racing room ??

[m glassburner]

What is your definition of racing room?

[Greg Amy]

The width of your car plus the thickness of a sheet of paper...?

[lateapex911]

On the outside, the width of the car,
on the inside...ummm.... depends on who's trying a pass, and for what position, and what lap it is... http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/wink.gif

In other words, if I'm leading (har har har!) and I got balked by traffic or something, and it's the last lap, last corner, I might be a little, shall we say, "not generous" about leaving room on the inside, as there are lots of cars that really don't need a whole car width of pavement!

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[m glassburner]

so...would running someone off course fit that ? :P

[Knestis]

Sounds like you already think you have an answer to your own question.

K

[m glassburner]

Yes , I know what my definition is...what's yours ? My idea is giving all drivers enough room to stay on track reguardless of what lap it is...(In the intrest of saftey and fairness) .

[RSTPerformance]

Originally posted by m glassburner:
Yes , I know what my definition is...what's yours ? My idea is giving all drivers enough room to stay on track reguardless of what lap it is...(In the intrest of saftey and fairness) .

Racing Room is allowing enough space for a car to fit beside me. The side I leave the space is my decision and will not be in your benefit. If you get on the inside of me under braking or in a turn then I left you to much room before the turn and should have been giving you racing room on the outside long before we came to the braking zone. Therefor I am going to have to leave you that car space on the inside since I didn't think ahead and planned poorly. When you race with me you will always have room on the outside. Just make sure you go to the edge of the track and you don't squeeze me in, afterall I left you the space outthere so you shouldn't get to greedy http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/smile.gif

Stephen

[JeffYoung]

In club racing, where they give us wood plaques at the end of the day, the definition is do NOTHING to endanger someone else's car. Even if they are doing something stupid.

[m glassburner]

That's what I think....and totally agree with .

[Joe Harlan]

Racing room is giving only enough room to race. The key word is race. I am not obligated to give up the line because you choose to try to drive under me when you have no chance of getting there. It is also not just opening up a hole because you got up along side. If you want the position I am in your gonna work for it but I will RACE you clean. I will say even for a 7 dollar plaque I have had incidental body contact and my fair share of little dents. Club racing is not vintage and it's not PCA racing. I do this to race as close as any pro and as hard as any pro. At that level you are bound to get stuff happens from time to time.

Hell I have run close enough to Darin several times to rub my SCCA sticker off on his rear bumper.... http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/smile.gif

[bldn10]

I started a thread on the topic of SCCA passing rules on the SCCA site that you might want to review (and revive). My premise was that our rules are far too vague, and this is a case in point - they state that everyone is entitled to "racing room" but fail/refuse to define the term. If you ask drivers across the board who "has the line" and who has to yield racing room and when, you will get myriad and inconsistent opinions. It is rather frightening to me to think that I and the guy next to me have entirely different understandings as to which one of us is going to have to back off. Randy Pobst stated it as I understand it in this month's SportsCar - if a guy can get up to your door alongside you before your turn-in, he's got it and you have to give way. Like Stephen said, you left the door open so you have to pay the price. But, regardless of what the rule is, I just want it clearly stated and understood by all of us (and SOM and COA). I advocate an examination and clarification, if not rewrite, of our rules.

------------------
Bill Denton
87/89 ITS RX-7
02 Audi TT225QC
95 Tahoe
Memphis

[buldogge]

Hey Guys... Sorry for the OT.

Bill can you email me when you get a chance about the GIR video...

buldogge <at> sbcglobal <dot> net

Thanx!

------------------
Mark Andrews
'92 ITS BMW 325is

[lateapex911]

Bill, that's the classic roadrace criteria.

In NASCAR, it's overlap of any amount. Unless you're pissed...but I digress.

The rule has changed recently to such a point that it seems to leave the officials with the leeway to place blame where they want to...or on both drivers.

The single issue with the half way alongside scenario is at what point in the corner do you need to acheive the 50% overlap to "earn" the corner? If you say at turn in, that makes it very hard on the passer in a lot of trail braking corners. And if you say the apex, well, that means the 'passee' can't move to the apex if a guy is on his inside, until the apex, and by then it's obviously way too late..he's got the corner!

As a 'passee' "closing the door" has it's drawbacks if done too early ...you are the guy who spins!

As the passer, if you ARE alongside, and he closes the door, you have a tough decision...hold your ground or try to back out of it? If you can't back out of it completely, you make contact, and the contact will likely spin him, BUT, the physical evidence will likely show that you were NOT along side, and the judgement goes against you! Which follows the 2nd rule of life, "No good deed goes unpunished"! LOL

Just some random thoughts...

