• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Track school comparison -- CSS, K@TT, STAR

Tzadkiel

Tzadkiel

New member
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Location
Campbell
Moto(s)
00 SV650, 08 ZX-14, 05 636
This year I attended three different two-day track schools. I attended Keith Code’s California Superbike School at Streets of Willow Springs, then I attended Keigwin’s At The Track (K@TT) Novice School at Thunderhill, and finally I attended Jason Pridmore’s STAR Motorcycle school at Thunderhill. This post is a summary of my experiences and it compares and contrasts the three schools. Feedback and discussion is welcome; please let me know your experiences.
 
Last edited:
California Superbike School at Streets of Willow Springs
This school was the most structured of the three schools I attended. For every track session I was assigned a 1-on-1 instructor. That instructor would tell me what to work on before the session, then he would watch me during the session, and then we’d talk about it afterward.

ORIGINALLY POSTED AS: This structure was good because it meant that you were going to get specific feedback, but it also meant you got less track time than at the other schools – CSS ran three groups whereas both K@TT and STAR ran two groups.

CORRECTED VERSION: This structure was good because it meant that you were going to get specific feedback -- also, you got the same amount of track time as K@TT and STAR since all three schools ran only two groups.

The strong structure and organization ran through absolutely everything CSS did. For example, announcements were always made over the public address system. The structure was good from an efficiency standpoint but was bad from the standpoint of customizing the feedback for an individual. For example, before every track session there was a lecture. It was obvious that Keith Code (or Dylan, who gave some of the lectures) was well practiced with the presentation of their lecture material. Both Keith and Dylan knew exactly what they were going to say and how they were going to say it. They also knew what questions students would ask, and knew how they were going to answer these questions (oftentimes with another question back to the student). As another example, just before you left the lecture Keith (or Dylan) would tell you what you were going to work on for that session. Then when you got to the track entrance you would “check-in” with the track monitor who would ask you what the lesson was (you had to repeat a 2-3 word catchphrase specific to the lesson at hand) and then ask you what the rules were (e.g., 4th-gear only, no brakes, or 2nd, 3rd, 4th, light brakes).

Here are the things I liked about CSS when I first took the school:

1) every time I went out they had me focus on one thing rather than providing a list of several things to work on. While I may be messing up several things, this was very effective because it allowed me to focus.

2) dedicated 1-1 time with the instructors for every track session

3) different instructors on each day

4) 'special' bikes - camera, brake, lean bike allowed me to do new things

5) visual drills to get you to “string together” corners

Regarding #1 above, I have since come to learn that this is par for the course for trackday schools, since both K@TT and STAR did the same thing (when I had 1-1 time, that is).

Here are the things I liked right after I attended the CSS school but I now dislike:

1) 4th-gear-only, no-brakes rules for early sessions. At the time I thought this was very good because I could focus just on the turn rather than trying to brake just in time and do everything all at once, but now that I’ve got more track time under my belt this structure seems to be a waste of expensive track time.

2) consistency amongst instructors. I thought this was an asset at first but have since changed my mind. All the CSS instructors were the same. They said the same things, had the same teaching technique, and emphasized the same points in the same way. The incredible “sameness” to everything reminded me of the townspeople in the movie Pleasantville.

3) Turn-Points marked with X’s on the track. I thought these were GREAT when I was at the school. “If I just ride over these, and then turn on them, I’ll be on ‘the line’”. Well, after going to many trackdays, I’ve learned that there is no single line. There are many lines depending on what you’re doing and how you’re riding. Maybe you’re passing someone, maybe you’re trying to save the edge of the tire, etc. Later when I attended the STAR school I did a 2-up ride with Jason Pridmore, and I had no idea that a motorcycle could be ridden so aggressively as smoothly as he rode. He’s a successful roadracer, a much better rider than I’ll ever be, went a boatload faster 2-up than I’ll ever go solo, and I didn’t feel any sudden aggressive countersteering techniques on the entire ride.

