Runoffs AS (has it come to this?...)

[Daryl DeArman]

Got to love the mentality of the guys talking about retaliations. Note that they are all in sedan cars with nice stout frames to protect them. Try that stuff in a formula car, and you might go to the hospital before going home.

I think PT got pretty good at it. It's an acquired skill. Maybe more people just need more practice in choosing the right time, place and technique. PT ought to have a school on the proper use of the chrome horn.


There's a simple solution. People race clean and they don't have to concern themselves with threat of retaliation. Punishment too harsh, don't do the crime.

Weren't most of us taught from a very young age to never start a fight? Don't throw the first punch. Walk away if you can. But also taught to defend ourselves. IF that's what happened here what's the problem?

[SEComposites]

I think PT got pretty good at it. It's an acquired skill. Maybe more people just need more practice in choosing the right time, place and technique. PT ought to have a school on the proper use of the chrome horn.


There's a simple solution. People race clean and they don't have to concern themselves with threat of retaliation. Punishment too harsh, don't do the crime.

Weren't most of us taught from a very young age to never start a fight? Don't throw the first punch. Walk away if you can. But also taught to defend ourselves. IF that's what happened here what's the problem?

All I can do is shake my head with a heavy heart reading things like this.

[GT1Vette]

Does this guy have a reputation for starting this kind of stuff, or finishing it?

From my personal observations of Tom Sloe over the years:

. August 2002, Mid-Ohio National GT1 race: Sloe moved over on Phil Simms three times as he (Simms) attempted to pass for the lead on the front straight. On the third move Sloe's LF hits Phil's RR and sends Phil across track into the tires protecting the bridge abutment on drivers' right at Turn One. Not sure what, if any, action was taken against Sloe.

. 2013 Runoffs, T1 race: Sloe gets wide in T-14 which allows Matthew Pullano to get a run on him for THIRD place coming to the checkers. Sloe moves over twice, finally putting Pullano into the wall on drivers' right before coming back across the finish line (backwards) and hitting the wall on drivers' left. Sloe gets a 1-year suspension. Pullano get third place and a totalled car.

. 2016 Runoffs in AS: described above in detail.

And these are just the ones I know about personally.

Our club does not need this kind of a member...

[John Nesbitt]

...

. 2013 Runoffs, T1 race: Sloe gets wide in T-14 which allows Matthew Pullano to get a run on him for THIRD place coming to the checkers. Sloe moves over twice, finally putting Pullano into the wall on drivers' right before coming back across the finish line (backwards) and hitting the wall on drivers' left. Sloe gets a 1-year suspension. Pullano get third place and a totalled car.

...

One very small correction. In 2013, it was a 6-month suspension, followed by probation. See Fastrack for Nov. 2013.

[formulasuper]

One very small correction. In 2013, it was a 6-month suspension, followed by probation. See Fastrack for Nov. 2013.

Evidently the previous penalties weren't severe enough. I'm thinking what would be the results in court if this happened on a public road.

[Steve Bamford]

I'm interested to hear what the punishment will be for this current offense.

[Robert Finlayson]

I was watching the race online. Mr Sloe was lapping a car on the back straight and there was contact between them. They didn't show a replay so not sure who moved but something did appear to break in his left front. My thoughts while watching were why is he so close to the lapped car, the track is very wide there. This guy is always trying to intimidate everyone, that's why. I have raced my corvette against him. Though I've never had contact with him, I know his reputation. His previous suspensions haven't gotten through to him, he needs to be permanently gone.

[Dave Welsh]

For those who have not done so already here is a link to the 2016 Runoffs thread on the AS forum.

http://www.asedan.net/forums/showthread.php?t=3667

[Garry Sharp]

He should permanently change his name from "Sloe" to "Parked".

[Chris Robson]

I should just "cut and paste" the AS forum response over here... Needless to say, many, maNY, MANY! feathers were ruffled by contact with Sloe. It appears that the McDermid incident was really the only one caught on tape (at the moment).

...you know that you are hitting rock bottom when Spec Miata is portraying it's class as the clean ones and telling its group to drive clean, while setting a better example of sportsmanship then the AS race...

It's like Steven Tyler telling you that YOU have a drug problem!...

...BTW, no offense to the Spec Miata crowd, I just found that bit of advice passed along to them on the false grid humorous!...

