Debacle at VIR; Rules Changes

[jcorsico]

All -

After the total disaster that was VIR, I sent the SCCA the attached letter. The system has got to change.

I welcome everyone's thoughts.

Jon

Corsico Letter to SCCA 04-17-17.pdf

[Dog Licked Racing]

Sounds very reasonable to me.

Do we need to go back to licensing levels like the old days - Are drivers coming to Majors who should still be completing some regional level racing requirements?

Sort of glad I did not attend VIR Major with my P2 car. I will be running it at VIR at the SARRC / MARRS event May 6 - 7, I hope the lousy drivers are racing elsewhere that weekend. I have raced SRF for years, that group has a certain reputation. When I first showed up with my P2 car I was approached by the Wings and Thing drivers Rep who told me some of the other drivers were concerned about me since I come from a race group that "appears not to value their cars". I told him that's one of my concerns too. These W&T cars are expensive, need a lot of prep to be competitive all weekend, and quite frankly require a lot of skill to drive. With all that on the line, a bit more professionalism on the track seems to be needed. Sadly it might take something like the proposed rules changes to force it

[HazelNut]

[Peter Olivola]

Complaining about the complexity of SCCA rules and then proposing an even more complex "solution" is not a solution at all.

SCCA rules compliance, including on track driver behavior, is a shared responsibility between drivers and officials. The failure to participate in the responsibility that entails can not be overcome with rigid and judicially unsupportable rules.

Racing is not Montessori school for grownups. It is a high risk behavior marked by many factors, including instant judgement. If the risk isn't acceptable, other hobbies beckon.

[Wren]

Peter,

It's probably good that you posted that because that is almost certainly the response that he will get. People will completely miss the point, just like you did. You dismiss his complaints out of hand, deflect the issues, and offer that maybe he should try other hobbies. You do all of that while failing to acknowledge there is any problem.
The SCCA is continuing to pretend there isn't a problem and everyone is suffering because of it. SCCA races shouldn't be something that people actively try to avoid, but they are rapidly becoming that. There is a huge problem and no one is even going to admit that it exists.

[jcorsico]

Complaining about the complexity of SCCA rules and then proposing an even more complex "solution" is not a solution at all.

SCCA rules compliance, including on track driver behavior, is a shared responsibility between drivers and officials. The failure to participate in the responsibility that entails can not be overcome with rigid and judicially unsupportable rules.

Racing is not Montessori school for grownups. It is a high risk behavior marked by many factors, including instant judgement. If the risk isn't acceptable, other hobbies beckon.

It's people like you - those who defend the status quo by declaring what happened at VIR to be acceptable - who need to be ejected from the SCCA.

[Peter Olivola]

Both of you fail to recognize that the refusal of the competitor community to file paper and participate in the process is why and how the situation has gotten to this point. Having watched many, many videos of incidents in an official capacity I can tell you, especially you, Mr. Corsico, that determining fault is a critical part of assessing penalties. Your so called solution fails to do that. Writing blanket rules, that amount to an even more complex version of 13/13, won't solve anything except drive competitors away from SCCA.

I have no problem standing on my official record as a steward who has had to deal with incidents, including mistakes made and lessons learned.

Have either of you spoken to your fellow competitors about their behavior?

If not, why not?

[problemchild]

Peter,

It's probably good that you posted that because that is almost certainly the response that he will get. People will completely miss the point, just like you did. You dismiss his complaints out of hand, deflect the issues, and offer that maybe he should try other hobbies. You do all of that while failing to acknowledge there is any problem.
The SCCA is continuing to pretend there isn't a problem and everyone is suffering because of it. SCCA races shouldn't be something that people actively try to avoid, but they are rapidly becoming that. There is a huge problem and no one is even going to admit that it exists.

It was an absolutely glorious weekend at an incredible racetrack that was underattended because of concern for predicted occurances that happened as expected. As Peter says, clearly, the customers are to blame.

[jcorsico]

Both of you fail to recognize that the refusal of the competitor community to file paper and participate in the process is why and how the situation has gotten to this point. Having watched many, many videos of incidents in an official capacity I can tell you, especially you, Mr. Corsico, that determining fault is a critical part of assessing penalties. Your so called solution fails to do that. Writing blanket rules, that amount to an even more complex version of 13/13, won't solve anything except drive competitors away from SCCA.

I have no problem standing on my official record as a steward who has had to deal with incidents, including mistakes made and lessons learned.

Have either of you spoken to your fellow competitors about their behavior?

If not, why not?

You sir, are an idiot, with your head shoved so far up your ass that you can't even see the patently obvious staring you in the face.

[John LaRue]

It is simply a mess. I agree with Peter that more rules are not what is necessary and that the failure of other competitors to confront the problem with a protest or otherwise exacerbates the matter. I also agree that too often the ridiculous protest process is a deterrent to getting what seems to be a routine problem resolved.

Not to take the spotlight off of this particular incident, but here is what I ran into a few years back. I was at MO in qualifying at a National. We were coming up into T11 which had a waving yellow that had been out for one lap. Two FA's were closing on me quickly and we were all going to converge on the corner at about the same time. I lifted and the FA's split me at the apex. Fortunately everyone got through without an issue, but it pissed me off. After the session I went to the tower and spoke with the Operating Steward who told me to write up a protest. I explained that I didn't want to protest anyone, I just wanted the stewards to knock the guys' heads together a bit. It never happened. Quite a difference from when I had an incident of a similar nature in an F2000 race and simply explained the matter to Rand who went and had a word with the chap.

The root of the problem in my estimation is that we have too many different cars - a class for almost everyone and until that changes we are going to get to experience these unacceptable run groups which will only further thin the herd. I ran that event last year and simply started at the back as I knew regardless of how much quicker I may have been than any number of cars I would not be quicker to T1 on the first lap. It wasn't as much of a mess as this past weekend it sounds, but it wasn't good racing. Keep in mind that the problem isn't as much of an issue in the closed wheel groups. The old question arises whose Ox gets gored in order to clean this up? Because of all of the backsplash experienced by BOD's previously the answer is likely no ones.

