Thunderhill Raceway Race Results - September 6

[gundogC3]

Yep, by about 6" Great race.

[Banker36]

Yall all need to just hgrow up and gop race..... Sure, Ive had a few but Im gunna say it like it is... Dont get yalls panties in a wad and shopw back up nand race.. There is no reason to let a "call" run you off. Im soprry, but I want "it" to bad to let something like getting kicked off the track run me off. Ya, somethings go your way and others dont, the bigger man woul dput his car back ont he track and show he will not be defied that fionishing position. So, buck up, fix whatever needs to be fixed and show up at the spectacular. Im gunna do it and it wasnt any bolt that screwed me, it was a piece of electronic equipment.... Imagine that, a piece o crap radio shack scannner kept me from what I want bad, a top 5 fionishg,,,, But all be damned if I aint gunna be back... I fix that car till hell freezes over to keep it ont he ytrack... Ill be honest, IM in it to knock the guys off who have been reigning over that class for awhile now, its time someone showed up with a challenge. I aint just talkin about me eiehter, I think ole Levi has got the car and willingness to prove it, I just hope we can get a 1 and 2 finish for the "yopunger" generation before long...

[gundogC3]

Yall all need to just hgrow up and gop race..... Sure, Ive had a few but Im gunna say it like it is... Dont get yalls panties in a wad and shopw back up nand race.. There is no reason to let a "call" run you off. Im soprry, but I want "it" to bad to let something like getting kicked off the track run me off. Ya, somethings go your way and others dont, the bigger man woul dput his car back ont he track and show he will not be defied that fionishing position. So, buck up, fix whatever needs to be fixed and show up at the spectacular. Im gunna do it and it wasnt any bolt that screwed me, it was a piece of electronic equipment.... Imagine that, a piece o crap radio shack scannner kept me from what I want bad, a top 5 fionishg,,,, But all be damned if I aint gunna be back... I fix that car till hell freezes over to keep it ont he ytrack... Ill be honest, IM in it to knock the guys off who have been reigning over that class for awhile now, its time someone showed up with a challenge. I aint just talkin about me eiehter, I think ole Levi has got the car and willingness to prove it, I just hope we can get a 1 and 2 finish for the "yopunger" generation before long...

I like the tude, dude!

[Truck99]

Matt, don't type when you've "had a few". Just messin' with you bud. See you at the track.

[Levi]

I think ole Levi has got the car and willingness to prove it, I just hope we can get a 1 and 2 finish for the "yopunger" generation before long...

Sounds like a plan, stan!

[Banker36]

Wow, I didnt really remember writing all of that. Can't say I feel any different sober though, what I wrote is pretty much how I feel.

[fast18]

Yeah Matt...I understood everything you said. I have worried about ride height so much my car is way above the limit. I also remember hearing time and time again about a bolt, nut or anything hitting the wheel would cause a dq....so I made sure I checked and removed anything that would cause a dq. I really feel for Doug and I hope this doesn't keep him from coming back. To me he won because it wasn't a blatant infraction...it didn't make his car faster.

[Mary Ann Naumann]

[  it was a piece of electronic equipment.... Imagine that, a piece o crap radio shack scannner kept me from what I want bad

OK, today is one week after this call, I have been reading this and trying to keep quite, but Matt, you know how excited that I am having you racing @ THR, but right is right and wrong is wrong, if I understood correctly, you got black flagged for not having a radio when it was obvious to the Race Director when you did not adhere to the RED FLAG during a bad accident on the track, a dangerous situation! Red means stop, the lights were on showing red, the red flag was out and the Race Director was calling for you to stop, which he would have done for you, if you would have happen to be one of the cars involved in the accident, once he called directly to you to stop, it was obvious you did not have a radio.

 

I appreciate your encouraging words to those not wanting to return, but please do not lead those readers who may not ever post, but read only, that the only reason you got pulled from the track was because you did not have "a piece o crap radio shack scanner". Safety comes first.

 

Hope to see each of you back next Saturday the 20th, hope those of you in the Houston and surrounding areas are all doing as well as can be expected.

[Budman]

I've been sitting on my fingers on this one for several days now. It is easy to have sympathy for the "Victim" in the case of the DQ. Indeed, the driver and team do have my sympathy for what has happened in this case, after all, it was just one little bolt, right?