[Daryl DeArman]

From my personal observations of Tom Sloe over the years:

. August 2002, Mid-Ohio National GT1 race: Sloe moved over on Phil Simms three times as he (Simms) attempted to pass for the lead on the front straight. On the third move Sloe's LF hits Phil's RR and sends Phil across track into the tires protecting the bridge abutment on drivers' right at Turn One. Not sure what, if any, action was taken against Sloe.

. 2013 Runoffs, T1 race: Sloe gets wide in T-14 which allows Matthew Pullano to get a run on him for THIRD place coming to the checkers. Sloe moves over twice, finally putting Pullano into the wall on drivers' right before coming back across the finish line (backwards) and hitting the wall on drivers' left. Sloe gets a 1-year suspension. Pullano get third place and a totalled car.

. 2016 Runoffs in AS: described above in detail.

And these are just the ones I know about personally.

Our club does not need this kind of a member...

Sounds like the process hasn't worked. Punishments haven't been severe enough to change the behavior.

[Daryl DeArman]

Evidently the previous penalties weren't severe enough. I'm thinking what would be the results in court if this happened on a public road.

In CA first offense for assault with a motor vehicle, the offense commonly known as road rage, is 6mos loss of license and anger management classes (I had to google it, haven't had any personal experience) Second offense is 1year loss of license.

If the incident results in great bodily injury it's a separate criminal offense, ranging in punishments from a little county jail time to 4 years in prison and/or fines no greater than $10K.

With our current political climate here it's not likely anybody would do much time at all, if any. Driving without a license? No big deal. Illegals don't even get their cars impounded if caught driving without a license as it would cause an undue hardship. The systems are broken.

[Daryl DeArman]

All I can do is shake my head with a heavy heart reading things like this.

The first part of my post (the PT side) was an attempt at humor.

The rest of it: regarding racing clean and not having to worry about retaliation. Learning not to start fights, but to finish them. Sad that makes you sad.

As the youngins' say: dontstartnuttinwontbenuttin.
Think about it. What's wrong with that? Other than spelling and grammar?

[reidhazelton]

Daryl - An eye for an eye, makes everyone blind. This isn't a school yard fight, this is racing. Retaliation is most always an escalation which is when things go from bad to worse. Like others said, sooner or later someone will be killed. Don't be an idiot, be the bigger person. There is a difference between racing contact (even intimidation and stupidity) and laying in wait to sucker punch a guy when he comes back around 90 seconds later.

This guy better get banned for life. I remember at the Runoffs at RA one year he got hit, went into the pits to change a tire, and came back out for some head hunting. I think something happened in T6. I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure that was him. Like Butch said, the finish at RA was the most ridiculous thing I had seen before this year. He should have been banned then, as the T13 Observation station workers, or those on pit lane could have been hurt. The car he nailed got pretty high up on the pit lane barrier as I remember it.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

As the youngins' say: dontstartnuttinwontbenuttin.
Think about it. What's wrong with that? Other than spelling and grammar?

I guess my 'street' isn't up to par - this means zero to me...

[Rick Kirchner]

A few years back this situation happened at a dirt track up in the North East and the county prosecutor went for criminal assault charges.

At first I thought it was just legal overreach by a guy who wants to move up the political ladder, but it was complaints from the competitors that got him to act.

[BeerBudgetRacing]

but it was complaints from the competitors that got him to act.

....laying in wait to sucker punch a guy when he comes back around 90 seconds later.

And this is the key action. He had 90 seconds to cool off - and didn't.

Became premeditated... Case closed...

[jhenn4716]

Sometimes you must bloody the bullies' nose and then take whatever lumps the principal tosses your way.

I don't know what preceded this incident.

I am going to go out on a limb here and suggest the hit was warranted, but poorly executed

Someone takes a shot at your quarterback's knees...somebody throws at the guy that hit a HR....someone races you dirty. For/against the written rules there's an effective process to discourage future unwanted behavior. Don't want unsportsmanlike conduct? Don't dole it out yourself.

You file a protest after the race. Actions like this can get people killed. Not what any of us signed up for.

[Zonker]

From what I've heard about penalties, he received a one year suspension for now because that is the most penalty they can impose at the track, but that a more harsh penalty can and will be looked into later.

That is correct, 1 year is the most the SOM can hand out. Further penalty such as being tossed out of the club is up to the Board of Directors.