[John Nesbitt]

Jonathan’s letter is a mixed bag. Some of it is very on-point. And some of it is a bit over-the-top, understandable in the circumstances. And, Jonathan, we could do without the personal abuse. In addition to being uncivil, it reduces your credibility.

What I agree with very strongly is pushing the Club to change, evolve, improve. Understand that change is very difficult in a private voluntary organization. There is no centralized authority and the various actors (volunteers) possess highly variable skills. The Club’s governance, from the top down, is almost designed to diffuse and deflect responsibility.

File a protest.

This is amateur sport, run by volunteers. Nonetheless, there are standards of performance. Speak to the Race Director, the Chief Steward, the Division Executive Steward, the CRB, your BOD member. Push. Bad officials (I am not talking about VIR specifically since I was not there) – stewards and others – can be disciplined. Pushed out, even. I have done it. But it takes real effort.

As Peter points out, rules enforcement is a shared activity. Stewards are supposed to respond to problems they observe. Drivers are expected to protest. Did anyone protest anything is the race group? If something happens that you do not like, and the officials do not take action, it is on the drivers to protest. If not, then you tacitly accept the outcome.

Protest. Protest. Protest.

Finally, and this is where I part company with Jonathan, accept that racing is a dangerous, no-fault (in the insurance sense) sport. It is inherently hazardous and, whether by human agency or mechanical failure, can bite you. Suddenly and hard.

To some very real degree, club racing is more dangerous than pro racing – highly variable driving and official skills, sometimes-sketchy car prep, and mixed-class run groups.

Accept also that nobody will make you whole. Like Jonathan, I have suffered thousands of dollars of damage from someone’s boneheaded move. I was angry – incandescent – but I accepted that risk when I went on track. I protested to establish a paper trail, but I still paid for my own repairs.

Bottom line: If you do not like something, throw paper. And keep throwing paper.

Protest.

[jcorsico]

Jonathan’s letter is a mixed bag. Some of it is very on-point. And some of it is a bit over-the-top, understandable in the circumstances. And, Jonathan, we could do without the personal abuse. In addition to being uncivil, it reduces your credibility.

What I agree with very strongly is pushing the Club to change, evolve, improve. Understand that change is very difficult in a private voluntary organization. There is no centralized authority and the various actors (volunteers) possess highly variable skills. The Club’s governance, from the top down, is almost designed to diffuse and deflect responsibility.

File a protest.

This is amateur sport, run by volunteers. Nonetheless, there are standards of performance. Speak to the Race Director, the Chief Steward, the Division Executive Steward, the CRB, your BOD member. Push. Bad officials (I am not talking about VIR specifically since I was not there) – stewards and others – can be disciplined. Pushed out, even. I have done it. But it takes real effort.

As Peter points out, rules enforcement is a shared activity. Stewards are supposed to respond to problems they observe. Drivers are expected to protest. Did anyone protest anything is the race group? If something happens that you do not like, and the officials do not take action, it is on the drivers to protest. If not, then you tacitly accept the outcome.

Protest. Protest. Protest.

Finally, and this is where I part company with Jonathan, accept that racing is a dangerous, no-fault (in the insurance sense) sport. It is inherently hazardous and, whether by human agency or mechanical failure, can bite you. Suddenly and hard.

To some very real degree, club racing is more dangerous than pro racing – highly variable driving and official skills, sometimes-sketchy car prep, and mixed-class run groups.

Accept also that nobody will make you whole. Like Jonathan, I have suffered thousands of dollars of damage from someone’s boneheaded move. I was angry – incandescent – but I accepted that risk when I went on track. I protested to establish a paper trail, but I still paid for my own repairs.

Bottom line: If you do not like something, throw paper. And keep throwing paper.

Protest.

John - I respect you greatly, but throwing paper is not going to fix this problem. There needs to be a fundamental change in the way the SCCA polices its own events.

The fact that the stewards are asking for paper before acting is part of the problem. The stewards (the police of the event) need to start acting like stewards and stop hiding behind arcane rules, lame excuses and deflections of responsibility. Somebody has to get control of the event, and the SCCA is the only body that has the authority to do it.

[gfastr]

Long long ago in the SCCA there were Observers on the flag stations. Their sole job was to monitor driver conduct. They worked in conjunction with Stewards. Often they were drivers from a different race group who volunteered their time for the betterment of the sport. Now, of course, times have changed. Though not necessarily for the better.

[SteveG]

As I recall, in the late 80's and early 90's SCCA had a penalty point system that operated in much the same manner as Jon suggests in his letter.

I've no idea what happened to the system, I do know that the system didn't always work as intended. I came within 2 points of losing my license because of an "unwritten rule" and my insane desire to run my FC within 3 db of the sound limit. I was excluded from the race results twice because I went over the sound limit on the last lap of the races. Since they couldn't black flag me on the last lap, they excluded me (the unwritten rule). For this I received 8 penalty points. A new muffler did solve all of my on track transgressions, I was a much safer driver for it.

I also know that on-track stupidity was not penalized equally, for example, a pass under was only penalized if it was reported by a turn marshal OR protested by another driver. No points were assessed if there was no paper trail on the pass.

As the theme of this thread is going, if YOU have an issue with someone's driving, officiating, or whatever, it is up to YOU to protest. Whether the results of the protest satisfy or not, it should not prevent the creation of the protest paper trail. If the paper trail is not created, the issue will happen over and over again.

Steve

[Wren]

As Peter says, clearly, the customers are to blame.

