E-Mail from Prill re: HST and "Green-2-Checker"

Not sure how many received the letter (email) on 4/28 regarding Hoosier Super Tour and driver behavior?

Apparently people are upset with HST (specifically VIR - which I've seen posts about).

I see the letter as a 'dressing down' of drivers and he quotes a bunch of stats.

One thing not mentioned is the effect of mixed classes and group counts. I still think it is very relative and I think my thread/letter from over a year ago is still relative.

https://www.apexspeed.com/forums/sho...s-Letter-30422

I'd like to see the stats on group size and their effects of finishing with no yellows - and whether they split start or not.

Here's the stats provided if you didn't see the letter:

Quote:

---

Some specific data from VIR:
• Number of participants: 409
• Number of sessions: 40
• Number of sessions that were interrupted (FCY, BFA, Early Checker): 22
• Number of sessions that went un-interrupted, Green-to-Checker: 18
• Total incidents* reported on race logs (from corner station calls): 212
• Spins: 92
• Total Cars involved in metal-metal: 65
• Number of vehicles requiring a tow of some kind: 57
• Individual cars involved in incidents that stopped a session: 50
• Laps not completed on Sunday due to reaching 35-min. time limit: 25 out of 112 possible (22%)
*Spins, metal-metal, barrier impact, stopped/mechanical – anything that either stopped a session or could have potentially stopped a session. Did not include calls of four-wheels off not involving a spin. The number should actually be higher than 212, but some of the hand-written notes were difficult to decipher.

---

Can you post the email content?

Here's the whole letter:

Dear Paul,

I write to you today, not solely as the staff lead of the SCCA Road Racing program, but as a fellow driver. Friends, we need to talk…

Over the last couple of years, staff has heard concerns from many of you about the level of driving, the number of incidents and the amount of discipline at our events—specifically the Hoosier Super Tour weekends.

Speaking to several of you over the last season, there is a belief that the driving quality has degraded, and the number of incidents increased over the last couple of years. Aside from the number of actions during a weekend, which has not shown a meaningful change outside of the Runoffs, we have not had a mechanism to specifically track the on-track activity. So, following this year’s VIR Super Tour (April 8-10), we combed through the T&S data and Communication logs and complied that information.

Some specific data from VIR:

• Number of participants: 409
• Number of sessions: 40
• Number of sessions that were interrupted (FCY, BFA, Early Checker): 22
• Number of sessions that went un-interrupted, Green-to-Checker: 18
• Total incidents* reported on race logs (from corner station calls): 212
• Spins: 92
• Total Cars involved in metal-metal: 65
• Number of vehicles requiring a tow of some kind: 57
• Individual cars involved in incidents that stopped a session: 50
• Laps not completed on Sunday due to reaching 35-min. time limit: 25 out of 112 possible (22%)

*Spins, metal-metal, barrier impact, stopped/mechanical – anything that either stopped a session or could have potentially stopped a session. Did not include calls of four-wheels off not involving a spin. The number should actually be higher than 212, but some of the hand-written notes were difficult to decipher.

This information gives us a baseline, something that we can track and compare future events to. As I looked through the logs, it also became clear that they don’t include every single thing that happened on track. For instance, one (metal-to-metal) incident that prompted a protest was not mentioned in the session log. This is a great reminder that, as outstanding as our corner marshals are, it is impossible for them to see everything that happens from their posts, particularly when they’re reporting on the 212+ other incidents throughout the weekend. So, if there’s no report, and the drivers don’t say anything, there is no record and no opportunity for investigation.

Without previous data for comparison, we don’t know if any of these numbers are better or worse than previous events. For the sake of this argument, let’s assume they are worse. Why is this happening, and why does it seem to have happened over the last couple of years? Here are a few considerations that have been relayed to staff recently by the racers themselves:

• COVID forced all of us to take time off from doing the things we loved. Now that many of us have returned to racing, there may be some rust, pent-up aggression and feelings that we all need to “seize the day” every chance we get.
• Whether it is politics, inflation, personal loss, or the overall state of the world, many people are kind of ticked-off in general. And some are taking that frustration to the racetrack.
• Yellows breed yellows. When you don’t have faith in your group making a lot of green laps, there is a sense of desperation. Desperate driving creates more incidents.
• Send it. A popular rally cry for some, but generally not a solid strategy, particularly in amateur motorsports. See also, “disposable racecars.”
• Too much, too soon? It’s outstanding that we have lots of new drivers coming into the program. The Hoosier SCCA Super Tour is designed to be the “big stage” and there are a lot of racers that take racing very seriously. For a new driver, that can be daunting. When you add a daunting racetrack to that situation, it can be downright intimidating. There is neither shame in asking for help nor recognizing that you may need to take a step back from the big stage. In fact, many would consider it admirable.
• There are many other reasons for sure, these are just a sample that we’ve heard over the last couple of seasons.

“What is SCCA going to do to fix this?”
This is something that I, and others, have been asked multiple times recently. From “hurry up the safety teams,” “harsher penalties,” “different run groups,” to “tiered licensing processes,” there is no shortage of ideas for program leaders, race organizers and officials to consider. Ultimately, there are many things that can influence change here.

And that all starts with us, the drivers. It starts with getting through Turn One. And then Turn Two, and all the way through Lap One, and so forth. It is acknowledgement by us, the driving community, that 57 tows over a three-day weekend is unacceptable. It is a commitment by the driving community to protect our sessions, and strive to go Green-to-Checker without interruption. It is a pledge to be the driver that you want everyone else to be.

I know the staff team, program leaders and officials will endeavor to seek out ways to improve the experience during our events. I ask that we, the driving community, do our part to start this Green-to-Checker (G2C) movement.

See you at the track,

Eric Prill
VP, SCCA Road Racing & Driver
(who has made his fair share of mistakes behind the wheel over the last 30 years, but always strives to be better)

is anyone surprised with those numbers in that email?

i hope Eric spends an appropriate amount of time studying the operations of the event, in particular, in contrast to the Spring Super Tour event the last year that the Runoffs were at VIR. Considering what a trainwreck that 2019 event was, I was surprised to learn that track management was being blamed for so many of the problems this time. Eric's staff is responsible for coordinating with track management and ensuring that operations are functioning properly. Getting everybody angry before they can even be parked, would seem like a poor recipe for a good event with high driving standards within oversubscribed race groups.

