ASK THE MXPERTS: I Have Questions About The Glen Helen National That I Know Jody Knows The Answers To; About The Crowd, The Two-Stroke Race, The Monster Sign, The Program And Other Things
ASK THE MXPERTS: I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE GLEN HELEN NATIONAL THAT I KNOW JODY KNOWS THE ANSWERS TO; ABOUT THE CROWD, THE TWO-STROKE RACE, THE MONSTER SIGN, THE PROGRAM AND OTHER THINGS
Is this crowd big enough? This is just one part of Glen Helen's giant layout
Dear MXA, I’m a regular on all the boards and I see a lot of talk about the Glen Helen National, but I tend not to believe what they say—since most of them are fat boys locked in their basements who don’t ride. Here are my questions, since I know that Jody knows the answers:
(1) How many people were there? I’ve heard that it was jam-packed and I've heard that it was empty.
(2) Why was the two-stroke race held so late?
(3) Why did the race last into the evening?
(4) How was the women’s race?
(5) What was the deal with the Monster sign on the big tabletop?
(6) Was backwards better or worse? I heard that it didn’t flow as well.
Here are Jody's answers to your questions:
(1) How many people were there? 17,000. It was a very large crowd, but SoCal spectators are late arrivers and with the Glen Helen pits open (for free) the fans voted against timed qualifying by going into the pits instead of out to watch paint dry. So, during the morning hours it looked like no one was there because they were in the pits, in the 660 motorhomes inside the track, in the parking lot or stuck on the highway. If the AMA wants to use time qualifying they need to use it 100 percent and get rid of the two Last Chance races (and just take the 40 fastest guys). But, it would be much better if they went to heat races instead of timed sessions. Something has to be done because they spent hours trying to select the 40 riders (and the Last Chance races only allowed two riders to advance).
(2) Why was the two-stroke race held so late? First, I should note that once Saturday’s program starts AMA Pro Racing/MXSports takes over. Glen Helen has no control over the events of the day. The races ran behind schedule all day. Glen Helen’s track crew gave up a large portion of its track preparation time to keep the races on schedule, but in the end, they couldn’t catch up unless the L.A. Sleeve Two-Stroke Challenge was moved to the end of the day. Obviously, a half-time show makes no sense as the final event of the day. It is counter-productive to the overall show and didn’t get the desired effect of having the nostalgic sound of two-strokes in the middle of the four-stroke Nationals.
(3) Why did the race last into the evening? If I was a conspiracy theorist I’d say that the sanctioning body, which really wants to go to a one-moto format, was sabotaging the race program to make it look like the only way they could get through the day was if they went to one moto. However, not being a conspiracy theorist, I don’t believe that this is what they are doing. They have just bit off more than they can chew. The schedule needs to be streamlined. Everyone knew that it was too long and too prone to delays—almost everyone that is. I'd estimate that by the start of the second round of motos that half the crowd headed for the gates. That is not a rousing approval rating of your entertainment package or race schedule.
(4) How was the women’s race? They are not ready for prime time. They would make a good half-time show, but it looked like a parade lap on virtually every lap of their race (except to their dads and boyfriends, who thought they were flying). To maximize the use of the women, the sanctioning body needs to keep them out of direct comparison to the men’s class. The women’s first moto looked okay (because the fans hadn’t seen the men), but their second moto (after the 450 and 250 National first motos) was very poor showmanship. The women tried hard, rode faster than many male riders could, but the Glen Helen track made them look slow. That is not in the best interest of an entertaining show. The women should race before the men, but never after or during the men’s race. Since the powers-that-be like the one-moto format so much, the women’s race would be the place to start.
(5) What was the deal with the Monster sign on the big tabletop? Lots of drama. I built the jump way before the arch was put up there. No one at Glen Helen wanted the Monster arch on the landing ramp of that jump. But, it got put there because Glen Helen isn’t in charge of signs, banners, billboards, repeater or arches. I personally talked to the official-in-charge on Wednesday about moving it to the take-off lip of the next jump down. He said that they liked it where it was and didn’t want to move it. It was in the wrong place and that was proven early on in practice. I was willing to tear the thing down. They weren’t. They were calling the shots. I couldn't change the landing ramp of the jump (because it was on the top of a concrete tunnel), so the only solution was to change the take-off so that the jump couldn’t be cleared. Unfortunately, if you couldn’t backside that jump you couldn’t clear the step-down triple. From my point of view it ruined a part of the track that I thought would be the most spectacular—it didn't however ruin the race. It was just a glitch in which the track and a big sponsor were at odds...and the sponsor’s interests won out (Monster themselves were never involved). It was a bad deal and caused a lot of hard feelings (and a few harsh word on my part to the parties at blame...and we are talking about placing blame here).
(6) Was backwards better or worse? I love all the instant experts who talk about how running the track backwards wasn’t as good as forwards. Except that we have been running the track backwards for several years. The direction we went this year was actually forwards—this was the original direction that we had used for years. My goal in turning it around had nothing to do with backwards or forwards, I just wanted to make a change so that fans weren’t looking at the same track year after year. I did it to make it more interesting. This track was different and that’s what the goal was (we have too many tracks on the National circuit that have been the same for decades). As for flow or lack of flow, what does that mean? I’m not trying to make the track easier to ride, or smoother for the riders or design a layout that makes them feel like they are sailing. Flow is counterproductive to forcing the action. The plan was to build in places to pass...and both winners came from outside the top six to win their motos. In fact, the top privateer came from 26th place to break the top ten. As a rule I want the track to be 40 feet wide everywhere, but we run closer to 60 feet in many spots and only narrow it down in the place where we think it will be one-line or we have a procedural interest in making it narrower (like at the mechanic's area). In no way are we interested in building a little track with limited lines. No track is ever perfect, which is why I have changed the Glen Helen National layout every year for the last 13 years. At the end of every race, I kick myself for the mistakes I made (in design, prep or dealing with the power brokers). Then, I vow to do better the next year. Only to repeat the same process all over again. I have ideas for next year, but...
