should he ever get knocked out of the top 20. To make it logistically easier for Rick, you would just have to let Rick know which number you will run for the next year.

Trust me, having witnessed this first hand, it makes events much more competitive and exciting throughout the year. The fastest people are always gunning for the #1 number, and the up and comers are trying to move up the ladder. New ppl to the club could instantly recognize the fast people in the club when they are on course and pay more attention to their driving.

CaClub does a lot of things well, but this is one of the most successful parts I've seen from other clubs that I was kind of surprised calclub doesn't do. Its easy to implement, and gives the number you run more meaning.

If you guys want to test it out, you could just start with the top 10 numbers and go from there. Nothing to lose, but lots of positives to gain IMO.

James Yom wrote:

Rick Brown wrote:

James Yom wrote:There is something that they do in Chicago region that I think is really kewl. For the numbers 1-20, they are awarded to the people that are the top 20 in pax for the season. So, like year end class points where we take our best 9 events, we'll take the best 9 events of all competitors and figure out who the top 20 in pax is each year. I think this is way better, as it increases competitiveness and instead of just being about luck to get a certain number, its earned. If you were #1 in the club, so should be your number.

Good for those people that make magnetic numbers, too. ;)

It should be optional. Many people have numbers than have some particular significance and would probably prefer to keep it.

The regions that do that already have that covered: you have your usual saved points card number, but earning a top 20 number allows you to run either your Top 20 number or your saved club number. For example, if Tom Berry is usually number 74, but won top pax in the club for the year, he could run number 1 for 2016, and his #74 is saved for him to returm to should he ever get knocked out of the top 20. To make it logistically easier for Rick, you would just have to let Rick know which number you will run for the next year.

Trust me, having witnessed this first hand, it makes events much more competitive and exciting throughout the year. The fastest people are always gunning for the #1 number, and the up and comers are trying to move up the ladder. New ppl to the club could instantly recognize the fast people in the club when they are on course and pay more attention to their driving.

CaClub does a lot of things well, but this is one of the most successful parts I've seen from other clubs that I was kind of surprised calclub doesn't do. Its easy to implement, and gives the number you run more meaning.

If you guys want to test it out, you could just start with the top 10 numbers and go from there. Nothing to lose, but lots of positives to gain IMO.

Just to make sure I'm following you, I run number 11 locally because that is the number I run nationally, and magnets don't work on my car. However, if I was in this other system, I couldn't run that number unless I came in 11th in points for the previous year? Even if I came in first, I couldn't exercise an option to keep 11 if the guy who came in 11th in points wanted it. Yeah, sounds like there are absolutely no downsides to this system.

So... you're intimidated by the challenge to come in exactly 11th?

Will Kalman wrote:So... you're intimidated by the challenge to come in exactly 11th?

My index may be 1.0, but I still need a calculator for all you other chuckleheads.

James Yom wrote:There is something that they do in Chicago region that I think is really kewl. For the numbers 1-20.............

If you want to have special markings for the top drivers we could use alphanumeric characters.
It works better for top 5 or 9...

A1, A2, A3, A4, A5.....

A, B, C, D, E, F....

01, 02, 03, 04, 05....

Kurt Rahn wrote:

KJ Christopher wrote:As part of the discussion process, it would be good to know just how many numbers are being held by those competing in the minimum number of events.

Let me do a quick analysis using the past year's event results.

Any results from this?

Also how much alcohol should I give you to accidentally give me a squatted number?

Back and forth resulted in having the rules revised to "one points event per 3 years".
Not what some wanted, but it is a step in the right direction and eliminates practices as "events" for the purpose of gauging attendance.

If you really want to push for more change in this matter Stephen then I suggest you voice your concerns to your Club Rep!!!
Remember, your voice to YOUR Club Rep matters!!!

Sean Fenstermacher wrote:Back and forth resulted in having the rules revised to "one points event per 3 years".

I must be missing something because I don't understand how that is a change from the rules stated at the beginning of this discussion (unless the practice thing was really the only change it made).

In the end the number isn't a huge issue for me but if I want anything else I'll make sure to bitch and moan at the right person

Before you could attend a practice to keep your number, now it has to be a points paying event. I didn't necessarily read the rule that way.

Remember these awful squatters are paying us. They must have a reason, they think are coming back whatever. If we tell them to screw-off, do you think they are coming back? And no doubt a few of these terrible squatters are so legendary in our region that treating them badly will send other oldtimers packing. Bad business. A few of these guys I don't think we did the right thing giving them prestige numbers. They were never core members of our region.

Steve Ekstrand wrote:Before you could attend a practice to keep your number, now it has to be a points paying event. I didn't necessarily read the rule that way.