Here are the things I didn’t like about the CSS school:

1) price. I was POSITIVE that I would “get what I paid for” but with the CSS school I paid >$2200 for 2 days (including their bike). That’s just way too much.

2) many many times (especially when Keith was teaching) the answer to questions of understanding (i.e., the student asks 'why…' or 'please explain…') was at its root nothing more than 'because I said so'. Logically speaking, this is effectively an 'argument from authority' and at its heart is a logical fallacy. The answer often didn't help the student understand; rather it sought to convince the student that he already understood.

3) 'you'll never slide the front tire' - really? Then why do people low-side? I’ve seen it happen right in front of me.

In summary, the regimentation of CSS permeated every aspect of the school and while in some areas it was good (you always knew “when” and “where” and “what”, and they kept to the schedule), the benefits of having an efficiently run school did not outweigh the drawbacks of dogmatic lessons. I am a better rider as a result of taking CSS though, so I don’t regret experiencing the school myself. I do regret taking the two-day school, though, because it was too expensive.
 
Last edited:
K@TT Novice School at Thunderhill
K@TT had a very different feel than CSS… there was none of the dogmatism of CSS. There was more tracktime than CSS and while the school was less regimented in the presentation of the training material, it was just as well organized as CSS. For example, you always knew when to be somewhere and where to be. For example you knew ahead of time when the trackwalks would occur and where you had to be in order to make the trackwalk.

The lectures at K@TT were different than CSS – Lance had many different instructors throughout the two days so you are exposed to a variety of viewpoints. K@TT’s 1-on-1 signup was also different than CSS: with CSS, you would have a specific instructor with whom you’d work for the day. You would work with this instructor every session, and he would watch you every session. With K@TT, you would sign up for a single 1-on-1 each day. CSS sessions were around 20 minutes; the K@TT sessions were 45 minutes long. So that meant that with K@TT you’d get 45 minutes of dedicated 1-on-1 time each day.

Here are the things I liked about the K@TT novice school:
1) 1-on-1 with Aaron Smith
Very helpful; the biggest help Aaron provided was confirmation that what I was working on was the right stuff to work on. He provided some good detail on the way I was doing my body positioning to get me to nut up to the tank. I've been pushing my butt back in the saddle and Aaron started me on the path to proper body position.

2) 1-on-1 with Craig Wierman and Paul Yoshimune
Unfortunately Eddy's bike was showing some Italian character during my scheduled 1-on-1 time with him, but Craig helped me out in what time I had left in the 1-on-1 and then in the next session Paul sniped me and helped me out too. Both were helping me with my turn-in points for T6 and T14 – I’d been early-apexing those turns so their feedback was really helpful.

Overall the most valuable formal part of the school was definitely the 1-on-1s. There's nothing like real feedback from people who are really watching you ride.

3) classroom sessions
Definitely the guy who created the biggest "Eureka!" moment for me was Doug Adler. I've always known that you should squeeze the brakes to load the front and then brake harder, but his explanation of why really made me understand. I'm one of those people who always has to know "why"; I don't retain lessons well if it's "do this because I say so." Doug's explanation of the "why" was outstanding and is the part of the school session I most remember. His explanation of pitching the bike and sliding the front if you “beat” the weight transfer was great.

Paul Yoshimune's teaching method was excellent -- he asked just the right level of questions of the audience to keep them engaged. I teach all the time in my day job and it was obvious that Paul knew just how to get the audience engaged with his questions. The questions were "closed" in the sense that they were specific enough that if you were paying attention you could answer the question (which meant your brain was actively thinking rather than passively listening); the asking of the question got the class thinking about it (which is the goal, after all).

The session “Picking up the pace” was great too... that session segued perfectly into future trackdays; it clearly outlined things to work on.

Lohmeyer's braking technique description was great; I took so many notes in that session it's ridiculous. They're all good notes though; hopefully one day I'll be a "good braker." Arnold's passing description section was really good too... tons of notes from that one too.

The rest of the sessions were also really good. The track breakdown section was really good because it focuses on what we should be doing that's track-specific... that helped me with my lines. The best thing from the track breakdown though was the "excess shift" elimination. Those sessions got rid of 4 shifts (2 up, 2 down) in the T1-T6 section, allowing me to focus on my riding instead of my shifting.

