AI/CMC Texas Points for Round 6! **2010 Points are Final!**

[GlennCMC70]

Attached are the points totals for Round 6. The totals are sorted by points w/ drops.
There was 5 drops for 2010. Drops are shaded in yellow. If I made an error in a selected drop, or an error of any kind, please let me know privately. I'll give you guys about a week to look them over before we call them official.

Casey Holdway set a new AIX track record as did Jeremiah Kellam in CMC2, but it was reset again by James Proctor who now holds the ECR CMC2 record.

[GlennCMC70]

It has been pointed out to me that David F was grid as CMC2 for R2 but was scored and classified as CMC in the results and in season points. If you are going to swap class's from one weekend to the next or during the weekend, you must inform timing and scoring of your class change. I can help you do that, but I will not do it for you. It is also wise to point out this error once the results are posted. It is an easy post race fix as long as the results have not been uploaded to MyLaps. Before I spend any time correcting this issue (or not correcting it), will this affect anyone's points if I change it or not change it?

He was scored as 2nd in CMC, but was really 6th in CMC2. Thats a big change. I'll change it if it needs to be, or if anyone just wants me to. Let me know.

[JasonLiiR]

I was gonna say that is why its only by 1 point is because i was 3rd in R2 not 4th. But it doesn't change the outcomes any.

[GlennCMC70]

Correction made.
I'm replacing the attachment in the first post.

[Wade]

Rookies get more drops? 23*.33=7.59, so rounds to 8? Kellam is still shown as a rookie, as is Crumpacker. I'm hoping that's not right!

[GlennCMC70]

Rookies get more drops? 23*.33=7.59, so rounds to 8? Kellam is still shown as a rookie, as is Crumpacker. I'm hoping that's not right!

Its not. Thanks. I'll fix it.

[David Love AI27]

WOW... I was finally able to open the file....

The points battle in CMC (1) has been unbelievable for the last few years, someone tell me, again, why the push to CMC2??????????????????? (yes, I know Wirtz would have easily won, but the end results are what counts)

So sorry to JW for the unfortunate turn of events, neither Jason or I wanted the season to end this way....

GARY!!! DUDE!?!? tied for overall points!!!! :shock: :shock: :shock:

Top 3 so very close and not a single contact form between us....

[Rob Liebbe]

Congratulations to the CMC crowd!!!! Enjoy your championship Mr. Love(s)!!!!!!!

[Fbody383]

I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me. I will tell timing and scoring everytime I change class; Glenn will help me but not he will not do it for me.

[JasonLiiR]

Thank you Rob. The last few months have certainly been a roller coaster, especially this last weekend. Went in expecting to be racing for Second but ended up fighting for a Championship on Sunday. Gary thanks for making me work for it.

[GlennCMC70]

WOW... I was finally able to open the file....

The points battle in CMC (1) has been unbelievable for the last few years, someone tell me, again, why the push to CMC2??????????????????? (yes, I know Wirtz would have easily won, but the end results are what counts)

So sorry to JW for the unfortunate turn of events, neither Jason or I wanted the season to end this way....

GARY!!! DUDE!?!? tied for overall points!!!! :shock: :shock: :shock:

Top 3 so very close and not a single contact form between us....

It's not so much a push to CMC2 as its a push to a single CMC class.
Does this need to be said anymore to you?

[michaelmosty]

Jason, congratulations on the Championship!!
You were incredibly focused throughout the entire weekend always making adjustments and repairs to the car as needed.

We all got a good laugh with about 1 hour to go before the final race of the year. Everybody was sitting around b/s'ing and being lazy except for Jason and Gary who both had their cars in the air, all wheels off, making the final adjustments. There were some pretty unique suggestions floating around for crazy ways to settle the final race.
My favorite was:
Jason and Gary only, standing start, side by side, waiting for the green flag, the flaggers opposite hand is raised, still waiting for the green, 15 seconds and still waiting. Meanwhile all the other racers are on the sideline crying with laughter while Jason and Gary are freaking out about to have a heart attack. :shock: Oops, sorry Randy. 8)

[David Love AI27]

It's not so much a push to CMC2 as its a push to a single CMC class.
Does this need to be said anymore to you?

We HAD a single CMC class...

and the 3rd gen is a perfect CMC car WITHOUT serious mods...

Just tonight I get a call from Jason wanting to spend more money on the 3 car to move to CMC2... I don't have any more money, if I did I would have been driving last weekend instead of working!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NEVERMIND... :evil:

[JasonLiiR]

Thats why im gonna buy the parts for the jump to the duece. Never asked you too.

[Al Fernandez]

Go J-love!! Be the only driver in history to win CMC and CMC2 championships!!

[David Love AI27]

Thats why im gonna buy the parts for the jump to the duece. Never asked you too.

Just make sure to call Al or Glenn when you need cash for the ignition system and the fuel delivery for the new setup...

[Alien]

We all got a good laugh with about 1 hour to go before the final race of the year. Everybody was sitting around b/s'ing and being lazy except for Jason and Gary who both had their cars in the air, all wheels off, making the final adjustments.

