Name (required):

  Expression ^{(Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)}

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:
>Sounds great Laurie. Certainly worth a try!! > >>Thanks for the massive response to my message on TT >>advance bookings. I’ve read through all 22 of them >>(including non-members!) and am encouraged that most >>are in favour of my suggestion of “squad numbers”. >>However some opinions conflict directly with one >>another – I guess that what debate’s all about. I will >>try and respond here to the comments made: >> >>Warwickshire police are against 30 sec starts, >>although it’s accepted in some other counties. Also >>extending the 6.30 or 6.45 start time early season >>would obviously help. There seems to be general >>agreement that those who have paid up front for the >>season should have priority. There’s a risk that this >>could be seen as an enhanced form of membership, but I >>can also see that those members might feel miffed if >>they don’t get a ride. So far we have 27 who have paid >>in advance so it isn’t a serious problem if they have >>a reserved number. >> >>The idea of having to count the number of advanced >>bookings (eg 3 max) is administratively difficult, >>together with some of the other “spreadsheet” >>suggestions. Also it’s common sense that we need a >>system that can continue in my absence. The basis of >>what I’m suggesting is for the system to be simple >>(for all of us) and for everyone to know where they >>stand. I don’t want to have to say “no” to people, >>simply because it’s seen as my decision, and have them >>respond in a challenging manner. I can challenge with >>the best of them, but that’s not why I turn out on >>Wednesdays. >> >>It’s clear that people are arriving early for TTs >>(like one hour before the start) just to get a number, >>then have to hang around for ages. On the other hand, >>because of other commitments some people can’t arrive >>early and would actually prefer a late number – so >>long as they get one. We’ve had 64 club members >>compete so far this season and about 35 or 40 members >>are riding regularly – say 3 weeks out of 4. If they >>had a regular number this would be kept open for up to >>say 15 – 20 minutes before their actual start time, >>then re-allocated in the event of a no-show. To have >>those numbers spread over 50 or so places would leave >>some gaps for the less regular riders and a few >>guests. Most of the current telephone entries would be >>unnecessary. As has been stated, to reduce the queue >>waiting to sign-on would improve safety and reduce the >>pressure on us. The onus would be on anyone unable to >>ride to inform us before the event so we could >>reallocate their number. The downside is riders would >>be starting amongst the same riders most weeks, >>although they could swap with others occasionally if >>that’s a problem. >> >>I have drafted a set of rules for what I’m proposing >>and last week sent it out to my committee colleagues >>for comment. I am hoping to achieve a consensus in >>order to put something in motion before waiting until >>the next meeting on 18th May. So far only 3 have >>responded, although it’s early days. It’s clear from >>Greg’s comments on Hinckley that every club finds >>their own way of dealing with the problem. Whatever we >>do will be an experiment and it won’t suit everyone, >>but only time will tell if we have made an >>improvement. If not, we’ll try something else!

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.