5) trackwalk
Awesome! I wish we could have done more corners. This was incredibly helpful. Actually seeing what the instructors are doing as they go through the corner was invaluable.

6) Tuesday night conversation with Phil
This had the biggest impact on my riding. After the first day of the school, just before I left I was talking with Phil Rusin and I mentioned how my left quad was really getting a helluva workout in the left turns... much worse than my right quad in the right turns (the next day Paul even said it looked like I hang off more in right turns than left turns). In talking with Phil about body positioning he showed me the ball-of-the-foot pivot thing on the outer part of the peg and I realized what I was doing wrong – I was only doing that with my right leg in right turns, and not with my left leg in left turns. I was keeping my left foot straight forward on the peg… That was keeping my knee in artificially, leading to the stress in my left leg. Sure enough, even though my left quad felt like shit Tuesday night, on Wednesday when I changed my foot position it felt fine.

7) Dave Moss
I switched from Pirellis to Dunlops and the bars were dancing on the straights. I told Dave about it and he thought for a while (I thought it was because my front Pirelli was a 65 and the Dunlop was a 70, so I had the front end too tall). Dave then said that wasn't it; it was the opposite – since the Dunlops have a big rear and the Pirellis have a big front the bike's rake was reduced. He dropped the front forks by 5mm and when I went back out the shake was almost completely gone... the change was amazing. The coolest thing about this is that I understand why the shake is gone – more rake in the front end means more stability. His suspension class at the end of the school was valuable too – very informative and it was surprising how un-set-up stock bikes are. What more can I say? The guy's a guru. Lance should get him one of those red Dalai Lama robes.

The only thing I didn’t like was the fact that there was only one 1-on-1 per day. Coming from the CSS school (where there was a 1-on-1 for every session), I felt that I was shorted 1-on-1 time. Upon reflection, two things made me change my mind:

1) the different economics of the two schools – K@TT was so much cheaper than CSS ($590 for K@TT with your own bike, $2250 for CSS with their bike) that the difference in 1-on-1 time is well worth the savings. As students, we tend to forget that Keith Code and Lance Keigwin and Jason Pridmore run businesses and they don’t do this out of blind altruism. They have to make the numbers work to run the school – Keith charges his students a lot more but has a higher instructor/student ratio.

2) there are so many things on which I need to work that having 1-on-1 instruction for every single session may be a bit too much. While I would like more 1-on-1 instruction, I’ve grown to like having a 1-on-1 in my second or third session of the day and then working on the feedback from the instructor the rest of the day.

In summary, the K@TT novice school was worth every dollar I spent on it – and then some. For me, having less 1-on-1 time was more than compensated for by the extra track time compared to CSS. Plus, the extras – like Dave Moss’s suspension session, and the approachability of the instructors – are positives.
 
Jason Pridmore’s STAR School at Thunderhill
As mentioned above in my CSS post, Jason Pridmore is a better and faster rider 2-up than I’ll ever be solo. I was really looking forward to his school because it’s from someone who has “been there” and “done that.” Jason delivered most of the lectures at the school.

The most amazing thing about the STAR school was that Jason wasn’t a dick – since he is a successful roadracer I had expected quite a bit of the egomaniac but that couldn’t be further from the truth. Jason’s lectures were excellent; he presented topics in a way that was very easy to understand and he drew on his experiences to illustrate points to the students. For example, in talking about gearing, when he said “when I was riding with Mat Mladin…” it really felt like he wasn’t name-dropping; rather he was just matter-of-factly drawing on his past experiences to better educate his students. He was also available after each lecture if you had follow-up questions that couldn’t be answered in the time allotted to the lecture. The feel I got was that he really liked what he was doing in instructing students.

