Pocono Mechanical Protest

[Greg Amy]

I was involved in a mechanical protest of a fellow ITA competitor's car this weekend. I wanted to offer the facts of the situation here first-person, in case there's any rumors flying around. Also, a couple of things happened, somewhat unexpected, that I didn't like and I wanted to pass along.

I and three other competitors - I'll let them offer their identities, as I did not ask them if I could post this - protested the Acura Integra of Windell Holmes for several items, primarily engine- and power-related (although there were some non-engine related items as well). What those specific items were is not particularly relevant, other than to say we were prepared to post the necessary bonds to partially disassemble the engine. Also note that we requested he be allowed to compete through the weekend, but we wanted his car impounded/babysat during that time frame.

We filed the protest immediately following Saturday's qualifying session. A court was convened to review our protest, and Windell was called up to the Stewards. After lunch the stewards came to us and notified us that Windell had chosen to withdraw rather than allow us to check his car, choosing to take the automatic 6 months license suspension and $250 fine. However, he further implied that he was not going to pay the fine, instead he was going to withdraw his SCCA membership and race EMRA and NASA exclusively from now on.

This wasn't necessarily surprising; we recognized that this was a tact he could take. It's not what we wanted: I certainly don't like the idea of a competitor simply walking away unhappy. I wanted Windell to compete with us; in point of fact, we welcome everyone. I also wasn't disappointed that I couldn't take a "shot" at him. The problem is, right or wrong, we believed that Windell's car was illegal and this is the only course of action we can take to verify it.

Further troubling, per the steward Windell said he felt like he was an outsider, that he wasn't part of "the clique". Therefore, I infer he felt he was being singled out and being told to go away by us. NOTHING could be farther from the truth. As noted above we welcome all competitors, and we welcomed Windell as best we could; it's just that we welcome him in a legal vehicle. If he was found during the protest to be legal I would have been the FIRST person to walk up to him, apologize, and make sure that all of his expenses were covered.

In the end, though, I'm left to simultaneously wonder if he ever was legal, and bemoan the loss of a good ITA competitor.

I'm really sorry it came to that.

Greg

[gsbaker]

Sorry to hear that.

[Jeremy Billiel]

Guys - I am sorry to hear that the protest ended this way. It's our duty as a self policing group to not be afraid to ask the tough questions and put your money where your mouth is (This is in the form of a bond to put the engine together if it was indeed legal).

[zracre]

Don't be sorry...if he was cheating (which it sounds like he was) instead of manning up and fixing it he belittles SCCA and jumps ship? Thats not right...It sucks to lose a competitor...if he was cheating and it was obvious what did he expect? Did you have dialogue with him before the protest? That may have helped things turn out differently...

[BlueStreak]

Sad story indeed. That said, the protest procedure is well documented, and being prepared to deal with a protest is just as much a part of racing as, well, a green flag.

Had it been me, I'd have been anxious to prove my innocence and make the protester look like a fool :P , but that's just me.

Then again, I'd probably turn around and spend a couple grand "counter" protesting out of spite ;)

Greg, it sounds like you feel really bad about this. You shouldn't, you followed procedure, somebody else decided that they would rather not. His decision, period.

I hope he changes his mind and comes back, but he should come back prepared to race within the procedures and possibilities that are documented in black and white.

My .02 as I sit stuck at home sick.........

[bg43wex]

Greg, if windell only qualified 5th why the protest?

was there some sandbagging going on that led to this?

Inquiring mind want to know, do tell please.

[Greg Amy]

Brian, we had planned this protest in advance of the event. We'd tried talking to Windell last year about our suspicions, but the discussions quickly turned into defensive posturing and were unproductive.

We'd decided well in advance to take this course of action; it had nothing to do with his qualifying position (nor should it...)

[Mattberg]

Greg,

Sure sounds to me like you did everything not only by the book but in a stand-up gentlemanly manner. Nothing to be sorry about. The fact that Mr. Windell believes NASA and EMRA will embrace him as a legitimate competitor, if they do, says volumes about those organizations and the integrity of their race programs.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I was also one of the participating protestors. We were hoping to split the costs of the bond. My perspctive on this:

This particular car, while it doesn't win everywhere, it holds at least one track record that I know of and has shown surprising 'bursts of speed' at odd times while on track. Video from multiple people from multiple regions of the car add to the evidence. Illegal items on the EXTERIOR of the car added to the suspicion of items not easily seen.

ITA in the Northeast is a great class but this car seemed to be that needle stuck in everyones craw for the past few years. The potest was written well in advance and done so in a sportsman like manner thanks to Greg's professionalism. While he did predict the outcome (withdraw, fine and suspension) I think all of us were dissapointed in it. I KNOW a protest sucks. I KNOW it is inconvienent. But as BlueStreak says, it is an opportunity to show the class that you are legal and fast. A real 'stick it' opportunity. A badge of honor.

While I will speculate privately why Windell withdrew without allowing anyone to look at the car, it still leaves me empty because I didn't really find out what I wanted to know.

The comments about the 'clique' and the 'boys club' fall on deaf ears for me. Windell, while he may be a nice guy to some, is confrontational and openly unconcerned about the rules when you talk with him. It's never fun. The Northeast has some of the best people in this sport and everyone is welcomed with open arms...to say that he has been excluded is both inaccurate (because he has never made an effort to even introduce himself) and disingenuous. He brings a dedicated crew, never pits with any of the IT guys and never speaks to anyone.

I think while the process 'worked', it still leaves me empty because we have lost a racer - but one who never wanted to be found IMHO. I wish him the best of luck and would welcome him back should he decide to prove his legality.

[Doc Bro]

I think that it stinks for Windell- to drive a couple hours, spend the money on entry and fuel and go home. Probably put him out 500, plus the 250 fine if he ever pays it. That being said, the "I'm taking my ball and going home" speaks volumes. Andy you nailed it dead on. Too bad. Nobody wins when it goes down this way. Ultimately though, were all responsible for our destiny. How you want your story written is your choice.

If he was a cheat then the integrity of the rulebook was preserved. If he wasn't then it'll stink to see him leave.

R

How did tech handle the protest??? ;)

[lateapex911]

I will try to be professional here....but I'll fail.

For those who aren't local, this car was the subject of a HUGE shouting match between one ITA driver and it's owner in impound after a race last year. The instigator decided not to protest because his last protest became a clusterf^ck, and he just wanted no part of that scene again. As a member of that protest, I can't say as I blame him....

This is the same car that seems to go thru cylinder heads and engines like singles at a strip club.

I have letters in my in basket with part names and numbers of items seen inside his engine that weren't supposed to be there.

The bottom line: this one is simple, and it has NOTHING to do with being "accepted" or any of that BS. That is simply a ridiculous "spin".

The car has been illegal, and was illegal. He has been warned multiple times. He made his decision, and decided that being suspended was his best option....there's no doubt in my mind that the car was illegal, and probably in many ways.

You guys are being nice, and lamenting the loss of a competitor...I have no such feelings...the class and category are better off without someone who chooses to operate in such a manner.

[JLawton]

I was also one of the protesters. I think withdrawing said it all. We didn't have to tear down his engine to know he was illegal. You could SEE items that were illegal.

And the part about being "left out"? Give me a break.............

There were a few other things that bothered me about this adventure, but I'm not sure we will get into it in public................

I say good ridence........

[gran racing]

The only way I feel bad for Windell is because he felt that it was necessary to cheat. Back when I was in ITA ('05?) at the NARRC runoffs, his engine died per ususal after the front straight. My hub happened snap in the same area and we ended up at the same corner location to watch the rest of the race. I have no clue how a conversation of cheating came up between him and the corner worker, but it did. I could not believe what I hear both of them saying, and I remember it very vividly. Windell said that we're just racing for fun and basically can't see why people are so uptight about cheating. We're just racing for plastic trophies. Right then and there, he was condoning cheating to me and the corner worker. What surprised me more was that the corner worker actually agreed with him (or felt uncomfortable about the situation and just went along with him). My only comment to Windell and the corner worker was "If we're just out here racing for fun, why do you feel it necessary to cheat?" Then I walked away very pissed off.

Feel bad for him? Absolutely not!! As Jake said, he blows his engine up many, many times. The theory has been if Windell gets out in front, don't worry, you'll see him on the side of the track any time now. What is the point of me saying this engine stuff? With his experience putting engines back together and availability of parts, he could put the engine back together in his sleep. It wasn't the work that scared him away.

I commend you guys for the actions you took. He's had plenty of warnings over the years. Maybe this is what it'll take for him to think twice about cheating next time. Heck, maybe now he'll put together a clean program and be able to enjoy racing more?

[dickita15]

If someone wants to build a fun car and not worry about legality then ITE is the place for them. It’s not like we are talking about a car that is running around at the back. This car was taking lap records and podium finishes from others who play by the rule. Not in my class please.

[Greg Amy]

How did tech handle the protest??? ;)[/b]
Didn't get that far.

We submitted the protest to the Chief Steward after the qually session. Peter accepted it, read through it, and spent some time explaining the process so we knew what to expect and how to act. Peter was open-minded, professional, and great to work with. He told us we'd be notified of their actions going forward and he relayed the protest to the Stewards of the Meet (I think?).

(Purely speculation, because we weren't involved; any stewards care to comment on the normal course of action?--->) The stewards reviewed the action for validity, notified Chief of Tech of pending actions, and contacted Windell to notify him of the protest. At that point Windell notified them of his intent to withdraw.

(Back in the garage) S.O.M Chairman Chuck Dobbs came to us (Jeff, actually, since he was the named protester**) and told Jeff of Windell's decision. Dobbs returned my protest fee to me and left.

Later, Chuck came by for some paperwork cleanup, and that's when he told us of his conversation with Windell.

So, since the protest never proceeded, we had no experience with Tech. I do believe, however, that Chief of Tech, Bill Etherington, would have handled this professionally and to our satisfaction.



**Jeff (was?) volunteered to be the named protester because I could not be there on Sunday (prior personal commitment). Had we been given the option to review the car, I could not be there for Sunday evening's activities. Short of that, I would have been the main point of contact, and I do thank Jeff for stepping (being pushed?) up to the plate.