Seems to me that the biggest impact on constant fcy is the extremely POOR/SLOW performance by the EV staff (at VIR, anyway).. and their inability to get to the area(s) of concern until ALL cars are grouped up behind the pace car(s). At Summit Point we raced mostly FCY free while EV picked up cars .. or moved them out of harm's way under 'condition yellow' flags. At VIR, my group spent 20 minutes of our 35 minute race sitting in the pits ... under YELLOW instead of RED.. after having spent several more minutes trundling around the track at 'reduced speed'.. all grouped up. In the VIR SM race, I watched EV (and track support) spend some 20 minutes replacing ONE 'quad' of tires along a wall at T5. The original quad was still there and could have easily been put back into position.. but they elected to bring in a totally new quad .. on a 50 foot flat bed that took most of that time just getting to the incident area - as did the big LOADER to move the quads. The cars were stopped on track under RED for most of that time until they finally released them to return to the pits under BFA.

OTOH, SRF had some FIVE separate incidents on the same lap at 5 different places on the track - about equally spaced around the track. I think they only got 1 lap of "racing". The Big Bore OW group got NO LAPS of racing. An incident at T1 and T2 on lap 1 and then .. another incident on the back straight following the restart to bring out another FCY to the end.

LOTS of 'no racing' races. I don't have the answer, but I sure do miss 'hot tows' that we used for the first 30 years of my racing 'career' - even during the Runoffs. All of that puts even more pressure on the drivers to MAKE THEIR MOVE sooner, rather than later. Personally, I prefer to do my best to stay out of trouble in the early laps. If I'm faster, I'll pass cars and have fun.. if I'm not, I'll get passed but can still have fun. However, when there are NO LAPS, it changes the game .. a LOT and it's certainly NO FUN to pack up a damaged race car to take home.

5 of us in my pack of 6 vees (of 15 vees in the group) at Summit also got called to the SOM's for "OVERDRIVING" the yellow. (i.e. we didn't slow down ENOUGH to make the corner stations and presumably ev - happy .. ). We slowed 'enough' to control our cars safely and make it obvious from in car cameras, but the workers and EV didn't see it that way since we were still moving 'fast' .. and not just trundling around. They let us go without penalty, but only because there is no definition of 'significantly' in the GCR.. Expect to see that rectified soon.

It IS interesting that we used to race MOST races with hot pulls and NO incidents as a result. And now workers cannot go out of their station until the pack is under control via FCY. I attribute this to the 'excess' of lawyers in our country that assure everyone that thinks they have been 'wronged' to SUE SUE SUE. Our justice system can no longer function efficiently because of the massive backlog on meritless suits being filed.. and it carries over into every other activity in the country. But what can WE do about that?

JMHO...
Steve, FV80

It does not matter what we use to do, these are the conditions we race under now.

We know what Regions and tracks do not do hot tows. We have a pretty good idea when an event is over subscribed. Evaluate the chances of track time losses and make your choices. It is your time and money to use wisely.

Brian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Davis

Seems to me that the biggest impact on constant fcy is the extremely POOR/SLOW performance by the EV staff (at VIR, anyway).. and their inability to get to the area(s) of concern until ALL cars are grouped up behind the pace car(s). At Summit Point we raced mostly FCY free while EV picked up cars .. or moved them out of harm's way under 'condition yellow' flags. ...

---

Some context.

EV at VIR formerly comprised a mixture of track and Region equipment and personnel. They did hot pulls. Then two things happened.

After a couple of incidents where racecars collided with EVs doing hot pulls, the track decreed no more hot pulls. This was in response to on-track behavior.

About the same time, there was a falling-out (personality clash) between the Region EV leadership and the track people. The upshot was that Region EV evaporated, leaving only track EV.

EV at Summit Point remains a mixture of track and Region. The track provides ambulances and fire truck; the Region provides wrecker and flat tows.

A few years ago, a new track manager took over. After visiting VIR, he decreed that the ambulances and fire truck would not go on a hot track – so FCY or BFA. The Region could continue with hot pulls if it was only Region equipment/personnel involved. (The Region EV people did refuse to do hot pulls one weekend after some advanced idiocy in a Miata race.)

The point is two-fold. These restrictions arose purely because of on-track behavior. And there is a sort of ratchet effect – restrictions tighten, but never loosen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve Davis

It IS interesting that we used to race MOST races with hot pulls and NO incidents as a result. And now workers cannot go out of their station until the pack is under control via FCY. I attribute this to the 'excess' of lawyers in our country that assure everyone that thinks they have been 'wronged' to SUE SUE SUE. Our justice system can no longer function efficiently because of the massive backlog on meritless suits being filed.. and it carries over into every other activity in the country. But what can WE do about that?

JMHO...
Steve, FV80

---

I agree with some of Prill's letter. I think it was necessary. He points out some very valid reasons for why WE may be part of the problem....However, I wholeheartedly agree with Steve's assessment - some tracks just won't let a car sit, regardless of whether there is any REAL danger to the driver, other drivers, or corner workers. I went to a Regional last weekend at Roebling Road to sort out some changes with my car. We (drivers) got a similar speech at our drivers meeting. However, the track, stewards, marshalls, and corner workers kept us mostly green the entire weekend, despite incidents. Just like in the "old days', we were given yellows at the incident for two laps, allowing everyone to be aware of the situation, then back to full course racing. I'm not sure why it can be done at certain tracks, and not at others. Some of the same officials ran the Roebling event that ran the Major at VIR. I'm all for attending more events at tracks that show a desire/strategy to keep courses green, but are any of us interested in attending the Runoffs willing to boycott a track, particularly when it's the venue for the next two years??