That response was so SCCA it hurts. But, its good for the OP to understand what the response to his letter is likely to be. SCCA leadership will just talk about how things were back in the day, refuse to acknowledge the problem, and let things get worse.

This is amateur sport, run by volunteers. Nonetheless, there are standards of performance.

John, I think your post was great and brought a very useful perspective, but I completely disagree with you on this. I think that the single biggest problem is that there are not standards anymore. If there were standards they would be enforced. I'm sure you know that the first rule of leadership is that the first time a leader walks past a bad behavior and leaves it uncorrected, he has set the new standard for his organization.

I think that there are a lot of issues with the proposed rule set, but one thing they have is a clear set of standards for behavior. I suspect that the worst offenders don't even realize that they are doing something wrong. Do the people with repeated mechanical failures at Majors understand that is not ok? Is it ok?
.

As Peter points out, rules enforcement is a shared activity. Stewards are supposed to respond to problems they observe. Drivers are expected to protest. Did anyone protest anything is the race group? If something happens that you do not like, and the officials do not take action, it is on the drivers to protest. If not, then you tacitly accept the outcome.

The process isn't working. It's broken and blaming the customers isn't working and isn't going to work. Change is needed.

Bottom line: If you do not like something, throw paper. And keep throwing paper.

Unfortunately, this concept isn't working. People are instead choosing to vote with their feet and wallets.

[FVRacer21]

You sir, are an idiot, with your head shoved so far up your ass that you can't even see the patently obvious staring you in the face.

In the "old" Scca, an ad hominem attack like that would have gotten you thrown out. And today is not productive.....

i like your points system, the next step is proposing a way to implement it. In a volunteer club, where we can barely come up with enough people to man timing and scoring, you will need a entire new group of people to run it.

in the NE FV. Group, we could informally start the program on a class basis, and discuss it amongst the drivers. However; I think the discussion point would go along way to solving the problem in the first place.

We help people whose cars are not up to race pace and educate the drivers who need help.

I wonder if the "wings and things" smorgasbord group is also contributing to the problem.

i also agree that the standards the SCCA set for this year for Majors is a very low bar..... Driving requirements have been declining as regions struggle to fill fields. The karting, iRacing, and watching pro racing (think world wrestling etc) mentality, has not been helping.

Chris Z

[DaveW]

I ran my last club race (except for the 2013 Runoffs where I entered under the previous-winner exception) in July 2010 at Nelson Ledges. I was caught up in a multi-car wreck not of my doing in an 8-class group due to lapping for the 3rd time in 8 laps a DSR that was about 40% over the lap times most of us were turning.

Several drivers in this group saw this wreck coming due to the 8-class grouping and the obviously way-too-slow-for-safety DSR. They asked the stewards to separate the cars into less dangerous groups, or at least dissuade the super-slow car/driver from competing. They refused to do anything about the situation because other groups had more cars, plus they were friends with the slow driver, and also didn't want to lose his entry fee. That, for me, was the final straw. I have not run a club race since. I now run the FRP F2000 Series.

Sounds remarkably similar, doesn't it?

[Peter Olivola]

Penalty points are and have been an integral part of the GCR for many years.

7.4. PENALTY POINTS
A. Penalties assessed by the SOM or the Court of Appeals accumulate
points according to the following schedule:
1. Fine ($1 - $99) no points
2. Reprimand 1 point
3. Fine ($100 - $249) 1 point
4. Loss of event points 1 point
5. Fine ($250) 2 points
6. Loss of time, lap, or finishing position 2 points
7. Probation of SCCA competition privileges 3 points
8. Disqualification 4 points
9. Suspension of SCCA competition privileges 6 points
10. Loss of accrued championship or series points 7 points
B. Penalties imposed by the Race Director or Chief Steward do not
incur penalty points. If a Chief Steward’s Action is protested and
the protest is disallowed (upholding the Chief Steward’s Action),
the SOM may, at their discretion, assign penalty points as listed
above.
C. When multiple penalties result from a single action, only the most
severe penalty accrues points.
D. Automatic penalties are imposed according to the following
schedule:
Condition Automatic Penalty
11-14 points accumulated in
consecutive 3 year period
Probation for 6 months or 6 events
determined by Divisional Executive
Steward
15 or more accumulated in
consecutive 3 year period
Suspension of competition privileges for
6 months
Invalid Statement of Facts
Affidavit
Event disqualification, 60 day suspension
of competition privileges, and 6 penalty
points
Refusing to allow teardown in
Mechanical Protest,Request for
Action, or Chief Steward’s Action
Event disqualification, 6 month
suspension of competition privileges,
$250 fine, and 6 penalty points
Non-Compliance in the following
classes:
Formula Enterprise
Spec Racer Ford
Enterprises Sports Racer
FE: see 9.1.1.I.19
SRF: see 9.1.8.E.T
ESR: see 9.1.8.H.18
NOTES:
-Penalties caused by accumulated penalty points do not themselves
result in further points.
-Penalty points expire 3 calendar years from the date they were
incurred.

As I recall, in the late 80's and early 90's SCCA had a penalty point system that operated in much the same manner as Jon suggests in his letter.

I've no idea what happened to the system, I do know that the system didn't always work as intended. I came within 2 points of losing my license because of an "unwritten rule" and my insane desire to run my FC within 3 db of the sound limit. I was excluded from the race results twice because I went over the sound limit on the last lap of the races. Since they couldn't black flag me on the last lap, they excluded me (the unwritten rule). For this I received 8 penalty points. A new muffler did solve all of my on track transgressions, I was a much safer driver for it.

I also know that on-track stupidity was not penalized equally, for example, a pass under was only penalized if it was reported by a turn marshal OR protested by another driver. No points were assessed if there was no paper trail on the pass.

As the theme of this thread is going, if YOU have an issue with someone's driving, officiating, or whatever, it is up to YOU to protest. Whether the results of the protest satisfy or not, it should not prevent the creation of the protest paper trail. If the paper trail is not created, the issue will happen over and over again.

