Thunderhill Raceway local results, 4/26/08

[Kathy]

Jay,

Don't ask him any questions, then he will have to post and have a wreck.

 

I think he said he had the oil changed in another post, so hopefully he won't be blowing any motors up in the truck.

 

He is saving that for the race track this year.

[bigfat]

Jay,

Don't ask him any questions, then he will have to post and have a wreck.

 

I think he said he had the oil changed in another post, so hopefully he won't be blowing any motors up in the truck.

 

He is saving that for the race track this year.

You are correct Kathy. Charlie Earnhardt hooked me up with an oil change.

So there hippy boy.

Those rumble strips on the side of the road are kick ass.

 

That saving it for the racetrack comment was loooooooowwwwwwwwwww.

[Kathy]

Jay,

Don't ask him any questions, then he will have to post and have a wreck.

 

I think he said he had the oil changed in another post, so hopefully he won't be blowing any motors up in the truck.

 

He is saving that for the race track this year.

You are correct Kathy. Charlie Earnhardt hooked me up with an oil change.

So there hippy boy.

Those rumble strips on the side of the road are kick ass.

 

That saving it for the racetrack comment was loooooooowwwwwwwwwww.

 

 

Well I have told you what to do to make sure that does not happen, but you just won't listen to me.

 

I love you Jody Wayne.

[bigfat]

Trust me, I talked to it alright. I talked to it reeeeeeaaaal good after the last two races.

 

Join the crowd. Love you too.

[tps22]

Please Kathy, I already had to replace one motor in JW's car. I can only pay for sooooo much

[Kathy]

Trust me, I talked to it alright. I talked to it reeeeeeaaaal good after the last two races.

 

Join the crowd. Love you too.

 

 

Why you gotta go complaining to pigeon? You think that is gonna help you? Nope, it won't.

 

I bet you still didn't talk to that car right. Remember I said be nice.

 

 

 

TPS22- Tell Jody to talk sweet to the car.

[dano36]

Of course it's OK to disagree. And I can fully understand the logic of your position. I've been on the wrong end of a Tech Official's decision a time or two myself.

 

But once you start making exceptions for this and exceptions for that, it never ends. And usually ends up with a bunch of ticked off racers rather than just the party who feels he's on the short end of the enforcement stick.

 

It would be all too easy for Jack to make and exception in these cases. Everyone likes the folks involved, the violations don't seem at all serious and nobody would really be pissed off if each were reistated or perhaps just docked a point or two. But the enforcement of rules at THR has been pretty much black and white for years. One of the reasons Jack is so highly respected in the racing community is that he doesn't make exceptions or play favorites.

 

Nick

Nick,

Maybe its time to reexamine some of these rules concerning disqualifications Nick and set a point fine system depending on the infraction instead of a complete loss of all points for that event. What happened to Shaun's distributor could have been an oversight and I know that is not an excuse, but a slap on the butt is as meaningful as the kick in the arse that he received. Personally, I think Crazyhorse is a great competitor and I sure hate to see him consider the season a lost cause for him because he is one of those that makes the A Line SS races the most exciting of all the THR events. JMO cause I am just a fan but I sure do notice lots of Crazyhorse fans in the stands there.

[NickHolt]

Take a close look at most rule books being used at short tracks today. Now go down each rule and make up a set of possible penalties for each rule making sure that you take into consideration every possible violation/situation and making sure that each penalty fits the "crime."

 

I think you will quickly see why there is no cookbook of penalties for each rule book.

 

I find it interesting that you should bring up much you admire/respect/like one of the drivers involved in this situation. But turn it around for a second. What if you absolutely hated the person involved? Do you think that tech officials should take into consideration how popular/rich/handsome/whatever the driver/owner is? Rule books and penalties should have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with how much a person is admired, respected, hated, loved, or whether this is the first offense or the 100th offense. The fair tech man puts out of his/her mind who the people involved are and makes his/her decision based on the black and white of the rule book.

 

And it's not like I haven't been down the Chief Steward, Chief Tech, Comp Director road before.

 

I'm sure Jack is feeling the heat from a lot of sources right about now, but I admire the man for making the decision without regard for anything but the rule book and his commitment to be as fair as humanly possible.

