The Tim K LRP Qualifying Story

[charrbq]

Everybody makes occassional mistakes, and everyone has an opinion about it. And we all know that Mattberg has an opinion on everyone and everything...as is his right. It's just that he refuses to agree with everybody, or frequently anybody, and few can understand why he takes that line. Only he knows the answer to that, and I doubt that he can explain it without slandering someone. There's a history there.

I work and race...national licenses in both. I've been fortunate to maintain a good raport with most drivers and stewards. I've never had to protest a driver for anything, but have always had that as an option. Most often, all that is required is a talk to a steward on channel B of the radio about the situation in question, vent my fears at the steward, and he talks to the driver. If the driver takes issue, then it becomes the steward's problem, not mine. If I feel the steward takes inappropriate action, then I have the right to protest the driver or the steward. Personally, I can never see doing that, but it's my option.

If I'd been at the corner in question, and had a near miss by a previous incident, I'd be nervous as hell everytime a car passed. At lunch, or whatever, I'd been screaming at the CS or the Safety Steward or someone in charge that something needed to be done to protect me and my crew from becoming statistics. We've all seen the incidents on TV where a worker was in a supposed safe position and was injured/killed by and errant car. We all know the dangers and try to prevent them.

Tim did nothing wrong, that I can tell from the video. Cheeze, if we held true to the white line rule, no one could ever clip an apex without a DQ! That would totally destroy the lines of a certain, well-known ITB driver!

While the statement, "Without the workers, we could never race" is true, it still grinds me. I love working a race as much as I love racing, as do most people I've worked with that do both. A lot of workers would love to race, but don't, for a miriad of reasons...economics being one, but certainly not the only one. Most of the people I work with truly enjoy do it because they love it. I agree with the statement, "Without the workers,
we couldn't race", but add, "Without the racers, we couldn't work." An example would be the CART race at Texas Motor Speedway a few years back that was cancelled the day of the races. I have several friends that showed up to work the race only to find out it'd been cancelled. Workers and no racers.

[Mattberg]

Everybody makes occassional mistakes, and everyone has an opinion about it. And we all know that Mattberg has an opinion on everyone and everything...as is his right. It's just that he refuses to agree with everybody, or frequently anybody, and few can understand why he takes that line. Only he knows the answer to that, and I doubt that he can explain it without slandering someone. There's a history there.[/b]

One comment... Maybe I should do what Barry Hair did and start a legal proceeding against you for insinuating that I've ever slandered anyone... then not show up at the hearing like he did. Pretty hilarious. Par for the course for a lawyer... there's your slander!

I work and race...national licenses in both. I've been fortunate to maintain a good raport with most drivers and stewards. I've never had to protest a driver for anything, but have always had that as an option. Most often, all that is required is a talk to a steward on channel B of the radio about the situation in question, vent my fears at the steward, and he talks to the driver. If the driver takes issue, then it becomes the steward's problem, not mine. If I feel the steward takes inappropriate action, then I have the right to protest the driver or the steward. Personally, I can never see doing that, but it's my option.[/b]

Let me ask this. Why does a worker need to protest a driver other than for an off track incident? The worker is not part of the racing per se. As I've said, if two drivers feel something was a racing incident why should a worker or official make that determination. Why must an issue be made out of a non-issue? Like I said maybe a worker who wants to protest a driver should have to get the other driver to back it up or it can't be filed. It's sort of like me filing lawsuit against you for damage you did to my neighbor even though my neigbor really wasn't damaged in his opinion. Now if a driver got up in a worker's grill, acted like an idiot, or pushed or slugged the guy, protest him. Protests should be a direct relationship. I've heard from officials that drivers don't protest enough so they need to step in for "our own good". Well drivers don't vote enough either but I don't see them taking any actions there to create more racer-centric governance.

