Contact impound

[kcolbey]

Who keeps the little black book? Who has access to it's data?

I believe it is a steward only thing, and not sure who keeps the "master".

[RSTPerformance]

No can do. It won't and should not matter how many times your name appears in that spreadsheet -- if none of the individual incidents resulted in the SOMs or CS officially finding you at fault, then you weren't at fault. If you weren't at fault, then it has no value in determining the punishment for the current infraction. Even if you were at fault, it bears no value in determining the punishment for the current infraction unless the driver is on probation.

You want to reduce the incidence of contact? Then grow a set, throw paper and hope that the SOMs become vertebrates and assign at least a reprimand (1 Point on your license).

No offense but... This is exactly what turns people away from SCCA. 30 year old rules that people think still work well.

As someone who has been part of the Stewards program I think several would support something like this (but I cannot speak for them). It is pushed year after year to make our "customers" happy and IMO this would be a step in the right direction. I have seen first hand the red book work to get everyone to move forward happily and this is just one more tool.

With that said I do have to admit, as mentioned and IMO a flaw in our SOM process is we are not allowed to use misdemeanors (red book notes) as an influence on our decisions.

Stephen.. Tough to type exames on my phone but would be glad to show you one of our accident reports when you come over. The key is identifying the information we what to gather.

Also to all- maybe we should be filling out voluntary incident reports "for the file" that include more than just MTM... Not every frustration comes with MTM when one of the parties has a brain.

Raymond

[Andy Bettencourt]

One of the most 'productive' meetings in NER for SM happened about 6-7 years ago. PTB decided that there was way too much contact so they called for an open meeting. They encouraged drivers to speak up in a large group to other drivers that they thought were too aggressive. After a few minutes, one driver says, "Who is #77?". #77 pipes up. He tells him that he thinks he is a rough and aggressive driver. #77 tries to defend himself until 2 other drivers also say they feel that way about #77.

#77 had little to no contact for the remained of the year.

I personally DO feel that if you posted a running spreadsheet next to the results (with totals and 'leaders') you would get people really thinking about contact. Anytime your anonymity gets taken away, your behavior changes at least SOME.

[dickita15]

I personally DO feel that if you posted a running spreadsheet next to the results (with totals and 'leaders') you would get people really thinking about contact.

maybe with an end of year trophy

[gran racing]

In regard to the cool off period, how do you make sure that the driver comes back and actually fills it out?

The driver signs the paper stating that they decline to comment now but will come back before the event is over. If they do not, there should be some type of consequence.

This cool off period can be critical. Hey Gulick, remember the ARRC when "two souther boys" were looking for me, Mark said he had my back and picked up a crow bar? Fortunately there instead was this cool off period, I showed one of the guys my video and the entire tune changed.

I have done it there, yes. Also on the front straight at Thunderbolt and LRP......no one said I was intelligent.However I have only ever given a bump to guys who asked for it.

Well then my friend, as I motion you to bump me near a flagger especially when some regions host the events I sure hope you do. Don't think people don't waive for the bump knowing ful well that region does not look the other way for bump drafts.

[EBSNASCAR]

Waterford Hills Road Racing has implemented a simliar program two years ago. There was too much "This guy hits people all the time", but when a protest came around, it was all heresay, with no evidence.

M2M contact = filling out a form discussing the incident, for both participants. Form has to be filled out 30 minutes after the race and placed in the "box" at tech. Stewards are in charge of reviewing and tracking.

[Flyinglizard]

Published contact reports would be very effective and get the reports on paper for all to see. Genius.

Black flag also does the intended job. Fill out the form, sitting in the car on pit road. That would have to be for contact that knocks someone off track.

SCCA has a no bump/push rule that is overlooked. Either change the rule (per NASA) or enforce it. As soon as you look the other way for one rule, the others are in jeopardy .

[gran racing]

Either change the rule (per NASA)

How does NASA address it?

[jjjanos]

I think that the accumulated body of "evidence" potentially serves as the context for any action that might be levied, not as "proof" that someone is guilty of something. It tracks patterns of behavior that can then alert folks - drivers and officials alike - that they should pay attention to an individual, rather than just assuming there's nothing wrong...K

It does not provide context -- if no investigation was done, you don't know the context of the previous incidents. If no punishment was given after an investigation, then the driver(s) weren't at fault. The only thing it does is let the Stewards know at whom they should look closely and that is an admission that the system is broken. Metal to metal contact is never acceptable, even if it is just "a racing incident."

