Thunder - 2014 Contact Issues

[GlennCMC70]

A few comments and then I will see where this thread goes.

1) I didn't lock the other thread and I don't know who did.
2) Keep it civil and respectful at all times. It's the internet and we all seem to read into what is typed and get on the defensive easily.
3) We all have the same goal, fun and safe racing. Assume we all are trying to help. Keep an open mind.

I have avoided this topic to ensure I have had time to cool off from my own personal meltdown at ECR. I left, cause I was no longer in control. I can blame it on personal life stress, but the short of it is..... I wasn't in control as a result of being involved in contact 2 weekends in a row that were not my fault (possibly a skewed POV....). I tuned in contact forms after the event. I have not been involved in any of the process there after.

Been doing a lot of thinking since ECR about contact since it was pointed out to me that Thunder has once again gotten a reputation for be a high contact class. I have missed a few events (more than normal) and was just plain out of the loop. Going to try much harder in 2015 to be there no matter what. One of the things that changed for the negative in 2014 was seemingly random Race Directors. Most of us knows that the Series Directors used to handle all class issues. That changed when Dave B took over. Now the RD does that to remove any appearance of bias since the SD's are racing w/ you guys. Good change and I like it. This past year it seems the RD's were different each weekend. Not good. With a new RD comes a blank mind w/ regards to who has done what in the previous events. That results in not thinking about a need to look-up past contact and how many driver points are accumulated and determining if further action is needed beyond the current contact. This is getting looked at and will likely be set-up on a web-based tool that the RD will look-up as part of each contact investigation. This will also help if a driver racing under 2 different RD's has had similar issues in the same weekend in different run groups or just switches classes from weekend to weekend resulting in being under multiple RD's throughout the year. Mike is working with Will on this new process. I hope they can get it to work.
Speaking of Mike, I know he is working on pulling stats to see if we have an issue w/......
A) Drivers who should have been close to or at 10 driver points for contact in case we really messed that one up.
B) Changing the points system from calendar year to a rolling 12 months.
C) Whether inverts cause more issue than qual based starts. Rolling vs standing. I even asked to look at each track individually to see if (for instance) TWS has more contact in T1 going CCW vs T15 going CW. Is there an issue w/ the track layout that inherently is more risky that others for the starts. We know MSR-C takes the green in two different places for standing vs rolling. Do we need to do this at other tracks?
D) Do we need to get rid of inverts? Not saying we will, but is it worth it? Should we limit it to 1 per weekend? If there was an honest way to set the grid, I would do inverts every race. Remember...... fun and safe....... At this point anything is on the table.

One area that was brought to my attention is race craft. Are we lacking it w/in our group? Do we need to have classes specific to each track addressing the line, when/where to defend, where "secret" passing zones are (so the pass is expected)? Where to expect that "surprise" pass? Not sure, but I bet we can drink a lot of beers doing it and learn at the same time. Once again, ideas, open mind, brainstorming here. (Michael Mosty gave me this idea).

And one last area to point out...... as was mentioned in the other area we were mentioning this..... 3/4 car rule.
I hate this rule w/ all my heart. I've used it to win and it has been used against me. But from an RD/SD POV, I hate it. If your not 100% clear on passing rules and the 3/4 car rule, stop here and read up before posting an opinion.
As we all know class rules supersede the CCR's. It was pointed out to me that another class did away w/ the 3/4 car width rule by replacing it w/ their own 1 car width rule. I like this and as a class, we can agree to do this. I already have a call into Al F about adding it into the CMC rules (proposal at this time). There is no reason I have to put my car 1/4 car width in the dirt to avoid contact and there be no penalty assessed to the driver who put me there if I had rights to position. My personal feeling is I want the curb to be excluded from the racing surface as well. I would love to hear thoughts on this from everyone. Am I off base here?

[BlueFirePony]

You lost me at "avoided" j/k

Anyway, I completely disagree with NASA's interpretation of the 3/4 width rule and I've talked to pro drivers who prefer the "equal racing room" interpretation - any rule that takes away a hard won advantage from a competitor is a bad rule...don't give the overtaking driver unfair advantage (i.e don't give him/her the right to the line) and don't give the overtaken the advantage (3/4 width) - let 'em race.
I'd like to have a "full car width" change made (thanks Glenn) but if that does not happen, at least NASA has as a clear situational clarification (Figure #4) so you should know the rule and understand why you are penalized, even if you don't agree with it.
"The driver of Car B should not have attempted to make that pass if he/she was not willing to drive into the dirt to avoid collision."

To me, the rules should be written to ensure all racing is done ON TRACK - that's where you win or lose the race.


Section 25.4.3 needs to be completely cleared up though as it has been revised and revised into lack of clarity - I would even suggest that an explanation be put in the section as to why the "The driver attempting to make a pass shall have the right to the line when their front wheel is next to the driver of the other vehicle" was changed out.
Frankly to me it seems that NASA has been confused on this for years and the current way 25.4.3 is written seems to support that theory (literally both ends of the spectrum are there...one in and one written out).