If I'd been at the corner in question, and had a near miss by a previous incident, I'd be nervous as hell everytime a car passed. At lunch, or whatever, I'd been screaming at the CS or the Safety Steward or someone in charge that something needed to be done to protect me and my crew from becoming statistics. We've all seen the incidents on TV where a worker was in a supposed safe position and was injured/killed by and errant car. We all know the dangers and try to prevent them.[/b]

The key statement and one I totally concur with. "I'd been screaming at the CS or the Safety Steward or someone in charge that something needed to be done to protect me and my crew from becoming statistics." Absolutely Chris. What I originally suggested. But that's not what happened.

Tim did nothing wrong, that I can tell from the video. Cheeze, if we held true to the white line rule, no one could ever clip an apex without a DQ! That would totally destroy the lines of a certain, well-known ITB driver![/b]

But he had to go through the hassle of defending himself for doing nothing wrong. Sort of spoils the fun and the purpose. That's all I'm upset about.

While the statement, "Without the workers, we could never race" is true, it still grinds me. I love working a race as much as I love racing, as do most people I've worked with that do both. A lot of workers would love to race, but don't, for a miriad of reasons...economics being one, but certainly not the only one. Most of the people I work with truly enjoy do it because they love it. I agree with the statement, "Without the workers,
we couldn't race", but add, "Without the racers, we couldn't work." An example would be the CART race at Texas Motor Speedway a few years back that was cancelled the day of the races. I have several friends that showed up to work the race only to find out it'd been cancelled. Workers and no racers.
[/b]

Well there's a flipside to that. If there were no workers I guarantee you there would be racing. Without racers there's nothing. What happens when the racers don't show up? No money. No beer party. No food. No fun or fulfillment of being a spectator of racing. Your TMS example tells all. What happens when there are no workers? Well, it happened a number of years ago when there was a pro race on the same weekend as a double regional as well as an enduro at Moroso and all the workers went to the pro race, which as racing spectators and fans of racing, they were more attracted to. Not bitter, just pointing out that they're not workers necessarily, they're fans pusuing their interest. I'll get to that in a minute.

I believe it was Mike Cox, a driver, who might have even giving up driving that weekend (can't remember), who answered the call to arms and got it all organized calling on drivers to work. I was more than happy to volunteer. He did such a good job that most of us didn't have to work although we were all ready to! One of the best weekends I've ever had racing. One thing I can tell you is having drivers on the corners... they really know what they're doing in reference to the passing flags.

Lastly, workers are great. They assist us in every aspect and every minute of a race weekend. When they protest us they become an annoyance and hinderance. It's happening too often lately. At the 2002 runoffs I heard there were almost 100 RFAs from officials and workers on Sunday alone for racing incidents. Isn't that a little out of control for folks who aren't in the race? They were told to cool it in 2003 from what I've heard and there were very few RFAs. They came back in 2004 and started up again with another huge number of RFAs. Two guys come together fighting for the same peice of real estate is going to happen. If the drivers consider it racing why should a non-racer (I could care less if he/she has in car experience, they're not on the track) make a call?

If a driver is consistently trouble, sooner or later, someone is going to take action on the driver side. All that happens now is too many drivers get hit with probation and sanctions, many times for a racing incident and no real wrongdoing, not to mention bad feelings about the club, and race at a percentage of max for a couple of races to get off probation. Takes away from every aspect of the sport and fun.

Solution? Create two types of protests. A racing protest may only be filed by a racing participant, driver or entrant. A membership protest or complaint may be filed by any member against another member for conduct "unbecoming" if you will and only relates to off track incidents. I get drunk at the beer party and pee on your BBQ, I deserve to be disciplined. I drive like an idiot and almost kill someone in the paddock, I deserve it. I drive a different line than most totally within the rules and some workers don't like it? Tough beans. Imagine how many protests will be filed against me!

[StephF]

To all, and especially to you Matt.

This link to an old thread is why he holds absolutely NO CREDIBILITY in my eyes, or in a lot of other peoples eyes too.

http://itforum.improvedtouring.com/forums/...topic=6918&st=0

I especially like the tone and content of post # 15.

It's long and sordid, but if you can slog through it, you'll have quite an eye opener as to his thought processes. And it's not pretty!