BTW, since he's probably working in the field this week and can't respond - but no doubt would - the fourth person was Joe DiMinno... - GA

[JeffYoung]

Total outsider here, but this one looks like it was handled professionaly and with respect for the competitor.

Cheaters are bad enough. Brazen ones, geez!

[Tkczecheredflag]

I don't know - You guys (Greg, Jeff, Andy and Joe) file a protest, but no one asked me to sign on. I am feeling very left out - not inlcuded - out of the cluque - not part of the boys club B) Was it something I said - is it that I drive a Acura - what have I done to desrve this :wacko: - poor me??? Actually you guys are the best well except for Joe (just kidding Joe) :023:

On a serious note - I have been racing with Windell since '97 in EMRA, when he was running a Geo Storm in ST-3. He has always held his cards very close to the vest, been his own guy, a good guy, but not used our club for it's social value. I have no problem with the door he choose to open in this regard but you have to remember that door swings both ways. Personally I have treated Windell like every other competitor - offered help or parts for his Acura when I could, and enjoyed conversation with him when available. Safe to say I am not a "social butter fly" in our great club, but I value the social aspects that we share in SCCA. Although I do not beleive Windell handled the protest properly, I will take this opportunity to remind myself to extend my hand of friendhship to my fellow club members. I beleive the story speaks for itself and like Dick's comment about ITE.

On a separate note, congrats to Greg A on his MBA Graduation at Quinnepac on Sunday - nicely done!

[x-ring]

I do believe, however, that Chief of Tech, Bill Etherington, would have handled this professionally and to our satisfaction.
[/b]

I'll chime in on that. I've worked with Bill the last few years at the Runoffs, and I have no doubt that everything would have been handled thoroughly and by the book.

[dazzlesa]

i applaud the effort. i found myself loosing a win on 3 occasions at pocono and watkinsglen to him. it absolulty stunk being blown away down the straights in the same 2nd generation integra. i moaned but i never stepped up to the plate. it was time and i am glad that you guys put the effort. play fair or go away! rick

[gsbaker]

This is the same car that seems to go thru cylinder heads and engines like singles at a strip club.[/b]
Singles? No wonder the girls call you Tightwad.

[RacerBill]

I, too, am sad to hear of these events. I don't like the fact that people think so little of their fellow competitors that they can circumvent the rules (the rules are what they are, and we need to live by them or attempt to change them by correct procedures). I am not pleased that someone felt that they could not continue with the club (but that is their problem, and they seem to have brought it on all by themselves).

I am, however very relieved that our system works. And that we have many more members with very high integrity who persued the issue in a very sportsman-like way. The end result, that a car that was prepared way beyond the limits of the rules has been at least temporarily removed from competition. The actions of the protestors were conducted in the highest standards of our sport. I am proud to be associated, even if only distantly with them.

Sorry it had to come to this, but I guess that in order to keep our sport clean, a little vacuming is necessary every once in a while.

I do have two concerns with the aftermath, not with the protest, but with the after action process.

1) If the protest etc. is not appealed, no one outside of this forum will ever know about it for future reference.

2) The protest was firstly against the car, and secondly against the driver/entrant. Was the protest and the results noted in the logbook? Was the logbook pulled? If this is not part of the process, should it be?

My concern is that sometime down the road, this car gets sold, as is, and some poor driver who was not told the truth about its preparation could be stuck with the same questionable parts.

Having information about the vehicle recorded and requiring a full annual inspection per GCR 5.9.2 A (which states "A full and complete Technical and Safety Inspection" would preclude this vehicle from returing to competition in its present state.

Again, my concern here is for someone who might innocently purchase this car.

But, anyway. Thanks to those who uphold our sport. I am looking forward so much to meeting you all in August. :)

[lateapex911]

Jeff, Jeff, Jeff, what were you thinking!? Come talk to me before you sign your name to the protest sheet the next time, LOL.

Kiddding, you guys know where I stand on issues like this. For your sake, I'm glad it went down the way it did. There are a lot of variables that can occur, and this way is pretty clean. Plus, it's a lot more work than you'd think for the protester.

For the rest of us, I imagine we'd have rather seen it go through, just out of curiousity.

And for those who aren't part of the series, the only reason this car hasn't been torn down years ago, was as Dave said, it rarely made it to the finish line. Lately thats been changing a bit, and he actually set a track record.

The other reason is that a protest against this car is a bit like shooting at a moving target...you never know what configuration it will be in on the weekend you choose to make your move. He actually brought the car down to the ARRCs one year, and he was either having prblems, or he'd changed back to stock stuff, as he barely eased away from me on the straight...and most ITA cars fly by my 7 on that straight.

Glad it worked out ...Pocono was a smart choice of tracks to do it at.

[Gtracer15]

Also, a couple of things happened, somewhat unexpected, that I didn't like and I wanted to pass along.
In the end, though, I'm left to simultaneously wonder if he ever was legal, and bemoan the loss of a good ITA competitor.
I'm really sorry it came to that.
Greg
[/b]



Brian, we had planned this protest in advance of the event. We'd tried talking to Windell last year about our suspicions, but the discussions quickly turned into defensive posturing and were unproductive.
We'd decided well in advance to take this course of action; it had nothing to do with his qualifying position (nor should it...)
[/b]



This particular car, while it doesn't win everywhere, it holds at least one track record that I know of and has shown surprising 'bursts of speed' at odd times while on track. Illegal items on the EXTERIOR of the car added to the suspicion of items not easily seen.

The potest was written well in advance and done so in a sportsman like manner thanks to Greg's professionalism. While he did predict the outcome (withdraw, fine and suspension) I think all of us were dissapointed in it. I KNOW a protest sucks. I KNOW it is inconvienent.
While I will speculate privately why Windell withdrew without allowing anyone to look at the car, it still leaves me empty because I didn't really find out what I wanted to know.

I think while the process 'worked', it still leaves me empty because we have lost a racer - but one who never wanted to be found IMHO. I wish him the best of luck and would welcome him back should he decide to prove his legality.
[/b]

I think Greg and Andy summed it up right there and yes, there is quite a bit of disappointment to go around today. There is no way at this point for anyone to know whether Windells car was legal or illegal. We can all speculate and speculate even more, and then speculate some more about this in the next few days but that WILL not change anything. We will never know. The other piece to this is whenever the #24 showed up for an event, the top runners knew that had to be on their A game. Sadly, as Greg indicated, he and the other top runners will never have another opportunity to take a "shot" at the #24 in ITA.

I was not there at Pocono this past weekend (prior personal committments) however, what is clear to me is that the planned witch hunt for the #24 car finally paid off. The years of planning the #24 hunt paid off in a really big way. Probably even better than anyone would have called it as, it was predicted that he (Windell) would withdraw, take the fine and suspension. Windell is no longer a threat in the ITA class and things will go back to "normal"...at least until the next "threat" emerges. I am left to wonder if Richard is next on the radar screen and plans are being made for him as well......but then again, he does not attend as many events and is therefore is usually not a threat for a championship.

Windell's withdrawal from SCCA altogether is not about being legal or illegal. Had he being a back runner finishing an occasional top 5 or so, this would be a non issue as we would be discussing an entirely different event from this past weekend. Feel free to discuss the illegal "EXTERIOR" parts Andy referred to, or the missing water bottle, or the letters Jake indicated he received containing part and part numbers that Windell had installed in his car/motor. This is pure speculation unless of course someone had/has x-ray vision. Part numbers would be extremely difficult and IMO impossible to obtain from a motor which had not being opened. Better yet, let's not forget to speculate about the weekend at Limerock where "someone" happened to pass by the #24 (while the valve cover was off) and by a casual glance only, was able to tell that the head contained "illegal" parts. Keep in mind his car went thru tech each and every time, impound each and everytime and passed. While this is not a cheap shot at the tech officials, EITHER, his car was deemed LEGAL during tech/impound after a race or our tech staff is a bunch of (insert your preference).

It is also unfortunate that Windell was found to be "unsociable". If I know/knew someone was constantly dogging me out, I would not readily smile and laugh with him/her/them. Great job dogging #24 enough to make him quit. Persistence pays of when it 10 against 1. Court was held and decided on in advance.....Kinda like the folks who are found guilty in courts, locked up and 10 years later DNA evidence emerges to prove them innocent.....At the time we were all sure they were guilty as charged. If we want them bad enough, we will find a way to get them....end of story. Believe me, I am just as disappointed to see him go.

[JLawton]

I think Greg and Andy summed it up right there and yes, there is quite a bit of disappointment to go around today. There is no way at this point for anyone to know whether Windells car was legal or illegal. We can all speculate and speculate even more, and then speculate some more about this in the next few days but that WILL not change anything. We will never know. The other piece to this is whenever the #24 showed up for an event, the top runners knew that had to be on their A game. Sadly, as Greg indicated, he and the other top runners will never have another opportunity to take a "shot" at the #24 in ITA.

I was not there at Pocono this past weekend (prior personal committments) however, what is clear to me is that the planned witch hunt for the #24 car finally paid off. The years of planning the #24 hunt paid off in a really big way. Probably even better than anyone would have called it as, it was predicted that he (Windell) would withdraw, take the fine and suspension. Windell is no longer a threat in the ITA class and things will go back to "normal"...at least until the next "threat" emerges. I am left to wonder if Richard is next on the radar screen and plans are being made for him as well......but then again, he does not attend as many events and is therefore is usually not a threat for a championship.

Windell's withdrawal from SCCA altogether is not about being legal or illegal. Had he being a back runner finishing an occasional top 5 or so, this would be a non issue as we would be discussing an entirely different event from this past weekend. Feel free to discuss the illegal "EXTERIOR" parts Andy referred to, or the missing water bottle, or the letters Jake indicated he received containing part and part numbers that Windell had installed in his car/motor. This is pure speculation unless of course someone had/has x-ray vision. Part numbers would be extremely difficult and IMO impossible to obtain from a motor which had not being opened. Better yet, let's not forget to speculate about the weekend at Limerock where "someone" happened to pass by the #24 (while the valve cover was off) and by a casual glance only, was able to tell that the head contained "illegal" parts. Keep in mind his car went thru tech each and every time, impound each and everytime and passed. While this is not a cheap shot at the tech officials, EITHER, his car was deemed LEGAL during tech/impound after a race or our tech staff is a bunch of (insert your preference).