 

I am a race fan. What I know specifically about race cars and running race tracks is somewhat limited. What I DO know about is RULES. We ALL live and die by them every single day. That's a big part of what makes our society function. To ignore them invites kaos.

 

I have read the ride height rules for the super stock class at THR. It says 4 1/2 inches. What it doesn't say is "4 1/2 inches except for cars with the number 02 on them." Nor, "except for body support bolts."

The rules must be applied with integrity, evenly across the board to all. To do otherwise would be to envite kaos. As soon a you make an exception for one you obligate yourself to make exceptions for ALL OTHERS. Once that sort of thing starts, where does it stop? And what's the deal on here about making disticntions between which is a "competition enhancing part" and which is a "non-competition enhancing part." A race car, by definition, is a "competition enhanced" unit. If one were to start making such distinctions, then it would have to be done and put in the rules for every single component on the car. The rule book would be 4 1/2 inches thick and could thus be used to check ride heights.

 

If safety comes first, fine. But a close second must come integrety in the application of the rules to all.

[fast18]

Hey..........I have a piece o crap Radio Shack scanner !!!

[marvinmcgee]

I agree with Budman and Mary Ann totally.

The current rules were broken and the DQ's should stand.

Maybe in the following years the current rules can be reviewed to keep

minor non performance issues from causing so much trouble and everyone can

continue to race!!!

[HiTech]

I agree with Budman and Mary Ann totally.

The current rules were broken and the DQ's should stand.

Maybe in the following years the current rules can be reviewed to keep

minor non performance issues from causing so much trouble and everyone can

continue to race!!!

i agree in some part /the question would be as always ..where and what rule do you start with and where would it end ..its dam if you do and dam if you dont ..that has always been a problem that cant be solved ...

[Truck99]

I agree with Budman and Mary Ann totally.

The current rules were broken and the DQ's should stand.

Maybe in the following years the current rules can be reviewed to keep

minor non performance issues from causing so much trouble and everyone can

continue to race!!!

 

Marvin, I'll respectfully submit to you that it would be next to impossible to go through the rule book and decide which rules to eliminate based upon their relative performance merit.

 

There will always be room for argument about certain rules and their necessity, but the problem is that never will everyone agree on which rules to keep and which to throw out.

 

And just for discussion purposes, I'll submit to you that ride height is, in fact, a performance issue. It may not have been in this case because of the circumstances, but overall ride height can be a performance issue without a doubt.

[matt5858]

I hate to hear all of this about the THR Super Stocks. I was out of town and missed the race. Congats Levi on your win! Many more to come Buddy. That sucks for Matt and Doug. It hurts to spend all that money to have a great night go to S#%T due to a call. What happened to Keith, and are you okay? We will be coming back next year (when I can afford a new motor) and winning the championship . See Ya at the next race.

 

Matthew Hodge

[dano36]

Like Budman, I am a spectator at racing events and I do not profess to know that much about the techincal rules. But I can say this much about the view from my side of the track. I do not see an argument with the rules as they are written, nor do I see any argument as to how they are applied, but I do see a definite problem with the penalties for violating these infractions. I believe punishments would be more acceptable if they were more designed to fit the "crime" rather than the one size fits all approach. Penalties can be administered points reductions, laps penalized and yes, even the dreaded DQ.

Points racing at local tracks is far tighter than racing in the big series so taking points can be pretty tough on a competitor. Or penalizing that driver a lap or two for some infraction can result in several positions difference in that particular race. That results in loss of points and money paid. I've heard it said before that its impossible to evaluate every rule and determine a graduated penalty system but it seems to me that other racing series and other tracks have this system in effect and it works well. If you take the time to write the rule you can take a minute more and decide the penalty.

I have seen this total DQ rule causing lots of hard feelings and something does need to be done about it.

[NickHolt]

I'm sorry Dano, your idea to have the punishment fit the crime sounds good on paper, but I don't think it will work in real life.

 

1) Perhaps the most obvious problem with a "sliding scale of punishments" nvolves the question, "Just who is going to make up the sliding scale?

 

a. A committee? Maybe you have not been to a committee made up of racers, but I have. There is no such thing as a concensus. Some want this. Some want that. And the side that looses the arguement is sure that the poweres that be are against them. So instead of one victim for every ruling, there are several.