I started reading this when it was being posted with an open mind. After all, if something is being kept secret, we should know about it, right? Even if it isn't in my area, it's good to know what is going on throughout the club as a whole. And maybe this poster has something valuable to say, that should be said. Maybe there is a coverup here that could affect us all one day.

Hell, I didn't know that I even knew him when it began.
And I don't know any of the other parties involved, so I was reading it from a bystander's perspective.

I couldn't believe the evil crap that was being spewed here.

And guys, the angrier he made everyone, the more he kept coming back on here to scream away, Mr Voice Of Logic. It's almost as if he craves having people telling him to f**k off.

Do you have online Tourette's Syndrome or something, Matt?

I was going to leave it alone until you made reference to it in your last post.

I can't stomach people who come online in their made up names and start trashing someone else in their full name. I know your name, but I don't see you having the stones to put it anywhere in your post signature. But it doesn't slow you down from naming other people in full, does it?


Matt....being a member of a club is a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT. So far, I've seen more acrimony and bitterness from you than from anyone else here. And VERY LITTLE input that could be defined as constructive.

And I am especially offended by your constant trashing of ALL workers and ALL officials.

Because, guess what Matt? When you trash them like that, you trash me, my family, my husband, my friends, hell you trash EVERYONE in the club when you do that. Because this isn't about "us" versus "them", Matt. It's about ALL OF US. That's what a club is: it's EVERYONE!!!

Paying entry fees to race does not give you carte blanche to be a Richard Cranium to the other "non-driving" members of the club.

And I, for one, am tired of having to stumble across your toxic wastefields here on line.

Go join NASA, or EMRA, or hell, you're probably ready for vintage. Take your toxins with you and leave us alone.

[charrbq]

Thank you Stephanie, for reminding us of who we are and why we race and why we all need/like one another. Not everyone gets along, or sees eye to eye, but that's normally the exception.

Thank you Matt, for doing what you always do best...pick apart anything you don't like said about you and throw it back it their face...sprinkled with a healthy dose of ink from your poison pen. Maybe it was just me thinking, but I didn't think I attacked you, and certainly not in the fashion you attacked me.

You must really feed on this stuff.

[Eagle7]

Let me ask this. Why does a worker need to protest a driver other than for an off track incident? The worker is not part of the racing per se. As I've said, if two drivers feel something was a racing incident why should a worker or official make that determination. Why must an issue be made out of a non-issue? [/b]

Tim didn't think there was an issue, he thought the system worked fine. Why should you make that determination? You weren't involved.

[Mattberg]

Well Stephanie, I'd really like to know a couple of things. When and where did I "trash" ALL workers? And, how does calling for a policy to restrict on-track racing protests to racers "trash" ALL workers? From your response I can only assume that I've failed in being issue specific. I will try and be more specific and if you can, please, as difficult as I think it is for you, do not take this personally. You and others get extremely defensive if ANYTHING is suggested that could possibly be, even in the slightest bit, interpreted as diminishing the role of workers and officials.

Anyway, to be specific and on topic, my issue is that these events and others like it, indicate to me that the worker role might be too broad or involved. When a worker can protest a driver for a racing issue doing nothing wrong, and that worker is ferociously defended to the point of unreproachable I'd say there's a problem. In other words, any criticism of a worker (emphasis on the singular, "worker") even if it is valid is considered sacrilege and the driver is considered guilty until proven innocent. There's an issue of reasonable basis. Do you really think 100 RFA'a in one race day from workers for on-track incidents can be justified? It's mind boggling to me. Perhaps it's just me. But for me to even suggest such is seen as an affront to ALL workers. As are my feelings that a worker shouldn't be able to protest a driver for playing by the rules because he/she doesn't like it. Feeling endangered is a valid claim but protesting a driver within the rules is unacceptable in my opinion. Even out of frustration or as a last resort, the fact that it was an option is what I take issue with. Should a driver be subject to a corner worker's frustration from lack of action by race officials? Not saying that's what happened but the system certainly makes it possibility. Is that good?