The thing is he is going to have a change to appeal these penalties and I'd bet he can throw enough money at it to get his license back soon enough.

The Court of Appeals is his only shot, and knowing them I seriously doubt they would over turn or reduce a suspension.

[Peter Olivola]

All appeals at the Runoffs are decided at the Runoffs.

That is correct, 1 year is the most the SOM can hand out. Further penalty such as being tossed out of the club is up to the Board of Directors.

The Court of Appeals is his only shot, and knowing them I seriously doubt they would over turn or reduce a suspension.

[R. Pare]

The lawyers would have to chime in on this, but I would think that he could be sued for damages as it looks like (being generous here) that his actions were willful and premeditated. An aggressive DA could also possibly try for something like vehicular assault - Ohio's codes are here:

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2903.08

This sort of behavior has zero business at a race track (never mind anywhere else), and the penalties for doing so need to be draconian.

[Zonker]

All appeals at the Runoffs are decided at the Runoffs.

Yep, it's over.

[Doug FST 5]

I just copied the post below from here: http://www.asedan.net/forums/showthr...?t=3667&page=3


Folks,

I just sent a letter to the BOD, requesting Tom's permanent removal from the club.

The stopping on track, backing up on track to a position where the previous corner can be seen, and the 90ish second period of time he sat, in the middle of the track, waiting for Andy as cars went by in the narrow opening he left tell me that this was not an accident, or a moment of loss of control, or an unthinking reaction in the heat of the moment.

It was a pre meditated action.

As much as I admire Tom's ability to drive, as much bad blood exists between Tom and Andy, or Tom and others, none of that excuses the on track equivalent of picking up a tire iron and starting to swing.

I do not want him driving with me.

I suggest anyone else that feels this way should also submit a letter. Bod@scca.com

Scott

[Garry Sharp]

I think PT got pretty good at it. It's an acquired skill. Maybe more people just need more practice in choosing the right time, place and technique. PT ought to have a school on the proper use of the chrome horn.


There's a simple solution. People race clean and they don't have to concern themselves with threat of retaliation. Punishment too harsh, don't do the crime.

Weren't most of us taught from a very young age to never start a fight? Don't throw the first punch. Walk away if you can. But also taught to defend ourselves. IF that's what happened here what's the problem?

This is one of the dumbest things I have ever read. What if a Novice driver made a mistake and was killed in retaliation? Anybody who has such low self esteem that they would risk another person's life or property for a $10 plastic trophy so they can feel good about themselves has some serious problems.

[marshall9]

The lawyers would have to chime in on this, but I would think that he could be sued for damages as it looks like (being generous here) that his actions were willful and premeditated. An aggressive DA could also possibly try for something like vehicular assault - Ohio's codes are here:

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2903.08

This sort of behavior has zero business at a race track (never mind anywhere else), and the penalties for doing so need to be draconian.

What damages? How would you quantify them? Im sure the defense attorney would settle for 10.00 to cover the cost of the trophy. It is possible that an Ohio crime was commited, but very difficult to prove any civil(monetary) damages. Any attorney would most likely argue the strength of the waiver and ask to what degree of certainty existed that the plaintiff would not have had a dnf but for the incident. It does not appear to be a winnable civil case, without damages other than the car damages, which are waived upon entry.
Thankfully, licencing can be attacked easier.

If those that were harmed want civil relief, they should sue after a criminal verdict is rendered and recorded. There is money involved at that level of racing, and most likely the offender's car and team are in the name of an
LLC, or Corporation anyway.

It sucks, but our waivers that we sign are very solid in regards to this. Contact an Ohio attorney for legal advice, this is just my opinion...

[jcorsico]

What damages? How would you quantify them? Im sure the defense attorney would settle for 10.00 to cover the cost of the trophy. It is possible that an Ohio crime was commited, but very difficult to prove any civil(monetary) damages. Any attorney would most likely argue the strength of the waiver and ask to what degree of certainty existed that the plaintiff would not have had a dnf but for the incident. It does not appear to be a winnable civil case, without damages other than the car damages, which are waived upon entry.

Thankfully, licencing can be attacked easier.



If those that were harmed want civil relief, they should sue after a criminal verdict is rendered and recorded. There is money involved at that level of racing, and most likely the offender's car and team are in the name of an

LLC, or Corporation anyway.



It sucks, but our waivers that we sign are very solid in regards to this. Contact an Ohio attorney for legal advice, this is just my opinion...