 

b. Whoever gets on Texas Speed Zone first with 5 or 6 screen names and makes it seem like the whole world sees it "my way?"

 

c. A dictator (othwise known as the Race Director)? Well, maybe. Especially if that dictator has been directly participating in racing for 25 years without ever making a friend with any of the other racers racing at that track. But we all know that many of the close friends racers make are other racers. Dictators will loose many friends and need a very thick skin and must have a huge love of the sport just to survive. They will be villified, cussed out, threatened and anything else that a pissed off racer (and his/her family members, friends, etc) can think of to make the dictator's life miserable.

 

d. A dictator who rules by committee? I dont' think I even need to go into that one. It's doomed from the start. Just ask any track promoter how effective committees are in making rules and coming up with something we all can live with. Racers just plain aren't made that way. We want our way and we want it NOW!

 

e. Fans in the stands? Sure, let the fans decide. After all, they're the ones who drive the sport, right?

Um.. don't think so.

 

 

2) What should the scale look like? Should it be multi-layered with every possible violation and it's punishment listed? Should it be broken down by Chassis, Engine, Drive Train, Carbs, Clutches, etc, etc, Or how about by intent? "I didn't know I was in violaton so I shouldn't be punished as severely as someone who knowingly cheated.. " I don't know about you, but my "intent meter" never has worked very well. Maybe we should look at the whole rule book and go sentence by sentence and assign a punishment for each sentence. Or perhaps let the Race Director decide who gets what punishment for what crime. He had better keep pretty good records and recall exactly what decisions were made for what crimes because the next time the punishment had better be exactly the same as the last instance.. But wait, this new crime is slightly different because of some reason or other. Now the Race Director has to come up with a new punishment that will bring down calls for tar and feathers from those who came before....

 

3) Who is responsible for enforcing the "sliding scale of punishments?" Even if you have Mother Theresa making the decisons, it will always be wrong. Just like it is now. Someone will always be on the "wrong" end of any decisions made by the track, whether it's by committee, by a dictator or Mother Theresa. Mother Theresa has long since gone to her Reward, and the list of 100% pure, innocent, fully knowledgeable folks is amazingly short.

 

Basically, what we have now is a set of rules that may not be perfect, Tech Official who may not be perfect and a bunch of racers who may not be perfect. And, as we see almost every time a decision is made by either the Race Director or the Chief Tech, someone is going to bitch and moan and even threaten to boycott the track because of their "maltreatment." Yes, it may not be "fair" to DQ every car that does not meet the criteria in those imperfect rules, right or wrong. Black and White. But to do it any other way at the local level is to invite total chaos.

 

Nick

[Pacecar]

Post-race tech inspection should only look at performance-based items. It would be reasonable to do a spot-check of a cross-member height, or one of the frame heights. (that's performance-based). The inspector doesn't need to roll the height check wheel all around the whole car to find a non-performance minor item that can lead to a DQ.

 

Pre-race inspections is the time to get picky and mention those non-performance items...... like your door numbers are only 17-3/4" vertical height, without the outline......, or where is your yellow rookie stripe on the bumper.

 

The inspector can make a list of performance-based items he/she intends to look at after the race. That list can be posted just as the race finishes.

 

P.S. Heads-up: The next DQ (after the race) will probably be based upon this rule:

Steel gussets are required at all areas where the tubing is welded to another

inside of the car.

[Budman]

What exactly IS a performance-based item. Is there a definition anywhere? I'm betting $5 bucks you can't come up with a list that all can agree on, on here.

[dano36]

I'm sorry Dano, your idea to have the punishment fit the crime sounds good on paper, but I don't think it will work in real life.

Nick: I've been involved in real life racing for a long long time and it works at other places but for some reason seems to be impossible here. I know you have been around too but why whenever this issue comes up its immediately deemed as being impossible. I've lived long enough to know that for every written rule there is an appropriate penalty for same, otherwise if not we would be sending people to the electric chair for running red lights.

 

1) Perhaps the most obvious problem with a "sliding scale of punishments" nvolves the question, "Just who is going to make up the sliding scale?

####It would be decided by the same people that write the rules.