More importantly and pertinent to the issue being discussed is that a worker protested a driver for doing what he had every right to do under the given rules. Seems to me that's a good indication of a flaw in the system. Wouldn't you agree? Again, suggesting that or proposing a solution is seen as a debasement of the whole worker population. Our legal system is a good example. You can basically sue anyone for anything. Look at the mess that's created and all the calls for tort reform. All I'm asking is that a line be drawn with a more sensible policy. A protest is sort of like a lawsuit. But when no rule has been broken it becomes somewhat like the four or five nuisance suits I see each year (it galls me to see the insurance company pay them off instead of fighting. ) But I have to deal with it just like this driver had to deal with this protest.

So, is there any line, where is it, and what's next? Unsafe passing as interpreted by corner workers? It has nothing to do with workers per se, it has to do with the system and the potential misuse or abuse of it. Let's say you detest me (sounds like you do anyway) and just for the heck of it you protest me after seeing what you THINK is a bump draft. Meanwhile the guy I'm simply drafting with is only too happy to have me there. Should I spend two hours with stewards getting hassled over it even if the outcome is in my favor? Has the system worked? One might say that in that case the outcome justified the system process but I would have to disagree having had to go through the hassle. I guess I'm just trying to figure out why a non-racer should be passing judgement on a racer and creating what amounted to an unecessary imposition. Maybe I'm wrong and in this particular case the whole mess will cause officials to establish some supplemental rules that makes the workers feel safe which is paramount. But that's a real roundabout way to justify it. As I've said, bottom line, is I think the events that transpired illustrate a serious flaw in the system subject to misuse.

p.s. If you remember me from my NEDIV days perhaps that you've forgotten that I was a grid and corner worker for a number of years while in college when tuition pretty much precluded me from racing.

I attacked you Chris? How? I asked a couple of questions. Sheesh. Actually I think you epitomize the perfect club member. You say you have as much fun working as driving. Model club member. Don't really believe that though. Nothing beats being on-track, right? Regardless, you do what you can to be there in whatever capacity you can for love of the sport. That's what an enthusiast club is all about. THe issue here is when that experience is imposed on without basis and the system that allows that to happen.

[Mattberg]

Tim didn't think there was an issue, he thought the system worked fine. Why should you make that determination? You weren't involved.
[/b]

I'm not making any determination. Just questioning the system. Being involved is really irrelevant. I'm looking at this and some other similar incidents recently as examples. I look at it this way. The precedent seems to be set and I'm just a little uncomfortable with it. I'm simply a driver knowing that I'm exposed to review of my driving technique and potential protest by a non-racer. I'm simply questioning that system premise. Ok?

If Tim isn't bothered by that and feels the system worked, that's fine. If it had happened to me I think I might be a tad annoyed. I think Tim handled it way better than I would have and with extreme poise. My hat's off to him. But like I said, I'm trying to understand the need for a worker to pass judgement on driving when one is within the rules. If you'd like, ignore this particular incident and consider it on a hypothetical basis.

Don't you think the system is subject to potential misuse or abuse? If someone thinks I'm an a-hole (pretty good assumtion ) and decides to protest me just for the hassle when I've done nothing wrong? Trust me, it's already happened. A lot of people would have a smile on their face and say I deserved it, but did I really or was it just an abuse of the system to satisfy a personal disdain for my existence? I hate to sound like I enjoy being hated but can you objectively see that as anything but an abuse of a flawed system? Just fodder for thought.

[charrbq]

You say you have as much fun working as driving. Model club member. Don't really believe that though. Nothing beats being on-track, right?
[/quote]
If I said it, you can believe it. Twist it anyway you want, or believe what you will, but it's the truth. Learn to live with it.

[RKramden]

I just really have a problem with officials protesting a driver based on technique issues.
[/b]

I, personally, have protested a driver when I was working as a starter. It was at a drivers school. It was the only time I ever even wanted to file a protest.

The driver was a nationally licensed driver (and mostly in the back of the pack in his class) and he was enrolled in the school as a student.