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[Matt Rowe]

My take has always been that the idea is for both drivers to do everything reasonable to avoid contact while still allowing for hard, honest racing. By putting a definite statement in place of when someone "has" the corner you give one person the "right" to cause contact. By keeping the rules open each drivers is potentially responsible and therefore has to act in a responsible manner. If you try and write a hard and fast rule you can not cover all situations. The current system allows the stewards to look at all available evidence and make the best call based on judgement.Perfect? No but you can cover all passing situations with any kind of simple, fair rule.

For example, say the rule is the overtaking car has the turn once his front bumper passes the overtaken cars front bumper. The imagine the overly ambitious driver diving in way late, getting along side but washing out and taking out both cars. But because the dents on both cars show his bumper was past yours the accident is your fault.

Again, I race with that attitude that if any contact is made I am partially at fault. Even if it's because I didn't completely anticipate how out of control the other guy was. That doesn't mean I'm going to give someone the whole track just to avoid something that MIGHT happen, but I'm also mature enough to admit that when something does happen I'm still responsible for avoiding contact, per 9.1.1.A.

------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96

[Bill Miller]

Hell I have run close enough to Darin several times to rub my SCCA sticker off on his rear bumper....



And I would have guessed it the other way around, for sure! http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/biggrin.gif

------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608

[Racerlinn]

I discovered this weekend that when it comes to Wrec Miatas, it's where ever they want to be on the track, no matter if you happen to already be there...
(Just my luck that I build a middle of the pack ITA car that happens to run with the middle of the pack SM cars...) http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/biggrin.gif

------------------
Steve Linn
'92 ITA Sentra SE-R
www.indyscca.org (http://www.indyscca.org)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v366/Racerlinn/SideSER2.jpg

[Eagle7]

Originally posted by Racerlinn:
I discovered this weekend that when it comes to Wrec Miatas, it's where ever they want to be on the track, no matter if you happen to already be there...
(Just my luck that I build a middle of the pack ITA car that happens to run with the middle of the pack SM cars...) http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/biggrin.gif

Don't I know it. My first ever race weekend a Pro SM wiped out my quarterpanel on the test day. Took me a month over the winter to cut it off and weld on a new one.

------------------
Marty Doane
ITS RX-7 #13
CenDiv WMR

[RacerBill]

I race go-carts every week, and one of the guys I race against is a three time SCCA national champion. The track is very narrow with tire walls all around (indoors). When the carts and drivers are very evenly matched, the only way to get by is by taking away the line. But by the same token, we try to make the passes as clean as possible, and not put the other guy into the wall. Try to get up along side the guy, so he can see you and has time to change his line.

I agree with all those in this thread that say that passing just takes common sense. In the end, both drivers have the responsibility to avoid contact during a pass.

There are too many different circumstances that can happen to make up rules for each one.

------------------
Bill Stevens
Mbr 103106
BnS Racing
83 ITA Shelby Dodge Charger

[Joe Harlan]

Originally posted by Bill Miller:

Hell I have run close enough to Darin several times to rub my SCCA sticker off on his rear bumper....



And I would have guessed it the other way around, for sure! http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/biggrin.gif




Nah, he is clearly the better driver, I
am just out there runnin people over... http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/smile.gif

[bldn10]

Matt: "By putting a definite statement in place of when someone "has" the corner you give one person the "right" to cause contact. By keeping the rules open each drivers is potentially responsible and therefore has to act in a responsible manner."

The way I see it, Matt, is that if I am trying to pass you and I know exactly where I need to get by a certain point, I can make the mental evaluation whether I can do it or not, and act acordingly. Or, as you said, responsibly. Conversely, you will know when you have to give it up. As I'm sure you know, if you get the rep of being the guy who always acts "responsibly" and avoids contact at all cost, you will be a sitting duck for the guys who will take advantage of your good intentions. They won't worry about a protest because there won't be any contact because you will have let them by. (As an aside, I think a rule violation is a violation whether or not contact occurs. I.e. if you lose a position because you gave way to someone making a banzai move to avoid contact, a successful protest should be in order.) On the other hand, if you do have a rule that gives you "the 'right' to cause contact," then the other guy knows he has put himself in a position where you can indeed take your line and he will have a pretty good notion that it will be he who gets penalized if contact occurs.

But the cruxt of the issue for me is that, although the rules are (perhaps intentionally) vague, that has not and does not stop all of us from having our own understanding of what the passing rules really are in practice. If what Pobst described in the SCCA's own publication (at least impliedly w/ SCCA's imprimatur) is wrong, it is a great diservice to all of us to even publish it, and it should be stated in the next issue that that is NOT the SCCA rule. If it is accurate at least in principle, then let's give it the official stamp of approval in the rules or at least so state in SportsCar or Fastrack.