 

a. A committee? Maybe you have not been to a committee made up of racers, but I have. There is no such thing as a concensus. Some want this. Some want that. And the side that looses the arguement is sure that the poweres that be are against them. So instead of one victim for every ruling, there are several.

####### Unless they have a committee that decides the rules, then NO.

 

b. Whoever gets on Texas Speed Zone first with 5 or 6 screen names and makes it seem like the whole world sees it "my way?"

##### I believe if a system of the punishment fitting the crime was in place then these would be down to a minimum. There will always be boo birds everywhere but I know one thing for sure. No one bases their rules on TXSZ entrys.

 

c. A dictator (othwise known as the Race Director)? Well, maybe. Especially if that dictator has been directly participating in racing for 25 years without ever making a friend with any of the other racers racing at that track. But we all know that many of the close friends racers make are other racers. Dictators will loose many friends and need a very thick skin and must have a huge love of the sport just to survive. They will be villified, cussed out, threatened and anything else that a pissed off racer (and his/her family members, friends, etc) can think of to make the dictator's life miserable.

###### Does the race director make up all the rules? I go back to what I said earlier. Whoever makes up the rules now can add in the penalties. The race director is a responsible position and is a heavy load to bear, but a dictator no. (your words not mine.) If he makes all the rules, OK. Then just add the penalties for violating that rule.

 

d. A dictator who rules by committee? I dont' think I even need to go into that one. It's doomed from the start. Just ask any track promoter how effective committees are in making rules and coming up with something we all can live with. Racers just plain aren't made that way. We want our way and we want it NOW!

######Committees would not be my idea. I never suggested changing the rules to start with Nick so I don't know where you got onto that subject at. I merely suggested having penalties for each infraction and that can be decided by the same people who make the rules now.

 

e. Fans in the stands? Sure, let the fans decide. After all, they're the ones who drive the sport, right?

Um.. don't think so.

#####Again, Nick I did not suggest this nor would I recommend it. No they watch the sport Nick and if you aren't pleasing them they will take their nickles and dimes elsewhere.

 

2) What should the scale look like? Should it be multi-layered with every possible violation and it's punishment listed? Should it be broken down by Chassis, Engine, Drive Train, Carbs, Clutches, etc, etc, Or how about by intent? "I didn't know I was in violaton so I shouldn't be punished as severely as someone who knowingly cheated.. " I don't know about you, but my "intent meter" never has worked very well. Maybe we should look at the whole rule book and go sentence by sentence and assign a punishment for each sentence. Or perhaps let the Race Director decide who gets what punishment for what crime. He had better keep pretty good records and recall exactly what decisions were made for what crimes because the next time the punishment had better be exactly the same as the last instance.. But wait, this new crime is slightly different because of some reason or other. Now the Race Director has to come up with a new punishment that will bring down calls for tar and feathers from those who came before....

#####The scale would be determined by the degree of the technical infraction. Its obvious that some infractions are more competitively advantageous than others and by that judgment it could be determined which is the more serious. I am not going to split hairs with you over what is what and how someone intended to cheat the system. Everytime this issue comes up, the immediate reaction is to come up which what I consider to be unreasonable reasons why it can't be done. My experience has been that other tracks and sanctioning bodies do exactly what I am suggestion and it works far better than the complete DQ rule.

 

3) Who is responsible for enforcing the "sliding scale of punishments?" Even if you have Mother Theresa making the decisons, it will always be wrong. Just like it is now. Someone will always be on the "wrong" end of any decisions made by the track, whether it's by committee, by a dictator or Mother Theresa. Mother Theresa has long since gone to her Reward, and the list of 100% pure, innocent, fully knowledgeable folks is amazingly short.

 

#####Once again, the same people who are making the decisions now would continue to make the decisions in the future. I am not asking to staff and entire group to sit up in the booth to make on the spot decisions but rather when a driver has an infraction which is considered the lessor of competitive advantages and is docked lets say 25 championship points, he is going to complain less loudly than if he was DQed. That is the point I am trying to make. No more no less. There is really no need Nick to make these references to Mother Theresa to belittle ones suggestions but once again I see doors closing when the mere mention of Lets try something new comes up.