Remember these awful squatters are paying us. They must have a reason, they think are coming back whatever. If we tell them to screw-off, do you think they are coming back? And no doubt a few of these terrible squatters are so legendary in our region that treating them badly will send other oldtimers packing. Bad business. A few of these guys I don't think we did the right thing giving them prestige numbers. They were never core members of our region.

Once I heard the argument for letting them pay but not attend, I changed my mind. Cash is king, and if they want to pay and not play, what's a few numbers?

Steve Ekstrand wrote:Before you could attend a practice to keep your number, now it has to be a points paying event. I didn't necessarily read the rule that way.

Basically the way it was, for a 1 - 199 number, don't piss off management and you can probably keep it. For 200 and greater, you could guarantee it through any participation. I missed the exact change as it was discussed while I was in a dead cell area, but it seems we only made the participation requirement more focused. I had hoped to listen in as I wanted to know what the estimated points card fees we received from the squatters actually was. I think it was over $1500-$2000 a few years ago.

Stacey (my Stacey) has been squatting on 101 for a while. No one has asked for it and it was an easy way to through $20 at the region, so I kept paying for it.

I was on the Board of a Men's Club at a golf course. One of perks was advanced tee times for members. The course in the next town went private and we got hammered with new members who wanted the advanced tee time perk. All kinds of discussion about turning people away who were from that town, requiring referrals, blah blah blah. We had a hard limit on memberships from the course so the problem had to be addressed. I suggested we raise our yearly membership dues from $50 to $200. The old guys freaked out. Bitched and moaned about the rich kids yadda yadda yadda. I explained that then we'd remove the added prize fund fee from our tournaments. And fund our Christmas Party and 3 Major Tournament events. Our normal membership rolls had been about 250. After the closure they swelled to the 525 cap. We gave preference to existing members of course. Our tournaments never changed in average entries. We went from $12,500 in fees to $105,000. Our costs raised by just the additional SCGA fees we had to pay. About $8000. So about an additional $84,500 to spread across our 250 active participants. Became the best Men's club ever. We had a few oldtimers that I recognized could no longer play in our tournaments so I created a special Founders Circle for them and we even paid their SCGA fees so they could keep their handicaps and play if they could. People who participated in every event got the biggest windfall. But just playing our Major events and maybe our Christmas Banquet would more than get your money back compared to our old membership structure. At some point it might have stopped working. But I know for sure it worked for at least 15 years. Doesn't necessarily apply to us. But I think it's a good example of how an organization found a creative solution to a problem that really paid off.

Seems like Sean mentioned we had 50 in the 1-199 range. So a $1000 a year in "free money".

I Would have never guessed it would be such a money maker but it is completely understandable to keep that flowing.

Stephen Strand wrote:Any results from this?

Never did, unfortunately. As soon as I posted this I got asked to work on something ASAP and never had a chance to sit back down and go through it. I'll look this weekend.

Stephen Strand wrote:Also how much alcohol should I give you to accidentally give me a squatted number?

Bear in mind that I'm a large human with a pretty high tolerance. It would be a lot.

Steve Ekstrand wrote:...Remember these awful squatters are paying us. They must have a reason, they think are coming back whatever. ....

There was another small part of the argument that I found compelling for keeping status quo: The "Squaters" in all likelyhood did EARNED those numbers at one point. Differently than our current system, but most of the squaters I've seen were past "Core" members and would be approved for a low number given today's restrictions. So changing the rules to turn over those low digit numbers quicker would really be taking away from what these guys have earned in the past.

Jay W

Jayson Woodruff wrote:

Steve Ekstrand wrote:...Remember these awful squatters are paying us. They must have a reason, they think are coming back whatever. ....

There was another small part of the argument that I found compelling for keeping status quo: The "Squaters" in all likelyhood did EARNED those numbers at one point. Differently than our current system, but most of the squaters I've seen were past "Core" members and would be approved for a low number given today's restrictions. So changing the rules to turn over those low digit numbers quicker would really be taking away from what these guys have earned in the past.

Jay W

The free money argument was more compelling for me.

The "earned" part was too general of a blanket statement and made without much investigation, IMO.
If anyone took a hard look, one could easily find numbers being held by those with more freshly minted SCCA numbers and low attendance.
Probably was/is some core member's wife, son, brother, buddy, etc....I mean it is hard to "earn" your way when you just started, right?

KJ Christopher wrote:
Just to make sure I'm following you, I run number 11 locally because that is the number I run nationally, and magnets don't work on my car. However, if I was in this other system, I couldn't run that number unless I came in 11th in points for the previous year? Even if I came in first, I couldn't exercise an option to keep 11 if the guy who came in 11th in points wanted it. Yeah, sounds like there are absolutely no downsides to this system.

This is really easy to solve. Keep driving like you've been doing, kick Marshall out of the car, and you'll be #1 PAX. Then all you have to do is tape over one of your 1s and you're set

Anyway, just trying to help.