cone specs

Doug Kadzban · Post by **Doug Kadzban** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 5:21 pm

the only technical cone specification i've seen for ISSA standard of slalom cones is 140mm diameter. are there any other dimensions? height, weight, etc? i'm just curious because i want to know if the cups i bought at walmart for slalom are suitable substitutes for ISSA-legal cones. mods, feel free to move this to beginner section if you need to.

thanks

Pat Chewning · Post by **Pat Chewning** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:41 pm

The rules are here and they contain more specs for the cones:

http://www.slalomskateboarder.com/phpBB ... php?t=5807

Cone specification:
· Base diameter: 140 mm +/- 20mm
· Cone height: 230mm +/- 30mm
· Material: Plastic
· Construction: Hollow (light weight)
· Base Flange: Not allowed
· No openings in side-wall of cone.

Doug Kadzban · Post by **Doug Kadzban** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:53 pm

Pat Chewning wrote:The rules are here and they contain more specs for the cones:

http://www.slalomskateboarder.com/phpBB ... php?t=5807

Cone specification:
· Base diameter: 140 mm +/- 20mm
· Cone height: 230mm +/- 30mm
· Material: Plastic
· Construction: Hollow (light weight)
· Base Flange: Not allowed
· No openings in side-wall of cone.

thanks!

Jani Soderhall · Post by **Jani Soderhall** » Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:01 pm

In my opinion we should be pretty strict on the acceptance of alternative cones used in races. At this moment the Seismic cones are THE industry standard and the ones to use. That is not yet written into the rules, but they are a guarantee to a safe race (well, as safe as it gets, you can still get one stuck under your wheels), but other softer, and/or smaller, cones really should be avoided.

For practise you may be OK with any cones.

/Jani

Erik Basil · Post by **Erik Basil** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:17 am

There are good reasons for rules that allow use of the Tracker cones and/or "cheer cones", despite the current proliferation of the expensive Turner/Seismic cones.

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:24 am

Are there still Tracker cones for sale or are you referring to old ones still being used?

Steve Collins · Post by **Steve Collins** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 1:15 am

My cone cache includes numerous soccer cones with the bases trimmed off. There are places in the "toy district" of downtown Los Angeles where you can get good, solid soccer cones for less than $0.50 each. Their size is almost identical to the Seismic (Turner) cones, although they are slightly lighter and stiffer.

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 1:19 am

Steve Collins wrote:My cone cache includes numerous soccer cones with the bases trimmed off. There are places in the "toy district" of downtown Los Angeles where you can get good, solid soccer cones for less than $0.50 each. Their size is almost identical to the Seismic (Turner) cones, although they are slightly lighter and stiffer.

I thought soccer cones had to be collapisable by nature of avoiding some 13-year old getting speared if landing on one?

That's why "safety cones" are so "squishy?"

Steve Collins · Post by **Steve Collins** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 1:42 am

The ones I use are not safety cones. They look like this:

I trim off the square corners of the base and drill a big hole at the apex for stringing the cones together.

Claude Regnier · Post by **Claude Regnier** » Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:00 am

Yep Steve, same ones that are available at $1.00 stores and such.

I use packing tape (clear) when they crack from gettng hit. When it's really cold they simply shatter, (ask Cividino) I gave him 40 out of my 200 4 or 5 years ago so he could could kick ass. He only had 10 or 20, that makes for short course setting.

The size is specified not the brand as far as ISSA rules go. Again that only applies to ISSA sanctioned events.

The whole point of the ISSA rules is to know what to except when announcing a contest.

Jani Soderhall · Post by **Jani Soderhall** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:58 pm

Claude Regnier wrote:The whole point of the ISSA rules is to know what to except when announcing a contest.

Which is why I don't recommend anyone thinking of using anything else than Seismic cones.

/Jani

Pat Chewning · Post by **Pat Chewning** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 2:51 am

Cone specification:
· Base diameter: 140 mm +/- 20mm
· Cone height: 230mm +/- 30mm
· Material: Plastic
· Construction: Hollow (light weight)
· Base Flange: Not allowed
· No openings in side-wall of cone.