It is also unfortunate that Windell was found to be "unsociable". If I know/knew someone was constantly dogging me out, I would not readily smile and laugh with him/her/them. Great job dogging #24 enough to make him quit. Persistence pays of when it 10 against 1. Court was held and decided on in advance.....Kinda like the folks who are found guilty in courts, locked up and 10 years later DNA evidence emerges to prove them innocent.....At the time we were all sure they were guilty as charged. If we want them bad enough, we will find a way to get them....end of story. Believe me, I am just as disappointed to see him go.
[/b]



Who are you??? It makes it a lot easier to accept your comments when there is a name attached to them.........

[benspeed]

This protest was a great example of competitors recognizing some real inconsistencies in performance that resulted in valid questions on the legality of the #24 car. I hate to have the thoughtful actions of some dedicated racers and competitors characterized as a witch hunt - these guys really did do the process right on a personal approach and rules approach by first speaking to the racer in about the questionable performance, monitoring the cars performance and telling the competitor that he is likely going to be protested. When it happened Windell opted to pack up and go - behavior that may be construed as guilty or somebody really feeling put out, isolated and unwilling to have his car torn down and then the work to put it together. The behavior lends itself to forming strong opinions - but that's it. I am not defending Windell by any means -I think he should have manned up to having the tear down. Sucks that nobody really will know.

I will say that I always spoke with Windell at the track and found him a competitve and quiet guy with a solid team that turned out to race at many tracks. He's wasn't going out of his way to be a social guy but when I sat down to eat dinner with him (uninvited - this was at the Glen two years ago when the cheater speculation was hot and he took track record) I was welcomed and enjoyed speaking with him and his crew. They felt like the club was out for them and they had no support. We did lose a competitor and that's a shame. I wonder if people would have thought more of him as a racer if he agreed to the tear down and was proven to be illegal - take his licks and penalties and come back to race legally and properly reprimanded or would people think more of him packing up and quitting SCCA.

I know what I think about that. Maybe Chad Knaus might have something to say too. He seems to have recovered after being proven a cheater. And will likely get some extra attention at tech for the rest of his career.

Question - has any competitor proven a cheat by tech come back to race and earn back respect? I haven't heard of ITA Shane Huffman (?) ever coming back to race and that is the only person I've heard of in the NE regional program proven to be illegal by teardown in my brief 7 years racing.

[gran racing]

Keep in mind his car went thru tech each and every time, impound each and everytime and passed. [/b]

Yeah, it's really tough to pass the weight inspection. :rolleyes:

Keep in mind my comments and thoughts about this protest are from someone in an entirely different class.

People spend way to much time and money to make their cars fast legally. Does it upset people if someone else takes short cuts and cheats? You better believe it does. Windell has never been shy about his toughts on the importance (or lack thereof) of cars being legal for IT.


Windell's withdrawal from SCCA altogether is not about being legal or illegal. [/b]

The next six months is. He choose not to prove his car was illegal although had the opportunity to do so. Is someone protests me in a fair way, then so be it and I get a free engine rebuild out of the deal. This was far from a witch hunt.

By the way, who did you say you are again?

[zracre]

Most people on here would be happy and flattered to get protested! I have heard people say stuff about me and wait anticipating a teardown of some sort excitedly! A protest is more of a compliment if you are not cheating. If you are cheating then the defensiveness and crying starts. If it was something simple to overlook or the owner didn't notice, then I would think someone would have told him. If it is blatant outright cheating and he gets mad when approached about it...expect someone to throw papers. If he is doing it for fun then there are other classes. Rules are rules and we all must follow.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Feel free to discuss the illegal "EXTERIOR" parts Andy referred to...[/b]

I refuse to get into any mud-slinging - especially with someone who is not willing to post their name in a response. I suspect you won't even in future posts.

I WILL however address the comments directed to me specifically. Last year at this same event, the #24 car had an aluminum "L-shaped" strip pop-riveted at the rear-most part of the factory rear spoiler. I don't know any better how to describe it other than to say it looked very much like a mini-version of what you would see on a NASCAR short track setup. Clearly illegal. I asked his crew guys what it was, got no response - and coincidentally it was gone the second day. Oh ya, the second day of that weekend he finished in the top 3 and was 100lbs underweight and was DQ'd. (http://www.mylaps.com/results/newResults.jsp?id=315466&highlight=8) The word was that he didn't know the weight on his car changed - and I believe that - because I don't beleive he has any interest in the rulebook.

The video I speak of is one from a Watkins Glen event where Windell is chasing the lead ITA car (not from NER). He chases for half the race and then, suddenly, he puts 10 car lengths on the leader between T1 and the chicane. I got the video in the mail asking if I knew anything about the car because it was unbelievable. This type of circumstantial evidence just adds to the perception and rumor. As far as this weekend, a casual glance showed his front airdam WELL below legal limits...but that was my own personal viewpoint and one to be verified by the tech guys. A protest is the only way to settle this stuff. It will never be known 100% why he refused to be torn down, take a fine and get a 6-month suspension. But I think it is reasonable to think that instead of standing tall and proving his legality, he chose to not allow anyone to see. That speaks volumes to me and eveyone who has asked me about this.

The witch hunt comments are obviously sour grapes. Last year, Greg and Joe 'manned up' and approached Windell about the perception of his car. As Greg has mentioned, things quickly deteriorated and nothing was accomplished. That was Windell's opportunity to talk about the issues which he neglected to take.

I am sorry he feels slighted in any way but this was a perfect opportunity to shove it right back up our a$$es by allowing a teardown and being found legal. I wonder why he didn't do that....

[R2 Racing]

I am sorry he feels slighted in any way but this was a perfect opportunity to shove it right back up our a$$es by allowing a teardown and being found legal. I wonder why he didn't do that....
[/b]
Seriously. If you really do feel like you're nothing more than the target of a witch hunt by a "clique" you're not allowed to be a part of (and having met Greg, Joe, and Jeff, that's BS), a tailor made perfect "Shove it up your a$$!" opportunity like this doesn't come along very often. I'd like to think that anyone who had nothing to hide would've relished that opportunity; especially when any costs accociated with the tear down would've then been completely covered.

[7racing]

never-mind.

[benspeed]

I tell anybody who will listen - you get one reputation in life and they don't grow back...

[lateapex911]

It is also unfortunate that Windell was found to be "unsociable". If I know/knew someone was constantly dogging me out, I would not readily smile and laugh with him/her/them. Great job dogging #24 enough to make him quit. Persistence pays of when it 10 against 1. Court was held and decided on in advance.....Kinda like the folks who are found guilty in courts, locked up and 10 years later DNA evidence emerges to prove them innocent.....At the time we were all sure they were guilty as charged. If we want them bad enough, we will find a way to get them....end of story. Believe me, I am just as disappointed to see him go.


[/b]

This isn't even remotely sensible or logical! He didn't leave because his feelings were hurt! Pulleeeze! He left because he made a call in his head, that opening up to the protest would be more expensive, in whatever terms that mattered to him, (money, time, reputation, whatever) than taking a 6 month suspension.

He was warned...and fairly so. That's "Dogging him out??" That's funny! If I were showing up, running like a freight train one day, and a dog the next, or fast on one lap then slow on another, and setting track records...and somebody said something about it to me, I'd either:
A- Have a darn good reason for my odd behaivior,
OR
B- I'd go home, straighten up my stuff and make darn sure I was squeaky clean.


The REAL bottom line here is that he didn't want to respect the written rules that everyone else abides by. And if you tell me I'm "Doggin him out" by recognizing that, well so be it.

Court was NOT held and decided in advance! Where do you come up with that!?? Nobody goes to the trouble to write a protest unless they really are darn sure the car is illegal. But .....the protester doesn't "Decide" the case. Heck, illegal cars squeak through protests because the protest was improperly written. The judge is the Steward, and the Steward made no ruling on this in advance, as far as I know.

DNA evidence?? Please...lets come up with something a bit more practical. We'll never know exactly which items on the list would have beeen found noncompliant, because the evidence is now useless,...it's not like DNA...once it's out of the control of the Stewards, it's toast. All we have to go on is the actions of the parties involved, and there aren't many innocent people who, after being "dogged out", wouldn't have LOVED to get protested and stick it in these guys faces.




I know what I think about that. Maybe Chad Knaus might have something to say too. He seems to have recovered after being proven a cheater. And will likely get some extra attention at tech for the rest of his career.

Question - has any competitor proven a cheat by tech come back to race and earn back respect? I haven't heard of ITA Shane Huffman (?) ever coming back to race and that is the only person I've heard of in the NE regional program proven to be illegal by teardown in my brief 7 years racing.

[/b]

I think NASCAR, and Pro Racing in general, is much different than club racing. In Pro racing, the officials are charged with ensuring compliance. In club racing WE are charged with that task, and the officials serve US upon request, to render judgements.

We are an honor society, in essence, and cheating is seen as an act of betrayal to your fellow competitior. In Pro racing, it's understood that you try whatever you can and if you get away with it, you've one upped the officials. Much different philosophies, in my opinion.

Shane (Hawthorne) has come back to race, but unfortunately he's been dogged with mechanical issues. I heard...but it was second hand, that his motor blew on one occasion, and something happend on a second race, but thats all I've heard. Oh, and he got married, I think, so that might be keeping him busy, (and broke, LOL)

[JLawton]

I am left to wonder if Richard is next on the radar screen and plans are being made for him as well......but then again, he does not attend as many events and is therefore is usually not a threat for a championship.

[[/b]

Richard who??

[benspeed]

We are an honor society, in essence, and cheating is seen as an act of betrayal to your fellow competitior. In Pro racing, it's understood that you try whatever you can and if you get away with it, you've one upped the officials. Much different philosophies, in my opinion.