 

Nick

[racer61]

Im sure Horse isnt happy about it but he did say he would take his penalty and go on. I would rather race for someone who will disqualify me along with anyone else rather than make exceptions. Like Nick said, as soon as someone gets wind of exceptions than its" he's got his favorites" or the always popular "I guess its ok to cheat if your so and so". Come on guys, we all can read the rule book, and some of us bend rules more than others but thats racing. Dont make such a big deal about it. There is not a perfect solution other than leave it alone. JMFO

[bigfat]

1) Motor/Drive Train infractions. Including Carb, ignition, exhaust, motor position, tranny, drive shaft rear end & gears etc. 25% deduction of points 50% deduction of purse (put the money towards the end of the year points fund)

2) Chasis/Weight infractions. Including height, chasis modifications etc. Same penalty as above.

3) Suspension infractions. Including shocks, springs, spacers etc. same penalty as above.

 

So forth and so on. 2nd infraction of the same rule double the penalty above.

 

 

Nothing like this can be come up with or is it just not worth it? I did his bumpin along 35E at 77 MPH. Again, I'm not trying to disrepect Jack or THR processes. I have all the respect in the world for Jack. Luckily I haven't made the tech pad since I started racing at THR . But I don't see what is so hard about implementing something like the afore mentioned. I'm sure I'm fixin' to hear it though. So let it rip. Hell Take a vote at the next Driver's Meeting. It's just more work for them, not us.

[chiefs13]

Hang in there Horse. I hope to see alot (alot, alot,alot) of racing from you this season.

[Pacecar]

In my 28 years of racing, disqualifications are one of the worst racing experiences, with only serious injury being worse than that. Disqualifications are very emotional, gut-wrenching, and impacts your whole family and supporters. And people viewing the situation from the outside looking in tend to be ruthless and have minimal compassion.

 

I can guarantee you that I can find at least one item that is illegal on any car. Even my own. One time, at a car show, a fellow racer in high points standing claimed that his car was 100% legal. I asked his permission to perform an inspection. After pointing out 3 minor non-conformances to the rules, I then asked him if he'd jack up the car for me to take a look. He had had enough.

 

I believe that the front-running cars tend to be the most legal. Yes, the guy in 11th place thinks his car is the most legal one out there, but odds are that I could find more non-conformances on that one as compared to a front-running car that's on the tech pad week after week. Most times, the racer that's content to finish 11th is just having a good time and is not able to recall the rules verse by verse. Yet he's the one that is ready to toss the hangman's noose.

 

What should occur after the race when it's found that the car's door numbers aren't 18 inches in height (measured vertically, not along the slant)? What should occur when the engine is torn down and there's evidence of antifreeze?

 

In the past, I've been asked to be a tech inspector. Some day, after I retire, I will. Maybe on a traveling series circuit if not locally.

 

If I'm allowed, I'll be willing to make some judgement calls in tech. I think each infraction could be judged to be performance related.... or not performance related. This could impact the seriousness of the penalty. Perhaps last place finishing position vs. a complete disqualification (no points, no money).

 

There's nothing worse to losing your passion for racing than getting disqualified, forfeiting your season's goals, losing the trust of your supporters, and being labeled a cheater.

 

I disagree that every situation is a black-and-white situation and that every infraction warrants a complete disqualification. And I've seen it carried to the n'th degree when a racer(s) was retroactively stripped of his whole seasons points on the last night of racing.

 

It's not often that BigFat makes some sense.

[bigfat]

Even a blind hog can find an acorn every now and then.

[abrungot]

Only place i can agree is on weight & Ride height.

 

I could understand if there was give on Ride Height & Weight if you roll across say 5 lbs light but in % its a 25 point, $25 pen.. Over that is a 50 point pen.. $50 pen

 

For Ride Height first time in season 25 point, $25 2nd 50 point $50. 3rd is DQ No Pay for night.

 

Anything else Motor/Drivetrain Suspension.. Full DQ...

 

I know several tracks if you got DQ'd on your previous race, you had to start scratch on the field the next week as well..

 

I know there are several teams that are breaking one rule, that is plain as day... its not performance inhancing that i know of.. solely cosmetic...

 

Don't understand why people can't follow the simple rule.. and when someone get's DQ'd because of it.. I am sure we will be right back here again...

[bigfat]

Here goes the whine'n over the BCs!!!! $5 fine at least.

[NickHolt]

Larry,

 

I am one of those who has encouraged you to enter the dark side and become a tech official. I think you would be excellent in that capacity. I trust your judgment and honestly believe that you are well-qualified to make "judgment calls" on the tech pad.