The upper limit, lower limit, Seismic, and Airflow cones are shown. You can legally use any cone that meets the specs....[/img]

Jani Soderhall · Post by **Jani Soderhall** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:16 pm

Jani Soderhall wrote: Which is why I don't recommend anyone thinking of using anything else than Seismic cones.

I forgot about the Airflow cones. I assume they're OK too.

/Jani

Gary Fluitt · Post by **Gary Fluitt** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 5:43 pm

Personally I would like to see a move AWAY from the standard competition cone. And while my friend Dan Gesmer has many thousands of dollars invested in the "Seismic/Turner" competition cone, he agrees with me on this.

I once calculated that MORE time is spent chasing, counting, and replacing cones, in a TS race, than is spent actually racing. This is insanity.

This sport is more like bowling than skateboarding sometimes.

Imagine the excitement of the spectator as they watch "course workers" (kids grabbed from the crowd) run around collecting cones and trying to hold them up (or a placard) so that a guy can count them up, report to another guy the number and color of the cones, so he can use a computer to calculate the penalty time added to his course time for knocking over the cone.

On top of that the spectator, who has just watched two skateboarders race down a hill, cannot tell you who won until this calculation has been completed.

I know this is slalom heresy, but cones got to go!

The closest we have come to mitigating for what I will call the "cone problem" is by adopting the Max cone rule that came from Grass Roots rules, was used in Morro Bay Nationals, and was generally disliked by the racers.

Word to Racers GET OVER IT. Its not about you. Its about the spectator. Well, OK, its not ALL about the spectator. We DO need an obstacle that you can see, that is safe, and is inexpensive, but I firmly believe we can come up with this and seriously improve the sport, both for the racer, the race organizer, and especially the spectator.

I have experimented with EVA foam disks with great results. In fact it was John Hutson that introduced me to the idea. He practiced slalom in a business park in Santa Cruz. A quiet, but automotive active hill. He couldn't place cones on the hill, without attracting police intervention. So he used circular slabs of wetsuit material he got from O'Neil. He chose to keep the discs black. On black pavement, the motorists couldn't see them. They drove right over them. Didn't even bat an eye. They were heavy/stiff enough that they didn't move when a car drove over them, and when you ran over them on a skateboard, you could feel a slight tug on your wheels but it didn't throw off your balance.

It's the perfect solution (he says with religious zeal)! A "cone" you don't have to chase, that slows you down when you run over it, such that it is "self penalizing", and can be easily seen by the skater.

Hut's discs were black by design, but the flip side could be neon green or orange for competition.

What about criddling? For competition thats easy. Place a standard cone on the wrong side of the foam disc. If someone hits a cone, that's a DQ. No more guessing if the guy went around the correct side of the cone. If a cone flies, it's an obvious DQ.

Imagine a slalom contest where you never had to count cones, the spectators could watch a dual race and immediately know the outcome, and no "cone heads" were needed to work.

I look forward to your comments.

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 5:59 pm

One question, Gary:

Whether using a max-cone count OR a total cone penalty rule, how does anyone know for sure what black discs are hit?

Some skaters flick a cone so slightly I wonder sometimes if they hit the cone or their draft knocked it over. With your disc idea how would we know what a skater accomplishes going through the course?

This sound stupid and unworkable but all I can envision is a "cone judge" for each and every disc who stares at it while a racer goes by. Then their obersvation is transmitted to the timer.

Tell me I'm missing something?

Gary Fluitt · Post by **Gary Fluitt** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:17 pm

Wes - thanks for your question. I did not make it clear.

One can run over the disc if they like, but it is going to slow them down such that it is a disadvantage. You will not want to run over the disk if you are trying to get the fastest line through course. The disc material slow one down, just as a "rumble strip" does, but much much less violently. The disk material may only slow you down by .05 second, but if you were to run over four of those, you've added. .2 to your time. hit 10 of them, and your slower by a full second now. The design is such that the more of it you run over, the more you will slow down. If just nip the edge of the disk, it probably wont cost you anything. If you put a full wheel on it, well, you're slowing yourself down.

So there is no need for judge.

It could just be a moon shape with a cone in the concave of the disk, but I'd prefer to get rid of cones entirely.