He decided that he should show the other students what a real start was like (his words) and since he was at the front of the pack for the practice starts he proceded to get hard into the throttle at the apex of 11 (the last corner before start) at Lime Rock way before the green would ever come out.

First time, I waved them off, second time, he didn't learn and waved them off again. Third time, and he still didn't learn and the field was waved off and black flagged, everyone got a good lecture about starts by the chief instructor and he was removed from the school.

The operating steward did nothing and is known for doing nothing (e.g. never a penalty, never a CSA, never black flag anyone for anything) so I protested him for dangerous driving and my protest was upheld. The steward just wanted the problem to go away without doing anything.

Was that protest wrong, too?

(Charter member of the Piggly-Wiggly Racing Team.
If you have to ask, send an e-mail to John, Matt's brother, or read the H-Production board archives.)

[lateapex911]

Ralph, Ralph, Ralph.....

Matt's involved here...it's all about mental masterbation...why are you dragging logic and facts into it??

[charrbq]

Ralph, Ralph, Ralph.....

Matt's involved here...it's all about mental masterbation...why are you dragging logic and facts into it??


[/b]

Jake...I like that term, "mental masterbation"...it's funny, yet frequently appropriate. Can I borrow that for a future reference or to used in a sentence I might deem appropriate?

[lateapex911]

Jake...I like that term, "mental masterbation"...it's funny, yet frequently appropriate. Can I borrow that for a future reference or to used in a sentence I might deem appropriate?
[/b]

Sure, but...
...be neat.

It has more impact that way.

[charrbq]

Of course...out of respect for it's author.

[Mattberg]

I, personally, have protested a driver when I was working as a starter. It was at a drivers school. It was the only time I ever even wanted to file a protest.

The driver was a nationally licensed driver (and mostly in the back of the pack in his class) and he was enrolled in the school as a student.

He decided that he should show the other students what a real start was like (his words) and since he was at the front of the pack for the practice starts he proceded to get hard into the throttle at the apex of 11 (the last corner before start) at Lime Rock way before the green would ever come out.

First time, I waved them off, second time, he didn't learn and waved them off again. Third time, and he still didn't learn and the field was waved off and black flagged, everyone got a good lecture about starts by the chief instructor and he was removed from the school.

The operating steward did nothing and is known for doing nothing (e.g. never a penalty, never a CSA, never black flag anyone for anything) so I protested him for dangerous driving and my protest was upheld. The steward just wanted the problem to go away without doing anything.

Was that protest wrong, too?

[/b]

Well, in this case it's a little different as the driver was actually doing something against the rules. What a National driver was doing participating as a student at a school is a little odd. I thought we didn't allow that? Not sure. Regardless, my suggestion of restricting the protest process is blown out of the water by this example. It's very interesting and something I hadn't even considered. Schools are a whole different animal, aren't they? I would venture to guess that MORE input from officials and workers would be a good thing and at that point they probably know the rules and guidelines better than many of the students. Right?

You also make another good point that screws my proposal. A person in charge that doesn't do his job as you described in your example leaves a dangerous void that could apply both to a race or a school. That actually is a whole separate problem. So, sure enough, you did the right thing. I gotta' think about this. I'm sorry I don't know your name but thanks for the input. I'll go back and re-think it.

[Wreckerboy]

SNIP

Go join NASA, or EMRA, or hell, you're probably ready for vintage. Take your toxins with you and leave us alone.
[/b]

Jeez, what did I do to piss you guys off? Don't wish him on me!

[RSTPerformance]

I'm not making any determination. Just questioning the system. Being involved is really irrelevant. I'm looking at this and some other similar incidents recently as examples. I look at it this way. The precedent seems to be set and I'm just a little uncomfortable with it. I'm simply a driver knowing that I'm exposed to review of my driving technique and potential protest by a non-racer. I'm simply questioning that system premise. Ok?