 

Basically, what we have now is a set of rules that may not be perfect, Tech Official who may not be perfect and a bunch of racers who may not be perfect. And, as we see almost every time a decision is made by either the Race Director or the Chief Tech, someone is going to bitch and moan and even threaten to boycott the track because of their "maltreatment." Yes, it may not be "fair" to DQ every car that does not meet the criteria in those imperfect rules, right or wrong. Black and White. But to do it any other way at the local level is to invite total chaos.

 

#####I did not critize the rules, I did not critize the Tech official and I did not say the rules were perfect so what is the point? I merely suggested why not try to come up with a set of penalties to fit the crime rather than the one size fits all rule. Seems to me that alone would stop lots of complaints.

 

#####And Nick, I may not have been involved in racing for some time now but I have worked at several race tracks as both a scorer and other official capacities in the past so I feel I know maybe just a tad more than those that have spent lesser time at racing facilities. I may not have the wealth of expertise in the sport as you and others have but I know enough to have at least an opinion. I have only made suggestions to how it is being done now. I am not bashing anyone. I am simply suggesting a change that might just make things a bit more understanding. Why are suggestions met with such hostility?

Dano

[ProTree]

some people could read this and think conspiracy theory:unsure:

[fast18]

I've been dq'd and it's no fun. I had an upper control arm that was a half inch off after taking off the weight jack and going back to stock with the car I bought. I got a free carb from a friend that wasn't such a great deal going through tech. The rules are in black and white. We the drivers should check our cars and if we are not sure ask the Tech Man. I have and it may save me some grief in the future.

[RodneyRodriguez]

I got dq'd a few weeks ago for the same violation. After that happened we left well enuff alone, went to watch the rest of the races and came back to load my hot rod and found that the LF had gone flat, made sense, we knew we had the car high enuff. We went and explained to Jack, he said our car was still too light!

Man talk about feeling like a clown!!!

That explains the Texas Tech violations!!

[STREET02]

Let me clarify a few things if I may. I did not reply to the DQ question , to ask for a complete rules review

or add a car #02 car clause. I have read and fully understand the rules for Super Stock class. But this particular rule in my opinion has room for tolerance if its not true "Frame Ride Height" infraction or the issue

is obviously not an attempt to gain a competitive advantage. I am confident most everyone can tell the

difference. I got a Feature Win taken away because the roller hit a body brace bolt after 50 laps of racing.

and deemed a ride height infraction. One hit and it was over....no " lets roll the car back to where it was

when you got out of it....but asked to push car forward about three feet." It hit one spot........

It was done ...DQ'D ...load it up. I did not make a scene...I did not cuss anyone out. I loaded up.

But I make no apologies for being upset , this DQ effected my Crew, Family and friends that support me.

And I feel the DQ was for something petty and meaningless...no disrespect..just my opinion.......

Kinda took the fun right out of the night...and the $441 I spent to show up kinda painful.

 

My point is 99 percent of the rules are enforced just as they should be with no room for grey talk. This rule however "Could" and I say Could... be enforced with a tolorance and

still keep Tech integrity and consistantcy. But HEY...guys this is just my opinon.

I respect everyones elses opinion too ....so we can agree to disagree fine by me !!

It has nothing to do with trying to undermine tech consistancy..and it has nothing to do with trying to

get a tolorance on every rule so the 02 car never gets another DQ!

I just would rather see tech more focused on that 99% of the rules that ARE black and white thats all.

 

 

DRIVER 02

[Budman]

Hey 02,

 

Thanks for responding!

 

I must say I agree with Dano, to a point. I too would like to see some sort of graduated disciplinary policy in the rules for "major" vs. "minor" rules infractions. A DQ is just so completely devastating for something so minor. I also see some major problems, as Nick has pointed out, in developing and administering such a policy.

 

Regardless if anything ever comes of it or not, I think a healthy, respectful discussion of the topic on here is a good thing. Let's hear y'alls thoughts on it.

[HiTech]

ive found that what tps has done in the past works out for the better ..tps has had some cars with little things i may add may have been over looked by the team by mistake .... but not up to teck rules .. worst than a bolt being to low .. ..we the teams know what they were ..some places would have plain old outright dq.ed that car period .. tps dq.ed them back to the last lead lap finishing order .two of those cars won the feature ..... noone that i know of was upset with those calls and where those cars finished .. . so this system maybe something other tracks and or series may look at ...is it perfect . no . nothing will be .. it keeps the cars comeing back though ..