You could easily sue the offending driver for this conduct and win. Assault is the most obvious claim that comes to mind. Just because you are on a race track doesn't mean that the laws don't apply. If this guy actually did what it sounds like he did, he should be in jail. This is a matter for the police an the courts. The SCCA is just subsidiary.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jcorsico]

You could easily sue the offending driver for this conduct and win. Assault is the most obvious claim that comes to mind. Just because you are on a race track doesn't mean that the laws don't apply. If this guy actually did what it sounds like he did, he should be in jail. This is a matter for the police an the courts. The SCCA is just subsidiary.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And if the question is damages, you could easily get punitive damages for this type of conduct (your recovery is not limited to the cost of your lost trophy). Drivers can't got around intentionally ramming other cars. That is a crime.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marshall9]

And if the question is damages, you could easily get punitive damages for this type of conduct (your recovery is not limited to the cost of your lost trophy). Drivers can't got around intentionally ramming other cars. That is a crime.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Okay. Send him your contingency agreement and good luck. I am on your side, but reality isn't. I am not interested in receiving a UPL sanction from this thread, but respectfully disagree with you on the topic.

[Daryl DeArman]

This is one of the dumbest things I have ever read.

Maybe you ought to expand your reading a bit more

What if a Novice driver made a mistake and was killed in retaliation? Anybody who has such low self esteem that they would risk another person's life or property for a $10 plastic trophy so they can feel good about themselves has some serious problems.

Yeah, that's where I was going with this. Novice makes a mistake and you kill him. That'll teach him to never do that again. No wonder people need safe spaces and have trigger words. I am talking about a jackass having zero respect for the race or your equipment purposely driving you dirty and you retaliating on him. The bully bullies you on the school yard you beat his ass. Not somebody bumps into you in a crowded airport and you go postal. Can you see a difference?

As to risking another persons' life and property over a $10 trophy, have you ever passed anybody on the track? Did you not realize the risk you were taking should a mistake be made by you or the other guy or a mechanical failure? Why bother putting somebody in that situation over a $10 trophy?

[Daryl DeArman]

I guess my 'street' isn't up to par - this means zero to me...

It means:

IF you don't start any trouble, there won't be any trouble.

That is the crux of my argument. Race hard, race clean, race with respect for each other. When somebody's actions are such that they've made it clear that they have little concern for you, your race or your equipment you need to speak their language for the message to be heard and received.

[Daryl DeArman]

Daryl - An eye for an eye, makes everyone blind. This isn't a school yard fight, this is racing. Retaliation is most always an escalation which is when things go from bad to worse. Like others said, sooner or later someone will be killed. Don't be an idiot, be the bigger person. There is a difference between racing contact (even intimidation and stupidity) and laying in wait to sucker punch a guy when he comes back around 90 seconds later.

Reid,

...and doing nothing effective the first time increases the likelihood of it happening again. In this case it seems fairly apparent that prior penalties for Sloe haven't been harsh enough.

If I've already lost sight in one eye, I'd like to make sure the other guy is heavily discouraged from attempting to take my sight from the other one.

I do agree there's a difference...but I'm not arguing this is a tit-for-tat exchange, nor have I argued the time/place/method utilized by Sloe was the best choice, only that on track retaliation is sometimes the best/most effective option.

[Matt Clark]

I have been around dirt track oval racing enough to have seen when police & lawsuits get involved with on-track racing incidents. you do NOT want to mix these things. push for harsher punishments from SCCA (lifetime ban in Sloes case) and let it go at that.
no one can win. once that door is opened, tracks can become liable, SCCA is liable, and you are liable. costs will skyrocket & no one can afford to race anymore.

[Steve Bamford]

It means:

IF you don't start any trouble, there won't be any trouble.

That is the crux of my argument. Race hard, race clean, race with respect for each other. When somebody's actions are such that they've made it clear that they have little concern for you, your race or your equipment you need to speak their language for the message to be heard and received.

Daryl you can't be serious can you? You're defending someone for taking matters into their own hands when you fail to realize that it isn't clear that the other driver did something deliberate or not. I recall an individual swear another car took him out & he held a tire over his head threatening the other driver as he drove past under FCY as he assumed he was taken out by him. Video later showed he had a mechanical failure on his car causing him to crash. Now in your scenario he would have been justified to hit the other driver if he could have.