The fact that this is what the club has evolved into is part of why I parked my car for 17 years. I don't want to spend a ton of money to get 10 green flag laps a weekend. It may be why I quit for good the next time. How anyone can justify racing a SM or SRF at Majors is beyond me these days. In those classes, your green laps per $$ would be a frightening calculation.

James
FV 19

For over 30 years the racing world has been venerating the worst role models possible,

Rubbin's isn't racing - it is crashing in a small way. The worst role models for racing have been Dale Earnhardt Sr., Ayrton Senna, Michael Schumacher and the Hamilton/Verstappen 2021 F1 Season. All those named leave one thing out of their racecraft - something sung with conviction by Aretha Franklin - R E S P E C T. In their lust and red mist for victory they all lost RESPECT - respect for themselves as well as the other competitors. With 'Officialdom' accepting the actions of those named as acceptable racing and not penalizing them for their transgressions we have what we have today.


Within SCCA it has evolved into 'I have the funds for repairs - Do YOU? Send it!'

That is not what Club Racing should be at any level - Drivers School to to Regionals to Super Tour events to the Runoffs. It is up to us, all of us, to quash the red mist within our helmet and use our brains instead. Professionals, in relative terms, get paid to wreck cars - the criticism gets thrown at them for not taking out the competition 'for the win' is significantly greater than is the condemnation they get for taking someone out. Thus all that is presented to us as Club Racers is the wrong way to race - because of the safety that has been built into the cars, the tracks and personal safety equipment - pros can get away with all their transgressions as opposed to what happened in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's and even took the lives Earnhardt and Senna. What we witnessed of the Hamilton/Verstappen 2021 season, in a earlier era, would have likely seen the demise of at least one, if not both of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mmi16

For over 30 years the racing world has been venerating the worst role models possible, .......
Within SCCA it has evolved into 'I have the funds for repairs - Do YOU? Send it!'

---

I agree with much of the commentary above, but think the biggest problem is actually a combination of arrogance and incompetence. When people crash in the first few laps of a test/practice/qualifing session (which happens all the time) it is because they don't know what they are doing!

In the old days, we had rich people driving the fast cars, but 80% of the racers were working class people driving their FVs, FFs, C-sedans, production cars, etc. They could not afford to crash. Now those working class people are about 10% of our community. I see this in the formula classes where the small-bore OW group has far fewer black flags and FCYs than the big bore OW group. When there is a problem in the small-bore group, then it is more likely to be the "send it" cause. But with the big bore group it is more likely people driving over their competence level in cars they are not qualified to drive. And they don't really care what it cost to fix their cars, other cars, or how much track time they took from their community.

I don't know how you fix any of these problems. As Harding said above, this is racing in our times. But while people can choose which events they attend, they can also select which classes they compete in. That is one of the reasons that I have focused my racing toward the small bore group and encourage newbies that I talk to, to do the same. All we need now is to keep those SEDIV race organizers from sticking FE or FC into the small bore group. The better solution would be having 3 OW groups instead of 2.

I was at the Super Tour at Pitt this past weekend and we (meaning the big-bore open wheel group) got a similar talking to with Doug Nickel. It was an open forum with everyone in that group with Doug, where we could discuss the previous events. Doug stated that the stewards can improve, which is definitely true, but it comes down to driver etiquette. I totally agree with that. Some drivers during the discussion suggested penalties for those who cause FCY or BFA. Doug even said they are considering parking a driver for the next session if they cause the FCY or BFA. But that can be a slippery slope. Say you try braking 10 feet later into a corner, lock up, spin, and get stuck in gravel or grass. I don't think you should be parked for that. That's part of driving ten tenths and finding a limit. However, if you are driving egregiously, as some definitely have during these events, you should definitely get parked.

Something that I personally suggest is shrinking the 115% rule. I believe IndyCar and F1 have a 107% rule. I'm not saying go that low, but maybe down to 112%. That should help with fast cars colliding with slow traffic, which happened during the GT on Sunday at Pitt.

But that doesn't stop the fast guys from treating each other like dirt. VIR FE2 race had the leaders all come together because literally none of them wanted to give an inch in turn 1 lap 1. Harsher penalties may just be needed to get through to some people.

Whatever the answer is, it isn't gonna come from the stewards room. It's gonna come from the drivers meeting and talking about it, which is why I welcomed Doug Nickel giving us all the chance to speak last Friday.

Vintage Racers Group (VRG) Mainly in the Northeast that the Formula Ford Challenge series (FFCS) races under.

4 wheels off, spin more than 180deg or contact with anything or anyone in ANY session and you come in and have a lengthy talk with the nice people at the black flag station in pit lane. If you ignore the black flag, you most likely have a short weekend.

Still some of the toughest FF racing that I've ever done in my 36 years at it.

Kudos to Eric Prill and team for compiling and publishing those stats from VIR. However, this is not granular enough. There is an 80/20 rule around on-track incidents – 80% of the incidents involve 20% of the drivers.

For example, in Q1 at VIR, an SM driver caused an incident serious enough that he was DQ’ed and suspended for a month. I have to be careful what I write in a public forum, so I shall simply say that I recognize the name. All good, but what happens when he returns? Will he see increased scrutiny and escalating consequences? Likely, no.

A while back, I led a driver review. As we dug through the archives, interviewed witnesses, and reviewed video, we discovered that he had been crashing people out for years. Nobody had connected the dots to establish a pattern of behavior.

I believe that there is a fairly small subset of – with apologies to Greg – problem children. A good first step would be to identify and deal with those drivers. Eric might start there.

I talked with Doug Nickel quite a bit this weekend, and I have to say I agree with him that we as drivers are most of the solution here.

I was at Road Atlanta in March. I was on track for 9 sessions. ZERO of 9 were green the whole time.
It was 30*F most of the weekend. I hadn't been there before. Most of our sessions had a crash on lap 1 or 2. It took me until Sunday to even get enough clean laps to learn the track, and that includes Thursday test day. I could not believe how quick guys were trying to go right out of the pits, and wasn't surprised when they ended up in the grass.

I couldn't go to VIR, but it sounds like it was even worse.