No offense but... This is exactly what turns people away from SCCA. 30 year old rules that people think still work well.

As someone who has been part of the Stewards program I think several would support something like this (but I cannot speak for them). It is pushed year after year to make our "customers" happy and IMO this would be a step in the right direction. I have seen first hand the red book work to get everyone to move forward happily and this is just one more tool.

If you're OK with throwing the book at someone who was the victim of several M2M contacts because he had incidental contact, then this is the system for you.

With that said I do have to admit, as mentioned and IMO a flaw in our SOM process is we are not allowed to use misdemeanors (red book notes) as an influence on our decisions.

The "red book notes" are meaningless without a finding of fault. Period. If there is a finding of fault, then there needs to be punishment. Period. You (as a steward) do have a means of giving that driver a misdemeanor. It's called a reprimand and it comes with 1 point on his license. I.e. you didn't screw-up bad enough to DQ you or take-away a position, but you still screwed up and that needs to be on your record.

What needs a good review is section 7.4 of the GCR. Rex Racer destroys someone's car on April 1 -- he gets a DQ and a 3 event probation. (4 points). In August, he does it again (he's off probation) and gets the same penalty (4 points for a total of 8). Next May, he does it again and the system FINALLY gives him a 6 month probation. Two Labor Days later, he does it again... darn, he's off probation and he only had 4 points on his license...

The judicial system is broken. It relies on either drivers to initiate an action (pack up and go home or stick around for the entire day?) or the stewards to do so (right....). When actions are initiated, the SOMs all too often treat it as a Capital Case and won't convict without 8 DNA samples and a confession.

[EV]

....The "red book notes" are meaningless without a finding of fault. Period.....

I disagree...

If your involved in 10 M2M's in a season, even if none were deemed to be your fault, you (or someone) need(s) to review what you are doing. I'm sorry, if you are paying attention, you won't hit stuff all that often.

On another note, I would like to add that even if the contact isn't M2M, if you contact something attached to the track (tire well, guardrail, tree etc), you should have to fill out a contact form too. I know one driver (who thankfully has retired from the sport), hit something and balled up a car every 2-3 events, rarely though was it another car. He was a danger, and needed to go away. A M2M system won't help take care of that idiot.

[jjjanos]

I disagree...

If your involved in 10 M2M's in a season, even if none were deemed to be your fault, you (or someone) need(s) to review what you are doing. I'm sorry, if you are paying attention, you won't hit stuff all that often.

And exactly what are they going to review? That there were X number of incidents? That information isn't actionable information, so what use is it? None of those incidents have any bearing on who is fault in the current incident or how the current incident should be punished.

FACTS IN BRIEF
At the FastRegional held February 30, 2022 at Marlboro Speedway, Iduhne Gothit (SM#1) protested Rex Cars (SM#2) for failure to complete a pass safely. The SOMs did their thing and upheld Iduhne Gothit's protest finding that Rex Cars failed to execute a safe pass and directed that Mr. Cars be disqualified and placed on a 6 race probation.

Mr. Cars appealed the decision of the SOM based on the inclusion of non-relevant materials and the dissimilar penalties imposed on other drivers found guilty of the same infractions.

DOCUMENTS AND OTHER EVIDENCE RECEIVED AND REVIEWED
1. Letter of Appeal from John Doe
2. Official Observer’s Report and related documents including in-car video from car #1 and car #2.
3. Reports and videos from the other protests in that run group.
3. Logs of incidents involving Rex Cars the occurred at events other than the FastRegional.

FINDINGS
After review of all the evidence, the COA finds that the decision of the SOMs was based, in part, on non-relevant materials, but that Mr. Cars failed to complete his pass safely. While the SOMs may impose any penalty, it is imperative that the judicial process be impartial and treat all violations similarly. Consequently, the COA overturns the penalty imposed upon Rex Cars and imposes a lost of position (the same penalty imposed to other drivers involved in similar incidents). SOMs need to be aware that, unless a driver is on probation, information unrelated to the matter under protest is irrelevant and cannot be considered in determining either guilt or punishment.

Mr. Cars appeal is well-founded.

One should not house-train a dog by logging the times he crapped in the house as a puppy and then beating the crap out of him when he becomes an adult.

[ShelbyRacer]

One should not house-train a dog by logging the times he crapped in the house as a puppy and then beating the crap out of him when he becomes an adult.

Out of everything you've posted in this thread, this makes the most sense.