If Tim isn't bothered by that and feels the system worked, that's fine. If it had happened to me I think I might be a tad annoyed. I think Tim handled it way better than I would have and with extreme poise. My hat's off to him. But like I said, I'm trying to understand the need for a worker to pass judgement on driving when one is within the rules. If you'd like, ignore this particular incident and consider it on a hypothetical basis.

Don't you think the system is subject to potential misuse or abuse? If someone thinks I'm an a-hole (pretty good assumtion ) and decides to protest me just for the hassle when I've done nothing wrong? Trust me, it's already happened. A lot of people would have a smile on their face and say I deserved it, but did I really or was it just an abuse of the system to satisfy a personal disdain for my existence? I hate to sound like I enjoy being hated but can you objectively see that as anything but an abuse of a flawed system? Just fodder for thought.
[/b]

Well, in this case it's a little different as the driver was actually doing something against the rules. What a National driver was doing participating as a student at a school is a little odd. I thought we didn't allow that? Not sure. Regardless, my suggestion of restricting the protest process is blown out of the water by this example. It's very interesting and something I hadn't even considered. Schools are a whole different animal, aren't they? I would venture to guess that MORE input from officials and workers would be a good thing and at that point they probably know the rules and guidelines better than many of the students. Right?

You also make another good point that screws my proposal. A person in charge that doesn't do his job as you described in your example leaves a dangerous void that could apply both to a race or a school. That actually is a whole separate problem. So, sure enough, you did the right thing. I gotta' think about this. I'm sorry I don't know your name but thanks for the input. I'll go back and re-think it.
[/b]

wow, Matt you gave me a lot of reading to catch up on... some of your posts I actually like, but others I completely disagree with you on... but I will try to dig through all the crap and find a couple of possibly intellegent comments...

1) At one time in my life I thought you were correct in one area- that many workers could benenfit or needed a better understanding of a drivers perspective. That is why I started getting involved in the SIT program... What did I learn?

A ) Yes thier are a lot of officials and workers that could benefit from a "drivers perspective." To my amaizment they have been far more open to my opinions that I ever imagined they would be. While some might not admit it others have, and I think many people have learned as much from me as I have from them. From what I have seen the workers and officials would like more involvment from drivers, so don't be shy and step up... it is actually a lot of fun!!!

B ) As a very active driver I can say that I learned a TON from being a very active SIT last year. Working every specialty has tought me a lot about a "workers perspective." It is amaizing how different things are. I am trying to put it into words and I can't quite figure it out... I guess thus far part of what I have learned is that I was wrong, most of the workers/officials DO NOT need to learn "what its like to be a driver." Thier decisions for the most part deal completely with safety concerns for all members or obviose rule violations. Sure as mentioned in "A" they can benefit from understanding drivers better, but all that helps them do is understand where "we" (drivers) are coming from. That understanding has generally made absolutely no difference in the final outcome or results of a protest. Many times that "drivers perspective" only helps in explaining to the drivers the results that they are presented with. Also please remember as with Tims case ( I was not involved at all from a official standpoint, I only saw these discussions) it seems to me that most of the workers/officials respect the drivers opinions and thier statements. IMO generally they are the most important during a protest be it from an offical or another driver.


2) I can see that "the starter" was able to finally get you to think about your position - should workers/officials have the ability to file protests? His/her example is good but IMO in no way different than the protest Tim had to "deal" with recently at LRP. I can easily see how the worker at the uphill could interpret that Tim was going against the rules by driving "off course." This also was a safety concern for the workers and drivers alike. Do I think the corner worker was wrong in filing a protest? NO. Do I agree with his/her interpretation, NO but I do respect their opinion and I find it valuable. Safety concerns as well as rule definitions are based on peoples interpretations. We as members in whatever capacity need to respect each others intrepretations and thus protests. IMO we as members also need to respect the current process that exists. Certainly "politics" IMO has brought out issues with "our" process however for the most part those issues are resolved with each step in the process. Their is no way that we can avoid that, it happens with every organization.