Summit Point Majors went off pretty smooth, but there were still more crashes than I would expect.

Last weekend at Pittrace IMO was pretty good, at least compared to the rest of the year so far. We lost most of Q2 due to a dumb crash on lap 3(ish), but Saturday race went off with no FCY and only a couple incidents. Sunday was terrible weather and we still got away with only a couple incidents, although that did include a couple laps of FCY.

- At all races I have been to this year, people are going WAY too fast on lap 1. Especially during practice and qualifying. There is NO reason to be driving 10/10 2 turns out of the pits, especially when it is 30-40 degrees out.

- Several incidents that caused FCY have resulted from cars coming to rest on the track with no apparent major damage. In some cases this is unavoidable, but most of the time, you should be able to limp it into the grass so everyone else can race. At Pittrace Saturday, the driver who caused FCY during Q2 had been unable to start his car without a jump box all weekend, so when he ended up right beside the track he couldn't move. Not saying he shouldn't have raced, but surely there is some responsibility there. At Road Atlanta Sunday race ended early because of a car sitting partially on the track in a turn. I don't know his story, but why couldn't he move to a safer location?

I admit I race in P2 which is not generally a super hotly contested class, but I don't take passes unless I know I can make them, and if someone comes up behind me who isn't in my class I let them by as quick as I can. Occasionally I have to pass them back, but so far it has never cost me a race. I had a great race with Bill Neimeyer on Saturday and passed each other numerous times with no incidents. But there was also at least one pass I could have taken on him but decided not to risk it, and I know I can trust him to do the same. I raced on Sunday in the rain on slicks, which was a stupid thing to do admittedly, but I forgot my rain tires, and Goodyear forgot the set they were supposed to sell me, and I wanted the points. I stayed out of everyone's way and had no issues at all. What I think is important about that is that when you give other drivers space, they tend to give you some too.

As far as mixed classes on the track, it doesn't bother me much, but I am surprised at what some people complain about here. As I see it, there are 3 possibilities for me:

1) P1/FA- enough faster than me that I just let them by with minimal interruption to me (or them hopefully).
2) FF/FV/FX- enough slower than me that I can pass them pretty much anywhere with minimal interruption. Occasionally I have to hard brake somewhere because I can tell one doesn't see me coming and I lose a bit of time in one turn. Big deal.
3) FC/FE2- front of the pack within +/- a second or so lap time with me generally. This is the only one that ever costs me any significant effort. Sometimes they are faster on certain sections and I on others, and it take some time and even a couple passes to figure out which one of us is really faster. However, the ONLY time this is really a problem is if the other driver is being a dick and blocking my passes, or trying to pass me in stupid ways. I have run laps where I trade passes with an FE2 and stay within 1s off my average lap time, as long as we both were clean about it. Not to mention I have also occasionally enjoyed the challenge of getting past someone even if they aren't in my class. If you are having to get through them, everyone else in your class is too, so any delay it causes should average out pretty much anyway.

I guess what I am saying here is that the vast majority of mistakes that I am observing are either dumb mistakes like too hot on the out lap, risky passes either directly or from desperation because someone is holding you up, or cars winding up in dangerous places with no good excuse not to move out of the way. All of these things happen sometimes during racing, but there is no reason for them to happen so often and we as a class of drivers need to get realistic about what series we are racing in and how much risky behavior we should be engaging in. I can't afford to throw away my car (or my life), and most of you guys can't either. We aren't racing in F1 here, and there is more than enough time to give up 0.2 seconds to give someone space.

EDIT: FWIW, I also agree with 115% being too big. And with penalties for incidents. IMO they should be harsher if they happen on lap 1. But also IMO, taking peoples times or position is a lot better than depriving them of the track time they might need to sort out their issues. Not to mention that many of these incidents are caused by people being overly competitive, so taking their times and positions will be as good a penalty for them anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FE2Racer9

Something that I personally suggest is shrinking the 115% rule. I believe IndyCar and F1 have a 107% rule. I'm not saying go that low, but maybe down to 112%. That should help with fast cars colliding with slow traffic, which happened during the GT on Sunday at Pitt.

---

As one that has been at the back of the pack. I attend the Supertour and Majors races because that is where the racing is.
Many regionals in my area would have no other entry in the class except myself. Having cars to chase and pace yourself - and learn from others is very important.

Mixed class grids:
When you are slower, traffic makes you even slower. Especially when it come to qualifying. Exponentially so. And when you mix classes what do you use? Is the 115% for a single class because of safety? Doesn't apply in mixed classes.

Grp 6, Race 2 - ButtonWillow ST in February. The slowest car was an FX with a best lap of 1:54. The fastest FX was 1:50 - so that's 103% in class. The fastest car on the track was an FA or P1 at 1:34 - that's (114/94) that's 121% in group.
We ran a split start that weekend. FC's in the second.

If you use class, I believe everyone qualifies at 115%. If you use group you'd lose 15 cars.

We had plenty of incidents that weekend. 32 cars in that group. But group 3 (FF/FV,etc) had 7 cars.
Using Race 2, the fastest FC was a 1:44. The fastest FF was 1:55, slowest FF was 1:57. But the slowest FV was 2:14.
So, FF to FV (134/115) is 116%. FC to FV (134/104) is 128%.

So, even though the speed difference (fastest FC to slowest FV) is significant, what effect does a smaller group size play?
121% and 30 cars vs 128% and 18 cars. That's twice the density but only a 7% speed difference.

Then there is money. I have yet to see anyone sent home because of the 115% rule.
If you start sending people home and keeping their money they will stop showing up. Especially Majors/$T

So, it also goes back to my original post. Until we can determine the effects of speed differential, class size, group size, class mix and split starts we're all guess at it.

Comment on Split Starts: I always agree with them but they are not always in my best interest. It's great for the front of the class because they get to battle it out within the class for 2 or 3 laps before they catch the back of the first pack. When you are in the second group and run toward the back, you are typically getting lapped 1 extra time per race - and usually lap 3 and that also messes with your own race earlier.