I think that's the most I've ever worked (not fixing something that broke) on the car during an event weekend! Saturday rotated front tires right and left. Sunday after qual, put in new front pads. Before the last race rotated tires back to front to eek out that last bit of performance.

For the points race, I never would have guessed it could end like it did. I went into this weekend 8pts after drops behind LiiR, assuming we got all 4 races in. Assuming that a tie in points is broken by whoever has the most 1sts, then 2nds etc, I knew I had to beat Jason every race by 2pts, and in one of those races beat him by two spots, or a get pole. Tough to do, but I had a slim chance. Hadn't even expected to be fighting for second earlier in the season.

R1, Jason doesn't qual well, and during the race, I was in 4th ahead of Jason, only gaining one point. Then I spin trying to chase Dave, and Jason gets around me. Crap, now he's up by 9. Then I see Wirtz's car dead/dying. Crap! That gives Jason a 2pt gap. End the race 10pts back. Arg.

R2, Shortened race, I'm in 2nd, Jason in 4th. Good, I'll get back within 6pts. After the shenanigans at Tech, I'm given 1st and Jason moves up to 3rd. I dropped the gap to Jason to 5 points.

That night on the lap top, we figure in the DQ as non droppable.* We figure that I'll again need to beat Jason in the races, but with the "win" (I use that term loosely) now only need to tie in points. So again, I need to beat Jason by one position in one race (worth 2pts) and another by 2 posions (worth at least 3). Wirtz has such a lead over me and assuming he gets pole and 2 wins, I would have to pull off a 2nd and a 3rd to win overall. If think it worked out that if Jason got 2 fourths or better, he would beat Jeff.

R3. This time I was the one with the bad qual (5th), and Jason was starting outside pole. Oh well, probably not gonna happen. Somehow, I get around Dave and Nick on the opening lap, now I'm right on Jason's bumper for the rest of the race. LAST lap, he has brake issues, goes off, and myself and Dave get by. I finish... 2nd, 2 spots ahead of Jason.

Holy crap. Only one point behind Jason. Finish 3rd ahead of Jason and it's all mine. On the invert, DF decides to stay in CMC1. It's Greg H and Nick on the front row, Jason and Dave, then myself and Wirtz. Again, somehow on the first lap, I get around Greg, Nick and Jason to fall into, yup, 3rd behind Dave, exactly where I need to be to take it all. But Jason couldn't just let that happen. He was coming full steam ahead halfway thru the race. I had made an attempt or two at Dave so I wouldn't have to deal with Jason :) Got alongside Dave into 3. Couldn't quite pull it off out coming out of four. Next lap, lets try that again. The moment I touched the brakes this time, I knew I left it too late. Note, brakes don't work as well when turning. Smacked into Dave the entire length of the car, watched Jason pass us both. Dang (understatement). Sorry Dave, guess orange is fast AND attractive.

So, uh, that's why I looked busy :)

Congrats again Jason!

*Who else thinks that is a bit too much, one DQ and your season is essentially toast? I know for the weight thing at MSR-H, the penalty was a droppable zero, and somewhere else, wasn't someone else able to drop a DQ for passing under yellow so it wouldn't kill their season? Would it be insane to propose that we can drop one and only one DQ per season?

[michaelmosty]

I'm going to put in a rule change suggestion regarding DQ's.

I think a non-dropable zero should be in place for blatant cheating. It seems a little harsh to get a DQ for being a few pounds under weight or having an oversight in the rules. I'd like to see something along the lines of a 25 point "penalty" (or 30, or 50 points, etc) for infractions that are not intentional.

I think you should definitely be held accountable for errors but it sucks when it kills your entire season.

[GlennCMC70]

We clarified the rules for things such as "passing under yellow" to be droppable. Our CMC rules say cheating and non-compliance are automatic DQ's. That is only for series rules. CCR rules violations are droppable per the CCR.
We set a presedent early in the year w/ giving a 0 in place of a DQ due to a weight violation. We have had issues for a few years now w/ the scales, and MSR-H this year showed signs of even more problems. We were not very confident in the tools we were given to check weight at that time, so we modified the penalty (legal per the CMC rules) and allowed it to be dropped and added a 2nd part to the penalty that those drivers would start from pit road. The same penalty was handed to Greg Hughs this past event as well.

As for a DQ being a season ending deal, your right. But w/ 4-5 drops per season, some guys will take the chance to only get caught less than 4-5 times and use those for their drops. Not something we want. So the idea was to "make it hurt" so the penalty for one offence was far worse than the reward if not caught. Myself and Al have talked about this very issue several times. I'm open to ideas. This is the "Rules Silly Season" so now would be a good time to make a proposal.

As for "season ending" - Sort of. Had JW not broke in R1 and finished where he normally does, he would have a 100 in place of the 92 he got. That 92 was his 5th drop, the other 4 were from a missed event. His next lowest score was a 95. So, change the 92 from R1 to 100 and drop the 95 from April TWS R4 and you have 1709. Thats 2 points more than JL. So it wasnt just the DQ, it was also the mechanical of R1.