I agree that no rule can be perfect in every situation, but that is not the question. The question is whether our rules be made better - leading to hard but safer racing and more predictable protest/appeal outcomes.

------------------
Bill Denton
87/89 ITS RX-7
02 Audi TT225QC
95 Tahoe
Memphis

[ITANorm]

Bill D.: I agree with your philosophy, but until we perfect and use lie detectors in SOM hearings, it's unenforceable. I've NEVER been on a first court where it wasn't the other guy's fault . . . never.

I'm less aggressive than some, more than others - but I won't attempt a banzai / unmakeable pass in hopes the other guy will give / flinch. In 12 years of racing, I've been lucky enough to only swap paint twice - and neither time was serious body work required.

Steve L. : You should come back to Gateway. You would have probably had an easy win on Sunday and an easy 2nd on Saturday. The only really fast ITA car there broke on Sunday - and I think you've beaten all the others there. BTW - they broke out the SM's and IT7's into their own group.

[gran racing]

There are a lot of good points being made here; unfortunately I can’t see a way to eliminate the subjectivity of it.

Bill – you make a good point about a person getting a rep acting responsible. During my first year of racing I was overly responsible and got bumped a few times and not given racing room on other occasions by a few particular drivers. They knew they could get away with it so they did. Funny how after the car gets hit a few times, the pretty paint job gets messed up and one gains more experience. While I still will not do any stupid moves (at least on purpose), my attitude definitely has changed. Much of my feeling is if you respect me and the safety of others, I’ll show you the same respect. But on the other hand if someone wants to rub…


------------------
Dave Gran
NER ITB #13
'87 Honda Prelude si

[Matt Rowe]

Originally posted by bldn10:
The way I see it, Matt, is that if I am trying to pass you and I know exactly where I need to get by a certain point, I can make the mental evaluation whether I can do it or not, and act acordingly. Or, as you said, responsibly. Conversely, you will know when you have to give it up.

Yes, there should be a "safe" point that you have to get to. In fact under the current rule there already is. It's the point where the other car knows where you are because any contact can potentially be his responsibility. Oh and just because you get along side someone don't expect them to give it up. You get room, not an engraved invitation to complete the pass.


Originally posted by bldn10:
As I'm sure you know, if you get the rep of being the guy who always acts "responsibly" and avoids contact at all cost, you will be a sitting duck for the guys who will take advantage of your good intentions.

I used the word responsible for a reason. It means that although I might provide racing room, incidental contact might still occur. And if it does I know that depending on the situation I also take some RESPONSIBILITY and it doesn't matter if the person was dead even, at my rear wheel or at my front well. It is the responsibility of all drivers to avoid physical contact between cars while on the race track


Originally posted by bldn10:
On the other hand, if you do have a rule that gives you "the 'right' to cause contact," then the other guy knows he has put himself in a position where you can indeed take your line and he will have a pretty good notion that it will be he who gets penalized if contact occurs.


But what if the overtaken guy doesn't quite get close enough to complete the pass but he is alongside. A rule that eliminates a driver from blame allows the lead driver to run the other off track without fear of protest. So much for racing a guy side by side for 3 turns, he can put you off in the first turn.

My feeling is the rule is adequate as written, the implementation has flaws. Some of them or a lack of observation/evidence. Other problems are inconsistency in the officials decisions. I would much rather see time spent on that than changing a rule that has been in effect and working for how long?

------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96

[This message has been edited by Matt Rowe (edited May 10, 2005).]

[Weaver7]

Matt you were behind me for the first half of the MARRS I event. I must say that we were indeed racing hard! But with that being said we never made contact once and we were extremley close to each other at times. I think we gave each other enough safe space and I'll admit you eventually wore me down. This also goes out to the racer in the red 240. That was alot of fun to say the least.

Bill Weaver
#63 ITA RX7

[Matt Rowe]

Hi Bill,

That was a lot of fun running with you that day. We were awfully close a time or two but you seemed to be good enough behind the wheel that I wasn't worried about you getting into to me. At least not by accident. So I'm guessing that you don't think I'm "too nice" when I'm out on track?