Comment on gridding for Q: Why do they send the fastest out first? That means when the fast guys are on their first hot lap, the slow guys are just out on their warmup. It doesn't reduce passing/interference. I think it makes it worse.

Possible solution.

The constraint here seems to ultimately come down to money and entires. How do we police poor driving without sending people home? Sending people home doesn't solve the driving issues or shortcomings, it just eliminates an entry. A 107% rule would send home almost a quarter of the prod grids so not a viable solution, and simply being slow isn't a safety issue itself. In mixed-class racing. We pass slower cars all the time. If an FF passes and FV it's no less dangerous than the FF passing a slow FF.

What about a mentorship or coaching program to pair drivers at the front of the grid (so long as they are not driving like a moron) with someone who might need some help? The constraint here is if those creating the on-track incidents are going to listen. If this is about ability and decision-making, that's an easier solution than if someone is just driving like a jerk. Not a whole lot you can do about that. I'd like to think that these incidents are more a result of a lack of ability than intentional behavior and carelessness.

^^^ This.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reidhazelton

What about a mentorship or coaching program to pair drivers at the front of the grid (so long as they are not driving like a moron) with someone who might need some help? The constraint here is if those creating the on-track incidents going to listen. If this is about ability and decision-making, that's an easier solution than if someone is just driving like a jerk. Not a whole lot you can do about that. I'd like to think that these incidents are more a result of a lack of ability than intentional behavior and carelessness.

---

I feel something like this is similar to "in order to enter this race weekend, you must have been a flagger for at least 1 weekend." People would simply not show up. My suggestion for the 112% rule was to help traffic. I feel many incidents are caused from fast cars approaching slow cars, and either the fast cars making super dangerous moves, or slow cars blocking. I was at a race last year where an FA ran straight into the back of a slower FE2 driver trying to pass him. That's on the FA, not the FE2.

This sort of thing is a huge risk-reward scenario. Do you risk parking bad drivers for a session, or even sending them home, knowing they may not come back? Depending on how bad that driver is, yes, I think you do risk it.

Maybe there should be some database or way of tracking incidents for each driver, entered in each weekend, then after say x incidents in y weekends, you get a talking to. Then a park for a session, then sent home. I don't know of anyone who would disagree with sending a dangerous driver home, maybe other than that driver him/herself.

Most of these issues are solved in between our ears when the helmets go on. I know there's a saying that when the helmet goes on, the IQ drops by 50%, or something like that.

Simple. Three discussions with a Steward in a season (and notations on your license) and you get sent home for the rest of the season. If you are too stupid to understand the consequences of your actions, in advance, you don't belong out there.

Note that this would require some discretion on the part of the Stewards. I caused an incident several years ago because of a terrible error on my part. Once out of race med, and post my spine X-ray (I did a lot more damage to myself and my car than the poor bloke I whacked), I went to see the fellow I hit. I apologized profusely, and accepted the blame for my stupidity willingly. To his credit, he was more worried about me than the incident!

I then sought out the Steward. I went to the tower, found the Steward, told him what I had done wrong, and accepted full responsibility (and, no penalty was levied) - 35+ years of experience as a clean competitor does carry some credit, and we can all make an occasional mistake. Hence the need for some judgement on the part of the Steward.

cheers,
BT

r e s p e c t

I appreciate that people are looking for solutions, but having a bunch of volunteer 75 year old men and women, some of whom perhaps raced a production car 50 years ago, and more likely have never raced, judging modern OW racers is not a remedy that will fix anything. It is a huge part of the mess we have. Yes, these fine people can determine when a blatant yellow flag pass occurs, or a FA car runs over a FV on an outlap, but they don't have a clue about context.

For example, when we watch a F1 session, we will see car A push car B off the track, and think car A deserves to be penalized. Then Martin or Johnnie comment that car B was in the wrong, because he "never should have been there". It is called context. We just cannot expect our volunteer officials to understand many incidents correctly.

The younger generations have many years of great coaching of racecraft. There are protocols and expectations within their racing. As a moderately successful OW club racer as recently into the last decade, I do not feel qualified to judge modern OW racing. My drivers and coaches are continually explaining to me why drivers are in the right and wrong. Any attempts to explain any of this to officials goes to closed minds. That 90% of the wrongs go unpenalized and random context issues often get selected for focus, just wears you down, especially when delivered with SCCA arrogance.

I am sorry, but thinking that increased enforcement of driving standards, within the current system, will be any more effective than convincing inexperienced wealthy old drivers that they should start in a entry-level car instead of a FC, FA, or P1 car, is unrealistic.

The single most effective tool we can use, is to make sure the big Majors and ST events have 3 OW groups.

After attending last years runoffs at Indy, as crew not driver, I was becoming concerned about the possibly excessive use of full track double yellows and use of the pace car. Then they allow the event to continue a lap or two before going green again.

So I spoke to a steward that I know and have come to respect over the years about the Indy runoffs and racing in general concerning that, in my opinion, full course yellows. It seems as thought the possible concern over insurance based issues dictating the use of full course yellows as standard procedure. Look I understand that is something we unfortunately have to deal with, but I think I would prefer a different approach and I mentioned that. Why not black flag any driver who is to aggressive under a local yellow?

Don't get me wrong but I have actually in over 30 + years of racing accidentally passed under a yellow because I could not see the yellow as I was passing on the opposite side of the car I was overtaking. Yes even those of us with a lot of experience do occasional screw up but if you are wrong owe up to it!

I told the steward that if this trend continues it is likely that I will stop racing again. I did once and I can do it again. I have been a relatively successful racer over the years but I still race for the enjoyment of driving fast with others but I don't need anymore trophies, so I don't have to win at all costs.

Ed

For example, when we watch a F1 session, we will see car A push car B off the track, and think car A deserves to be penalized. Then Derek or Johnnie comment that car B was in the wrong, because he "never should have been there".

This ^^ is total BS. They are supposedly the greatest drivers in the world. They can stop hitting each other. They are just not incentivized to do so. Regardless, if F1 and NASCAR want to put up with and promote that behavior in order to draw eyeballs fine, just keep that crap away from amateur racing. I think Indy has a better handle on it for obvious reasons.

