The NEDiv "Redbook" -- leading to cleaner racing in the division

[Gregg]

A few days ago, John Nesbitt, whom any of you know and who serves as the Stewards' representative to the DC Region's Club Racing Committee sent a document out for driver consumption on the use of a "Redbook" by the stewards at all NEDiv events. I think it's definitely an idea whose time has come and hope it will lead to better, safer and cleaner racing in the division. Here's what he sent:


Why do we need a Redbook?
Lack of continuity is a shortcoming in Club Racing. Each race – each run group – exists in isolation. An operating steward seldom has the same group twice in a season. There is very little to link an incident one week at track A with an incident three weeks later at track B, even when it is the same kind of incident, involving the same driver.

History of the NEDiv Redbook
Over the years, there have been several attempts to track incidents through the season. The objective is always to find patterns of behavior and to intervene before they get out of hand. In the past, these attempts, often called “Redbooks”, have been very labor-intensive, involving mailing typed reports back and forth, and have failed. Two years ago, Earl Hurlbut, the NEDiv Executive Steward responded to driver complaints about repetitive misbehavior on track and revived the Redbook concept. This time, it is a Word document, and information flows via email.

The Redbook tracks drivers who consistently have problems with our rules. We focus on contact, Pass under Yellow, starts, and unsportsmanlike conduct. We want to intervene early, before problems build.

How does it work?
Before every NEDiv event, Earl emails the latest Redbook to the Chief Steward. This document is confidential. The Chief Steward shares it only with the operating stewards and the Chairman of the Stewards of the Meeting (if a driver in the book comes before the court).

During the event, operating stewards will keep a slightly closer eye on drivers in the book. They will record significant infractions, if only as a non-punitive reprimand. Operating stewards will always discuss the issue before taking action.

After the event, the Chief Steward submits a report to Earl. These are objective reports. “Driver X received this penalty.” Not, “Driver Y has a bad attitude.” Earl revises the Redbook as appropriate. The next weekend, the cycle repeats.Earl notifies drivers who land in the Redbook. Over time, if the incident was a one-off, a driver will fall out of the Redbook. However, if the pattern continues, Earl will intervene with stronger corrective action. This could take the form of a Driver Review (see GCR section 2.5.).

What the Redbook is not
The Redbook is nothing more than a tool for tracking behavior over a span of time and a variety of tracks. It is not a penalty or punishment. It is not some kind of probation. It does not expose occupants to more severe treatment. It simply records who did what, where, and when.

What the Redbook means
The Redbook is an attempt to overcome the shortcomings of Club Racing event organization. It is a non-punitive record of significant infractions. It comes into play only when the infractions repeat.

The Redbook is a response to frequent - and vocal - complaints from the driver community about repeat offenders. If you have questions or comments about the Redbook, please do not hesitate to contact Earl or me.

Both John's and Earl's contact info can be found here:

http://www.nediv.com/?option=com_etree&view=displays&layout=users&category=6

[240zdave]

We need this in the Southeast Division.

[TomL]

I also think this is something we need here in SEDiv. I have a question on how this will operate. It seems to cover only those who are penalized at an event - if there isn't a protest or stewards action then an incident effectively doesn't exist. I'm sure that this will help with repeated, major problems. However, it doesn't address the far more common problem of drivers with multiple incidents of contact, any one of which individually is not major, but in aggregate amount to a significant problem. The great majority of contacts result in no action. Probably most shouldn't - we all occasionally make mistakes. But when certain drivers make more than their fair share of "mistakes", the Redbook procedure seems to do nothing to address them.

Perhaps we could use the system that was proposed a few months back to have all drivers involved in contacts fill in a brief report on the contact. If both agree it was just a racing incident, nothing happens. If both agree it was one person's faults, it may go in the book. If both say it was the other person's fault, it definitely needs to go in the book. Those are the incidents that cause me the most annoyance. Particularly when it's the same person who hits me and multiple other people and wants to blame the offended parties. Yes, I know we could protest, but everyone knows the hassle (and sometimes ill will that that it causes) and for a single incident it often just isn't worth it. But a procedure to address multiple, individually minor incidents should cut down on their occurrence.

I know that this would make the redbook a bit more work for the person in charge of it, but I think that it would address a problem that is far more widespread than the handful of repeat, flagrant offenders. Any other ideas?

[Chip42]

I'm with Tom on incident statements being required, and very much support the redbook concept if it can be made to work in the SE. I'd go so far as to say BOTH should be GCR prescribed.

further, I'd like to see the chiefs share their books between neighboring divisions such that it is available for review if a driver crosses divisional lines and is involved in such an incident as would make it's presence useful.