Excellent point - honor vs. big stakes gamesmanship with the tech guys.

Looks like even Jr. will be getting some penalties for illegal mounts on his COT wing.

[lateapex911]

Richard who??
[/b]

Good point Jeff! The only Richard I can think of in the class is Richie...and he was a member of the 5 involved in the Hawthorn protest.

Which brings up anpother point. I can't speak for these four guys, but the post above seems to indicate that this was a gang up. I doubt it was for the reasons implied. Protests of this nature are often done by a group, as it's a very good way to share the expenses, which can be significant.

And....was Windell actually a threat for the championship? And does that matter? If someone feels that my car isn't legal...that I've done something either maliciously or not, I want them to get resolution ....whether I "matter" to the big picture or not.

(Of course, I'd appreciate it if they imformed/asked me about their issues first, just as was done in this case, .)

[seckerich]

People spend huge amounts of time and money to develop a fast car that wins legal. If someone else cheats to beat you they are stealing--plain and simple. One warning to get it right and then protest. Great job of doing the right thing for the class. :023:

[Greg Amy]

...the planned witch hunt for the #24 car finally paid off.[/b]
To carry that analogy to its logical conclusion, in our case "the witch" committed suicide by running and jumping into the fire the moment she heard someone scream the accusation, long before any trial was convened...and we didn't even get to see if she floated...

GA

[JeffYoung]

Was she lighter than a duck?

[dickita15]

Who are you??? It makes it a lot easier to accept your comments when there is a name attached to them.........
[/b]
http://itforum.improvedtouring.com/forums/...?showtopic=9867 (http://itforum.improvedtouring.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9867)

[lateapex911]

Well, well, well, isn't THAT a perfect bit of irony?

Wonder if he ever sold the car with the ...err...nevermind.

[zracre]

that splains it! :bash_1_:

[Eric Parham]

I think you guys did what had to be done to promote fair racing. I do not think you should feel bad about the way the protest turned out. I used to know the protestee from autocrossing. My bad, but I had not found enough time to chat much or catch up in recent years.

I don't think anyone here is to blame, but I do believe that he accurately told the steward how he felt. I think he also felt that most of his competition was cheating. Perhaps it was his racer's ego. Knowing some of you guys pretty well, I am quite certain that he was completely mistaken. Perhaps his social distance, as others have mentioned, kept him from noticing that. Thus, my guess is that he believed he was justified.

It sounds to me like Greg tried reason last year but ran head first into that ego. I wish someone else had made another effort. I doubt whether we'll see him again. If we do, it will only be if he believes that he's on the same footing as everyone else, and believes that the past won't be held against him. I do respect him for being so honest in his discussions on rules compliance, but it seems like that honesty should have provoked more friendly discussions with his competitors than it actually did.

I hope that the present or any other protested party would be accepted back without prejudice should he choose to come back after serving his suspension and paying his fines. Some comments that I see above to the contrary may be accurate, but are not in the spirit of good sportsmanship, IMHO.

[gran racing]

If someone were to come back, approach the people they cheated against and publicly appologized, then yeah, I can see your rehabilitation happening. If someone just comes back after the suspension is lifted and the items were not simply different interpretations of the rules or even an honest mistake, you lost my respect and would really have to earn it back.

I guess it's just my personality, but there's not much gratification in winning and setting lap records if I'm cheating. I'd rather come in 10th legally than cheat and win even if others are cheating. Again, pushing the rules is a part of racing but people need to be willing to defend their reasoning and why its legal.

[RKramden]

plus the 250 fine if he ever pays it.
[/b]

SCCA has a "list" and he will be added to it. If he does not pay the fine, he won't even be allowed to renew his membership. Any debts (either to a region, or to national) can get you on the "list".

A few drivers have tried to run races at NHIS but were on the list. They had to pay the outstanding debts (either to national or to a region) before they were allowed to register for a race.

As for running with EMRA, I noticed that their rules don't even contain the word "protest", and I have never known them to be concerned with cars being legal. Meeting safety requirements, yes, but being legal, no.

[RSTPerformance]

I hope that the present or any other protested party would be accepted back without prejudice should he choose to come back after serving his suspension and paying his fines. Some comments that I see above to the contrary may be accurate, but are not in the spirit of good sportsmanship, IMHO.
[/b]

Good comment Eric.

I do have the slightest respect in the fact that he simply withdrew and took the hit. That certainly IMO shows that he knows if he had gone through with the protest they (the stewards/tech) would have done a good job and found illigal parts. He at least had enough respect for all of the volunteers at the event to not drag them through a long process in hopes that someone makes an error that favors to his benefit.


Thanks to all involved for making the process work.

Raymond

[Wreckerboy]

SNIP

As for running with EMRA, I noticed that their rules don't even contain the word "protest", and I have never known them to be concerned with cars being legal. Meeting safety requirements, yes, but being legal, no.
[/b]

First, thanks for the compliment regarding safety concerns.

A brief clarification regarding EMRA and the legality of cars within class, as this is a common question or concern. I know I am not being attacked, and take no offense with your comments. You are correct, there is no verbiage in the EMRA Car Prep Guide with regards to protests. This stems from EMRA's mindset with regards to car classification. It's a little more liberal than the SCCA (not better, just different) and allows for cars to be modified in excess of the class rules. EMRA ST rules do not track to the IT rules item for item.

However, such modifications do not come without a cost - EMRA has a process in place that allows for "bumping" a car up in class depending upon what modifications are made above the rule set. These are spelled out in the Car Prep Guide as:


From The EMRA Car Prepartion Rules: ST Class exceptions are designed to allow modification to the car within the limits of car preparation.
An “exception” is any deviation from the class car preparation rules, as defined. Only the below deviations, or bumps, are allowed.
ANY CAR TAKING AT LEAST ONE (1) EXCEPTION, AS DEFINED BELOW, WILL BE MOVED UP IN CLASS. [/b]

Although every attempt is made to properly class each car for an event, it is really the responsibility of the competitors to police and identify improperly classed cars. EMRA wants to be sure that an individual racer or time trialist knows he/she can and should report what he/she feels is an incorrect classing to the Chief Steward, Stewards, or Tech.

Basically, we handle it in a much more informal manner than the SCCA does. Again, not better or worse, but more suited to our needs.

Some of you here have run with us and have had questions regarding the legality or classification of cars. I've had some competitors express concerns about specific cars, and I've either worked with the person to understand the rules or to understand that a specific car may or may not be illegal. However, we have had protests filed in the past and cars have been inspected. It just doesn't happen as often.

Again, just clarifying things, no offense taken.

[Eric Parham]

That certainly IMO shows that he knows if he had gone through with the protest they (the stewards/tech) would have done a good job and found illigal parts. He at least had enough respect for all of the volunteers at the event to not drag them through a long process in hopes that someone makes an error that favors to his benefit.
[/b]

That just got me thinking. This is purely hypothetical, but what would be the "best" course of action if someone was protested for an item that she knew to be questionable, and decided at that point that she would rather admit she was wrong and save everyone the ordeal of a teardown. Is that allowed, and if so, in what ways might the outcome or aftermath differ from the present case?

Also, if someone is proven non-compliant and/or substantially admits to it, can anything be done about track records previously set by that particular car/driver combination? Shouldn't we at least assume that a record set during the last year should be invalidated (at least in the absence of a showing by the competitor that the problem was just a recent mistake)? Can the protestee come forward and admit that a record should not stand without incurring additional penalties? It seems like this sort of thing should be in the GCR, but I don't really see it.

Why don't we automatically have a higher level of post-race inspection whenever a new record is set? On a side note, does the protestee in this thread still hold a track record for WGI, or was that the ITA long course record (recently nailed by GA :023: )?

[Andy Bettencourt]

That just got me thinking. This is purely hypothetical, but what would be the "best" course of action if someone was protested for an item that she knew to be questionable, and decided at that point that she would rather admit she was wrong and save everyone the ordeal of a teardown. Is that allowed, and if so, in what ways might the outcome or aftermath differ from the present case?

Also, if someone is proven non-compliant and/or substantially admits to it, can anything be done about track records previously set by that particular car/driver combination? Shouldn't we at least assume that a record set during the last year should be invalidated (at least in the absence of a showing by the competitor that the problem was just a recent mistake)? Can the protestee come forward and admit that a record should not stand without incurring additional penalties? It seems like this sort of thing should be in the GCR, but I don't really see it.

Why don't we automatically have a higher level of post-race inspection whenever a new record is set? On a side note, does the protestee in this thread still hold a track record for WGI, or was that the ITA long course record (recently nailed by GA :023: )? [/b]

http://www.mylaps.com/results/newResults.j...360&highlight=4 (http://www.mylaps.com/results/newResults.jsp?id=228360&highlight=4)

Short course record.

I would think that if you admitted to any infraction, they would just penalize your race and your license. By refusing altogether, you take the suspension and fine.

Tough to prove anything retroactively - and "I just put that in this winter" would come out of any cheaters mouth. I am sure you can admit to anything and have anything changed but how often does that happen? At NHIS, Nick's Qualifying time was an impossibly low 1:14.0 in SM. We knew it was wrong and so did everyone else. I went to T&S and told them we wanted our second fastest qual time which was accurate according to our stopwatches. They will change stuff for good reason.

[lateapex911]

During the CRX protest (See "A Protest Story" on this site), one of the questions I asked the Protest Steward, was, when he told me that the pistons were not Honda, was, "What did he say in answer to the question of when that motor was installed?". He responded "I don't know". Upon further, rather annoyed discussion, it turns out that he failed to ask that question in any way, but admitted he should have. It was somehow forgoten.

It was critical up to the day of the protest, as the car had recently set a track record. But, that record was broken by another car on the day of the protest, so it became a moot point.

But, through my discussion with him, IF he had asked, and the answer came back something like, "I didn't know there were illegal pistons in it, I bought it from a guy last winter", then indeed, the record would be erased. Now, thats just one stewards word on it, and there were several significant procedural mistakes made on that protest, and presumabley he should have caught them...so, who knows if he's right.