------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96

[Hotshoe]

...I have a hard time understanding why someone would risk their safety and the safety of another driver for a ten dollar trophy.
...Just a few weeks ago at Savannah I attempted to pass another car on the outside of turns one and two. I gave the other driver plenty of room and made no move to try and "Pinch" him down.
...Knowing that I had the better of him I made a special effort to keep it clean and give him more than enough room. But that was not good enough for him.
...He over drove the exit of turn two, and hit the right door of my car, not once, but twice. Then proceeded to push me sideways out into the grass before braking and getting off the side of my car.
...Did I protest him? No Way, Same driver two years ago punted me in turn six at the SIC and I was charged with blocking and he was totally behind me when contact was made.
...I can imagine what they would say about this incident. They would probably say that I should not have tried to pass on the outside.
...I only suffered minimal damage to my car but was glad that I had the experience to stay in the throttle and not lock the brakes because the car did try to dig in while he was pushing me sideways. Sure do not like to roll over in a corner that has had it's share of cars roll over in the soft dirt.
...I was unable to continue because the right front wheel filled with mud and was out of balance so bad that it could not be safely driven.
...So, I got to race five laps of a fifteen lap race because someone that has no respect for the safety of another driver decided to overdrive their car, knock me off the track, spin me around, and cost me about $400.00 all for a trophy??????
...If I am ever in a race with anyone that has this mentality please, let me know. I will gladly sit that race out. It is not worth it to me. I have things in my life that are a lot more important to me than a TROPHY . And my safety is the first one on the list.

...Tired of the tunnel vision,
..........Rick Thompson

[zracre]

At the march double sarrc in moroso...the definition of racing room= 0. My car came back with a dent on every corner from people shoving me off the outside trying to keep the ita car back...i was trying to stay in front with all the its cars stopping in the corners...more needs to be done about this....not worth the little wooden trophy for the win i got...$800 trophy....

------------------
Evan Darling
ITA Integra

[bldn10]

"Yes, there should be a 'safe' point that you have to get to. In fact under the current rule there already is. It's the point where the other car knows where you are because any contact can potentially be his responsibility."

Matt, where is that in the current rules? All it says now is that "the overtaken driver has the responsibility to be aware that he is being overtaken...." You are stating Pobst's rule. That's exactly what I mean - everyone assumes certain things are in the rules but they really aren't. If we drive and the SOM and COA make rulings beased on extrinsic principles, let's make them part of the written rules.

"Oh and just because you get along side someone don't expect them to give it up. You get room, not an engraved invitation to complete the pass."

Absolutely. When I say "give it up" I am only referring to the preferred line - you can't at that point turn in on the guy. However, he only gets a car width racing room and if that is not enough for him to make the pass safely, any contact is his responsibility. Inherent in any suggestion I make is that the overtaking car is under control and can make the turn w/o leaning on the overtaken car or cutting him off at the exit. I.e. no banzai moves.

If the overtaking car get's alongside but not to the magic point, yes, the overtaken car would have the right to the line, meaning that the overtaking car should back off. But you would still have the rule re avoiding contact and it would be paramount. However, if the overtaken car gives way to avoid contact when the overtaking car is in the wrong, and he loses his position by doing so, he should be able to protest and get his position back whether there is contact or not. That way the overtaking car is in a lose-lose position - a rather effective disincentive to try to bully your way through. Or at least a better one than what we have now. (Of course the overtaken driver doesn't HAVE to protest - we all enjoy hard, side-by-side racing w/ someone we can trust, and that is its own reward - more than a hunk of wood.)

Dave and Norm, you are right that we cannot eliminate subjectivity or factual disputes; but that does not have to be the only objective. Is not REDUCING the subjectivity a worthy goal? All I'm saying is let's just get everyone on the same page. Moreover, the vague rules we have now are an incentive to argue everything you can think of rather than a defined set of relevant facts.

Let me ask all of you to just have an open mind to rewriting the rules. Don't be against it because you don't think it can be done - let those who are willing to try have a shot at it - only be against it if you are completely happy w/ the rules as they are now. And I don't mean as you assume them to be or as Randy Pobst or anyone else explains them to you.

------------------
Bill Denton
87/89 ITS RX-7
02 Audi TT225QC
95 Tahoe
Memphis

[Matt Rowe]

Originally posted by bldn10:
Matt, where is that in the current rules? All it says now is that "the overtaken driver has the responsibility to be aware that he is being overtaken...."


Bill, it is located in 9.1.1.A - It is the responsibility of all drivers to avoid physical contact between cars on the race track. That section allows a steward to penalize either or both drivers in a situation depending on the facts in that particular case. If you create a rule that defines a point where driver A has the right to line then the stewards will be left with no recourse to punish the guys making banzai passes.


Originally posted by bldn10:
Inherent in any suggestion I make is that the overtaking car is under control and can make the turn w/o leaning on the overtaken car or cutting him off at the exit. I.e. no banzai moves.