Everyone knows how much I like hay bales (Breckenridge 2004).

What about if someone were fully on the wrong side of the cone? This is where a cone would come into play, or some other obstruction that when hit, would indicate a criddle, which is a DQ.

I envision a flag of some sort, like GS Slalom snowboarding, for the "wrong side" of the gate. Now something that would hog tie the racer, but it would be terribly obvious. Time to pull out of the course.

Cones are great for practice, but unless you institute a max cone penalty that is pretty low (like 5 or less) cones are a big bummer for races. Even at 5 per course, you're potentially chasing and counting up ten cones.

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 9:17 pm

OK. I understand the concept.

Now comes the persnickety nit-picking aggravating questions for which I am known:

How to guarantee running over the disc slows down everyone THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT? In other words if two racers are very competitive (as in comparable) and both hit a cone then that's exactly the same penalty. But if one hit's a disc and only slows one tenth but the other guy hits one disc and slows 1.5 tenths, then haven't we sort of rewarded a guy for his "disc technique?" Seems like a weird way to win a race. It would be like if we started judging "how" someone hits a cone: full on, full penalty - knicked it, half penalty.

Oh, and another thing. How is the disc secured to the road so it does not under any circumstance move when hit, clipped or knicked?

Jani Soderhall · Post by **Jani Soderhall** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 10:22 pm

Very interesting. It would be completely revolutionary if we could change the sport in such a way. But will it look as impressive if the "obstacles" aren't there? I think it's the cones that makes it look impressive, because people easily understand that you have to navigate around them. Of course, we have learned that they have no idea what it means when cones are hit.

I was impressed with the Japanese slalomers that used poles at some events in the 90's. The only problem was that if you hit the pole holder "foot" then you'd slam heavily. But the movement generated by swinging poles could be spectacular.

I also like the triangular flags that snowboardraces sometimes use. Ideally they would just swing back into position.

Back to the pads though: Can't we make those pads pressure sensitive in some way and automatically report cone counts (in addition to slowing the skaters down)? I think this has been mentioned by someone, probably John Gilmour, but maybe nobody has a low cost technique for this. Hmm, defeats half of your intention though.

/Jani

Pat Chewning · Post by **Pat Chewning** » Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:50 am

See here: http://www.slalomskateboarder.com/phpBB ... php?t=5873

There are ways to automatically count cones (or cone-like pads being hit). Give me enough money and I'll deliver a system....

Three or more ways it could be used:
Sense a "normal" cone being displaced (with normal rules).
Sense a "pad" cone being hit (with rules that hitting the pad is wrong -- penalty)
Sense a "pad" cone being hit (with rules that hitting the pad is necessary -- good)

Gary Fluitt · Post by **Gary Fluitt** » Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:08 am

How much do you need Pat? I'll write you a check.

Hitting cones, or pads, should always be a bad thing.

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Wed Nov 11, 2009 3:19 am

Here's a sketch of my idea of the ideal system for our sport:

These would be battery powered and the swing gate is spring loaded. If the skater hits the gate the light goes off and stays on until reset.

No cone heads, no popcorn. Just a lot of bright lights after a run.

Some drawbacks:

1. mass producing hundreds for racers. Having at least 150 to two 75-cone courses
2. a bright enough battery-powered light source so there's no missing a hit in bright sunlight.
3. A resetting system that would involve either a failsafe wireless system OR running a wire down the middle of the course to connect each gate to the timing table.
4. Possible serious damage if a skater goes WAY off course and hits the mechanism. The gate length is subject to being adequately supported to remain perpindicular to the base.

Advantages:

1. Rather apparent. Hit a gate, light goes off.
2. Racing as fast as lights can be counted and reset
3. Never have a "cone out" again. If the base doesn't move the gate doesn't move.

Anyway, that's the way I see it.

Gary Fluitt · Post by **Gary Fluitt** » Wed Nov 11, 2009 3:26 am

I like it. battery operated and bright enough to see in daylight could be hard to achieve. This would be super cool for Super G or GS. harder for tight of course. Everything is harder for Tight. Tight can just go away in my opinion.