Updates should be sumbitted to the sanctioning regions redbook and to the Executive Stewards of the driver's division or region of record, regardless of where the race is held and regardless of the sanctioning region's access to the Region of Record's redbook.

[JLawton]

I think it's a great idea! :happy204:

[StephF]

Do we get to nominate people for it? Maybe get their very own page, and perhaps an award at the end of the year?
:)

[lateapex911]

As I said over on brown, yea, great, I'm all for it.

I would like every chat a Steward needs to have with a driver logged, as well as every protest even when there is no action taken, or penalty administered.

I understand that it's not an ideal solution, but it's a great interim step. Ideally, Stewards would be more apt to actually punish bad driving, but I understand the burden of prooof and the nature of on track incidents. Plus the fact that often Stewards have never actually raced, which makes it even more difficult to judge on track incidents.

In the end, some drivers race hard, never get protested or complained about, yet win races, set lap records and win championships. While others rack up dents and complaints and protests like dryer lint.

It just isn't random, when you step back and look at the big picture, and this is a more effective method of seeing the bigger picture.

Yes, I know there is a loss of due process, but it's a minor cost compared to the benefit.

[gran racing]

This document is confidential. The Chief Steward shares it only with the operating stewards and the Chairman of the Stewards of the Meeting (if a driver in the book comes before the court).

Does the driver who got added to the book get notified and a chance to provide their perspective? While corner workers and officials have their idea of what happened, if the driver in question can provide video or more information about the situation it would be quite helpful.

[John Nesbitt]

Does the driver who got added to the book get notified and a chance to provide their perspective? While corner workers and officials have their idea of what happened, if the driver in question can provide video or more information about the situation it would be quite helpful.

Yes, when the Exec notifies a driver, that driver has the opportunity to make a response. The Exec can decide to modify/remove/leave unchanged the notation.

Keep in mind that entries in the Redbook follow actions taken at the track – protests, Chief Stewards Actions (by the operating steward, typically) or Requests for Action (judgments of the Stewards of the Meeting). It is not just flaggers or stewards expressing an idea of what happened; there is an actual paper trail.

The driver has the right to protest and/or appeal all of these.

My advice to a driver in these circumstances (i.e. who felt that he had been done wrong) would be to fight the underlying action itself. Fighting the tracking of the action does not reverse the action.

It is critically important to understand that, contrary to some uninformed comments elsewhere, this is not anything like a new penalty, or an extra-judicial punishment, or a secret blacklist.

It is simply a way to track incidents over time/space, and an aid to identifying patterns of behavior. Nothing more.

The Redbook explicitly does not track every conversation stewards hold with drivers. It tracks only significant events that, if repeated, would justify intervention by the Exec.

Will this usher in the New Millennium? No. Is it a perfect answer to all contact problems? Likely not. Is it a step in the right direction? I think so.

Remember that the Executive Steward created the Redbook in response to repeated complaints from drivers about serial offenders.

[BruceG]

Do we get to nominate people for it? Maybe get their very own page, and perhaps an award at the end of the year?
:)

Steph....repeat offenders will be featured in a special picture addition where they will be wearing Smart, black striped, non nomex suits and holding a board with numbers on it........LOL

[jjjanos]

I appreciate the stewards attempting to address drivers' concerns, but if the same SOM standard of proof is used going forward, I am not seeing how this fixes "the chopper problem" (tm)


It is critically important to understand that, contrary to some uninformed comments elsewhere, this is not anything like a new penalty, or an extra-judicial punishment, or a secret blacklist.
During the event, operating stewards will keep a slightly closer eye on drivers in the book.Which looks like a blacklist.


It is simply a way to track incidents over time/space, and an aid to identifying patterns of behavior. Nothing more.
This document is confidential. The Chief Steward shares it only with the operating stewards and the Chairman of the Stewards of the Meeting (if a driver in the book comes before the court).Which goes beyond tracking and is not confidential.


The Redbook explicitly does not track every conversation stewards hold with drivers. It tracks only significant events that, if repeated, would justify intervention by the Exec.GCR 7.4, i.e. We already have a system that tracks significant events that, if repeated, automatically requires intervention by the Exec. That system does not spit out repeat offenders because the system of imposing penalties is broken. The Redbook relies on that same, non-functioning system of imposing penalties.

[vicktorvolpe]

Why do I feel like a certain red honda civic is going to wind up in this red book? :)

[ShelbyRacer]

Yes, when the Exec notifies a driver, that driver has the opportunity to make a response. The Exec can decide to modify/remove/leave unchanged the notation.