Steve

[FVRacer21]

...........

As the theme of this thread is going, if YOU have an issue with someone's driving, officiating, or whatever, it is up to YOU to protest. Whether the results of the protest satisfy or not, it should not prevent the creation of the protest paper trail. If the paper trail is not created, the issue will happen over and over again.

Steve

In the SCCA you can protest virtually everything, even the shade of the Black Flag. (and if you do we will have RAL color #s for 2018!)

For driving you should look at 6.11. RULES OF THE ROAD
For car prep you should look at 9.3. GENERAL TECHNICAL AND SAFETY Specifications
For officials you have 5. OFFICIALS, THEIR DUTIES, OPERATING PROCEDURES, AND EQUIPMENT
For race procedure you have 6. RACING RULES AND PROCEDURES

Here you can use the system to change the system. If you bombard the officials with legitimate issues (and yes you can protest the officials...) then people will stand up and take notice. People will get penalty points and people will get thrown out.

Chris Z

[John Nesbitt]

The stewards (the police of the event) need to start acting like stewards and stop hiding behind arcane rules, lame excuses and deflections of responsibility. Somebody has to get control of the event, and the SCCA is the only body that has the authority to do it.

Jonathan,

We need to distinguish two separate problems here.

First, this is not F1 or NASCAR or even a lower level "pro" series. There are not cameras covering every angle and inside every car. There are not dedicated series officials (except at the Race Director level). The operating stewards (who are the first line of enforcement) depend on calls from the corners. There are ever-fewer flaggers. Where we had five or six on a turn when I started, today we are lucky to have two on each station.

So the incident frequently does not get seen and consequently there is no call to Race Control. No steward - not me, not anyone - will penalize somebody without cause. Without a call from the station, and with the press of the operational tempo, the operating stewards deal with the incidents about which they know.

The demographics of F&C are such that this is not likely to change.


Second, there are officials, stewards and others, who do a poor job. If you take a group of anything - stewards, FE drivers, you name it - and rank-order them, you will get a top 10% and a bottom 10%.

Understand that Club culture and governance is strongly weighted against any sort of corrective action around poor performance.


I propose a small thought experiment: Imagine that the Club institutes the rule changes that you ask. What will change?

Answer: Little or nothing.

There will still be the same patchwork of information, and the same variability among officials. The officials who are doing their job right now will keep right on doing their job, and the folks who are not will continue not. The Club has no appetite to confront that. So the chances of root-and-branch reform/change are slim to none, and slim has left town.


As a practical matter, your best option is to throw paper, keep throwing paper, and complain up the chain about bad officiating. It takes time and effort, but this does produce change.


As I wrote earlier, Club culture is deeply rooted and deeply, deeply resistant to change. The Club may be dooming itself to irrelevance. All that we - drivers and officials - can do is to effect change at the margins.


Maybe not the answer that you wanted, but I suspect that it is the real-world answer.

[Raceworks]

There's a couple of basic problems:

1) The general run-group guidelines just don't work with the purpose built cars. 20 cars per mile may work with miatas or SRF, but it's much more dicey in cars that are way faster, have shorter braking distances, and way less margin for error. Bad run-grouping is what is hurting purpose-built cars at the regional level. The August race at Daytona was a disaster because, in part, we had too many cars with way to large a speed differential. The response from the officials was that the run grouping was necessary because relatively few OW / SR cars enter that event. We explained that the lack of attendance was due to the bad run grouping. And so the circular argument goes on.

2) Some of the classes really don't play well together. This is particularly true with FF / F5 / FV. The centrifugal clutch cars take off weird compared to the conventional ones, and the Vees can't brake worth a damn (while the others can brake very very well). This leads to some very dicey situations in traffic even with good drivers who pay attention. When FM was more numerous things were always messy when FE / FC cars would get mixed in with us as while the lap times are similar those cars make them in very different ways.

3) If you are in a downforce car with a relatively good HP-to-weight ratio and sticky tires, and you can barely manage the same lap times as mid-pack FF cars, something is seriously wrong with your set-up or driving technique. On the test day (which, to be fair, was run by the track & not SCCA) it was very difficult to get clean laps in FF in at all if one got tangled up with the poorly driven wings & things cars that would rocket down the straights and become rolling chicanes in the corners.

4) Related to #3, the level of racecraft just flat out sucks. Fast cars making dive-bomb moves after the slow car has initiated turn-in, slow cars weaving around randomly like drunks on a Saturday night, and people wrecking on the out lap of a practice session are all indications that we as drivers need to do a better job.

5) The officiating is very inconsistent, even with the alleged benefit of the consistent staffing with the Majors / Super Tour format. I'll give you an example: GCR 6.5.2.B.1. This is the part about race starts, specifically the part where if a pace car is used, the pole position car is supposed to maintain pace car speed until the green flag is displayed even after the pace car pulls off. And yet, most of the time this rule is not obeyed and more often than not the race is started anyway to the great detriment of safety. Then there's the fact than in our group a driver got a penalty on Saturday for incidental contact while everyone was scrambling to avoid a car that had just spun out in front of them, but the guy that ran another car over on the start going for a gap that wasn't there to my knowledge didn't get anything.

6) Motorcycle engines ought to stay in motorcycles. I swear 2/3 of the yellows and black flag alls we get are when one of these things either blows up or spins & strips the starter or breaks a chain.




