Running Experts and Amateurs Together In Practice

[EX_#76]

I am sorry to have mildly offended you.  Your implied expert superiority mildly offends me.  I will actually be an expert next year, so I have been around the sport for a while.  You are entitled to your opinion just as much as I am to mine.  I don't wish to start some personal argument here.  I can see we will just have to agree to disagree.  I am sure others will chime in and we will see how the thing goes. 

[r6_philly]

I am sorry to have mildly offended you.  Your implied expert superiority mildly offends me.  I will actually be an expert next year, so I have been around the sport for a while.  You are entitled to your opinion just as much as I am to mine.  I don't wish to start some personal argument here.  I can see we will just have to agree to disagree.  I am sure others will chime in and we will see how the thing goes. 

The superiority is not implied. it was explained. People who have been doing it longer are on average better than people who have been doing it shorter. Why were you offended? Are you offended that you started late? When an expert thought he was better than me in my first year, I was NOT offended, I just wanted to ride more, race more and be as good if not better than him.

I don't understand why you would have a problem with that? It is not like I said experts are superiority  because of any intangible reason? I explained that skills are built over time. Give yourself time and you will have more skills.

Do you really want to argue that experts on average don't have superiority riding skills, abilities and knowledge?

Why are you offended? I am really not getting it now.

[ahastings]

The fact still remains that (at least in the LW class) you still have to race with the AMs.  It would be best to know thier habits before you race with them.  You will always need to work your way through traffic safely.  That statement would still be true even if all of the riders on the track were experts.  We are all capable of making mistakes.  I have seen Ex and Ams make big ones

I know enough of their habits, I was an am. Don't need practice for that, I need practice to make sure I am running at pace to be competitive with the experts. I am happy that CCS usually doesn't combine in the Mid-Atlantic, probably because we have larger turnouts than you corn huskers in the midwest. I guess if the turnout was light it wouldn't be too bad , but not when there are 35-50 bikes on the track and over half are ams.

[tstruyk]

I am mildly offended... "corn huskers" are from Nebraska which would fall in the great plains region...not the midwest 

I think a few longer responses buried my question... is the point of the arguement to increase practice time?  Or is it to allow Am to practice with Ex in general?  Whats the purpose of the discussion?  Why SHOULD we combine Ex/Am... what is the proposed benefit.

I know there is argument that am's CAN practice with Ex's... but how does it benefit the majority?

[EX_#76]

The superiority is not implied. it was explained. People who have been doing it longer are on average better than people who have been doing it shorter. Why were you offended? Are you offended that you started late? When an expert thought he was better than me in my first year, I was NOT offended, I just wanted to ride more, race more and be as good if not better than him.

I don't understand why you would have a problem with that? It is not like I said experts are superiority  because of any intangible reason? I explained that skills are built over time. Give yourself time and you will have more skills.

Do you really want to argue that experts on average don't have superiority riding skills, abilities and knowledge?

Why are you offended? I am really not getting it now.

Really man, take it easy

[r6_philly]

you are the one who got offended with an discussion regarding why an expert is an expert, and why an amatuer is an amatuer.

I think you should take it easy, discrediting my passing ability because you were offended of being an amatuer is sort of a desperation move...

Hey I just tell it like it is. When you race/ride this long you know there isn't any point in taking offense in anything. people come and go, people change their mind anyway. That's why I said "mildly offended" it was supposed to be funny. I think some did get it 

[EX_#76]

you are the one who got offended with an discussion regarding why an expert is an expert, and why an amatuer is an amatuer.

I think you should take it easy, discrediting my passing ability because you were offended of being an amatuer is sort of a desperation move...

Hey I just tell it like it is. When you race/ride this long you know there isn't any point in taking offense in anything. people come and go, people change their mind anyway. That's why I said "mildly offended" it was supposed to be funny. I think some did get it 

I think you have read allot of hostility into my words and this subject is now off on a tangent.  I know why an expert is an expert, and they do have more experiance than the AMs, I have never disputed that.  I am trying not to make this personal.  I have stated my opinion, and you stated yours.  No I didn't get the mildly offended dig, sorry about that. 

[r6_philly]

- you said you would not ride close to me because you implied I would be a danger to you
- you told me to take it easy which implied I am on some sort of rage

If that is you trying not to be personal I really don't know what it would be like when you do try

- you said you were offended by my implied expert superiority which would suggest that you want to dispute the fact that I think experts are better at racing (in general) than amatuers.

I am just debating the original topic and you just broke off, and I tried again to lead the discussion back on to a merit based conversation about why our opinions differ and you said I am leading it off topic.

I did NOT say anything that is personal toward you even up to this point, eventhing I have said can be applied to anyone with a yellow plate. You however keep singling me out and accusing me of "making it personal". What did I say was personal in the previous posts?

