-----Original Message-----
From: J. Brett Howell [mailto:jbrett@pebblemotorsports.com]
>.Seems to me that would have been the sporting thing to do. Then
>again, and this is just speculation on my part, maybe the protestor
>is more concerned with winning a National Championship by protesting
>faster drivers instead of setting up his car and out driving them.
: Hmm.I missed your smiley, so I assume you are serious.
He did successfully protest himself into a trophy spot. He also helped me
move up a couple of spots (I still would have trophied, just probably a
couple of spots back) so I should be tickled that he did this. I'm not.
: I don't have time to explain why this insinuation is absurd, but I will
: point out to anyone who missed it that this is a clear example of the
: unfair treatment heaped upon anyone who dares to follow the rules and
: employ the protest process. This one is particularly below the belt
I think you should make the time to explain why this is absurd. What was
done was, IMHO, underhanded and unsportsmanlike. Period. I would have a
great deal of trouble looking myself in the mirror if I had done this.
Anyone is free to use the protest procedure as they see fit, but they
shouldn't expect anyone to respect them if it is abused as it was in these
cases.
: considering the driving history of the person casting aspersions and the
: driving history of the person at whom I believe this is directed (Clint
: MacMahan).
To me driving history is like investing. It really means nothing, for their
current performance, if someone is a past champion or successful competitor,
or total loser. Some drivers will perform consistently well, others will be
hit and miss.
>.It is my opinion, however, that competitors should take the time
>(if it's available) to talk to people about what they think is
>illegal with their cars and give them a chance to fix it before
>filing protests - especially if the illegality appears to be either
>a) an oversight or b) something that provides no competitive
>advantage.
: Who makes the determination as to whether something is an oversight or
: provides no competitive advantage? The protestor felt that the protested
: parties had been given advance notice, and that the items in question
: did provide a competitive advantage. The protest committee agreed with
: the advantage of the exhaust and you yourself agreed with the advantage
Bzzt, wrong. The protest committee agreed that the exhaust length was
illegal. I do not recall anyone indicating there was an advantage gained or
lost. The width issue was measured by the protest committee and found to be
in compliance.
: of width. It sounds like reasonable people agree with the protestor.
: Maybe we should stop inferring that he is a weenie or unsportsmanlike?
No inference here. It was a weenie thing to do and highly unsportsmanlike.
: As for giving advance notice, how many times does someone have to be
: told to make their car compliant before it becomes protestable? Does
They don't HAVE TO be told at all, that is just the sportsmanlike/un-weenie
way to handle the situation.
: each time have to be documented and witnessed? Is videotape of the
: conversation admissible or does the fact that it can be tampered with
: make it suspect? I'm at a loss for how to manage this.
I never asked John/Stu when he put the exhaust on the car. It may not even
have been there when the "warning" was issued. Besides, there's nothing to
manage. You cannot legislate morality.
>By the way, we did ask one of the protestors (via email on another
>list) what it was that was illegal with our cars. We received a
>reply that stated "I would be happy to talk to anyone. I will not,
>however, be telling individuals what I think is wrong with their
>individual cars."
: That is Chris' prerogative. I believe notice has been served on the
: class that if one person is going to be held accountable for following
: the rules with zero tolerance than everyone will be, and therefore it
: would behoove someone driving a formula car at the National
: Championships to ensure that their car complies with all the formulas.
As they should anyway. I think it is a sh***ty attitude to make a blanket
statement that everyone's cars are illegal and then clam up. I'm certain
that my car is totally legal, by my interpretation of the rules, and I
believe that it is just a mind game being played.
: Read the rules (about 2 pages in the GCR) if you don't think you can
: rely on someone to tell you what is wrong with your car. It's your
: responsibility to prep the car properly beforehand, not someone elses.
That is correct. BUT, I also believe that discussions should be started
between competitors to decide what the rules really are saying, maybe we
need to change some that don't make sense for Solo II.
: J. Brett Howell (aspiring to mAs)
Ron Madurski
FM 124
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Partial archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|