First and foremost, we as drivers DO need to do better. To wit -

1. Situational awareness is critical. If you're in a "fast" car running by yourself and you keep seeing a "slow" car in your mirrors, guess what? You're probably driving that guy nuts and might want to think about backing off on the next straight to let him by. In mixed run groups, never assume you're "in the clear" even if you're not getting blue-flagged. A quick glance in the mirror before turn-in can save you a lot of heartache.
2. If you're in a faster car and you're rolling up on a slow-mover just remember the rule I use: "If I were in the slower car, where would my eyes be at that point?" In other words, if that slower car has just turned in and you decide to jump beside them, that wreck is on YOU. A driver's first priority is to control their own car, and after turn in my eyes are glued to the apex. If you're not capable of making this kind of calculation in the cockpit, you're driving over your head and either need to get something slower to play with or up your cardio regimen.
3. If you're in a slower car and you see a fast-mover rolling up on you, for God's sake stay consistent. If the fast-mover is worth a damn, he's probably already planned his move well ahead of time. Even if he's just popped around a blind apex to find you there, the LAST thing you want to do is suddenly swerve just as he's rolling up on you (even if you're good enough to give him a point-by).
4. Give your tires time to heat up, as well as assess the track conditions. The out-lap on any session, let alone the first practice session of the day when the track is dewey and you're still sleepy eyed is NOT the time to go 10/10ths.
5. A green track is not the time to scrub your tires. I have literally lost count of the number of times I've nearly been collected by some idiot on a green track swerving back & forth to heat their tires up. First, its against the rules. Secondly, getting up to speed and then braking does WAY more to get your tires up to temp that that stupid butt-wriggling.
6. The pack needs to be formed up well before it comes on the front straight. Too many times people are still scrubbing tires or hanging back when they need to be forming up for the start. Ragged starts with big gaps are a big cause of first-lap incidents, "yellows breeding yellows" and general shenanigans.
7. Try to figure out the the different performance envelopes of the different classes of cars. Centrifugal clutch cars tend to coast where you expect them to accelerate, Vees have surprisingly good mid-corner speeds, an Atlantic can go from a blip in your mirror to all over you in an eyeblink. FF's can brake ridiculously well for having no wings and brick-like tires. If you're in doubt, err on the side of caution and assume he's an idiot with partial blindness. In any case, keep in mind that no matter what when you come up on a slower car your "hot lap" is most likely screwed whether you slow down & wait to make a safe pass or decide to pull a Zanardi and go 4 wheels in the grass only to find out you ain't no Zanardi.
8. Don't expect the officials to be omniscient. They can typically only see a very small sliver of the track, and there's usually only one radio frequency for them to work with to control the race. Sometimes incident reports get lost in the shuffle, especially for "busy" races. If you don't know how protests & appeals work, learn them. If you're a driver and you don't have time to file a post-race protest, put someone on as your entrant who does. You can protest or appeal virtually anything in SCCA, and trust me if you can speak their language sometimes it goes very far with the stewards. They also have rules of evidence so video is a VERY good thing to have these days. Or, at the very least try and find a witness or two who isn't a relative or team member. Otherwise they really can't do anything just on your word.
9. TALK to your fellow drivers if you have a problem with them, or even if you don't. Ideally, do this after you've cooled off a bit, so it's more of a discussion than a screaming prelude to a police incident report. For one thing, you'll become a human face rather than an anonymous wheeled object. For another, you can often avoid future protests or other on-track unpleasantness. You may find out their car just has weird performance characteristics, or they wear glasses and thus the peripheral vision isn't as good, etc.
10. Keep in mind that no matter where you go "hot pulls" are getting harder and harder to get done at many tracks either due to worker safety rules (the tow truck drivers are usually paid), insurance requirements, and in some cases state laws.

The officials also need to do better -

1. If there's a rule in the GCR, enforce it every time. More importantly, it should be enforced the same way every time. If club racing is a sport where no contact is allowed, then that should be the rule every time. If certain kinds of contact are OK at certain times and aren't OK at others, then THAT needs to be the rule every time and it needs to be unambiguously spelled out.
2. When I was in the steward training program one of things I did like was the emphasis on "customer service." However, you can have too much of a good thing. Some customers are better of not having, because a handful of nasty customers are going to drive off all your good ones.
3. Never be afraid of the words "I don't know." One area where racers see what appear to be inconsistencies is when somebody gives an answer just to save face & it turns out they were wrong.
4. Sometimes I've seen them throw full-course yellows in practice or qualifying. This is pointless. Black flag the group and bring everyone in. Double yellows should only be for races.
5. Reconsider some of the run groupings whenever possible.

We all need to push for some rule changes, in particular we need a standardized set of penalties as follows at the very least for the Majors / Super Tour level races -

1. Drivers that cause a black-flag all condition in a practice or qualfying should lose track time in subsequent non-race sessions. It doesn't matter what the cause is: mechanical, crash, spin & get high-sided. The time lost should be the time lost from the session. If you crash & move a barrier and your group loses 15 minutes of a 20 minute session, you get parked for 15 minutes in pit lane for the next session. For the last qualifying session before a race, grant a position penalty for every 5 minutes or fraction thereof. If no further positions can be taken away, the car starts from pit lane.
2. If the polesitter fails to maintain the pace car speed before a green flag, it's an automatic black flag and stop and go penalty.
3. Any contact that results in a car spinning out, going 4 wheels off track, or damaging it so heavily it can't continue the race results in the other car getting an automatic stop and go penalty. Other penalties may be assessed later depending on how egregious the contact was or if the victim files a protest.
4. Drivers that repeatedly leave the track surface (two or four wheels off) will be black flagged and given an opportunity to rehydrate, take a breather, and/or fix their cars.
5. Change the qualifying cutoff to 107%. This is supposed to be top-tier racing, after all. Only grant an exception for cars / drivers that turned a lap within 107% of pole time in an official timed practice session.

[John Nesbitt]

... I think that the single biggest problem is that there are not standards anymore. If there were standards they would be enforced. I'm sure you know that the first rule of leadership is that the first time a leader walks past a bad behavior and leaves it uncorrected, he has set the new standard for his organization.