 

But let me give you a word of warning. Once you make a judgment call, you had better keep that exact situation in mind for the rest of your career. The first team that comes along with the same infraction and you apply a slightly different "judgment call" for that team, your reputation is shot no matter how well-intentioned and pure your motives were in making the call.

 

Teams don't forget your rulings. They remember them for years and years because, as you so clearly pointed out, DQ's and other tech penalties are traumatic. But as a tech official, on the other hand, it's just another difficult call you had to make and after a while one DQ tends to blend in with other DQ's as time marches on. It's hard to keep all the nuances of a similar infraction years earlier in mind and accurately compare them to the current scenario - especially when someone is ready to attack you with a tire iron on the tech pad for discovering that non-performance-enhancing lightweight crank, or whatever.

 

One "judgment call" that's either a bit more lenient or a bit more harsh than the other and you're obviously playing favorites, you're obviously taking bribes, you obviously hate that team, you obviously love the other team, you're an idiot, you're off your meds, you don't know crap about anything and you're more than likely just an all around bad person. Folks whom you thought of as friends won't even speak to you any longer let alone have lunch with you. At least you'll save time at Christmas because you won't be getting many Christmas cards...

 

Nick

[Truck99]

It's not often that BigFat makes some sense.

 

You got that right!

 

One thing is for certain, Crazyhorse and his team have not lost any respect or trust from this team, nor have we labeled him a cheater. They have been busting their butts since that car was finished to get the bugs worked out of the brake system. I imagine changing that module just never made it to the top of the list of priorities considering everything else that was going on. In our experience, removing the MSD module and replacing with the DUI stock-type one did not change performance one bit, so it doesn't bother me that it was in there. The super stock class needs racers like Shawn Paul Lehman, so I hope he continues to make every race this season.

 

That being said, I don't fault Jack at all for making the decision. He never likes making the call to DQ someone, but he'll do it when it has to be done and will stick by it.

[ninetynine2win]

EXACTLY what Chase said.....see ya' at the track Shawn Paul, and keep on truckin'.

[dano36]

Take a close look at most rule books being used at short tracks today. Now go down each rule and make up a set of possible penalties for each rule making sure that you take into consideration every possible violation/situation and making sure that each penalty fits the "crime."

 

I think you will quickly see why there is no cookbook of penalties for each rule book.

 

I find it interesting that you should bring up much you admire/respect/like one of the drivers involved in this situation. But turn it around for a second. What if you absolutely hated the person involved? Do you think that tech officials should take into consideration how popular/rich/handsome/whatever the driver/owner is? Rule books and penalties should have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with how much a person is admired, respected, hated, loved, or whether this is the first offense or the 100th offense. The fair tech man puts out of his/her mind who the people involved are and makes his/her decision based on the black and white of the rule book.

 

And it's not like I haven't been down the Chief Steward, Chief Tech, Comp Director road before.

 

I'm sure Jack is feeling the heat from a lot of sources right about now, but I admire the man for making the decision without regard for anything but the rule book and his commitment to be as fair as humanly possible.

 

Nick

 

Nick,

Since you mention the many rules on the books it us obvious that at some point in time the powers that be sat down and came up with these rules and I was wondering why it could not be determined then as to what penalty to assess if its violated. Now I know that is hindsight but surely these rules are under constant study to keep abreast of the ever changing technology in racing. So why not then and afterwards at the end of the season when the rules are reexamined. I believe it unfair to totally disqualify a competitor for a rule infraction in the first place instead of assessing a point fine which can be as effective as a complete DQ. I am not saying there could be instances where a complete disqualification is necessary but I fail to see where a lessor infraction should carry an equal penalty as someone who grossly breaks the rules.

I did not refer to Shaun Paul because he happens to be my friend, rather I mentioned him because he was a part of this discussion. If it was Snidley Whiplash the arch villan of racing I would have still commented. , I was commenting on a fans perspective of the DQ rule, not that Shaun got stung. I know Jack does a great job as the Tech Inspector and I have much respect for him. I learned long ago you don't shoot the messenger, just the message. So turn it around and throw another name in there and I will say the same thing. So to summarize I will say "CHANGE THE RULES TO FIT THE CRIME'.