The positives from STAR were:

1) instruction from someone who has “been there” and “done that”

2) feedback from instructors was excellent – Todd Rainey helped me a lot with body position, and Angie Loy got me standing the bike up out of turns for the first time ever

3) trackwalks and demos were excellent – at STAR, each day had one trackwalk (no instructors riding the course) and one demo (same as the trackwalk, except instructors – including Jason – are riding around the course illustrating “good” and “bad” technique). This was also valuable because Dave Stanton (a very fast Thunderhill rider who’s had AFM #1 several times) also participated and provided a lot of valuable instruction.

4) efficiency philosophy – I really liked Jason’s philosophy of riding efficiently (he said it’s something he learned from Mat Mladin). What I took from this is to efficiently use the track, efficiently use the gears, and efficiently use the tires. It’s not always fastest to “swoop from all the way outside to all the way inside then all the way outside again.” To see why, consider that the width of Thunderhill is 36 feet. If the track width was increased to 50 feet does that mean you should swoop from inside to outside for every turn? What if the track was 100 feet? It turns out that assuming “the fastest line for every turn is to enter from the far outside” is incorrect. The flow of the track (corners before and after) and the nature of modern bikes have a LOT to do with this.

5) 2-up ride with Jason Pridmore. If you haven’t experienced this, then make it a point to take a STAR school and get a 2-up ride. It was incredible! HOLY COW the guy is fast. Also, very very smooth on the controls. Not once on the 2-lap 2-up ride did I feel him shift; maybe his bike had a CVT :). He’s got special handgrips in the back of his tank so you have something to hold on to – this allows him to move around on the bike. The 2-up ride was simply incredible; he was SO FAST on the track that it really revealed how far I have to go to become a better rider. The biggest thing the 2-up ride did for me is give me a very real sense of what a fast ride is like at a racetrack. I remember when I got off the bike after the ride I said to Jason “that was amazing; you’re so smooth and fast you’re a robot!”

6) Mark’s body position workshop – something about the way Mark described the proper body position caused it to “click” for me. The most important body positioning lesson that I learned is that you don’t have to be radical to have good body position. I had been trying to move too much off the bike given the pace I was running (~2:20 or so) and as a result it was tiring me out. The body position workshop combined with the 2-up ride showed me that I don’t have to work myself silly to have proper body position. As my pace increases I’ll move more but for the time being I feel that I finally have the proper form.

7) Two groups, so you had a lot of track time

8) $675 for both days was a fair price

9) Conversation with Andrew Trevitt – I had a good conversation at lunch with Andrew on the first day; I learned about tires and suspension during the lunch talk.

There was only one thing I didn’t like about the STAR school – out of the three schools, the STAR school was by far the least organized. There was no agenda with fixed times for the school, and as a result I missed the instructor demo on the second day – along with about nine other students who also missed the demo! We were eating lunch in the Thunderhill clubhouse, and then one of us said “hey, what’s going on?” when we heard bikes on the track. There were two STAR employees in the clubhouse with us, so we had thought we were OK. I went outside to look around and there was no one in the paddock except for two other students who came up to me and said “where is everybody?” I went in to the clubhouse to ask the two STAR people and they said “well, we made an announcement”. If you made an announcement then why are nine students wandering around wondering where everyone is? A few of the students actually missed both instructor demos because they didn’t hear the announcements. Since STAR didn’t use the track PA (just a bullhorn) it was pretty hard for everyone to hear the announcements, and the lack of a published schedule meant that you didn’t know where to be somewhere.

Also, there was supposed to be a “tire talk” on the second day, but for some reason that never happened. I was really looking forward to that lecture!

In summary, while the STAR school could definitely benefit from hiring an event coordinator, I found the quality of the instruction excellent. Both the lectures and the 1-on-1s were outstanding.

I’ll definitely be going back to both the STAR school and K@TT. Feedback is welcome; what are your experiences?
 
Last edited:
great write-ups!

Great write ups, thanks for sharing your experiences. Although I haven't had the opportunity to try the other two schools, I completely agree with your thoughts on K@TT, Well worth the price of admission and then some. I've not heard much good about CSS, but haven't talked to that many people who have been. BTW, I work a little with Doug Adler at his regular "day job", so I'll pass on all your praise!:thumbup
 
Feedback is welcome; what are your experiences?
Click to expand...
I did not find STAR the least bit disorganized. On the contrary, they clearly had an agenda and a schedule, and they stuck to them. The agenda was even printed in handouts.
 