I think that there are a lot of issues with the proposed rule set, but one thing they have is a clear set of standards for behavior. I suspect that the worst offenders don't even realize that they are doing something wrong. Do the people with repeated mechanical failures at Majors understand that is not ok? Is it ok?
....

In fact, there are standards. I helped develop standardized steward training. I helped write the Stewards Manual.

The problem is that most Divisions still do not train their stewards in any consistent fashion. The problem is that the leadership generally does not hold officials accountable for their actions.

I know from my work life that an organization gets the behavior for which it gives incentives. As long as officials are rewarded (with continued assignment) for poor performance, the organization will get poor performance.

Again, I emphasize that I am speaking generally. I was not at VIR. I do know that the Race Director is one of the very best stewards in SCCA, as are the operating stewards listed on the assignment sheet.

[mmi16]

In regard to what I view as an excessive number of Turn 1 incidents at VIR during the Super Tour.

The location of the Starters Stand down by pit out is out of view from a majority of the field, with race groups the size that were at VIR this past weekend. Beyond 8-10 rows back one is looking 'up hill and around the bend' to try to get a glimpse of the Starters Stand and flag action. With the race groups being between 20 and 30 rows deep that means the bulk of the field is guessing if the Green Flag is being waved. It is even worse when the 40-60 car fields are in a single column on restart - part of the field is still coming through the Hog Pen when the leaders get the Green - without a crew with radio, you are trying to out guess what is taking place.

I understand that the location of the Starters Stand is VIR's choice, but to my estimation they have chosen poorly.

[cooleyjb]

Until stewards stop using the excuse of 'racing incident' to not award any penalty things will not get through to a driver who continually is involved in on track problems.

If you can't assign blame to one or the other person you should be assigning blame to BOTH. 1 pt is fine. But it sets a real paper trail on someone.

There was ample opportunity to hand out penalty points to people this weekend. Video showing impacts by unaware drivers that caused thousands of dollars of damage to cars. Yet stewards said, unfortunate situation, racing incident and that there wasn't enough damage to justify a penalty. Points should not be scary to hand out. Just like on the street. A couple of points aren't going to take away your license. Lots will cause you to sit down for a while.

[Peter Olivola]

Was this a result/lack of result of an RFA or protest?

B. Penalties imposed by the Race Director or Chief Steward do not
incur penalty points. If a Chief Steward’s Action is protested and
the protest is disallowed (upholding the Chief Steward’s Action),
the SOM may, at their discretion, assign penalty points as listed
above.

Until stewards stop using the excuse of 'racing incident' to not award any penalty things will not get through to a driver who continually is involved in on track problems.

If you can't assign blame to one or the other person you should be assigning blame to BOTH. 1 pt is fine. But it sets a real paper trail on someone.

There was ample opportunity to hand out penalty points to people this weekend. Video showing impacts by unaware drivers that caused thousands of dollars of damage to cars. Yet stewards said, unfortunate situation, racing incident and that there wasn't enough damage to justify a penalty. Points should not be scary to hand out. Just like on the street. A couple of points aren't going to take away your license. Lots will cause you to sit down for a while.

[jcorsico]

This conversation is insane. It has gone like this:

Corsico: SCCA events are out of control. SCCA is abdicating its fundamental responsibility to police its own events. SCCA needs to regain control and penalize bad actors. Corsico proposed a points system, which is simple and clear and very easy to implement. It allocates responsibility to the people who actually cause harm.

SCCA Steward 1 Responds: There is nothing wrong. Changing the rules won't work. Racing is dangerous. Corsico should quit the SCCA.

SCCA Steward 1 Responds Again: The current mess is the fault of the drivers for not filing paperwork with the stewards. If only more paper were generated, this problem would go away.

SCCA Steward 2 Responds: The drivers need to generate more paper. If only there were more paper, the Stewards would actually do their job.

SCCA Steward 1 Responds Again: Surprise! There actually is a points system in the GCR, which is remarkably similar to what Corsico proposed.

SCCA Steward 2 Responds Again: These problems cannot be fixed.

Steward 1 doesn't even understand what I'm saying, because he keeps proving my exact point (there is a penalty points system? Seriously? When the hell was that last enforced?). Steward 1 doesn't even realize that my core complaint is that there is no rules enforcement.

Steward 2 acknowledges there is an issue, but then gets wrapped up in the technical rules morass created by the SCCA and basically tells me the problems with the club are impossible to fix.

This is pure insanity. The club has utterly failed in its most fundamental duty, which is to host safe and fun events. Everything else in this conversation is a distraction. The club is a failure. It needs to be fundamentally changed.

[jcorsico]

We all need to push for some rule changes, in particular we need a standardized set of penalties as follows at the very least for the Majors / Super Tour level races -

1. Drivers that cause a black-flag all condition in a practice or qualfying should lose track time in subsequent non-race sessions. It doesn't matter what the cause is: mechanical, crash, spin & get high-sided. The time lost should be the time lost from the session. If you crash & move a barrier and your group loses 15 minutes of a 20 minute session, you get parked for 15 minutes in pit lane for the next session. For the last qualifying session before a race, grant a position penalty for every 5 minutes or fraction thereof. If no further positions can be taken away, the car starts from pit lane.
2. If the polesitter fails to maintain the pace car speed before a green flag, it's an automatic black flag and stop and go penalty.
3. Any contact that results in a car spinning out, going 4 wheels off track, or damaging it so heavily it can't continue the race results in the other car getting an automatic stop and go penalty. Other penalties may be assessed later depending on how egregious the contact was or if the victim files a protest.
4. Drivers that repeatedly leave the track surface (two or four wheels off) will be black flagged and given an opportunity to rehydrate, take a breather, and/or fix their cars.
5. Change the qualifying cutoff to 107%. This is supposed to be top-tier racing, after all. Only grant an exception for cars / drivers that turned a lap within 107% of pole time in an official timed practice session.