But..if it were ME asking the questions in the Stewards position, it would be one of the first questions I'd ask. And I'd ask it again when the results were being presented.

[Chris Wire]

Why don't we automatically have a higher level of post-race inspection whenever a new record is set?[/b]

I don't know that regions specifically monitor or even care about track records. It's more for bragging rights for the racer types. I know that when a time shows up on the T&S sheet here in CFR and it's below the "track record" for the venue, it will be noted on the sheet. But as for 'scrutinizing' the new record holder for compliance, the region doesn't treat it any differently than normal.

I could find no specific reference to it in the GCR.

[Tkczecheredflag]

Question - has any competitor proven a cheat by tech come back to race and earn back respect? I haven't heard of ITA Shane Huffman (?) ever coming back to race and that is the only person I've heard of in the NE regional program proven to be illegal by teardown in my brief 7 years racing.
[/b]
I started sharing garage space with Shane Hawthorne ITA #69, this past year in our home town. He is currently building an engine (to IT spec) and expects to be back this year. He spent the last year "tying the knot", and although we do not see each other all that often I believe he will be back in ITA soon. I know he has a current SCCA comp license and is looking forward to a come back as soon as possible.

Keep in mind that all good stories (protests) have two sides and this one is no exception. I've heard his version and it would surely make you scratch your head a bit. I suspect that the "real true story" lies somewhere in the middle of the two versions.

The real question is this - Is he bitter and does he seek "paper retribution"? :blink:

[gran racing]

The real question is this - Is he bitter and does he seek "paper retribution"?[/b]

If the cars he's or anyone else is seeking retribution to are legal, then who cares. :P

[Andy Bettencourt]

That is EXCELLENT about Shane. Never met him but hope to race with him.

[Rabbit05]

That just got me thinking. This is purely hypothetical, but what would be the "best" course of action if someone was protested for an item that she knew to be questionable, and decided at that point that she would rather admit she was wrong and save everyone the ordeal of a teardown. Is that allowed, and if so, in what ways might the outcome or aftermath differ from the present case?

Also, if someone is proven non-compliant and/or substantially admits to it, can anything be done about track records previously set by that particular car/driver combination? Shouldn't we at least assume that a record set during the last year should be invalidated (at least in the absence of a showing by the competitor that the problem was just a recent mistake)? Can the protestee come forward and admit that a record should not stand without incurring additional penalties? It seems like this sort of thing should be in the GCR, but I don't really see it.

Why don't we automatically have a higher level of post-race inspection whenever a new record is set? On a side note, does the protestee in this thread still hold a track record for WGI, or was that the ITA long course record (recently nailed by GA :023: )?
[/b]




I don't think that a higher post race inspection is a good idea when a new record is set. To reward a driver that had a good day by sending his car/motor home in a box would not be fun. There are a number of fast drivers here, that have well developed cars, with technology advancements, and we apply it to our cars, track records are going to be broken.
I think the current way of approching a driver/ car ,trying to talk it out first, is a great way for the self policing of IT. And if there is no resolve between drivers, then, yes, you have to go to to the tech officials.

I just dont see the point of cheating for a $2 plastic trophy .



John VanDenburgh

VanDenburgh Motorsports
IT ??VW

[benspeed]

It's good that Shane will return and hopefully recover his racing reputation. I hope he goes above and beyond to prove he has acknowledged what happened and demonstrates an "open engine" approach to his future racing.

I would like Windell to feel that he can return to SCCA, but only under our rules and willingly complied to.

As a club we should always be willing to give our members a second chance. And those members who step out of line should recognize they will receive a higher level of scrutiny.

[Eric Parham]

I would think that if you admitted to any infraction, they would just penalize your race and your license. By refusing altogether, you take the suspension and fine.
[/b]

If a protest was filed on cam specs, compression ratio and rear track, for example, would the engine still get opened to check cams and pistons if the car was found non-compliant on rear track? At any point, could the protestee avoid a teardown by admitting to one item, or would he have to "admit" to everything on the list (even if compliant) in order to avoid a teardown? Would the answer depend on the particular item admitted?

[lateapex911]

I think thats in the hands of the protestee. In our protest, we were asked if something was found to be illegal, early in the process, did we want to contnue? If we said yes, and the rest of the items were in compliance, we would lose our bond money for that part of the protest. If we said no, then the bond would be returned, and the driver would be penalized for the found infractions, but nothing more.

I think the same would hold in the event of a "confession". It would depend on what was confessed, and ultimately up to the protester to accept or not. So, lets say compression and cam were still up in the air, and the cam was "confessed to". Maybe thats an attempt on the protested driver to keep the rest of the protest from occuring. Or is it the gentlemanly thing to do to save everyone the effort? Bluff? Or? It becomes a bit of a poker game.

(To head that off, in our protest, we instructed the Stewards that we had written our protest, and expected it to be completed. We were not going to stop halfway)

[theracinglawyer]

I should not even get involved but I want to remind all of you who feel bad and are bearing your souls. When you do something you feel was in the best interest of the sport and your class of racing you don't need to apologize. When you win by cheating all you prove is that you know how to cheat.

All that being said, lets hope the reasons the competitor refused to have his car torn down had nothing to do with cheating.

You are leading by example and for that Greg you should be congratulated.

Good luck this year.

[lateapex911]

I got an email form someone close to the Stewarding game, that adds a bit of light to some of the questions.

1- Track records. It's not going to be removed via the protest process if it was set prior to the event that the car was protesed at and found illegal. It will be stripped from the record if it was set at the event the protest occurred, as the car gets wholly removed from the results.

2- "Confessions"- The opinion would be that the confession would need to be total, to avoid the teardown. And that most SOMs would be very hesitant to accept it, as it leaves the parts in the car, and with no parts and no measurements, the protestee can appeal the decision, and the SOM has nothing to stand on.

Again, these are opinions, but from someone better informed than I.

[jjjanos]

2- "Confessions"- The opinion would be that the confession would need to be total, to avoid the teardown. And that most SOMs would be very hesitant to accept it, as it leaves the parts in the car, and with no parts and no measurements, the protestee can appeal the decision, and the SOM has nothing to stand on.
[/b]

I would lose a great deal of faith in the protest/appeals process if a driver wins an appeal in a case where he signed a statement admitting that his car was noncompliant. I would hope that admitting to the infraction would be sufficient to uphold the original protest, even without a physical test of the legality of the parts in question.

In terms of stopping the protest once an illegal part is found, I would think it would be a mixed bag. If you stop upon finding an illegal part and the driver wins an appeal, he would be reinstated and you would have no way of knowing whether the rest of the car was legal.

[dj10]

I was involved in a mechanical protest of a fellow ITA competitor's car this weekend. I wanted to offer the facts of the situation here first-person, in case there's any rumors flying around. Also, a couple of things happened, somewhat unexpected, that I didn't like and I wanted to pass along.

I and three other competitors - I'll let them offer their identities, as I did not ask them if I could post this - protested the Acura Integra of Windell Holmes for several items, primarily engine- and power-related (although there were some non-engine related items as well). What those specific items were is not particularly relevant, other than to say we were prepared to post the necessary bonds to partially disassemble the engine. Also note that we requested he be allowed to compete through the weekend, but we wanted his car impounded/babysat during that time frame.

We filed the protest immediately following Saturday's qualifying session. A court was convened to review our protest, and Windell was called up to the Stewards. After lunch the stewards came to us and notified us that Windell had chosen to withdraw rather than allow us to check his car, choosing to take the automatic 6 months license suspension and $250 fine. However, he further implied that he was not going to pay the fine, instead he was going to withdraw his SCCA membership and race EMRA and NASA exclusively from now on.

This wasn't necessarily surprising; we recognized that this was a tact he could take. It's not what we wanted: I certainly don't like the idea of a competitor simply walking away unhappy. I wanted Windell to compete with us; in point of fact, we welcome everyone. I also wasn't disappointed that I couldn't take a "shot" at him. The problem is, right or wrong, we believed that Windell's car was illegal and this is the only course of action we can take to verify it.

Further troubling, per the steward Windell said he felt like he was an outsider, that he wasn't part of "the clique". Therefore, I infer he felt he was being singled out and being told to go away by us. NOTHING could be farther from the truth. As noted above we welcome all competitors, and we welcomed Windell as best we could; it's just that we welcome him in a legal vehicle. If he was found during the protest to be legal I would have been the FIRST person to walk up to him, apologize, and make sure that all of his expenses were covered.

In the end, though, I'm left to simultaneously wonder if he ever was legal, and bemoan the loss of a good ITA competitor.

I'm really sorry it came to that.

Greg [/b]

Greg, you have nothing to feel bad about, you didn't do anything wrong. Not only that but you said last year you approached him! F^*) the cheatin SOB. He proved he was cheating by slithering away under a rock to hide. Go let him cheat with nasa or erma. Last year while I was @ Mid O I heard some guys saying that they thought I had M3 cams in my car. If anyone thinks I'm cheating, bring their cash and I'll tear it down in front of them, with or without a protest. Greg, we lost a cheater and gained a more viable and honorable racing organization. You should be proud and if your not I'm proud of you. :D

[Gtracer15]

Brian, we had planned this protest in advance of the event. We'd tried talking to Windell last year about our suspicions, but the discussions quickly turned into defensive posturing and were unproductive.
We'd decided well in advance to take this course of action; it had nothing to do with his qualifying position (nor should it...)

See my response about court being held and a verdict determined even before the paperwork was filed. It was pre determined that #24 was illegal well in advance of Saturdays event.



Greg,
The fact that Mr. Windell believes NASA and EMRA will embrace him as a legitimate competitor, if they do, says volumes about those organizations and the integrity of their race programs.

Really, no need to take a cheap shot at EMRA or NASA. This is an SCCA discussion and your comment is not relevant to #24 being legal or illegal.



Who are you??? It makes it a lot easier to accept your comments when there is a name attached to them.........

Really not relevant to the discussion either....Are you implying that only if you know what my name is, you will accept my comments "a lot easier"?...come on Jeff. You know who I am....