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Wed Nov 11, 2009 3:34 am

Plus buying 300 batteries and extras for a race involving 75-cone dual courses with each gate requiring two batteries.

It could add up. But, try to get someone who drag races to commiserate because we spent a couple of hundred on dry cells. Hell, they spend that much on air filters . . . between runs!

Joe Iacovelli · Post by **Joe Iacovelli** » Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:35 am

How about these Gary?

http://csne2.homestead.com/jar_openers.html

Robert Gaisek · Post by **Robert Gaisek** » Wed Nov 11, 2009 6:23 am

Oh, I know......I know......(waving my hands).....let´s use....cones?

Rick Floyd · Post by **Rick Floyd** » Wed Nov 11, 2009 6:37 am

Gary Fluitt wrote:Tight can just go away in my opinion.

-RF

Jack Smith · Post by **Jack Smith** » Wed Nov 11, 2009 7:19 am

Just nail 'em down like they did in the old days! I'm sure Rick Floyd would be stoked because he digs the danger.

Seriously though, I've been down this road many times and still haven't come up with anything that works. We have to get rid of manually counting cones. Heck, NASCAR can clean up a five car crash quicker than we can count, reset, and calculate penalties on some dual courses.

Everybody keep those thinking caps on...we'll figure it out sooner or later.

Gary Fluitt · Post by **Gary Fluitt** » Wed Nov 11, 2009 8:03 am

Joe,
I was thinking more along these lines

Rick Floyd · Post by **Rick Floyd** » Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:42 pm

Jack Smith wrote:Just nail 'em down like they did in the old days! I'm sure Rick Floyd would be stoked because he digs the danger.

YES! NAIL those suckers down and use the big-a$$ street cones like young Jack grew up with...(that's why you have to talk so slowly to him).

Or we could just use fake titties, either way.

-RF

Steve Pederson · Post by **Steve Pederson** » Thu Nov 12, 2009 6:08 am

Gary Fluitt · Post by **Gary Fluitt** » Thu Nov 12, 2009 4:32 pm

Cool signal hill video. I was there (the following year). thanks for the post.

Sj Kalliokoski · Post by **Sj Kalliokoski** » Thu Nov 12, 2009 8:00 pm

Just humble opinion of spectator who was racer long time ago

People need to see how track is placed and they need to see if rider passed cone/pole succesfully thru, other wise it is again mystery for them.
I've heard many times comments like nice run but you dipped cone(s), so why not use same rule for real racing as for 25 or 50 cone races. No missplaced allowed.
That is easy for spectators, one cone down then it is DQ. No cone counting required, if any marshall raise red flag then DQ.
Same way as on snow slalom, if you missed pole you are out

Ulf Haag · Post by **Ulf Haag** » Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:28 pm

I like cones they're a part of skateboard slalom.

IMHO have a straight forward very clear rule "big sign" that shows how many cones a racer is allowed to hit before his DQ'd 1-3 cones maximum.

Just my two cents

Peace//Wolfy

Steve Pederson · Post by **Steve Pederson** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 2:40 am

Joe Iacovelli · Post by **Joe Iacovelli** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 2:53 pm

Hi Steve,

Welcome to the fray. Great ideas. Let's concentrate on on the timing display. I really like this idea and it has been discussed for years.

Where do we get it? How do we pay for it? How do we ship it from race to race? ALGE rents them starting at $4500 a day per board and they are not interested in sponsoring us.

I'm not asking to discourage you, but do you have any input? Got a friend that works at Timex or Rolex that wants to sponsor us?

I view this as a crucial step in making up more spectator and TV worthy, but really am at a loss on how we get it.

Steve (and everyone else) please don't stop coming up with ideas, but we need solutions too.

Joe Iacovelli · Post by **Joe Iacovelli** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 3:04 pm

Gary,

I was serious about the jar opener link I sent. Is that not what you meant about neoprene rumbel strips? More like mouse pads?

I see value in this, but do not know what spectators will be able to percieve without a taller visual indicator.

On Wesley's idea. Does anyone know what a "tip-up" is for ice fishing? What if the "cone" had a tip-up? No need for batteries or issues in bright sunlight?