You say it is inherent but I would like to see the wording that guarantees that. I don't think it is possible to make hard and fast rule like what you want without removing the necessary flexibility. But, even though I don't think it's possible I would be happy to debate proposed wording with you. Just put up something definite and I'll try and shoot it full of holes. http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/smile.gif


I am assuming that your idea of a clear rule is something along the lines of the overtaking driver has the right to the perferred line when his front bumper is even with the overtakens cars door/front wheel/front bumper. In that case I still think you will see people diving down the inside just to get their bumper to touch whatever that magic point is. In the protest the only hard evidence will be the dent that clearly shows the overtaking driver had the right to the line. But dents don't show that it was a banzai move, just a snapshot at the time of contact. In those cases the overtaken driver is going to lose unless multiple reliable sources can show it was a banzai pass. Under our current rule it is more likely that both drivers or neither will be penalized. Not perfect but it leaves the judgement more open

Also, consider a case where the overtaking cars gets even with the magic right of way point. Not in front or behind but even. That's a hell of judgement call to determine who has the right to the line.

Again, I'm not saying a revision to the rule isn't possible but it's damn hard to come up with something that works well for all situations. Put something in writing and we can debate the finer points. But, keep in mind the two big problems will remain, reliable evidence/witnesses and consistent stewarding. I don't think a rule change is going to effect wither of those.

------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96

[oanglade]

In my opinion, if they got their front bumper to the inside of my rear bumper, I have to give them enough space and can't simply shut the door on them. Otherwise, in my opinion, I knew he was there and I forced the contact.

I don't believe in the "the other car has to be completely along side me or it's my line..." It's not my line anymore if I have to create contact to keep it.

Just my opinion.

------------------
Ony Anglade
ITA Miata
Sugar Hill, GA

[Daryl DeArman]

If you guys are tired of all the rubbin' is racin' come out and join the open wheel crowd. Given the consequences they appear to be infinetly more respectful of 'racing room' and will actually find ways to make passes/prevent passes without resorting to NASCRAP tactics moving you out of the way.

I have a problem with a hardfast rule defining where someone's car has to be. There has to be subjectivity. If one has the right to choose any line whatsoever until we are up to their door, we are giving them the option of pinching down or drifting up into the area we occupy and we as the passee are expected to take evassive action to avoid contact. That could make it extremely difficult to ever make a pass when cars are of very similar cornering speeds. Yet if you make the rule so that any overlap gives both parties an equal responsibility; what about the banzai move that gets the bug on the front bumper just up to my rear bumper?

I feel that I only have the right to whatever piece of real estate on the track that I want when I can put my car there without initiating contact or cause you to brake/check up/drop wheels to avoid contact.

All I need to do is leave enough room for your car minus a sheet of paper on the desired side and you'll have to work your way around the hard side. Rest assured I won't make it easy, but advancing/defending by contact takes very little skill. I have zero respect for those who race that way.

[Wayne]

Please, no more rules. The gcr is already 3" thick...

[Eagle7]

Originally posted by Wayne:
Please, no more rules. The gcr is already 3" thick...
Actually, it's 1.5". Maybe yours was printed single-sided? http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/smile.gif

------------------
Marty Doane
ITS RX-7 #13
CenDiv WMR

[mlytle]

actually, the gcr itself is pretty thin...it is the comp spec's that make the book thick.... http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/wink.gif

[Mike Guenther]

Ony, you have my agreement on this.

"In my opinion, if they got their front bumper to the inside of my rear bumper, I have to give them enough space and can't simply shut the door on them. Otherwise, in my opinion, I knew he was there and I forced the contact.

I don't believe in the "the other car has to be completely along side me or it's my line..." It's not my line anymore if I have to create contact to keep it."

If they got there I respect their ability and give them the respect that I would expect if I had worked my way to that point. Its about having fun and respecting each other, not being butt heads just to get that plaque. All the senarios about what might be done to get up there and what might happen because of it are just some of the many possibilities that take place in the dynamics of racing. It is still all club racing for fun and excitement and sometimes things don't go the way we would like them to in that second of action. But respecting your fellow racers will bring you many friends that are comfortable going door to door with you and enhancing that adrenalin rush.

Ony, you said it clearly, thank you.

[gsbaker]

Originally posted by Mike Guenther:
...If they got there I respect their ability and give them the respect that I would expect if I had worked my way to that point. Its about having fun and respecting each other, not being butt heads just to get that plaque....

I'm with Ony too. It can only mean one thing if the same car fills your mirrors: they are faster.

Reminds me of my school experience when I asked my instructor how best to handle letting cars by. He suggested I drive faster so it wouldn't be a problem. Wise guy. http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/smile.gif

G

[ITANorm]

Originally posted by Mike Guenther:
"In my opinion, if they got their front bumper to the inside of my rear bumper, I have to give them enough space and can't simply shut the door on them. Otherwise, in my opinion, I knew he was there and I forced the contact.