Keep in mind my comments and thoughts about this protest are from someone in an entirely different class.

YOU said right there Dave.



I refuse to get into any mud-slinging - especially with someone who is not willing to post their name in a response. I suspect you won't even in future posts.
As far as this weekend, a casual glance showed his front airdam WELL below legal limits...but that was my own personal viewpoint and one to be verified by the tech guys. It will never be known 100% why he refused to be torn down, take a fine and get a 6-month suspension. But I think it is reasonable to think that instead of standing tall and proving his legality, he chose to not allow anyone to see. That speaks volumes to me and eveyone who has asked me about this.
The witch hunt comments are obviously sour grapes. Last year, Greg and Joe 'manned up' and approached Windell about the perception of his car. As Greg has mentioned, things quickly deteriorated and nothing was accomplished. That was Windell's opportunity to talk about the issues which he neglected to take.
I am sorry he feels slighted in any way but this was a perfect opportunity to shove it right back up our a$$es by allowing a teardown and being found legal. I wonder why he didn't do that....

Andy, see my note to Jeff about posting my name. You guys all know who I am so why an issue all of the sudden?? Does posting my name in my signature make me one of the "boys"???........if so, I decline. Last time I checked, we were still a free country with the ability to make most of our own choices. This I hope will not become a mud slinging match and stay somewhat on topic.
I am also impressed Andy that with a "casual glance", you were able to determine right there that the spoiler was out of spec. I would hate to think what you would have seen if you actually looked closely. I however applaud you by also STATING that that was ONLY your opinion and had to be verified with tech. It still does not negate the fact however that you has also boldly stated "ILLEGAL EXTERIOR PARTS" implying that you knew they were illegal ...........EVEN though you know for a fact that you were merely speculating based on a casual glance and presumably here say.
You know Andy, not everyone thinks the same way. While it might be "normal" for you to want to shove something up someone's a$$ to get back at them for whatever, FORTUNATELY, we do not all think that way. Seems to me that you are implying that the #24 was illegal and had convince you and others that he was illegal because he did not seize the opportunity to shove it up your a$$. Yes???NO???



This isn't even remotely sensible or logical! He didn't leave because his feelings were hurt! Pulleeeze! He left because he made a call in his head, that opening up to the protest would be more expensive, in whatever terms that mattered to him, (money, time, reputation, whatever) than taking a 6 month suspension.
Court was NOT held and decided in advance! Where do you come up with that!?? Nobody goes to the trouble to write a protest unless they really are darn sure the car is illegal. But .....the protester doesn't "Decide" the case. Heck, illegal cars squeak through protests because the protest was improperly written. The judge is the Steward, and the Steward made no ruling on this in advance, as far as I know.
Shane (Hawthorne) has come back to race, but unfortunately he's been dogged with mechanical issues. I heard...but it was second hand, that his motor blew on one occasion, and something happend on a second race, but thats all I've heard. Oh, and he got married, I think, so that might be keeping him busy, (and broke, LOL)

Jake, we've butted heads on this before, so this is just a continuation. I actually agree with you that Windell did not leave on Saturday because someone hurt his feelings, but DISAGREE 100% with your statement " He left because he made a call in his head, that opening up to the protest would be more expensive, in whatever terms that mattered to him, (money, time, reputation, whatever) than taking a 6 month suspension.
My disagreement comes from your inability, in logical terms, to be inside of Windells head (on Sautrday or any day for that matter) knowing his thought process at that time and ultimately his reason(s) for his decision.
So when you begin your response with a statement such as" This isn't even remotely sensible or logical! you should keep your own spoken (in this case typed) words in your mind as you proceed.

In addition, using your vast knowledge and understanding, you indicated that apparently, #24 continously blew motors/heads whatever, implying and strongly suggesting that it was because he is/was illegal. You also indicated that Shane H is back but unfortunately is being dogged by mechanical issues. This is the same Shane who is now supposed to be racing "legal" . Well using your logic, apparently Shane has not been rehablitated because if he is also dealing with mechanical issues, then he must still be using illegal parts. Correct????? Or is it that he is breaking for reasons other that being illegal???? (Not including tying the knot as that can break things as well).....Or is it cars with legal motors can INDEED have mechanical issues?? You decide because you are in a "know" position. Shane, this is not taking a "shot" at you...



Which brings up anpother point. I can't speak for these four guys, but the post above seems to indicate that this was a gang up. Protests of this nature are often done by a group, as it's a very good way to share the expenses, which can be significant.

See my note about a witch hunt. Protests can indeed be expensive and usually are only done by those having the means and willing to foot the cost. How many guys do you know outside of the top 5 ITA drivers in the NE who are in a position to do this???? Just think of how many people it would take to file such a protest against someone like Greg or Andy. That would indeed take a 'GANG" and it would probably never happen. You know that as well as I do.



To carry that analogy to its logical conclusion, in our case "the witch" committed suicide by running and jumping into the fire the moment she heard someone scream the accusation, long before any trial was convened...and we didn't even get to see if she floated...GA

Fortunately Greg, the #24 witch did not commit suicide. The hunt was planned and crafted to perfection as you stated....You said you also knew what the response would be as you guys had already discussed the #24 options when the plan was revealed. Obviously, you guys put a lot of time and effort to ensure that you obtained the desired result. See my note to Andy about the opportunity to shove something up someone's a$$ regarding committing suicide and floating.



It sounds to me like Greg tried reason last year but ran head first into that ego. I wish someone else had made another effort. I doubt whether we'll see him again. I do respect him for being so honest in his discussions on rules compliance, but it seems like that honesty should have provoked more friendly discussions with his competitors than it actually did.

Sure sounds like Greg "tried" to reason last year, does'nt it, but was confronted by ego. Well its all #24's fault then. He (#24) was the bad guy and everyone else was the goody guys...the goody guys always win, right. This is not a disagreement with what you are saying. Who knows how the "reason/discussion" really went down? Was it done in a threatening and or confrontational manner? Was it done in a " hey Windell, lets talk about the illegal stuff on your car??? Was it done in a "we/I would like to look at your car (feel free to look at mine)??? Or was this just thrown together and done on the fly??? Look I am not saying that Greg did anything incorrectly because I was not there at the time he and Windell had the "talk". I am sure you were not present either. We only know what we know based on what Greg stated.
None of that makes any difference at this point. It is already a done deal. Goal was to eliminate the #24. Goal accomplished.




Keep in mind that all TRUE stories (protests) have two sides and this one is no exception. I've heard his version and it would surely make you scratch your head a bit. I suspect that the "real true story" lies somewhere in the middle of the two versions.

^^Enough said. I do not believe we will have the opportunity to hear a complete and unbiased version of either side, not that it matters now. At this point, it is a combination of second, third, fourth and fifth hand versions of this past weekend and all the pieces which lead up to it. I am confident that the NE region ITA group will go on smoothly without #24...at least until the next threat shows up.



All that being said, lets hope the reasons the competitor refused to have his car torn down had nothing to do with cheating. You are leading by example and for that Greg you should be congratulated.
Good luck this year.

I think it is safe to say that the reason(s) #24 refused to have his car torn down HAD nothing to do with cheating. You would have to look beyond the refusal for a tear down and fine/suspension to see that with the addional steps taken, realize that this was way more than just that.

See you guys at the track. :birra: :eclipsee_steering:

[JoshS]

Can we please stop referring to this individual as "the #24?" There are other #24s out there racing and personally, I don't want to be confused with this individual. What's wrong with names?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Andy, see my note to Jeff about posting my name. You guys all know who I am so why an issue all of the sudden?? Does posting my name in my signature make me one of the "boys"???........if so, I decline. Last time I checked, we were still a free country with the ability to make most of our own choices. This I hope will not become a mud slinging match and stay somewhat on topic.[/b]

You know what it does and doesn't do. It lends credibility to your statements when you sign your name. I didn't make the connection until Dick posted the link. Birds-of-a-feather...

I am also impressed Andy that with a "casual glance", you were able to determine right there that the spoiler was out of spec. I would hate to think what you would have seen if you actually looked closely. I however applaud you by also STATING that that was ONLY your opinion and had to be verified with tech. It still does not negate the fact however that you has also boldly stated "ILLEGAL EXTERIOR PARTS" implying that you knew they were illegal ...........EVEN though you know for a fact that you were merely speculating based on a casual glance and presumably here say. [/b]

Well, these things aren't hard to determine. The rear spoiler last year was blatent and just stupid. My 'casual glance' this year was on the front spoiler. The rule states it can't be lower than the lower wheel lip...my glance showed it clearly was...no issues - he ran.

You know Andy, not everyone thinks the same way. While it might be "normal" for you to want to shove something up someone's a$$ to get back at them for whatever, FORTUNATELY, we do not all think that way. Seems to me that you are implying that the #24 was illegal and had convince you and others that he was illegal because he did not seize the opportunity to shove it up your a$$. Yes???NO???[/b]
So how DOES he think? How do YOU think? If you are protested, do you run and hide or do you stand up and prove your legality? My comments were tongue-in-cheek. What that clearly meant was that if you were legal, this was a perfect opportunity to get proven so. When you intentially avoid such compliance checks, the belief that the car in question is illegal is not only fostered, but some would say proven. Not me, but most. I wanted to see for myself how what I see on the track can be possible legally. It's that what the protest process is for, no?


See my note about a witch hunt. Protests can indeed be expensive and usually are only done by those having the means and willing to foot the cost. How many guys do you know outside of the top 5 ITA drivers in the NE who are in a position to do this???? Just think of how many people it would take to file such a protest against someone like Greg or Andy. That would indeed take a 'GANG" and it would probably never happen. You know that as well as I do.[/b]

Yes, these things can be expensive...but only to the party that is wrong. I have no problem with my car getting torn down...legal cars get a free rebuild! If you are illegal, it will cost you. If Windells car was legal, the group that protested would have to pay the costs. Simple really. Legal? No cost to you. Inconvienient? You bet - but a small price to pay to hush the naysayers.