These are some very constructive ideas.

[Peter Olivola]

What you chose to claim is a fundamental responsibility of the club fails to recognize that the club is you. You either contribute to the solution or you are part of the problem. Blaming anyone else for competitors lack of participation in the process is a cop out. The insanity here is insisting on something that isn't as you represent it. Rules enforcement is and has always been a shared responsibility. Refusing to accept your role in that process makes comments like the ones below difficult to take as anything more than a case of an exaggerated whiner gene present, to some degree, in everyone who competes.

This conversation is insane. It has gone like this:

Corsico: SCCA events are out of control. SCCA is abdicating its fundamental responsibility to police its own events. SCCA needs to regain control and penalize bad actors. Corsico proposed a points system, which is simple and clear and very easy to implement. It allocates responsibility to the people who actually cause harm.

SCCA Steward 1 Responds: There is nothing wrong. Changing the rules won't work. Racing is dangerous. Corsico should quit the SCCA.

SCCA Steward 1 Responds Again: The current mess is the fault of the drivers for not filing paperwork with the stewards. If only more paper were generated, this problem would go away.

SCCA Steward 2 Responds: The drivers need to generate more paper. If only there were more paper, the Stewards would actually do their job.

SCCA Steward 1 Responds Again: Surprise! There actually is a points system in the GCR, which is remarkably similar to what Corsico proposed.

SCCA Steward 2 Responds Again: These problems cannot be fixed.

Steward 1 doesn't even understand what I'm saying, because he keeps proving my exact point (there is a penalty points system? Seriously? When the hell was that last enforced?). Steward 1 doesn't even realize that my core complaint is that there is no rules enforcement.

Steward 2 acknowledges there is an issue, but then gets wrapped up in the technical rules morass created by the SCCA and basically tells me the problems with the club are impossible to fix.

This is pure insanity. The club has utterly failed in its most fundamental duty, which is to host safe and fun events. Everything else in this conversation is a distraction. The club is a failure. It needs to be fundamentally changed.

[jcorsico]

What you chose to claim is a fundamental responsibility of the club fails to recognize that the club is you. You either contribute to the solution or you are part of the problem. Blaming anyone else for competitors lack of participation in the process is a cop out. The insanity here is insisting on something that isn't as you represent it. Rules enforcement is and has always been a shared responsibility. Refusing to accept your role in that process makes comments like the ones below difficult to take as anything more than a case of an exaggerated whiner gene present, to some degree, in everyone who competes.

Peter – You epitomize what’s wrong with the SCCA. Your job as a steward is to enforce the rules. My complaint is that rules are not enforced. You respond to me by saying that it’s actually MY fault that YOU don’t enforce the rules.

You and your attitude need to be ejected from the club. You are correct – I am the club. And as a member of the club, I want you and your thinking out.

[Peter Olivola]

You know nothing of my work as a steward. I suggest you bank down your political rhetoric and read the GCR at least as closely as you read your contracts text in law school. Those are the rules stewards apply. Shouting, repeatedly, that we aren't doing our job does nothing to effect change. It has been explained to you how and why things are structured the way they are. That you don't accept that is your right, but it does nothing to advance your cause.

There are several avenues open to you to make an impact on the club. Get involved in your local region management. Run for the SCCA Board of Directors. Apply to become a steward. Those and other areas of responsibility will provide you an opportunity to have a direct impact on things. Posting here doesn't.

Peter – You epitomize what’s wrong with the SCCA. Your job as a steward is to enforce the rules. My complaint is that rules are not enforced. You respond to me by saying that it’s actually MY fault that YOU don’t enforce the rules.

You and your attitude need to be ejected from the club. You are correct – I am the club. And as a member of the club, I want you and your thinking out.

[Eric Cruz]

jcorsico - I know you wish to eject everyone else from your club, but I go back to the adage about the member of the marching band that believed he was the only one in step, and everyone else was out of step with him. I know you are an FE guy and we haven't met, but I was there too last weekend, and I just can't agree with tossing everyone else in the club. I wholeheartedly agree with what one of the posters said (Maybe John Nesbitt) that Steve Pence is about the best Race Director/Chief Steward the club has ever had. He is without a doubt the best I've experienced in 27 years of doing this. You are calling other people idiots and perhaps you should consider your personal situation and perspective before you do so.

I'll look at this thread again in the morning when I have time to digest and provide a proper response. But know I'm an old guy and a privateer dealing with all the FE challenges on my own, and I sure didn't see your gearbox in front of my nose.

Best regards,
Eric

[jcorsico]

jcorsico - I know you wish to eject everyone else from your club, but I go back to the adage about the member of the marching band that believed he was the only one in step, and everyone else was out of step with him. I know you are an FE guy and we haven't met, but I was there too last weekend, and I just can't agree with tossing everyone else in the club. I wholeheartedly agree with what one of the posters said (Maybe John Nesbitt) that Steve Pence is about the best Race Director/Chief Steward the club has ever had. He is without a doubt the best I've experienced in 27 years of doing this. You are calling other people idiots and perhaps you should consider your personal situation and perspective before you do so.

I'll look at this thread again in the morning when I have time to digest and provide a proper response. But know I'm an old guy and a privateer dealing with all the FE challenges on my own, and I sure didn't see your gearbox in front of my nose.

Best regards,
Eric

That's funny, because my gearbox was in front of your nose for much of Sunday's race. I also finished directly behind you in Saturday's race. I drive a black car.

In any event, our finishing order is a distraction. Nowhere have I proposed ejecting everyone (I just think we should eject Peter). I never proposed ejecting Steve. I also never directly blamed him for Saturday's debacle; he has to work within the system that exists today. And I propose changing the system.

And, to be clear, the only person I directly called an idiot was Peter.

[Peter Olivola]

Do you have any evidence that I've done anything beyond disagreeing with you?