Rather than this, would it not be better to leave the notation, but add in that response from the driver? This way, it's not all on the exec to "remove or not remove" something. I'd also suggest that any modifications to notations are shown as a change via markup style notation, with a note as to why the change was made. Though I'm not a club racing steward, I do officiate at other events, and seeing the "whole story" would be important to me.

Again, that's merely a suggestion. Overall, I like the idea, and will continue to participate in such a way that my name will (hopefully) not appear in it.

[JLawton]

Why do I feel like a certain red honda civic is going to wind up in this red book? :)


Holy crap!! You were reading my mind!!! ;)

[mossaidis]

Why do I feel like a certain red honda civic is going to wind up in this red book? :)


Holy crap!! You were reading my mind!!! ;)

Somehow I feel each of you owes me a beer now... odd. I prefer a nice stout. A 92+ Bordeaux will do fine too.

[BruceG]

Somehow I feel each of you owes me a beer now... odd. I prefer a nice stout. A 92+ Bordeaux will do fine too.

You gonna be doin' the perp walk, Mickey Mouse!!:D

[vicktorvolpe]

Somehow I feel each of you owes me a beer now... odd. I prefer a nice stout. A 92+ Bordeaux will do fine too.

Give me a call....Greeley's after work one day? Just don't make me go to queens.

Look, at least you'll have the chance to explain yourself. I forget if it was John Nesbitt or someone else came up to me after a Pro-IT race and said "the corner workers called such and such incident in, did car # XX spin you in turn one?" My response was "no, I actually did that all on my own with my own lack of talent"

The fact that this will maybe allow for conversation between parties that "get together" is what I see as the main benefit. Have seen too many times when one guy pushes what's left of his car into his trailer and drives off.

I can see getting the car into your trailer quickly because you don't want people staring at the piece of metal that used to be your car, but leaving without some form of conversation with the stewards or other drivers is a big mistake in my mind.

-Vick

[JLawton]

Somehow I feel each of you owes me a beer now... .

Hmmmmm, I think it's YOU who owes ME a beer........... (me?? Long memory?? naaaaaaaaa :) )




Look, at least you'll have the chance to explain yourself.

I don't think that would have helped him in ANY of the situations........ :D

[Abhi]

Hmmmmm, I think it's YOU who owes ME a beer........... (me?? Long memory?? naaaaaaaaa :) )




I don't think that would have helped him in ANY of the situations........ :D

Now guys.... Let's not pick on Mickey

We all do things unintentionally sometimes.

Abhi

[CRallo]

This is a great step!

wish we'd had this last year... It took an 8 (or more) car incident on a start at NJMP to finally get us action against a certain white Porsche!!


can mechanical issues like always leaking oil be included in this please?! yup, the same car inspired this question. Sad really...

[Marianne]

Although it can sometimes appear to be picking on a specific driver I think the red book is a good idea. I know of times in the past when drivers asked the stewards to keep eye on a specific driver for poor driving. That does get relayed to the corners if the stewards feel there is a reason.
Whenever the corner stations call in contact they are asked - "In you opinion what was the cause?" Obviously we can only base our answer on the part of the track we see. We won't know how the two drivers have been interacting in other places around the track that may have led up to the incident at our corner. So it is just our view. I know you drivers understand this is all we can provide. So many times we are not sure if there is contact and don't want to falsely accuse drivers of contact so we won't call in possible contact.
Here's to a great 2013!
Marianne

[jjjanos]

Why do I feel like a certain red honda civic is going to wind up in this red book? :)

Doubtful... I think Ginsberg is planning on using the car only once this year.:o

Maybe the stewards are going to be serious about driving infractions from now on. All I know is that out of 5 protests where I (1) or a close friend were involved (4), these were the outcomes:

1. "Do you really need to file paper on this? Why don't you go iron it out between the two of you" which resulted in the hitting driving offering to help fix the hit car and then never showing up. (Next morning -Sorry, but the time limit has expired on your protest)
2. A driver on probation driving into another car, the SoMs finding that driver was at fault and imposing no penalty (rectified by the CoA)
3. A pass under a standing yellow caught on my video and confirmed by the driver being passed (insufficient proof).
4. A driver in a non-ITB car dive-bombing the ITB leaders that had just passed him, spinning, failing to put both feet in and clobbering one of the lead cars. (Insufficient proof.)
5. A tussle in the chute on a 1-lap warm-up session where one driver was (correctly) dinged for not being aware and the other dinged (correctly) for being overly aggressive.