Fortunately Greg, the #24 witch did not commit suicide. The hunt was planned and crafted to perfection as you stated....You said you also knew what the response would be as you guys had already discussed the #24 options when the plan was revealed. Obviously, you guys put a lot of time and effort to ensure that you obtained the desired result. See my note to Andy about the opportunity to shove something up someone's a$$ regarding committing suicide and floating. [/b]

I love this standpoint. The reason it was done ahead of time is because these things are difficult. We wanted it to be as easy as it could be for everyone. That is a difficult task but we tried our best.


Sure sounds like Greg "tried" to reason last year, does'nt it, but was confronted by ego. Well its all #24's fault then. He (#24) was the bad guy and everyone else was the goody guys...the goody guys always win, right. This is not a disagreement with what you are saying. Who knows how the "reason/discussion" really went down? Was it done in a threatening and or confrontational manner? Was it done in a " hey Windell, lets talk about the illegal stuff on your car??? Was it done in a "we/I would like to look at your car (feel free to look at mine)??? Or was this just thrown together and done on the fly??? Look I am not saying that Greg did anything incorrectly because I was not there at the time he and Windell had the "talk". I am sure you were not present either. We only know what we know based on what Greg stated.
None of that makes any difference at this point. It is already a done deal. Goal was to eliminate the #24. Goal accomplished.[/b]

Actually, Joe was there as well so he can verify. I talked with another guy yesterday about Windell and he said he belived the attitude. "Why?" I asked, because the guy telling me this isn't even in Improved Touring. He goes on to tell me that he was in the Registration line at Pocono either last year or the year before and he turns to make small talk. Introduces himself and asks Windell his name and what he drives. The short of it is that Windell basically told him it was none of his business. Real nice - but consistant with the other data.

The goal was not to eliminate Windell. The goal was to verify the legality/illegality of the #24 Integra. Really quite simple. What was predicted was that he would leave without verification because he knew he was illegal. I ask you - WHY DID HE LEAVE and take the fine and suspension instead of allowing his parts to be checked?


I think it is safe to say that the reason(s) #24 refused to have his car torn down HAD nothing to do with cheating. You would have to look beyond the refusal for a tear down and fine/suspension to see that with the addional steps taken, realize that this was way more than just that.
[/b]

HA HA! This could be the funniest thing I have read from you yet. How was he to know how much 'planning' had gone into the protest? Bottom line? He had a chance, and he didn't take it. We all know why.

[jjjanos]

See my response about court being held and a verdict determined even before the paperwork was filed. It was pre determined that #24 was illegal well in advance of Saturdays event.[/b]

That leap of logic would be capable of clearing a tall building. While it may be true that the competitors who filed the protest were convinced that the car was illegal well in advance of the event, the legality of the car has yet to be determined. The teardown itself is what determines the legality. And frankly, if I reach the point that I am willing to protest a competitor for cheating, then his qualifying position for the race isn't going to change my view - particularly if I believe that sandbagging has been used in the past.


Goal was to eliminate the #24. Goal accomplished.[/b]

Wow... I thought the goal was to determine the legality of the car. If the goal was to eliminate him, then a tap in the rear at the correct part of the track would have ended his day and possibly the car's career.

Sorry, but a refusal to submit to a teardown is prima-facie evidence that the car is illegal, particularly if one has not been subjected to prior protests regarding the legality of your equipment.

[Zephyr]

Go let him cheat with nasa or erma because they don't care if you do or not.[/b]

I have attended one EMRA race and sadly was not able to race due to a mechanical but I have been racing with NASA for years and involved with them for even longer. Stating that we do not care if drivers are cheating is a bold statement. Cheating is unacceptable anywhere. If you feel something is out of compliance you should approch the individual face to face rather then speculating as a group. Quite often there are items that are overlooked and easily rectified with a short friendly conversation. There are some who will go out of their way to legitimately cheat and use illegal parts. They know who they are and will have to deal with the fallout when they do get caught.

It is our jobs as racers to keep everyone honest regardless of sanctioning body.

[JLawton]

[Really not relevant to the discussion either....Are you implying that only if you know what my name is, you will accept my comments "a lot easier"?...come on Jeff. You know who I am....
[/b]



Ummmmmm, Einstein??? I really have no idea who you are... <shrug>


"Maybe" not relevant but anyone can be a chicken sh*t and make flaming remarks without using their name........


Be a man...............

[gran racing]

It lends credibility to your statements when you sign your name. I didn&#39;t make the connection until Dick posted the link.[/b]

Exactly. Most of do not know who you are. It sure is easy to hide this way.



Keep in mind my comments and thoughts about this protest are from someone in an entirely different class.
[/b]


YOU said right there Dave.[/b]

Meaning I do care about the legality of cars, especially those within our category. Would I consider protesting someone in another IT class if I truly believed they were cheating? Yup.

Have you ever even given the slightest amount of consideration how cheating and taking short cuts impacts others? Because it does in many ways.

It was mentioned that Windell (# 24 as you refer to him) thought that everyone else was cheating and thus in his mind, he had reasons why it was acceptable for him to cheat. There&#39;s a trickle down effect with all of this. When he and I had our memorible chat, I was someone fairly new to the sport. I looked at him as someone who was experienced in racing, and was shocked to hear his viewpoints about cheating - that it really isn&#39;t that big of a deal if it&#39;s done, cause it&#39;s just club racing. After that conversation, he lost my respect.

Like I&#39;ve said here before, if the car is legal, there&#39;s nothing to worry about. Out of curosity, was a total bond amount ever agreed upon or if not, what figure did you come up with that this would cost (if you don&#39;t mind sharing this info.)?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Out of curosity, was a total bond amount ever agreed upon or if not, what figure did you come up with that this would cost (if you don&#39;t mind sharing this info.)? [/b]

Never even got that far.

[lateapex911]

GTRacer15....I was going to go though your post and do the whole quote thing, but honestly, it&#39;s not worth the time.

In the linked thread regarding the sale of your car with it&#39;s lightened flywheel, you clearly have indicated that legality isn&#39;t that much of an issue to you, and that we should all mind our own business. That speaks volumes about how you handle yourself, and your integrity.

And you&#39;re too chicken to sign your name....really racking up the points now.

Suffice it to say that you haven&#39;t provided any real information that has added to Windells situation. As a matter of fact, you&#39;re hurting his case, LOL. (Here&#39;s a guy, who&#39;s known for his not so legal car and a bad attitude, telling everyone that they&#39;re all wrong about windell! Too funny!)

But a couple points-

- The "court" hadn&#39;t come to ANY decision ....and still hasn&#39;t. Get your terms straight. The court is the Stewards of the Meet (SOMs). The Drivers felt strongly something was amiss, and made a charge to the court for verification. Windell was asked, essentially, "Would you like to defend yourself?" ANd he relied "No". And left. All the drivers wanted was verification, yes, or no. I&#39;ve been there, I know. I wanted proof...yes or no, is this guy running straight? If he is, I will walk over and apologise, and take whatever he wants to say to me. Thats the "bet" you make withyourself when you protest someone...you could be wrong, and if so, you must be prepared to apologise and accept his thoughts. If he&#39;s not straight, then he shouldn&#39;t be racing. It&#39;s really that simple. Lets not try to spin this and create internet truths that are far from reality.

(As for Shane.....to my knowledge, which may be wrong, he has returned twice, and had mechanical issues, one of those I understand was engine related, the other, I am unaware of. So, he&#39;s got one possible engine related issue. Thats far from a trend. Trust me, I would love to know Shanes point of view, but he&#39;s never voiced it publicly. I&#39;d like to think he was unaware of his issues, and I wish he had just come clean, and entertained the discussions that occured before his protest was lodged. But thats water under the bridge. I&#39;m going to assume that when he returns, he will have bent over backwards to ensure his car is legal, because he wants to be legal. I say this because in your post, you indicated you thought I was implying that Shane was running illegal parts, by way of logical inference. But the logic fails as the difference between the Windell situation and Shanes is many degrees.)

Windell has demonstrated his engine oil and other parts for all on the track to see on multiple occasions over the years. But...is that proof he&#39;s illegal?? Of course not..There are many possible and good explanations, like he&#39;s not a great mechanic, or the parts he&#39;s using are inferior...and on and on

Windells engine issues were just one of the many reasons his car was thought to be illegal. Nobody is going to protest someone because they blow up frequently! Thats just not a good bet.

So, tell us, WHY do you think, (or know) he refused to have his car inspected?? If you&#39;re going to say stuff, make it substantial, not just blanket statements like:


"I think it is safe to say that the reason(s) #24 refused to have his car torn down HAD nothing to do with cheating. You would have to look beyond the refusal for a tear down and fine/suspension to see that with the addional steps taken, realize that this was way more than just that."...[/b]..

:rolleyes:

Oh, that, and signing your name would help your case too. Your choice of course.

[JohnRW]

http://www.informationweek.com/shared/prin...cleID=199600005 (http://www.informationweek.com/shared/printableArticle.jhtml?articleID=199600005)

[dickita15]

John, I want to be you when I grow up. :023:

[Doc Bro]

I did some on line research and I found out who GTracer15 is. He&#39;s Windell&#39;s flywheel balancer!!

R

[dpc]

Dick, don&#39;t ever grow-up. dave

[Wreckerboy]

Greg, you have nothing to feel bad about...<SNIP>... Go let him cheat with nasa or erma because they don&#39;t care if you do or not.[/b]

Do we know each other? Have you run any EMRA events lately? Those are pretty strong words, and compleatly untrue. I take particular offense to because I am the EMRA Chief of Tech. Much as Zephyr said, and more eloquently than I, EMRA does not tolerate cheaters in any shape or form.

Perhaps we haven&#39;t got the legions of manpower and rules that you are used to with the SCCA, but that doesn&#39;t mean we don&#39;t get the job done, or tolerate cheaters in any form or fashion. Just like in any of the other sanctioning bodies mentioned here today, it is our jobs as racers to keep everyone honest. If you EVER have concerns about any car you see at an EMRA event (including my own) I invite you to find me or any other EMRA Official So And So immediately to discuss it. We&#39;ll review the facts with you and the competitor if need be, and resolve the issue as quickly and as fairly as possible.