However, if somebody forces their way in on an attempted pass that is at best inadvisable, and I will have to alter my normal line to allow him through (possibly putting me in a hazardous situation), there's liable to be a bit of paint swapped.

If he was truly a faster car, I would have probably already waved him by to start with.


[This message has been edited by ITANorm (edited May 13, 2005).]

[Mike Guenther]

Norm,
these are the situations I'm talking about. Yes, sometimes paint is exchanged if you're racing someone. If its someone I know and respect, we might be racing for a few turns or even a few laps and if a little paint is exchanged between friends, well that's the price for adrenlin today. But if its someone I don't know and haven't developed a trust and friendship with yet, I'm probably gonna give in to them and follow them for a few laps and then pick my corner to make a move and start racing with them. Or maybe not race them at all. If I don't feel comfortable sharing the track with them side by side, I won't risk wrecking my car over that position for a piece of wood at the end. I don't care as much about position as I do about having fun racing with guys (& gals), that I can trust that they will race clean. If you drive up on the inside of me and go a bit deep, that's O.K., but you better be able to keep your car under control. I'll give you plenty of room to track out, but I still need a car width myself, so don't push me off. Let's go racing. http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by Mike Guenther (edited May 13, 2005).]

[bldn10]

Here is some rule language I posted on the SCCA Passing Rules thread back in Jan.:

"Provided that it is under control and can otherwise safely negotiate the corner, if the overtaking car can achieve a position alongside the overtaken car such that its front axle is forward of the overtaken car's rear axle without causing the overtaken car to alter its normal line, then the overtaking car is entitled to racing room and the overtaken car cannot impede the overtaking car."

This retains the concepts of "racing room" and "blocking" in our current rules but expressly makes car position relevant.

The other side of the equation is to not only retain but beef up the anti-contact rule w/ something like this:

"If the overtaking car forces a pass in violation of this rule and the overtaken car loses a position in order to avoid contact, the overtaking car will be penalized appropriately."

The intention of this is to protect the guy who, as Matt said, acts responsibly and gives up the corner to avoid contact even when he has the line. And conversely to punish the bullies who rely on others to do all the contact avoiding.

------------------
Bill Denton
87/89 ITS RX-7
02 Audi TT225QC
95 Tahoe
Memphis

[lateapex911]

Bill, that's a great line. And I agree with it in principal.

The issue I see is at what point during the event of the corner is the overlap to be obtained??

In other words, if I am being overtaken, my "normal line" WILL have to be altered at some point. But that point varies corner to corner, and car to car.

WHEN am I forced to alter my line to accomodate?

And, how can that be worded in such a way as to cover all eventualities??

I think that is the key to the general vagueness of the current rule.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[Matt Rowe]

Bill, that looks pretty reasonable, but . . .

My first concern is there are a lot of words. Yes that is a pretty thin argument but typically the more words in a rule the more people tend to find "alternate" interpretations. That certainly isn't a good reason to toss it out but something to bear in mind.

Second, the phrase "then the overtaking car is entitled to racing room" could be taken that prior to that point the overtaking car is NOT entitled to racing room. Either that or you are restating what is already established under the existing rule which says that everyone is entitle to racing room. Also it can be implied that blocking is allowed prior to that point because the phrase about impeding the car does not take effect yet.

I do like the second rule concept protecting the position of the guy who avoids contact when he is not at fault. While I don't see anything inherently wrong in the wording I think coming up with evidence to support a protest is going to be difficult at best.


------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96

[This message has been edited by Matt Rowe (edited May 17, 2005).]

[ITAMiata]

I like Bill's policy. I especially like the 2nd part that covers the responsible driver.

Bill Hollinger
ITA Miata #33

[tbtapper]

what Rickey fails to tell you about racing room at the SIC incident 2 yrs ago is;
We appealed his protest because the GCR states that the lead car is obligated to give racing room for the overtaking car as well as the other way. the stewards agreed with our appeal since we had witnesses and marks on the side of Thumpers car. Rickey appealed that decision and provided a video from a following car. The appeal board observed the overtaking car under rickey and braking as well as putting wheels in the dirt to avoid contact. Rickey----it wasnt a rear end collision as you claim. Rickey you just arent telling the whole truth.

in reference to the incident 2 wks ago, i was following Rickey as he attempted to pass other cars in the dirt drivers right. He "in front of you drifted" two or three cars and slid drivers left fairly out of control. I lost sight of him at that point but he was not in control at last sighting.He probably got control in that millisecond because he never makes mistakes(just ask him). Well that apparently means that old "Thumper" bumped wheels with him in a dastardly plot to put him out of the race. I wonder where the mud came from since Roebling is pretty much all sand?
Yours Truly Bubba San