So rather than just stating why you think it's not a good idea, what would you suggest be done with the information?

[Andy Bettencourt]

Except the dog issue falls down here: It's not the dogs owner who has to punish him. It's the other dogs who share the yard who step in the crap and shouldn't have to.

We police ourselves. The system isn't failing us, WE are failing us. If we don't have the nut to file the paper, then it isn't really bothering us all that much. The log and written suggestion here WILL in fact have people thinking about their contact. The fact it's down on paper will remind them of incidents they have 'forgotten' about. Stewards will see trends and can have proactive meetings reminding drivers that they need to stay clean. The idea has great upside.

I for one don't want a flagger making the call on a black flag during a race. PTB could be more proactive with 'meetings' but people who are not experienced racers shouldn't be making judgement calls that prevent someone from scoring.

[RSTPerformance]

This is racing, everyone should be a dog by now, if not go back and time trial with the puppies . JK sorta (but still in good fun, no offense!)...

We all have been involved in incidents, probably on both sides. Anyone who says every contact needs protest paper written needs to get back out on the track in wheel to wheel competition and be more realistic.

This idea is good, it won't eliminate things but it will help reduce unexessay incidents until it becomes the new norm It will make some people happy and others who probably need it most will get upset once in a while.

Raymond "I will work with documenting the Formula Mazda guys" Blethen

[Knestis]

The idea as presented isn't being proposed as a replacement for the protest process. It's being suggested as a way to influence the culture and generate some social accountability. It isn't really much more than a formalized "go have a talk with the guy/gal" approach that most of us suggest should be a part of the repertoire of dealing with miscreants. Suggesting that it's a bad idea because it doesn't accomplish what the protest process does is kind of silly, given that it's not supposed to.

K

[JeffYoung]

Great idea. No downside.

[jumbojimbo]

The best thing it would do is foster communication and make people think about how others see and understand what happened. Not that your understanding is wrong, it might be, but it's important to understand what other people are thinking.

Example, guy spins in oak tree, does not keep the brakes locked, rolls up and gets clipped. Of course no paper will be thrown. But if each driver writes down what they THINK happened and compares, they may each realize they had some responsiblity. One should have had the brakes on, the other shouldn't use a moving car as an apex. Lessons learned for both. In many (most?) cases of m2m the correct conclusion is probably "yeah, we both should be more careful."

It would also help to lower animosity in some cases. There are a lot of incidents where someone just plain makes a mistake. It doesn't even have to be a poor decision or a reckless move. It can simply be a driving error. Sure, not an excuse, blah blah blah, but if both drivers understand that the contact was not negligent, not on purpose, but just "I reached the limit of my driving skill and learned a lesson" then maybe you lower the animosity a little and everyone gives a little more space next time. When people cut each other less slack and give less room out of some perceived slight is not constructive in the long run. Edit: granted this is where it is up to us to go to the other person's paddock and say "Sorry Bill, my bad", but how many newbies really understand how important that is?

There are lots of good things that can come out of communication, it doesn't have to be about assigning blame or finding bad guys. It can be about understanding what the other person is thinking.

And I agree, the papers themselves shouldn't be used as evidence, and probably shouldn't even be used to show a pattern. But when the same guy comes in event after event and consistently disagrees with the other person and consistenly doesn't reach an amicable understanding of what happened and what to do better next time, that's some pretty useful info for a steward.

[StephF]

I like it too. I was thinking of Kirk K's incident with the Chopper at WGI last summer. If both parties had had to come in and fill out forms, would there have been more of a consequence after the fact?

[Knestis]

I can speak to one side of that question...

If I'd had - or had been forced - to put my understandings and perceptions on paper and talk with others about what had happened, I would have been more likely to come to the conclusion that I did need to protest his actions, right then and there. There wouldn't have been "consequences" arising directly from filling out a witness form but that would have clarified my thinking and set the stage for additional action should it have been warranted.

As I said, this wouldn't replace the protest process. It would complement it.

K

EDIT - when I was a teacher, I settled more than a few long-running personal student feuds by simply putting the two parties in chairs facing one another and telling them we weren't going to leave until they talked to each other. I didn't care about what, and it USUALLY worked out that they found something in common. I had one pair literally ready to kill each other (9th graders) who discovered that they both loved dogs and volunteered at shelters. Changed the whole dynamic.

[Andy Bettencourt]

I bet people would start bringing their video to the impound area too. More often than not, video 'teaches' one of the parties what really happened.