The younger generations have many years of great coaching of racecraft. There are protocols and expectations within their racing.

Just because it's "new" doesn't mean its right. Look at pro basketball. If you or I played that way at the park, there would be a fight. If you played that way in a high school game you'd foul out in the first half, not to mention have dozens of turnovers for carrying and traveling. The pros and TV have ruined that sport. We should not let "pros" and I'll use that term loosely - ruin ours. This is AMATEUR racing. Even the supposed "pro" stuff promoted here. If a steward reprimands a young driver for bad behavior and the kid says "but that's what my coach told me to do" the next conversation the steward should have is with the coach - to the point of telling him that everybody he coaches will enjoy special scrutiny until the problems are corrected.

I don't have a problem with guys crashing on their own. It sucks to have FCY and lose track time but that is a different issue with different solutions. But it should be made clear that accidents resulting from aggressive driving that result in damage to a competitors car or injury will be dealt with harshly. Geeze, the club now requires cameras. How hard can it be with video?

That 90% of the wrongs go unpenalized - which is the case in almost every sport where you have more than two opponents. It does not mean you stop enforcing the infractions you do see. In fact, you do it with an eye toward the fact that you are missing most of it.

Fixing the problem of wealthy guys in cars that are too fas for them is easy. Just require a superlicense and appropriate experience for certain classes.

As is often said, we all pay to use the same asphalt. Your entry does not entitle you to any special treatment on it compared to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick Kirchner

For example, when we watch a F1 session, we will see car A push car B off the track, and think car A deserves to be penalized. Then Derek or Johnnie comment that car B was in the wrong, because he "never should have been there".

This ^^ is total BS. They are supposedly the greatest drivers in the world. They can stop hitting each other. They are just not incentivized to do so. Regardless, if F1 and NASCAR want to put up with and promote that behavior in order to draw eyeballs fine, just keep that crap away from amateur racing. I think Indy has a better handle on it for obvious reasons.

The younger generations have many years of great coaching of racecraft. There are protocols and expectations within their racing.

Just because it's "new" doesn't mean its right. Look at pro basketball. If you or I played that way at the park, there would be a fight. If you played that way in a high school game you'd foul out in the first half, not to mention have dozens of turnovers for carrying and traveling. The pros and TV have ruined that sport. We should not let "pros" and I'll use that term loosely - ruin ours. This is AMATEUR racing. Even the supposed "pro" stuff promoted here. If a steward reprimands a young driver for bad behavior and the kid says "but that's what my coach told me to do" the next conversation the steward should have is with the coach - to the point of telling him that everybody he coaches will enjoy special scrutiny until the problems are corrected.

I don't have a problem with guys crashing on their own. It sucks to have FCY and lose track time but that is a different issue with different solutions. But it should be made clear that accidents resulting from aggressive driving that result in damage to a competitors car or injury will be dealt with harshly. Geeze, the club now requires cameras. How hard can it be with video?

That 90% of the wrongs go unpenalized - which is the case in almost every sport where you have more than two opponents. It does not mean you stop enforcing the infractions you do see. In fact, you do it with an eye toward the fact that you are missing most of it.

Fixing the problem of wealthy guys in cars that are too fas for them is easy. Just require a superlicense and appropriate experience for certain classes.

As is often said, we all pay to use the same asphalt. Your entry does not entitle you to any special treatment on it compared to me.

---

You should be a club racing steward. Your comments reek of the arrogance required to do a job you are totally not qualified for. I never said that when 2 cars come together, that one should not be penalized. I said that the 75 year old steward who has never raced may assess the blame completely differently than a steward who retired from high-level racing several years ago. At this point, whether in SCCA, NASA, vintage, or the semi-pro series around, there are virtually no recently retired racers in the steward roles. We are lucky if we have stewards who raced in OW within 25 years. This is also happening on track where we have 75 year old gentlemen racers driving 15 seconds per lap off the pace, sharing the track with 15 year olds driving faster than the pace.

To apply a blanket standard of officiating is a great idea. Now tell me how we are going to achieve that! If we are going to start throwing the book at people, we need the book to be the right book, and the people throwing the book to be qualified to throw it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by problemchild

The single most effective tool we can use, is to make sure the big Majors and ST events have 3 OW groups.

---

I think that is a good option. At least they should test it for a year.

I know they will say there isn't enough time.
But people are getting short or FCY sessions now. People aren't getting to race now.

As said above, part of the problem at VIR was the need to make a pass in the first corner or two if you are running for season championships. You know there was only going to be part of a lap before going to FCY, so you had no choice but to go for it if you were going to win.

That is a real but really stupid scenrio.


It is also on the drivers to ensure they get the field grouped up fully at a track you know only sends EV once the full field is completely gathered up behind the pace car. There were a couple times were it took us THREE laps before a single EV vehicle was released from the pit lane. Three very slow laps before a single EV was sent. Part of that was on drivers taking forever to get get joined up with the main pack. You need to catch up under FCY when you are in a safe, incident-free zone.

Additionally, P1 needs to get slowed adequately when it does got FCY. Get slowed down quickly and safely as awareness allows and get the field joined up as fast as possible.

I am pretty sure I won't be going back to VIR as long as they go BFA/FCY for cars well, well off the track in safe areas. Just a massive waste of our money and time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iamuwere

I am pretty sure I won't be going back to VIR as long as they go BFA/FCY for cars well, well off the track in safe areas. Just a massive waste of our money and time.

---

So I'm hardly qualified to lend an opinion here, but hey its the internet. And I'm probably in the category that some of you would nix from the field for failing to meet a % of pace standard (I'm working hard to make it to mid-pack guy if that helps) :-)

But serious question, I was at a vintage event at VIR a month ago, and they used local yellows only with cars just off the track. I actually don't recall any FCY or BFA in any of the FF sessions, and there were certainly cars that were off track in several of those sessions.