I'm not sure what you're really trying to prove by defending an unwinding position on this topic. Best to let it go as neither of us was there & not something worth defending. You have heard repeatedly the individual in question has been a little more then aggressive at times, better to stay clear of this one rather then defend. There is a process to deal with issues on the track via the stewards.

[Daryl DeArman]

Daryl you can't be serious can you? You're defending someone for taking matters into their own hands when you fail to realize that it isn't clear that the other driver did something deliberate or not.

Apparently I mislead you to believe that I was defending somebody/anybody for retaliation when it was not clear the other driver did something deliberate. I never suggested that someone should retaliate when they aren't certain.

The position I have been defending is only the one that sometimes a little retaliation is called for.

As to this incident; I started off way back in my very first response on this thread stating that "I don't know what preceded this incident" I even put it in bold and underlined it so that people could read that I was not talking about retaliation being warranted/justified in this specific incident. That rather, the people stating there's no place for it, never warranted, etc. were speaking in gross generalities and I disagreed.

I later asked "Does this guy [Sloe] have a reputation for starting or finishing" this type of stuff?

After Butch educated me with some history, I stated that apparently the penalties haven't been harsh enough to alter future undesirable behavior.

The system (protests) is broken.

Sometimes it is best to solve problems rather than let the courts decide.

[Steve Bamford]

Apparently I mislead you to believe that I was defending somebody/anybody for retaliation when it was not clear the other driver did something deliberate. I never suggested that someone should retaliate when they aren't certain.

The position I have been defending is only the one that sometimes a little retaliation is called for.

As to this incident; I started off way back in my very first response on this thread stating that "I don't know what preceded this incident" I even put it in bold and underlined it so that people could read that I was not talking about retaliation being warranted/justified in this specific incident. That rather, the people stating there's no place for it, never warranted, etc. were speaking in gross generalities and I disagreed.

I later asked "Does this guy [Sloe] have a reputation for starting or finishing" this type of stuff?

After Butch educated me with some history, I stated that apparently the penalties haven't been harsh enough to alter future undesirable behavior.

The system (protests) is broken.

Sometimes it is best to solve problems rather than let the courts decide.

But to my point a post earlier the individual who was waving the tire at the other driver was sure, at the time, he was taken out. It wasn't till after off track it was discovered via video it was a mechanical failure. If he had of stayed on track, based on your statements it seems he should have taken it into his own hands & perhaps run the other off the road.

[bluterek155]

http://www.scca.com/videos/2027404

Skip to min 41 to see what happened in 2013

[Jtovo]

How in the hell does this A-Hole still have a license?

How in the hell did he not get his ass kicked?

I would like to meet up with him one day and ask him what the world goes through his mind when he drivers like this.

He needs to be kicked out of the club. And the other racers in his group need to threaten to NOT RACE if he is allowed to race.

[Daryl DeArman]

But to my point a post earlier the individual who was waving the tire at the other driver was sure, at the time, he was taken out. It wasn't till after off track it was discovered via video it was a mechanical failure. If he had of stayed on track, based on your statements it seems he should have taken it into his own hands & perhaps run the other off the road.

I'm not saying what anybody "should" do. I have said what is sometimes warranted/effective.

It seems that people that are black/white on the issue of retaliation vs. protests are reading more into my words than what I've said. I don't believe it's a once size fits all situation. I don't believe it is never warranted, just as I don't believe it is always warranted. We each have our own burdens of proof and level of transgression where we would be willing to turn the other cheek.

[Daryl DeArman]

How in the hell does this A-Hole still have a license?

How in the hell did he not get his ass kicked?

.

Oh no. You can't be serious. Are you suggesting that resorting to physical violence is ever warranted? You barbarian. That's NEVER the answer. You should retreat to your safe space, and write down how the incident made you feel. Just knowing how upset the offending party made you will alter his future behavior.

[Peter Olivola]

No changes to the GCR needed. The SOM handed out the maximum penalty they are authorized to and referred the situation to the BOD for further action. The bylaws already provide a mechanism for the BOD to permanently ban someone.

More rules won't change official behavior. More rules won't change driver attitudes towards protests. Everything needed to deal with any on track situation is already in place. The challenge is getting people to use the mechanisms that exist. If they won't use them now, more mechanisms won't change that.

Letters to the BOD is most likely the proper way to proceed. Then, make changes to GCR rules on behavior and sanctions.