I would suggest you not make such statements without considering the facts.

We now return you to the scheduled rant already in progress....

[JohnRW]

I want to be you when I grow up. [/b]

You can&#39;t do both.

[benspeed]

Hey, I&#39;ve got EMRA&#39;s back also. Raced with them several times and they put on a great event. Folks should not be disparaging both EMRA and NASA because somebody who&#39;s accused of cheating plans to race with those clubs.

[dickita15]

I really think that comment was not meant to disparage but was to demonstrate the SCCA rules have a documented process for a racer to follow if he believes that a competitor is cheating while the other groups handle this in an informal manner. No should cry foul when they are protested in the manner described in the rule book and if they don’t like the protest process they race where the protest process is not part of the rules.

[lateapex911]

Even so, I would think that if I were racing EMRA, or NASA, knowing what happened regarding Windell in SCCA, I&#39;d be pretty quick to have a chat with Rob regarding Windell, if thats where Windell feels the rules aren&#39;t important. (Judging by his comments to the stewards as reported by Greg in the early posts)

[dj10]

Do we know each other? Have you run any EMRA events lately? Those are pretty strong words, and compleatly untrue. I take particular offense to because I am the EMRA Chief of Tech. Much as Zephyr said, and more eloquently than I, EMRA does not tolerate cheaters in any shape or form.

Perhaps we haven&#39;t got the legions of manpower and rules that you are used to with the SCCA, but that doesn&#39;t mean we don&#39;t get the job done, or tolerate cheaters in any form or fashion. Just like in any of the other sanctioning bodies mentioned here today, it is our jobs as racers to keep everyone honest. If you EVER have concerns about any car you see at an EMRA event (including my own) I invite you to find me or any other EMRA Official So And So immediately to discuss it. We&#39;ll review the facts with you and the competitor if need be, and resolve the issue as quickly and as fairly as possible.

I would suggest you not make such statements without considering the facts.

We now return you to the scheduled rant already in progress....

[/b]



Bob, I just noticed what I typed and I want to apologize to ERMA & NASA for the comment I made. I honestly didn&#39;t mean to say that because I DO know NASA cares about cheaters, I&#39;ve seen them DQ some. I&#39;m also glad to see that you care about cheating as well. If I would have proof read my statement more carefully, I assure you I would not have posed it and have since edited my statement.

Sincerely,

[Bill Miller]

Haven&#39;t read all 4 pages of this, but here are a couple of comments:

Greg,

You&#39;re a stand-up guy in my book, why feel sorry for a cheater?

GTwhoeveryouare,

No witch hunt, guys using the process. And Windell&#39;s decision to take his car home is really no different than the guy that refuses to take the breathalizer when the cop pulls him over. It&#39;s an admission of guilt. If you&#39;re legal, you&#39;ve got nothing to hide, and you get a free rebuild out of it, and more importantly, something that you can point to and say "I told you it was legal". There&#39;s no logical reason why someone that knew they were legal would give up the rest of their racing season and pony up more money.

Jake et. al.,

Why are you guys even wasting time w/ this guy (GTwhoever)?

[Wreckerboy]

Bob, I just noticed what I typed and I want to apologize to ERMA & NASA for the comment I made. I honestly didn&#39;t mean to say that because I DO know NASA cares about cheaters, I&#39;ve seen them DQ some. I&#39;m also glad to see that you care about cheating as well. If I would have proof read my statement more carefully, I assure you I would not have posed it and have since edited my statement.

Sincerely,
[/b]

Thanks Dan, you&#39;re a stand-up guy for posting that. Hopefully we&#39;ll get to meet face to face some day.

[p99ro]

"I`m Here TO Speak my Mind" I`m glad it happened.
His car sounded like a V8 with a super charger. His Idle was off. Just flat out Cheating.
He new what he was doing for years. The 1st SCCA race I saw was him catching on fire from a blow engine.
Be real. Sure he can come back we are a club but we will be watching.
I`ve spent a lot of money to run 4-8th being passed by a guy that started last out of 40 cars and passed in the 3rd lap. Give me a break.
Point is as it has been said this is a code. Were not talking about a water bottle. That does not improve the performance. I have to add weight to my car It sucks but hey thats what I have to do. Blaney left the club due to the fact Wendal broke his track record at WGI and had a big fight. Thats just wrong. Its like stealing from somebody`s car while they are on the track.
We trust each other.
And for those who are cheating this better be a wake up call because I`ll help write a check.
Most of us are fair and do it by the book. It`s about doing the best you can with the car. I could not sleep with a win if I knew I was cheating.
Lets be frank He CHEATED.
CAMS, Pistons. Etc.... It was amazing when he was confronted just lied to everyone.
He can drive a car. he`s been doing it for a while.
Wendal just put in a leagel motor come back and drive your a$$ off like everyone else.
Scott 07 CRX ITA NER :dead_horse:

[BRAD BARNHOUSE]

I had heard that he was suspected of cheating,but beating him in the NYSRRC Series (twice 2003,2006) in an under prepared Civic made it even sweeter. He was the only other ITA racer that I know of that had any interest in the series. That is disappointing to me, it is a fun series. I will run MARRS until interest is revived in the NYSRRC Series. So I guess they lost two competitors.
Brad

[p99ro]

Hi Barn guy

What you have to remeber he Blew up a lot so at times he would probaly have a plan motor.
I have finished in front of him too. Tracks like WGI are Horse power tracks/short course.
Look I like wendal he`s a nice guy. But cheating for racing is not new. How do you think the King got 200 wins. People get away with it for years. Its just redicualis when it`s done in Club racing. Its for fun.
SCCA does a decent job of getting cars somewhat even but. ITS old Nissan`s Sentra are Fast. Some how they are not the one`s getting extra weight. Now if I had the monies I would change cars. But If I race as hard I can and have a blast racing someone for 4th or 15th thats what it`s about. So if I`m winning because I can drive in that place normaly but I have extra power for the straights it would seem to be hollow. I`m not good at golf, bowling ect. But I can hold my own in Reginal SCCA racing.
I was in a race at WGI. started 5th and wendal started last. 24 cars. By the 2nd lap I was passed.
He blew up or something with one lap to go. I had gotten up to 3rd. But when he broke I finished 2nd. :026:
If people are cheating with big motor`s I feel they should maybe take a look at what they are doing. :unsure:
A lot of people are working hard and speanding money to drive fast and legal. :bash_1_:
The amount of money it must cost to soup up a motor tey could use on track time.
I don`t know. :dead_horse: When I raced go-kart the cheating was big and still is. They get tricky. Nitro, cams, coils.
Intake. I payed for good motors and had them refreshed every other week. Thats what it takes.

[Tkczecheredflag]

Hey Scott - Nice to see you on the board again.

[p99ro]

Tkczecheredflag NIce to see your doing well.
Got to brake know and then now A.
I always thought you had a brake light switch at LRP with your little car.

Can`t wait to race in a class with you.
Scott :026:

[lateapex911]

SCCA does a decent job of getting cars somewhat even but. ITS old Nissan`s Sentra are Fast. Some how they are not the one`s getting extra weight. Now if I had the monies I would change cars.
[/b]

Why change cars??? A CRX can give fits to every ITA car on many tracks, and on the right track, a CRX is nearly unbeatable.

If you need proof, saunter over to the Mid Ohio IT Fest section and check out some videos from the Mosers!
1st at MO, and 2nd and 3rd at the ARRCs. The CRX is pretty darn competitive.

[dazzlesa]

i am actually tempted to try a crx. light and if they are well sorted. i know one that was wicked fast at lrp. are they that scary to drive?

[Chris Wire]

i am actually tempted to try a crx. light and if they are well sorted. i know one that was wicked fast at lrp. are they that scary to drive?
[/b]

Not at all. I have raced three different CRXs with friends of mine, and while they all had different setups, they were all actually quite nice to drive. I know from watching Joe M&#39;s MO video that it looked like the steering wheel never stopped moving. That&#39;s probably a function of setup and driving style, which obviously works for him! :023:

The short wheelbase makes the car a bit twitchy under braking and in transition, but once you get accustomed to the feel it&#39;s not too scary. It doesn&#39;t seem to have the overall top speed of the Integra, which I&#39;ve also raced. If I were a FWD kind of guy I&#39;d build one in a heartbeat.

[p99ro]

HI
The CRX I have is steady under braking. Not twichy at all. Although I`ve seen the affect of that with Blaney
Behind the wheel. But he`s a mad man with one.
Ray LeeChee had Blaney in front of him at NHIS coming out of 2 and for no reason it just SPUNNNNN. Another time in front of Ray again It just SPUNNN. :OLA:
It drives a lot like my old go kart. Tight and very quik responce. But yea The Integra can out power it.
Scott

[almracing]

As a driver of a CRX (the lone CRX at NHIS races), I have not found the car to be too twitchy. But it is not forgiving under heavy breaking if the car is not settled/straight. As for Blaney spinning at NHIS Turn 2 - my car does the same thing thru turn 2. About 3/4 of the way thru the oval, the rear of the car likes to rotate. It can be quite unnerving to say the least. The best thing for it is nice new tires.

[lateapex911]

As for Blaney spinning at NHIS Turn 2 - my car does the same thing thru turn 2. About 3/4 of the way thru the oval, the rear of the car likes to rotate. It can be quite unnerving to say the least.
[/b]

Duly noted...........

;)

[Tom Blaney]

I just had to take this opening ...

I spin because I try harder!!!!!


Actually the car can be quite twichy depending on how stiff it&#39;s sprung, and how hard it gets pushed. However what I do like about it is that you pretty much know when your on the edge, and how much more you can push it. It just takes a better man to know when enough is enough.

[Tkczecheredflag]

I just had to take this opening ...

I spin because I try harder!!!!!
[/b]

Tom - Sounds like the beginnings of a great sponsorship opportuity with Avis. ;)

Saw Kill Hannah, Alice in Chains, and Velvet Revolver last night at Mohegan Sun - Can some one please stop the ringing in my ears? It&#39;s been a great summer for music anyway.