SCCA overtake is written very clearly to specify BOTH drivers have the right to racing room which is described as

sufficient space on the marked racing surface

that under racing conditions, a driver can maintain control of his car in close quarters.

Also from SCCA rule:

Drivers must respect the right of other competitors to racing room. Abrupt changes in direction that impede or affect the path of another car attempting to overtake or pass may be interpreted as an effort to deprive a fellow competitor of the right to racing room.

And as is consistent in most rule books

The overtaking driver is responsible for the decision to pass another car and to accomplish it safely.

[GlennCMC70]

I really expected more chatter than this after 24hrs.

[blk96gt]

From the other thread...

I never meant to leave that impression if it came across that way - I figure the other thread got locked because the emotions were high.

Yes, but it isn't always intentional. I think I took Mosty wide/off track at TWS. He was working on an outside pass and I couldn't hold it down and he avoided any contact.

I agree 100% that it's not always intentional, which is why I stated first that I understand why the rule is in place, and why it's my fault. After I hit the submit button I regretted posting that paragraph at the end.

You hate that people are racing aggressively and trying to get to their apex and keep you behind them? Is it that "we" have contact or that "you" caused contact because you didn't give up the non-position you never had? I did that exact thing to Mitch at Hallett, left a black mark on the new white paint, and it took me some soaking to admit to myself that he was right - I didn't have position and I didn't make enough effort, any actually, to avoid the contact.

I'm not trying to beat you up, just supporting your observation that I want to continue to learn and understand the expectations of those racing around me.

Al/Glenn/Marshall - appreciate all the work you guys put in so we can do this thing.

Again, I'm in 100% agreement that it would be my fault if an incident as you described above occurred between myself and another driver. I should have been more clear when I made that comment. The situation I'm talking about is this:
Car A is ahead of car B coming out of a corner, car B has a better exit and before the braking zone for the next turn manages to get a nose up to the rear wheel of car A. Both cars brake at the same time, with car A coming down following the normal driving line and contacting car B. Car B never "established position" by getting the front wheel to the driver door, so the incident would be deemed the fault of car B.

I guess what I meant by "hate" is that I don't really understand why someone would want to do this, especially during a regional race. Last couple laps for nationals, sure, but seems that doing this during a regional race is overly aggressive and an unnecessary risk that doesn't do anyone any good. The way I approach a situation like this is that if I even think that someone may have a nose on the inside of me, then I will give them room (or at least to my recollection I do). I do this because I have no desire to have contact with anyone, even if it would be the other driver's fault. What I try to do is that if there appears to be a chance that the car behind me could get the inside before the start of the turn, I'll defend the position by moving down to the inside line before they have a chance to get on the inside.

[BlueFirePony]

I really expected more chatter than this after 24hrs.

I tried...

[mach1]

Here is one for ya, check the video, I was racing John and giving him enough room, little did I know we were 3 wide and Jerry was on the other side of John. Jerry came to me after the race and told me. I'd like to see his video of it.

Check this at 25 seconds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX7vr3u-Jgg

[BlueFirePony]

Again, I'm in 100% agreement that it would be my fault if an incident as you described above occurred between myself and another driver. I should have been more clear when I made that comment. The situation I'm talking about is this:
Car A is ahead of car B coming out of a corner, car B has a better exit and before the braking zone for the next turn manages to get a nose up to the rear wheel of car A. Both cars brake at the same time, with car A coming down following the normal driving line and contacting car B. Car B never "established position" by getting the front wheel to the driver door, so the incident would be deemed the fault of car B.

I guess what I meant by "hate" is that I don't really understand why someone would want to do this,

Driver A has to give Driver B "racing room" if Driver B has successfully started the overtake (front/rear bumper overlap). So if there is contact, the question comes down to how much "racing room".
Equal racing room
I prefer "equal racing room" which at a minimum means Driver A gives Driver B enough room to negotiate the turn safely, with all four wheels on the racing surface. That does not mean Driver B can banzai the corner as he still carries the full responsibility for making a safe pass. Also Driver A needs to maintain a line and abruptly changing that line to pinch Driver B would be frowned upon and if contact is made would go toward assigning blame. In this regard there is the expected give and take...Driver A gives enough room and maintains the line, but Driver B must use that room safely and in fact may have to adjust speed. This allows Driver A to be defensive and Driver B needs to decide if this is the corner to make the pass or not.

3/4 width
In my opinion the only place for the 3/4 width rule is when Driver A is attempting to hold off Driver B BEFORE the pass can be established. Driver A is allowed one defensive move but must leave 3/4 width on the side he is defending BEFORE taking the turn. Once at the turn, Driver A has the right to the line and if the pass has NOT been started then Driver A does not need to give 3/4 width. If Driver B HAS started the pass, then EQUAL racing room should be given by both drivers. I've got several examples on video where this has been done - I would say successfully . I'll dig up the links, but a few top of mind:

My very first race weekend at ECR, DLo did it to me turn after turn after turn...toying with me until I finally sold him a dummy going into T1.

Frank did it to me at TWS - as we approached the turn Frank glided up to the outside where I was trying to overtake and gave me just enough room that I would have had to put two wheels off to start the pass. He continued to carry that line into the turn and since I did not start the pass I backed out.