Great info! Thanks. I've only taken CSS, so comparisons to the other schools are really helpful.
 
Good write ups, I think the CSS writeup reflects what a lot of people think. Regardless I still want to give it a shot at least once.
 
Great write ups! Thank you for taking notes. Your comments are more detailed but generally draw the same conclusions that others have mentioned. I am not interested in going to Cal Superbike school.
 
I've done both STAR and K@TT and agree with your assessments. Pretty spot on. Though I liked the relaxed pace of STAR. I'd repeat both though my fave is STAR. Something just clicked. But K@TT is also most excellent. I'm a tdtp holder with K@TT for a reason. :) I'd endorse both in a heartbeat. Good thread.
 
thx to all for the feedback; I can't wait for next year. We've got some of the best weather in the world out here and I can't wait for March so I can go riding on the track in the sunshine again!

regarding uraniaclio's comments:
Next year I'll do a bunch of days with K@TT (some schools, some trackdays) and a bunch of STAR schools too. I agree with your positive sentiments about STAR, although I don't know if something clicked for me because of the school itself or because it was my third school and with the trackdays this year I've been getting more comfortable. One thing is for sure, though -- Jason Pridmore's lecture style is very effective. I felt like he was really able to put many of the pieces together into a cohesive whole so I had more of a "big picture" view of riding. As long as he's delivering the lectures I'm going back to many more STAR schools.
 
Tzadkiel said:
California Superbike School at Streets of Willow Springs
I did a 2-up ride with Jason Pridmore, and I had no idea that a motorcycle could be ridden so aggressively as smoothly as he rode. He’s a successful roadracer, a much better rider than I’ll ever be, went a boatload faster 2-up than I’ll ever go solo, and I didn’t feel any sudden aggressive countersteering techniques on the entire ride.
Click to expand...


As someone who has read into all these different schools techniques and also someone who I think (based on what I have read from books) turns in late and uses the countersteering technique to get the bike over quickly I might be able to relate why this was.

From what I've been told JP takes a narrow entrance and turns in relatively earlier and arcs through turns which is a very smooth way of riding. CSS teaches a later turn in point which means you have less time to get the bike steered, meaning it has to transition from upright to leaned over faster and more precisely. I can guarantee that CSS does not want you to countersteer quickly UNsmoothly. There is a smooth and controlled method to countersteering quickly. I personally do it all the time, it is an aqquired skill, but once you can do it, it is an invaluable skill. Even if you do not like the lines that CSS teaches the skill of being able to "flick" or "turn" the bike very quickly and efficiently will help you in all those "oh-shit" moments when you are passing someone on the brakes, missed a turning marker, or just came into the turn too-hot.

This is also what the no-brakes drill is about (I'm assuming) not worrying about the brake helps you focus all of your attention to the entry and exit of the turn. You can set your entry speed to something comfortable and manageable. Combined with the marked turn-in points, you will be able to practice steering quickly, because this skill is hard to do when you factor in other variables like using the front brake and countersteering. Plus the no-brakes drill is also an excellent warmup for the beginning of the day at any trackday. Trying to bomb down straight aways and open the throttle IMO is one of the biggest mistakes people do early in the day. Its near impossible to get into a comfort zone doing this. You wait till after lunch to do this. Being hard on the brakes is one of the scariest things to do on the track, especially when a turn is coming right at you.

Again, I've never attended the CSS school but have read some of the books they have put out. While I don't agree with everything they teach and from what I've heard "the only way" of doing things, I have recognized what I do in my riding and realized that it was very familiar with what they teach. So basically I'm guessing as what they were trying to teach you, but it makes sense to me. I have the best street rides ever tooling around on a road I know very well and not using the brakes, makes for the smoothest riding ever, which is way more fun that just "fast".
 