Cliff Notes:

1. you didn't like what I said about experts are more trustworthy and am's are not as much, to me.
2. and you took exceptions to that, so you thought of a smart ass way to come back by saying that I must be dangerous if I want to run race times in practice.
3. Then I didn't like that so I went on and on about why I am not unsafe
4. you then didn't want to take it personal (Even though I still was not personal toward you) so you said we agree to disagree
5. I don't agree to disagree so I tell you why experts are superior
6. you couldn't come back to that one so you tell me to take it easy
etc...

I still would like to know why you were offended in the first place? Are you saying that experts are not better at racing than amatuers? if so why do we even classify anyone as being experts? And why do they use the words "amatuer" and "expert"?

[EX_#76]

- you said you would not ride close to me because you implied I would be a danger to you
- you told me to take it easy which implied I am on some sort of rage

If that is you trying not to be personal I really don't know what it would be like when you do try

- you said you were offended by my implied expert superiority which would suggest that you want to dispute the fact that I think experts are better at racing (in general) than amatuers.

I am just debating the original topic and you just broke off, and I tried again to lead the discussion back on to a merit based conversation about why our opinions differ and you said I am leading it off topic.

I did NOT say anything that is personal toward you even up to this point, eventhing I have said can be applied to anyone with a yellow plate. You however keep singling me out and accusing me of "making it personal". What did I say was personal in the previous posts?

Cliff Notes:

1. you didn't like what I said about experts are more trustworthy and am's are not as much, to me.
2. and you took exceptions to that, so you thought of a smart ass way to come back by saying that I must be dangerous if I want to run race times in practice.
3. Then I didn't like that so I went on and on about why I am not unsafe
4. you then didn't want to take it personal (Even though I still was not personal toward you) so you said we agree to disagree
5. I don't agree to disagree so I tell you why experts are superior
6. you couldn't come back to that one so you tell me to take it easy
etc...

I still would like to know why you were offended in the first place? Are you saying that experts are not better at racing than amatuers? if so why do we even classify anyone as being experts? And why do they use the words "amatuer" and "expert"?

So I said some things that you took offence to, Sorry.  Lets just forget all of these things and try to discuss the issue.  I am not offended at all by what you stated about AMs being less experienced.  My mildly offended was also meant to be sort of funny also.  Judging by how you reacted I should not have said that.  The point that I guess I was trying to make when I offended you, was that racing is also a mental experience.  My feeling is that if a rider is trying hard to get a good lap time during practice, a riders thoughts of how someone is holding another back could manifest itself in an aggressive pass that could go bad.  I do not mean you personally, you may have very good control over your emotions for all I know.  If you are lucky enough not to race with the AMs then practicing with them would not be of much use.  I was looking at it from my perspective.  In the Midwest the light weights practice and race together.  I try to make mental notes about what the riders who are slower than I are doing to get a feel for them, especially if the seem to be inconsistent or flinch when someone passes them.  I think practicing with those riders is a benefit for me during a race.  I have also heard some of the experts in my region say the same thing (like PJ who already responded on this thread).     

[EX_#76]

Wow 473 views!!!  Looks like I have created quite a stir.  Come on all of you...  express your opinion

[njracer]

What about running practice sessions by lap times instead of by class, I know LRRS does something like this?

This is the best idea I think (I started with LRRS/GPpro back in 95).  Keep the ex and am's in their own practice.  Start practice with slow am's and then slow ex's, then med am's, followed by med ex's, then fast am's and finish with fast ex's.  It seems to work well for LRRS and from what I've seen, they have very large grids.

njracer

[r6_philly]

  that was a better response man 

I still think, that while laptimes are important, the skill levels is more... but thats just my opinion (and apparently the establishments opinion).

laptime doesn't tell all the story. I practiced at VIR on sunday 10 seconds slower than I did in a race on Sat. Because I just wanted to warm my body up and get read for racing. That doesn't mean I am not capable of going faster, nor does it mean I am more dangerous (than sat).

I think I am more comfortable practicing around people who are more likely to make similar decisions and people who are similarly experienced so they can deal with unforseen situations better.

Experts crash less than AM's because, in my humble opinion, when things go wrong, they are more likely to save it. So I Think in the same sense, if an EX is to find himself all of sudden on a colision course with another, the chances are the ex's will be able to come away more likely than the am's...

anyhow... practicing by laptimes is cool and all, I still will not be comfortable with someone turning my pace but only on his second weekend (yes that happens).

I would rather practice with slow experts than fast amatuers.

And as it stands, I don't see how the Experts will benefit from a combined session. Arnie said it right, we were all Amatuers once, we know how to ride around Amatuers, we have had at least 2 years of experience. So we can do just fine riding with them, we just rather not.