[tbtapper]

what Rickey fails to tell you about racing room at the SIC incident 2 yrs ago is;
We appealed his protest because the GCR states that the lead car is obligated to give racing room for the overtaking car as well as the other way. the stewards agreed with our appeal since we had witnesses and marks on the side of Thumpers car. Rickey appealed that decision and provided a video from a following car. The appeal board observed the overtaking car under rickey and braking as well as putting wheels in the dirt to avoid contact. Rickey----it wasnt a rear end collision as you claim. Rickey you just arent telling the whole truth.

in reference to the incident 2 wks ago, i was following Rickey as he attempted to pass other cars in the dirt drivers right. He "in front of you drifted" two or three cars and slid drivers left fairly out of control. I lost sight of him at that point but he was not in control at last sighting.He probably got control in that millisecond because he never makes mistakes(just ask him). Well that apparently means that old "Thumper" bumped wheels with him in a dastardly plot to put him out of the race. I wonder where the mud came from since Roebling is pretty much all sand?
Yours Truly Bubba San

[Hotshoe]

...I know what happened at the SIC, and so do a lot of other people. I have a tape to prove it, and will gladly send a copy of it to you John Henderson.
...And as far as the race a couple of weeks ago at Roebling Road. I ran off the track in turn four to avoid contact with Tim Dejoris in his Acura Integra because he did not see me and cut me off. See, some of us do try to avoid contact. Remember "Safety First"
...So, why don't you ask Jeff Ryan and Tim Dejoris what happened at Roebling Road a couple of weeks ago. They both saw what happened and they will be glad to "tell you the TRUTH"
...And you are wrong about the way you think I perceive myself. I do make mistakes, I trusted the driver of the 6 car didn't I.
...Oh, and ask Kurt about how much "mud / wet sand" I removed from inside my right front wheel.
...I can only hope that you and the rest of those that feel like there is a problem here can put it to rest.
...I mentioned what happened because unsafe driving needs to be addressed. Like I said, If another driver feels like they are wanting to win no matter what the cost. Then please let me know. I consider my SAFETY worth a lot more, and would rather sit that race out.

... And should we care to mention who was passing cars under a RED FLAG a few weeks ago at Roebling Road?

...Rick Thompson # 99 IT7



[This message has been edited by Hotshoe (edited May 31, 2005).]

[Greg Amy]

I had a good one this weekend at LRP where one of the green ITS Golfs literally drove me off the left side of the track, nearly into the Aarmco, going down No Name Straight. Since I didn't know which one of you to "have a discussion with", I figured it was best to grab a beer and let it go.

To whichever one of you that was (and I have a fairly good idea), consider this little tidbit: had I not taken to the grass to avoid you as you came over on me as I was passing you, the end result would have been to turn you sideways, directly into said Aarmco. It would not have been a positive development for that pretty metallic green paint.

You owe me, at the very least, an apology, if not a sixpack of my favorite (and I have higher beer standards than DP).

Greg Amy
#31 ITS black Miata

[67ITB]

Greg,

I don’t know which one it was, but since I was pitted with both, and tow one of the cars to the track...... I don’t think that either post here.

Next time just stop over and chat with them, as they are both reasonable people. And I am sure they could both learn from the situation. I will pass this along to them.

Not to mention I don’t need to try and get a busted car in the trailer for any reason!!!!!

I for one had a great time racing with you on Saturday. There is a long break now so you should be able to get both cars fixed!!!

Matt Bal

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
... And should we care to mention who was passing cars under a RED FLAG a few weeks ago at Roebling Road?

not that it is relevant to this disagreement, but to set the record staight, there is nothing against the rules about passing under a red flag.

dick patullo

[Hotshoe]

Dick,

... I sure hope they don't make you a Steward.
...The rule is written that you come to an "immediate controlled stop". So, If the three cars in front of you stop and pull to the right and you do not then you better have a good excuse why your car could not stop as well as the ones in front of you.
...I think the rule is clear enough without having to over explain it.

...Read between the lines...

[Bryan Watts]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
...The rule is written that you come to an "immediate controlled stop". So, If the three cars in front of you stop and pull to the right and you do not then you better have a good excuse why your car could not stop as well as the ones in front of you.

The problem is that I rarely see people coming to a "controlled" stop in red flag conditions. They see a red flag and go into panic mode and forget to check their mirros when when I'm only a car length behind. You better believe I'm going to just flick the car around them and come to a stop in a controlled and calm manner near a corner station instead of going into full-on lockup mode like the duffus in front of me, potentially causing another wreck when race control already has a serious problem on it's hands.