On Wolfie's idea, what happens if you hit a gate in skiing or snowboarding, do you DQ? Why not limit the cones counts by making the penalties worse or the limit smaller. SOunds like a good idea to me. Does it accomplish what we are trying to do?

Joe

Donald Campbell · Post by **Donald Campbell** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 4:20 pm

the main goal is to make the race spectator friendly and understandable also

a limit of cones allowed-if there will be cones-seems to be the only solution

Joe Iacovelli · Post by **Joe Iacovelli** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 4:39 pm

Donald and Wolfy,

I agree. What if the cone count was three. I do a lot of announcing. I can picture announcing "Watch the cones people! 3 is good, 4 is a DQ. He hits 1, 2......" etc.

That would work OK, wouldn't it?

What do you think Gary? We would actually use cones to our advantage by involving the crowd. Can you hear them counting out loud?

Joe

Miguel Marco · Post by **Miguel Marco** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 5:43 pm

This is something Dan probably doesn't want to hear but a 1.5" to 2" lower cone while maintaining the same bottom diameter would help minimize cone hits. A lot of cones are displaced by kneepads (toeside) or lower leg (heelside), and not by the board or feet.

No cone penalties and a low maximum hits allowed would be good for the bigger races, but could discourage beginners if they get DQed almost every run.

And Steve, the volunteers at the timing table are not the cone judges and it'S not their job to count cones. They input in the software what is relayed to them by the cone marshalls. And you should be thankful they are staring at the laptop cause if one of them didn't catch a human error made in Antrim you wouldn't have made the round of 4, much less a podium...

Michael Stride · Post by **Michael Stride** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:33 pm

Can you hear them counting out loud?

Not in dual races, no.

Donald Campbell · Post by **Donald Campbell** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:51 pm

the moderator should do that job if he is able to comment at that time
a good moderator can create a lot of excitement during a race.
moderators used at pool contests differ so much from the ones i
heard at slalom races.

any good! moderator can make it happen and have the audience in his hands

we need to get a lot more emphasis here too.

but back to the topic

cones could remain as they are but... there needs to be a limitation.
max 3 cones and you're gone
actually it should be up to the race organizer to speak out the limitation once the course is set
and visualized by the organizer.
brixlegg would have 2 practice runs f.e. and right after that a limitation would be declared.

only then i can have a clear vision of how challenging the course might be for the riders and then come up with a decision.
how about that for now?

Joe Iacovelli · Post by **Joe Iacovelli** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 9:17 pm

#1 - Donald - YES! That is what I mean. I think I do a medicore to credible job of announcing, but even as the announcers it can be confusing, what are you announcing? "racer A has a .2 sec advantage! he hit one cone and crossed the line ahead of racer B who hit no cones" you still have to wait.

It means nothing. With some minor rule changes or a different way of looking at things -
"racer A hits two cones and crosses the line before racer B, RACER A WINS!"

I worked with a professional announcer in Athens one year, he was great, but there is only so much you can do, some slight modifications would absolutely make racing more accesible and interesting.

Rick Floyd · Post by **Rick Floyd** » Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:01 pm

See Morro Bay 2008 format - first racer across the line wins (only if within 6 cone DQ limit at that race). Add to that the excellent ongoing commentary at that race by Denis S. and it seemed most of the spectators knew exactly what was going on MOST of the time. I never have understood people's resistance to this format. Good quali times not only gave you a bye or easier first round opponent, they also gave you lane choice - granted you need two very similar courses with no curves in the track to make this work. And you pull early - you DQ...kind of a barge gate without the gate. I liked it.

Fabian Bjornstjerna · Post by **Fabian Bjornstjerna** » Sat Nov 14, 2009 12:19 am

Morrow Bay 2008 sound appealing, i think.
But....don´t experiment on the world shampionships!
Try your ideas on a series of competitions first, please.

Steve Pederson · Post by **Steve Pederson** » Sat Nov 14, 2009 1:22 am

Steve Pederson · Post by **Steve Pederson** » Sat Nov 14, 2009 1:47 am

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Sat Nov 14, 2009 1:56 am

Steve Pederson wrote:
Joe Iacovelli wrote:With some minor rule changes or a different way of looking at things -
"racer A hits two cones and crosses the line before racer B, RACER A WINS!"
Let me see if I understand what you are saying or if I'm twisting what you are saying into a different thing.
What I think you are saying sounds like an excellent idea to me.