In closing I would say Matt If I read between the lines a bit I can see that you bring forward valid concerns of different people and their capacity to have have rights as members. However I thikn your concerns are not valid as a whole, as with every organization thier are a few less gifted members. I do think that the protest process that we (Memebers of SCCA) have created to deal with oposing views of ALL of our members at an event is the BEST process that could be made and should not be altered at this time in anyway other than possibly to address some better uses of new technology and communication. Their are plenty of "checks and balances" that prevents any one person or group of people from having to much power.

Matt I would also suggest that you give the SIT thing another chance if the spot is still open for you. You obviosly didn't didn't "click" well with your mentor. Maybe you can get someone else to show you the ropes so that you can see the benefits of the things you so frequently argue against. Also remember a perfect process can certainly be flawed with "bad" people. If you think that it is flawed with "bad" people then fix it by getting invloved yourself (not just bitching about it) and bring along a few friends - I did, and I found that the areas that I thought were "bad" were actually increadably correct and a good part of the reason for SCCA's success.

Hope all is well;

Raymond "I hope I am not making anyone mad" Blethen

PS: Matt All anger and joking aside you have a lot of potential to be something great for this club. Figure out how you are insulting all those around you so you can stop, then do something with all that "intelagence" you seem to possibly have. You can make a difference, just go about it a different way.

[dickita15]

PS: Matt All anger and joking aside you have a lot of potential to be something great for this club. Figure out how you are insulting all those around you so you can stop, then do something with all that "intelagence" you seem to possibly have. You can make a difference, just go about it a different way.
[/b]

Raymond, that was a very good well thought out post, but unless I have gravely misjudged matt he has no interest in not being insulting.

[RKramden]

Yes thier are a lot of officials and workers that could benefit from a "drivers perspective." To my amaizment they have been far more open to my opinions that I ever imagined they would be.
[/b]

Well, you failed at Start and need to work there again. This time, doing lapcharts of the "wings and things" race at NHIS. Lets see, 120 MPH under your feet, and you have to pick out the nose numbers.....Just might be a challange.

I think it fair to say that I had rather lengthy chats with the Exec Steward and your mentor about you. I don't consider any of what I said private. What they said, however, is, but only because I won't speak for others.

I did like that rather than hit the driver with the rule book, you wanted to help the driver understand why something was important so he could understand why he was being asked to change something on his car. A lot of stewards use the rule book as a justification of their actions. It is very different than using the rule book to guide your actions.

Dave

Ex driver, ex steward, ex tech inspector, ex fire rescue, ex ....
Starter, Flagger, and sometimes Pace Car driver.

[RSTPerformance]

Well, you failed at Start and need to work there again. This time, doing lapcharts of the "wings and things" race at NHIS. Lets see, 120 MPH under your feet, and you have to pick out the nose numbers.....Just might be a challange.

I think it fair to say that I had rather lengthy chats with the Exec Steward and your mentor about you. I don't consider any of what I said private. What they said, however, is, but only because I won't speak for others.

I did like that rather than hit the driver with the rule book, you wanted to help the driver understand why something was important so he could understand why he was being asked to change something on his car. A lot of stewards use the rule book as a justification of their actions. It is very different than using the rule book to guide your actions.

Dave

Ex driver, ex steward, ex tech inspector, ex fire rescue, ex ....
Starter, Flagger, and sometimes Pace Car driver.
[/b]

Dave-

I only failed at start cause you do such an amaizing job!!! Years of experience certainly shows in your abilities to do that job. Those dam lap charts I am confident that I can say I understand the aspects and responsabilities of the starters job, but certainly agree that it would take years of practice to become "one with the starters stand" as you have.

It was fun working with you and I look forward to future oportunities to do so again!!!

Raymond

PS Dave-

Your post left me wondering what your conversations with my mentor and Exec Steward were... Not sure if your comments were to be taken as a positive or a negative. Be sure to let me know ESPECIALLY if thier were negatives that I should be aware of. - Thanks

[lateapex911]

Dave,

One thing you have to give Raymond....

He has a great attitude.
He tries very hard.
He wants to be fair.

Ok, that's 3 things.
But they are all qualities that are needed to be a Steward.