That's funny, because my gearbox was in front of your nose for much of Sunday's race. I also finished directly behind you in Saturday's race. I drive a black car.

In any event, our finishing order is a distraction. Nowhere have I proposed ejecting everyone (I just think we should eject Peter). I never proposed ejecting Steve. I also never directly blamed him for Saturday's debacle; he has to work within the system that exists today. And I propose changing the system.

And, to be clear, the only person I directly called an idiot was Peter.

[Robert Finlayson]

Just wanted to say "Nice Run" to Eric Cruz this weekend. I was watching on race monitor and cheering you on.
Let the "debate" continue!

[cooleyjb]

Was this a result/lack of result of an RFA or protest?

B. Penalties imposed by the Race Director or Chief Steward do not
incur penalty points. If a Chief Steward’s Action is protested and
the protest is disallowed (upholding the Chief Steward’s Action),
the SOM may, at their discretion, assign penalty points as listed
above.

One I know for sure was a protest and that had good video showing the contact from the immediately trailing car. You couldn't expect any better evidence and yet no one got in trouble for contact. If there is contact someone is at fault.

Barring a a mechanical one of three situations create contact between two cars

driver a is at fault
driver b is at fault
both drivers at fault.

In in all those situations a driver should get a penalty preferably at least a point to create an issue for habitiual offenders.

[Peter Olivola]

My rotation assignments over the past several years have included only a handful of 6.11.1 cases when I was an SOM and they were rather more straightforward. Don't recall an equal fault situation. Any penalties we imposed automatically included points.

Have written a number of RFA's as an operating steward when the situation needed more time than I had to sort out or the penalties I could hand out weren't as strong as I felt needed. The outcomes have been mixed. Some went the way I expected. Some, as a result of a more thorough investigation, turned up evidence that called for a different outcome.

As a Chief Steward I've never discouraged a protest. I try to go out of my way to make the process as painless for the competitor filing the protest as possible including initiating calls for corner witness statements and any T&S information that might be useful. All done before the protest was actually in hand. I have time stamped a protest form when handing it to the competitor to fill out to stop the clock. When I see a competitor floundering around trying to find the GCR/Supplemental Regulation that applies to his case I will help him locate it.

I can't speak for all areas of the country, but my experiences in CenDiv, GLDiv, MiDiv and RMDiv are that the stewards in those divisions work much the same as I described above.

Even when not getting a protest, if a driver or drivers are concerned enough to seek me out to register their dissatisfaction about something I will attempt to find corroborating evidence. Video is useful, but there is a tendency to try to limit what the stewards can see. The GCR is rather pointed on this. All video evidence submitted must be complete and unedited and we have a responsibility to view as much of it as we need to arrive at a finding. That's time consuming, and when a competitor says he has video I'm going to write an RFA if he doesn't protest because as CS, I don't have the luxury of blocking out the rest of my responsibilities to deal with this one case.

I continue to recommend to any and all competitors, if you can't get the CS to consider your complaint, file a protest. That puts it where it can be investigated more thoroughly and is one of the reasons we have the SOM process.

One I know for sure was a protest and that had good video showing the contact from the immediately trailing car. You couldn't expect any better evidence and yet no one got in trouble for contact. If there is contact someone is at fault.

Barring a a mechanical one of three situations create contact between two cars

driver a is at fault
driver b is at fault
both drivers at fault.

In in all those situations a driver should get a penalty preferably at least a point to create an issue for habitiual offenders.

[Dog Licked Racing]

I got a question about the % based qualifying rule ( be any number like 107% or even 120%)

Is this the percentage of the fastest car against all the car in the run group, or is it to be applied by car classification against just that class?

If applied against the run group lets looking at Sundays Qual 2 times, Christopher Ash earned the pole with a 1:48.035, applying the rule at 107% (1:55.597) would have bumped all but the top 16 cars. As a driver in a P2 car I might never get to race, as only 1 P2 car would have made the cut. I think the current rule is 120% which would covers me by a significant margin and bumps only the last 2 cars with a posted time.

If applied by class (lets look at P2 as it my class) Bryan Yates earned the pole with a 1:53.604. Applying the 107% (2:01.55) rule two P2 cars would have been sent home, maybe 3 if I had attended as I am now running 2:01's at VIR.

So Stewarts - What is the current percentage value and is it applied against the run group or by class within a run group?

[Dog Licked Racing]

BTWI always knew the answer I want to see if anyone else did.

The GCR (on page 61) states

6.4.2.E. Each driver/car combination must qualify within 120% of the qualifying time of the fastest qualifier in his class to be allowed to
start his race. The Race Director or Chief Steward may waive this requirement and may allow non-qualifiers to grid behind qualifiers.

So just about everyone would have made the field on Saturday, once again the Stewarts did apply the rules of the GCR as written.

[924RACR]

There's also usually some language in the supps covering pace, the ones I've seen are indexed relative to lap record for each class.

Always with the proviso that it's at the stewards' discretion.

I'd be fine if they'd just deal with those forcing others off track or taking out other cars during unsafe re-entry of track.

Oh, but we have a culture that says you need to talk to the other guy first. And you're a jerk if you throw paper (with or without talking). And if you can find the other guy and talk to him - odds are you won't make the deadline to throw paper. And even if you do, the stewards may well walk over, inspect your car, say "no major damage" and decline to follow up (actually happened to a friend in a door-slammer class at VIR this past weekend, courtesy of a driver who should've stayed retired and has apparently been a clueless menace at every event this year).

But I guess not enough of us want to really do anything about it...

[jcorsico]

Barring a a mechanical one of three situations create contact between two cars

driver a is at fault
driver b is at fault
both drivers at fault.

In in all those situations a driver should get a penalty preferably at least a point to create an issue for habitiual offenders.

This is 100% correct and I could not agree more.