[gran racing]

True, but at the same time if the car in front of a person comes to a very controlled stop and gradually pulls off to the side the following car can not simply "come to an even more controlled stop" after that car. And if they do for whatever reason, they should allow the car they passed to move back in front of them once the red flag is taken away. (Again, talking in general and not about the other situation they are debating)

------------------
Dave Gran
NER ITB #13
'87 Honda Prelude si

[lateapex911]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
Dick,

... I sure hope they don't make you a Steward.
...The rule is written that you come to an "immediate controlled stop". So, If the three cars in front of you stop and pull to the right and you do not then you better have a good excuse why your car could not stop as well as the ones in front of you.
...I think the rule is clear enough without having to over explain it.

...Read between the lines...




Sadly, Dick is one of the more reasonable, clear thinking and relatively not uptight guys I have met in racing....and for those reasons, he is apparently not steward material. Too bad, he'd be great.

As for passing under the red, the whole point as I understand it is to stop the race, and clear the track.

So if you are in a bunch of cars, I can very easily see a situation where you are tucked in tight to a guy and you don't see the flag, just him suddenly moving right or left and stopping, as though he had a problem. Of course, as soon as he moved over your vison would be clear, and you would see and abide by the red flag, but you might end up stopped ahead of him.

No harm, no foul...and nothing to get excited about.

Now, if a guy sails by stopped car after stopped car, he should be hit upside the head for being a bonehead who doesn't look at the flaggers and is acting in a dangerous manner.

I am sure that Dick, if we were lucky enough to have him as a steward, would attend to that situation properly.....



------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]

[dickita15]

Originally posted by Hotshoe:
Dick,
... I sure hope they don't make you a Steward.

well Rick we agree at least on that.


Originally posted by Hotshoe:

...The rule is written that you come to an "immediate controlled stop"...
...I think the rule is clear enough without having to over explain it.


well if you have a problem with someone not coming to a controled stop, say so. passing under a red is perfectly legal and I am only interested in a casual reader not thinking otherwise. if a driver in front of me does a panic stop under red the only responsible action for me is to pass the person and then pull over off line in a safe position.

Dick patullo

[RSTPerformance]

"Sadly, Dick is one of the more reasonable, clear thinking and relatively not uptight guys I have met in racing....and for those reasons, he is apparently not steward material. Too bad, he'd be great."

Jake- So you are stating that all stewards are unreasonable, unclear at thinking, and uptight? Careful before you respond to this, as I haven’t hung out with you this year yet http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/wink.gif Some of them might be watching, and they don't forget the hostile http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/smile.gif

The real reason though for my post... I am not going to get into the debate on what is racing room and can we pass under a red or not. However I will comment that from a steward’s point of view I dealt with a few driver vs. driver protests last weekend at the Nelson Ledges National that dealt specifically with the ideas behind racing room. I WAS VERY SUPRISED... It isn't easy to determine with a piece of paper what really happened. I was surprised that none of the drivers in any case had videos but it was helpful to listen to the witnesses. Without the witness it really was a he said / she said, especially for me as I was way out of region and did not know any background on the drivers in question. My advice for those really worried... Get video's and always get a witness. Many of us are "growing/learning drivers" so first try to talk (civil) to the driver you had an issue with, and don't be afraid to bring the video with you (I have used the video once to defuse an issue with another driver and actually team up with the other driver to file a protest on someone else). If all else fails make a protest, we all want this to be as safe as possible http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/smile.gif.

Raymond "delete, delete, delete" Blethen

PS: I know some of you are probably giggling as I certainly have been "wound up" a few times... Looking back though I can't think of one situation it helped me in... Live and learn.

[dickita15]

Originally posted by RSTPerformance:
Live and learn.

raymond, think how smart you will be when you get to be my age.
http://ITForum.ImprovedTouring.com/smile.gif

mr patullo

[lateapex911]

Ahhh good points young Raymond...and upon re-reading, it DOES sound like a slam on stewards....

You will note that it was written in the middle of the day..a very odd time for me to post as I am aways working then, but I had a minute, and responded hurriedly.

The concept was more that Dick thinks he's not quite crazy enough to take the Stewards position, as it's not the easiest job around.

As in: Dick is way too clear thinking to get himself into a job like that!

All in good fun anyway...

Look, folks know that like drivers, we have some good apples, some average apples and some apples that you might want pick around in the Stewards role....but since I have been racing with the club, NER at least, has made some great inroads in improving the club official/driver interface.

------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]