For example - let's say that each racer is allowed to hit a set number of cones. Let's say three for this example.

Racer A hits one cone. Racer B hits three cones but crosses the finish line first. Racer B is the winner.
There are no time penalties for hitting cones. Only the raw time is used. You can hit up to three cones without any penalty. But if you hit four or more cones - you are given a DQ - not the fun ice cream kind. The number of cones allowed to be hit can be determined by how many cones the course has.

Maybe this would speed up the time between races. No need to calculate cone penalties. No need to count lots of cones. If a racer is used to running clean races, maybe this will encourage the racer to be more aggressive and go faster and hit a couple cones. If a racer is used to hitting lots of cones, that racer would have to work harder to get better or go slower to hit less cones.

This way might also make it easier for a spectator to understand what's going on.
But I think we'd still have the sometime confusing issue (for the spectator) of one racer having a .015 time advantage going into the second run.

Does any of this make sense?

Steve,

What you just described is an available alternative race format in the ISSA rules. Both the no-cone penalty and double-eliminatiin racing formats are approved for ISSA-sanctioned events.

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Sat Nov 14, 2009 1:57 am

Rick Floyd wrote:See Morro Bay 2008 format - first racer across the line wins (only if within 6 cone DQ limit at that race). . . . . And you pull early - you DQ...kind of a barge gate without the gate. I liked it.

Thank you.

I do try my best.

John Gilmour · Post by **John Gilmour** » Tue May 11, 2010 4:55 am

Here is my take on using objects other than slalom cones.
When it comes to practicing, having to chase objects around is a real pain in the butt.
Also police officers respond quickly to calls about somebody putting cones in the road. They feel that we are infringing on their domain.

When it comes to self penalizing slalom cones -- here are the issues.

First off, if the cone is displaced everybody can see it immediately. Of course if we only use rubber discs no one will be able to tell if you hit a slalom cone or not. In that respect -- we will never know if a particular run was a clean run or not.

It would be possible to vary the amount of penalty in a number of ways.

You could change the overall thickness of the disc- thicker ones are slower.

You could change the hardness of the disc- softer ones are slower.

You could also make the disc thickness change and get thicker as you approach the center of the disc -- or perhaps instead of a disc, the shape might be that of a half moon that is thickest in the center. Or it could get softer near the center.

That way the further you are off course, the more you are penalized.

The main issue, is that we simply have to become better racers.

Also, criddleing would still exist... but it would not be obvious to other racers.... which..IMHO is too bad... because I always watch to see if racer hits a gate..and look at the time and ponder if it was worth it.

Personally, where I live now, it is very hard to do any slalom practice -- every street seems to be crowded to some extent, and there are virtually no public parks -- it seems every Greenspace has been turned into a private golf club. So I'm interested in finding something to use other than slalom cones so I don't attract the attention of the police.

More importantly, I wanted to sound absolutely ridiculous when some stupid housewife who hasn't had sex in two years calls into the police and files the complaint on her cell phone.

One woman suggested to me that it would be a good idea to use tampons, or maxi pads with their adhesive strips. Could you imagine?

Housewife who hasn't been laid in two years- "Hello, is this the police? I'd like to make a complaint -- we have some skateboarders skating around some tampons. Would you please come out and tell them to go away?"

Officer Dave -- (both officers shaking their heads) "sure lady, anything you say."
Turns to other officer -- "Hey Bill, can you believe the lunatics that call us today"

Officer Bill #2 "Yeah Dave, that crazy lady calls every day -- maybe we should block her cell phone, what a quack. I'm not bothering to go check that one out."

I've also thought of using Leaves, snails, hamburger buns..etc.. anyone have any good ideas?

Join the ISSA 25 cone series. One cyber race every second month!

Regular sessions allow newbies to join our community and discover slalom racing.

cone specs

cone specs

All pirpos cones

Re: All pirpos cones

Re: All pirpos cones

Cones are Killing Slalom

Automatic cone counting