Corey did it to me at Hallet - he spun on the start and I got a run on him on the outside. He glided over, to give me 3/4 width down the straight and I took it for a bit until I realized I could not get into passing position and the next corner was coming up so I bailed and fell back into line.

I did it to Eddie later that weekend - coming out of T9, Eddie had a run on the inside so I glided over to the right on the way to T10 and left him 3/4 width where he went two wheels off for a bit trying to pass but ultimately bailed. Didn't matter, he got me there next lap I think. :/

[Fbody383]

I really expected more chatter than this after 24hrs.

First time online this weekend...

Car A is ahead of car B coming out of a corner, car B has a better exit and before the braking zone for the next turn manages to get a nose up to the rear wheel of car A. Both cars brake at the same time, with car A coming down following the normal driving line and contacting car B. Car B never "established position" by getting the front wheel to the driver door, so the incident would be deemed the fault of car B.

THIS is the question. Car B does NOT have "position" as it is currently defined, but might have been able to establish "position" by outbraking Car A, or could have given up the "non-position" and avoided any contact.

SCCA overtake is written very clearly to specify BOTH drivers have the right to racing room which is described as...

Here it is directly from the GCR:

6.11. RULES OF THE ROAD6.11.1 On Course Driver Conduct
A. Drivers are responsible to avoid physical contact between cars on
the race track.
B. Each competitor has a right to racing room, which is generally
defined as sufficient space on the marked racing surface that under
racing conditions, a driver can maintain control of his car in close
quarters.
C. Drivers must respect the right of other competitors to racing room.
Abrupt changes in direction that impede or affect the path of
another car attempting to overtake or pass may be interpreted as
an effort to deprive a fellow competitor of the right to racing room.
D. The overtaking driver is responsible for the decision to pass another
car and to accomplish it safely. The overtaken driver is responsible
to be aware that he is being passed and not to impede or block the
overtaking car. A driver who does not use his rear view mirror or
who appears to be blocking another car attempting to pass may be
black flagged and/or penalized, as specified in Section 7.

To me it's not as definitive as a simple "right to racing room," we are still racing and not time trialing.

I will agree that SCCA seems to be saying that at all times you cannot drive the guy directly next to you off a straight, even to establish your line on corner approach. I think most of us could agree it is reasonable to expect a driver directly next to you, travelling a straight, to know you are there and leave room for all 4 tires on the actual racing surface. But in many cases a failed pass attempt is the sole responsibility of Car B, and may require Car B to take the evasive action.

I think we've uncovered a couple of issues:

A) A driver is simply over his/her head and causes contact - the event at MSRC, I was in over my head, locked up the car, went off/back on track and knocked Randy's car one deal off.

B) A driver "thinks" they have the right to be there - the 55 came inside me ECR T6, was a little late in braking/respecting track surface, light nose to tail contact. (not a perfect example) A better one may be when I was outside Mitch last corner of Hallett and had a wheel along his outside rear quarter. He let the car go to track out, while I thought he would/should "give me the room" on the outside. I put a black mark on fresh white paint - and I was wrong to do so.

C) A racing incident - TWS CCW, 4 cars racing into T1, the first 2 touch, the back 2 touch in what was deemed a "racing incident" - watch the video from the 11. I don't know what I supposed to do differently - I KNEW the 55 was outside me and that I was more than 1 car width from the edge of the track. When I felt the contact, my impression was that the 55 had lost track of me dealing with the self-preservation issues of the potential 2 car wreck happening in front of him.

I hope the discussion continues to be positive and we can find examples of both what to do, and not to do. If we want stricter class rules than the general rules, fine. If we want to add points penalties for accrued contact - fine. If we want to adjust qual spots - fine.

Still reading through all of this - but if anybody has any issues with my racing, I would like to know about it.

[Fbody383]

D) Do we need to get rid of inverts? Not saying we will, but is it worth it? Should we limit it to 1 per weekend? If there was an honest way to set the grid, I would do inverts every race. Remember...... fun and safe....... At this point anything is on the table.

Absolutely not. I would rather we find a way to reward contact free racing in the invert

My suggestion essentially gives points for most places improved, tie going to the car starting furthest back.

[Fbody383]

Didn't want this missed and brought from the other thread:

One topic in this light is divebombing. I think of it as a negative example...a bad thing to do. Other people characterize it as a good passing maneuver, within the rules.
Here are two ways I have heard it described:
1) (I think a dive bomb is) when an attempt to pass is started when the overtaken car is ALREADY taking the turn and has the RIGHT to the line - maybe they just got off the throttle, maybe just a downshift, or maybe they are turning in...at this point the pass has NOT been started and any contact is 100% the responsibility of the overtaking driver.
2) (I don't think a dive bomb is) when you come in hot, late brake and overlap the bumpers BEFORE the other driver starts their turn....of course you need to be in complete control..otherwise all bets are off. But this is show some people characterize divebombing...in this light, I don't have a problem with it - I just consider is an aggressive overtake but nothing wrong with it.