Most drivers that race at THR have family and fans that attend there regularly to watch their hero race and to lose any of them to a hard fast rule such as this one not only hurts the car counts but the seat counts as well. JMO.

Dano

[sprintsrule]

I have been involved in a track and I believe coming up with varying degrees of penalties would be next to impossible. Something else that would need to be considered is why each person is out there racing. I have only raced for a points championship one time. All of the other years I raced I would just race where and when I wanted to race because I did not care about points. You can take away all of my points and I would not care. If you are only going to take $50 out of my winnings for my ride height being too low, I can make more than that $50 by running the car low just in the amount of positions I gain over the cars running legal (I learned that in Nick's seminar). That would encourage me to cheat because I would benefit. It would also unfairly cost everybody I beat money because their winnings would be less. You have basically penalized everybody. If you take all of the money away then that would deter me because I need the money to race next week. Somebody who does not need the money but likes the publicity of winning would not be detered. Therefore the same penalty does not even affect people in the same way. If you take the points, money and the win away then you have something in there that will deter everybody because they will lose everything by cheating.

[dano36]

What you are saying is that its impossible to devise a system of point penalties for each written tech specification? I've seen tracks that had them. I admit that I have not worked at a track now for over 30 plus years and I am sure the tech is a much more complicated now but if its impossible to come up with a point reduction penalty system why is it they can come up with the tech specifications. I am just saying that it seems to me that the one rule fits all is a bit much and is really not fair to the guy who had a minor infraction which had little effect on performance. Your example was what I would consider a flagrant violation in that you 1, knowingly made the illegal modification and 2. It gave you a definite advantage over other competitors in compliance. That is why I suggested that the complete disqualification rule still be used. NASCAR assesses penalties in this manner but rarely do they disqualify anyone. The lessor the "violation" the lessor the point reduction. Since you feel this would still give an unfair advantage over others then add to the rule that they go back to the end of cars on that lap and if that happens to be his car then penalize him one lap. The loss of position and points will make the person think about doing it again. Then if you want a real serious deterrent to violators of rules, second time nets a suspension. Its not impossible Sprintsrule; maybe difficult but not impossible.

[sprintsrule]

It is impossible to come up with one that would not cause more headaches for everybody than the system in place now.

[NickHolt]

Even with scores of highly-paid and very-experienced tech officials, years and years of racing experience under their collective belt and a set of rules that cover just about every nut and bolt on the car, NA$CAR gets a black eye almost every time they hand out a penalty. It's NEVER fair and it's ALWAYS controversial.

 

What makes anyone think that a local tech guy is going to do any better trying to decide what penalties fit what violation?

 

One of the big problems with any variable penalty system is in determining the "performance advantage" of a given part. Is a part that produces a 2.5 horsepower increase a significant advantage? Why not 10.2 horsepower or 6.7 horsepower or 20 horsepower? Is 1.2 volts from the electrical system a significant advantage? Why not 0.7 volts or 1.8 volts? Is 10 pounds light in the chassis an advantage? How about 50 pounds? What do both those numbers mean in terms of a handling advantage? What if the left side weight is way under the maximum but the total weight is 50 pounds under the minimum? Is that a handling advantage or a handling detriment? Or how about soaking tires? Is there a difference in penalties between cleaning the tires with a solvent before qualifying and soaking them all week with a roller?

 

These are just a few "performance advantage" scenarios off the top of my head. I'm sure there are hundreds, if not thousands, more examples where coming up with appropriate penalties would be - at best - a shot in the dark.

 

And how in the world do you determine the "intent" of the rules violator? Take the competitor's word for it? Look him/her in the eye and judge his/her intent? Give a polygraph? I don't know about yours, but my "intent meter" is not too reliable.

 

Bottom line: If intent and performance advantages are not clear-cut criteria for handing out penalties, what do you suggest the criteria become? Good old common sense is probably the most sensible, but what is "common sense" to one group of people is probably not "common sense" to another group of people who have a different perspective.

 

Nick

[SSCHUCK]

Come on Horse I remember someone being almost 500 points out of the Championship and He came back to finish in 2nd place for the year.Remember you beat him by one point for the Championship.

Of course thats when there was a race season not what we have now.

[RodneyRodriguez]

here's what you can hang your hat on S.P., if you got hung for something like you did the other night, odds are some of these other hot shoes out there are going to get caught too for something, should make for a pretty tight season, I wouldn't give up hope yet dude!