And there are still problems with the timing systems, information input and the spreadsheets at virtually every race.Too much time has been spent getting our timing systems and spread sheets to do what we the racers felt was important to simply through it out the door because Wesley decided to announce the double elimination format now.
It's nothing more than a trickle. I do agree the fields are faster, amazingly fast.Everyone has noticed the new blood coming into the sport over the last several years. Sure not as much as we'd like but we are growing in numbers and the fields are getting faster and more competitive.
Actually using the DE system, combined with the Max Cone DQ and False Start DQ ideas described in the US Nationals thread, would take much less time to run than the current system. Racers would also not have to wait as long between runs, due to less calculating and information input into the spreadsheet.The double elimination system was used a lot in Sweden back in the days when Corky was a judge at many events, so he was certainly just giving an example when saying "crazy format". I like the double elimination system, but you need time to do it, and I'm not sure the audience understands much of it. Thus I personally have some doubt for the larger events. Wasn't there a long discussion on other similar race proposals a couple of years ago. Some of which were made to create more equal races and remove the need for 1-16, or even worse 1-32 to meet. These runs normally have little, or no, value.
I feel both the racers and audience would find it much easier to follow that the current system.
As for 1-32, I agree. At a National or World Class event their should be no more than 16 racers in the head to head, I would prefer to see 8 racer finals.