Is it a VIR decision or a sanctioning body decision in terms of handling FCY for vehicles off track?

Personally I like the ideas you guys are coming up with on a points type system for comp licenses.

Just to put the 115 rule in perspective, at Pitt last weekend P2 record was 1:44.6, making 115% 2:00.3. That is really slow, about the same pace as a fv or sm. I personally don't care if people are off the pace, but if you are in a P2 car and qualify slower than a vee, clearly you have issues.

Yes indeed. That is a big gap in speed.

The real problem becomes when you have a situation like a P2 that can easily walk away down a straight from an FE, but parks it in a corner. The FE catches and makes a mess of their race and then works to try to keep the p2 behind. It creates friction and eventually crashes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iamuwere

The real problem becomes when you have a situation like a P2 that can easily walk away down a straight from an FE, but parks it in a corner. The FE catches and makes a mess of their race and then works to try to keep the p2 behind. It creates friction and eventually crashes

---

I hear this all the time, but as a p2 driver frequently on track with fe2s, I have not observed this to actually be the case, neither in regards to the bad interaction nor the large difference in cornering vs straight line speed you suggest.

At summit point majors my best lap was 1:12.4. fe2 ranged from 1:12.5 to 1:13.3. I ran several laps with fes with maybe one annoying interaction the whole race.

At Pitt race my best was 1:41.5, fe2 ranged from 1:39.5 to 1:46.5. I passed several and a couple passed me. Only one time was it an issue that I noticed and that one was an fe holding me up in turns, not the other way round. Even so it cost me maybe 3 corners off pace and made no difference in my overall race.

My observed issue with fe2 has been much more loss of track time from them crashing into each other or solo than anything like that. I used to race in fc, and there was a similar argument about FC vs fm back then. That one didn't hold water either.

Again it comes down to being good drivers and not trying to race someone not in your class. Different car dynamics is a convenient excuse but not actually what is happening on the track with very few exceptions, at least in my experience.

I have lived it many, many times.

Greg Rice you are the shining example of a guy that bitches all the time but never stands up to actually do something productive. Don't like the Stewards? Be one. But we never have to worry about that, because you'll never step up.

Try picking my points apart one by one and provide what you would do differently.

I'd tell you what I really think but that would get me banned.

Incidentally, EVERY steward I raced under in VARA was a retired driver. Don't know about the SCCA guys in the SE because I never had to have a chat with one. Don't even recall more than one FCY in the three years I raced there either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by patman

Personally I like the ideas you guys are coming up with on a points type system for comp licenses.

---

We used to have that - it was:
Novice Permit - 2 schools
Regional License - Novice + 2 regionals (could not run Nationals (today's Majors)
National License - Regional + 4 more regionals -
to renew - 3 Nationals or 4 Regionals in one year - or you dropped down a license!
It would be interesting to know the level of experience of the drivers causing the incidents.

Now there are 2 ways of correcting an out of control driver:
1. Peer pressure from a group of drivers,
2. Protest.

Driver's don't like to do the second, and sometimes the personalities don't work for the first.

BTW - threatening to kick his a** or run him off the road next time is counterproductive - showing the cash to protest sometimes works. Have some GCR sections memorized so you can quote them.

Another answer is obvious - more of us need to get in the Steward's program. But since many of us plan to race into our 70's, that is a dilemma.....

ChrisZ

PS - Greg complains a lot, but he is a business owner that brings cars to the club - in other words - he is a Customer. No customers - no racing - Now we are a club, which blurs the line - one minute the SCCA treats us as customers, then next as members. This has been a problem since I joined 45 years ago. When Oscar (RIP) used to complain about too many classes, what would he say about today! However; today, I would say we have to act like members, because the support end, workers, officials and administrators, are woefully short.

Regarding the 115% rule... could the lack of enforcement of said rule at Majors - let alone tightening it up some - not be a significant factor on the lack of entries at Regionals/Divisionals?

Used to be, even when I started you knew you didn't go to Nationals until you had your poop in a group and could carry some decent pace in a reasonably-reliable car. Or if you had a Regional-only IT car. Now, the only reason I'm aware of that drivers would choose Regionals over Majors is entry fee (or, still, racing an IT car that can't double-dip - so Vintage IT).

Similarly, I don't understand why the only time we see a furled black these days, let alone a full black, is in correlation to a sound or transponder issue. Being at Waterford a lot, we see a fair bit of the sound variety. ;)

I think the 115% rule could contribute to the driving standards issue, but I think the points others have brought up regarding the example shown in the pro realms and a lack of respect are decidedly more impactful on this issue. The former, it is without a doubt that we primarily must rely on coaches and mentors to share the appropriate knowledge. The latter - anything that pushes racers to associate with eachother outside of the cars is important. Whether it's a manditory impound policy, social evening get-togethers, or just setting a good example ourselves by walking around grid and accosting others in our group - a little goes a long way.

This gets to one of the reasons I have much enjoyed racing ITB, and now P2: we're not the big dogs in the race. We're used to being second-class citizens - and we're OK with that. We're OK with not having the fastest, biggest, most powerful car out there; we've already (mostly) checked our egos at the door. We also know that we're the ones who end up having to do the work to fix our cars if there's any damage, and while they may not be worth a whole lot of money, they're worth a lot to us. I haven't found a single driver in P2, of the many I've spoken with and race with, that isn't similarly friendly and helpful, and respectful on track. I don't so clearly get the same sense from the other classes we share the road with - not so consistently.

I do understand, after playing the OW game for a number of years now, that it's a very different proposition racing our kinds of cars vs. SMs and other things with fenders. The margins of error are so small - and I've whiffed those enough times to appreciate - both in how we prepare and drive the cars - that you cannot take this stuff half-heartedly and expect to survive long with body and machinery intact. This naturally lends itself to a very serious approach with little room left for levity or camaraderie. But we still have to share the road, and we have to cooperate on track to give all of us a decent chance of pushing the car back on the trailer in one piece at the end of the weekend.