Last edited:
Dylan: thanks! Your program was my first exposure to track instruction and I appreciate the experience.

yody: You're right. I definitely think it's important to be able to countersteer quickly for certain situations and this is true for both street (avoiding cagers and obstacles) and track (avoiding incidents). Also, think of T5 at Thill -- I would think that's the place on Thill where you are countersteering the most and flicking the bike the most (I'd be interested in other's feedback on this). That doesn't mean that's what you want to do for T7 or T8 though, or for many of the other turns at THill (or any other track). Finally, just like you when I go street riding on Hwy 9 or 84 or Skyline or any of the other local twisty roads I almost never use my brakes. The street rides I most enjoy are also the ones on the twisties that don't need the brakes. That started to scare me when I would just ride on the street, though, because one of the biggest things I learned from going to trackdays was to really use the brakes. Nick Ienatsch says that the brakes are the most powerful component on the bike, and I never really experienced that myself until I started doing trackdays. Then I did a 2-up ride with JP and realized I don't brake as hard as I should. There's always room for improvement!
 
yody said:
As someone who has read into all these different schools techniques and also someone who I think (based on what I have read from books) turns in late and uses the countersteering technique to get the bike over quickly I might be able to relate why this was.

From what I've been told JP takes a narrow entrance and turns in relatively earlier and arcs through turns which is a very smooth way of riding. CSS teaches a later turn in point which means you have less time to get the bike steered, meaning it has to transition from upright to leaned over faster and more precisely. I can guarantee that CSS does not want you to countersteer quickly UNsmoothly. There is a smooth and controlled method to countersteering quickly. I personally do it all the time, it is an aqquired skill, but once you can do it, it is an invaluable skill. Even if you do not like the lines that CSS teaches the skill of being able to "flick" or "turn" the bike very quickly and efficiently will help you in all those "oh-shit" moments when you are passing someone on the brakes, missed a turning marker, or just came into the turn too-hot.

This is also what the no-brakes drill is about (I'm assuming) not worrying about the brake helps you focus all of your attention to the entry and exit of the turn. You can set your entry speed to something comfortable and manageable. Combined with the marked turn-in points, you will be able to practice steering quickly, because this skill is hard to do when you factor in other variables like using the front brake and countersteering. Plus the no-brakes drill is also an excellent warmup for the beginning of the day at any trackday. Trying to bomb down straight aways and open the throttle IMO is one of the biggest mistakes people do early in the day. Its near impossible to get into a comfort zone doing this. You wait till after lunch to do this. Being hard on the brakes is one of the scariest things to do on the track, especially when a turn is coming right at you.

Again, I've never attended the CSS school but have read some of the books they have put out. While I don't agree with everything they teach and from what I've heard "the only way" of doing things, I have recognized what I do in my riding and realized that it was very familiar with what they teach. So basically I'm guessing as what they were trying to teach you, but it makes sense to me. I have the best street rides ever tooling around on a road I know very well and not using the brakes, makes for the smoothest riding ever, which is way more fun that just "fast".
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if it's turning in early Star school stresses. They stress smooth input above all else. And part of what they teach is to use cornering to scrub speed rather than relying on late heavy hard braking. They used t2 as an example and it was pretty interesting.
 
uraniaclio said:
I'm not sure if it's turning in early Star school stresses. They stress smooth input above all else. And part of what they teach is to use cornering to scrub speed rather than relying on late heavy hard braking. They used t2 as an example and it was pretty interesting.
Click to expand...
Yes this is what I referred too, they teach you lines that will help you in smoothness, like turning in earlier and not using up the entire track however IMO or at least in my eyes considering my riding style there are some things you are giving up by choosing to ride the STAR lines but as long as you are understanding what those things are and why I'm sure you can make their preferred way of riding work just as well.

In the end there are many different ideas and ways of going fast around the race track. Physics comes into play, but really what it boils down to are compromises. What compromises do you make that you feel are worth the benefits. What concept allows you to use full benefit. We all identify with what works for us, and usually that is what one would run with. Another reason I would like to try the CSS school.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top