It's in my interest as much as anything to make sure I know the guy I'm starting next to, and that he or she knows me. I'll say hi before the start, and I'll go say hello to whomever I finish next to when we make it to impound. Hopefully there's not too much to talk about other than "hey, what a fun race!" as we struggle to take 7th overall...

I am putting my time where my mouth is, though I still actively race and prep a team of cars, and have become part of the problem (aka management) this year: I have begun training as a steward. It's amazing how many people already have very sincerely thanked me for doing so - there's clearly as much need as ever, and in our group of stewards at Waterford I don't think I can even name a single one who hasn't raced! Yes, they all have, if some more recently than others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FVRacer21

PS - Greg complains a lot, but he is a business owner that brings cars to the club - in other words - he is a Customer. No customers - no racing

---

I am a realist and a problem solver. I have proposed many solutions to many problems over the years. I spend hours and hours finding solutions to problems, but the current SCCA is 3 decades past having any chance of solving it's problems. Complete reform is required. But the people in power love their power (much like Washington politicians) so will never bring the reform we need. Inconsistent and random officiating is probably the biggest problem I have right now from my business perspective, so I have thought a lot about it over the past few years. Simply put, if I am taking my customers to events like VIR, I won't be in business very long. I would love for you all to "fix" this, but I am not holding my breath that that will ever happen.

How many remember the article by Randy Pobst months ago about good/acceptable driving? In my 30+ years of racing I think one of the biggest issues is drivers who think that dive bombing into the turn under braking and expecting to be let by because they are faster/stupider than driver they are overtaking. If you can't get your front wheels even with the car you want to overtake by turn in, then it isn't your corner! Tires smoking and out of control isn't an excuse. Just realize that kinda driving only slows the both of you down and if there is someone close behind and a seasoned racer, they are loving you allowing them to catch up.

I have learned over the years that in that circumstance it is better to let the other car go and pass them back as you exit the turn since they are attempting to stay on the track. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of people who end up buying top notch equipment but lack the race craft or experience to be able to optimize the cornering ability of their car so, so will as we say, park it in the turns. It is frustrating when due to track design you simply can't make a safe pass and get stuck behind someone who kinda should stay behind and possibly learn how to drive the corners.

If you think that cheap trophy is more important than the potential cost to fix your car, then please go dirt track racing, it is encouraged there. Open wheel racing comes with considerable more risk than fendered cars but I guess some drivers don't understand that.

Ed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by problemchild

The single most effective tool we can use, is to make sure the big Majors and ST events have 3 OW groups.

---

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ed Womer

...I have learned over the years that in that circumstance it is better to let the other car go and pass them back as you exit the turn since they are attempting to stay on the track.

---

Exactly this. I don't know if this is even being taught in race schools any more... I know there's plenty of old guard still out on the track happy to pass the lesson on though! Which, admittedly, I am now included in (having been racing over two decades and now pushing my 50's)!

I also wonder, among all the topics discussed in race schools and coaching, if instead of discussing when and how to make a pass, if anyone ever talks about when NOT to make a pass?!?

But it's also a HORRENDOUS disservice to us, the amateur racing world, that F1 coverage rarely shows and NEVER highlights these passes being made, although they are, instead preferring to show the dive-bombing and running-off-the-track Schumacher style that's so dramatic these days.

One is thoughtful, practiced racecraft, and the other is primadonna selfish blundering to the front in a way professed to be following the gospel of St. Ayrton - "If you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver" - yet actually is better aligned with another well-known former F1 driver: "If you go for a gap that no longer exists, you are Pastor Maldonado."

Rick and FV mentioned something that should be reinstated........tiered Licensing.
So some idiot can complete a Skippy school (or insert others here) and be granted an SCCA License as entry to the top tier of SCCA Club Racing and given the chance to prove they have no real experience while taking others out? Really?

Let's go back to: Novice License - Competition License - later National License.
This won't solve everything because 'red mist' will always exist somewhere........but there needs to be less of an emphasis on simply making entry fee money at various levels.

The biggest complement I've ever received many years ago is when I had merely a Competition License (not yet National) and I was sitting in my Crossle 32F on the grid waiting to go out at Moroso and Reggie Smith in the next car turned to me from his car and said, "You, I can trust." I cried tears of joy crossing start/finish at Sebring sometime later when I finally achieved what it took to get a National License. I felt compromised when SCCA did away with the Novice/Competition/National steps.

I ask > Now isn't that more about what "Club" racing is about...than a voucher from a sponsor and a trophy?

While I can understand that SCCA felt the need to reduce the number of Race Schools to 1 from 2 and created the one size fits all Competition license to make it easier for new drivers to get on track, they may have caused a greater issue with inexperience being accepted.

How many of us who are instructors have had race school students who have never been in a race car or do not have any track experience? That is easily a 50% number for me. They show up to a SCCA Race School when what they need is a basic driver's school. Even in the days of the double driver's schools, we spent the entire weekend reducing their lap times by 30 seconds and teaching them how to determine the correct line. Forget about teaching them how to drive off line or avoid an incident or how to late brake under control. Forget about teaching racecraft which requires a decent knowledge of car control and driving fast without having to constantly think about it. We all remember that your initial times on track when you had to account for the flags, other cars passing you, being in a pack, the run down to Turn 1, shifting and being in the right gear, having 360 degree situational awareness, looking in your mirrors, etc, etc, etc. It was an overwhelming experience and took track time to get our collective acts together. A lot of what we do in a race car is instant reactionary without time to think about it -- but you only get to that stage with experience. Much of that stuff should be figured out before one attends a Race School. I would like to see a return to the double school requirement and add a precursor requirement for some HPDE/TT/etc experience.

As has been said here already, just meeting the minimum requirements on a Novice license to get your Competition license for most drivers does not mean you are ready for a Majors. I would also like to see a return to the Regional competition races requirement before one qualifies for a "National" license.

All of the above is not going to solve the issues caused by drivers over reaching or doing stupid stuff that we tend to see in Majors. Drivers have to resolve that among themselves. We have all been the victims of stupid stuff and have probably caused some issues ourselves. But having a certain respect for others on track can go a long way.