The thing to remember is the Season Points is not always won by the fastest guys. Those are the guys who normally take more risks on the track and in the pits. Every now and then you will get cut walking the razors edge. It happened to me my 1st year. Its happened to Todd and he lost a Championship from it.

I bet next year there will be at least two more drivers who watch their season points from MSR-H in January like a hawk. You never know how things will play out. And you guys will now have a story to tell for many years to come about the 2010 CMC Season points Race! 8)

[GlennCMC70]

I'm going to put in a rule change suggestion regarding DQ's.

I think a non-dropable zero should be in place for blatant cheating. It seems a little harsh to get a DQ for being a few pounds under weight or having an oversight in the rules. I'd like to see something along the lines of a 25 point "penalty" (or 30, or 50 points, etc) for infractions that are not intentional.

I think you should definitely be held accountable for errors but it sucks when it kills your entire season.

Just what I wanted to see.
Remember, it will always be an "oversight" according to the driver. It may very well be more times than not, but it will not always be.

How about a Zero for the race your caught in and the previous race as well? Takes two of your "drops" but not your whole season. The 2nd time it (any violation, not only the same one) happens in a season, its a non-droppable DQ.
Yes/No?

[michaelmosty]

I just don't like the fact that if you don't miss a race then a "dropable" zero is not even a slap on the wrist.
If we dictate a specific point deduction it will be a tough penalty but still won't kill the entire year.

I see this being two completely different stories with AI and CMC. If CMC followed the same point system as AI then a "zero" would be much easier to overcome.
In CMC 1st to 10th is a 13 point swing.
In AI 1st to 10th is a 45 point swing.

[GlennCMC70]

I just don't like the fact that if you don't miss a race then a "dropable" zero is not even a slap on the wrist.
If we dictate a specific point deduction it will be a tough penalty but still won't kill the entire year.

I guess I'm confused. Are you saying we deduct more than 100 points?

Isnt that what a drop is - a droppable score that has a maximum 100 point value.

Give me an example.

[mitchntx]

I can honestly say I've never seen Glenn more torn about the DQ of JW. He was honestly upset and not happy about the decision to be made.

And we all seem to waffle, me included, back and forth about compliance vs non-compliance, black and white interpretation, more tech vs leave it alone ... we all have voiced opinions.

Intentional or accidental ... performance enhancing or not ... a violation is a violation. I hope we can all agree with that.

It's the punishment side of the violation is where things get screwey.

JW is probably the most highly respected driver in our group ... he's probably the most personable individual in the pits ... and has more Marlboro Man dashing good looks than Adam Ginsberg.

Opposite end of that spectrum? Well that's probably me.

So should the punishment differ between Jeff and I? Easy to say No on Thursday evening post race ... damned hard Saturday night with a season championship on the line.

We either saw or read or heard about rules enforcement at Nationals. And the underlying reason for all the drama was ... inconsistency between regions.

Most sorta knew what to expect at their local track ... but didn't realize how far the wink-wink - nod-nod had gone till put under the nationals microscope. And the consequences will be discussed for years ... well, maybe months ... 11, to be exact.

And up to this point, the "violation" that Jeff had was no big deal. And in reality, it played no role what-so-ever in his on-track performance.

But the inconsitencies in rules interpretation, implementation and enforcement that are running rampant in this series nationwide are beginning bite folks in the perverbial ass, even those violations that truly are no big deal.

Now if the rules revision process wan't a joke in of itself, then I would lobby for clarification. A suggestion like Michael made is a good start to a dialogue. But common sense takes a back seat to politics and nepitism. Personalities play a bigger role than reality.

Oh well ... it is what it is.

So the take-away should be ... be legal, boys or pay the price.

[Alien]

I definetly wouldn't propose to be able to drop any more than 1 DQ a season for the reasons Glenn mentioned about someone trying to get away with it 4-5 times.

I agree with Mitch too. I'm fine with the enforcement, it's the penalty that needs addressed.

I'm thinking of anything that could currently get you a DQ. Passing under yellow, being under weight, having something not legal on the car, blowing a dyno. If someone pulls a 237hp, do we want their whole season blown? And I'm not talking that, well, now they can't win the championship. I'd be annoyed if that took me from 4th place to a best finish of 10th in one swoop. I guess it's not until now that I realized just how detrimental a DQ is on season points.

I think MM is going for something like this. You get moved to last place, the fine is 50 points, or this *edit2* example: you are moved to last place, points are now 90. Your penalty is 45 points */edit2*, plus start the next race from pit lane. Should be easy to calculate, just add a penalty column into the spreadsheet so it won't accidentally be counted as a drop.

Currently, a DQ is essentially equivalent to a 100 pt (or wherever you finish) penatly. In the case that Glenn pointed out about Wirtz's drops, this year is really unique. He had almost a perfect dominant season. LiiR and I aren't exactly consistant frontrunners. Had it been a normal season full of CMC1 cars, Wirtz would have dropped a lot more.

On another note, the zeros in the spreadsheet like like Nick and Jeremiah never started that race. For the zeros like that maybe make it 1 or 5.

*edit* with a penalty column in the points, you could even have a scale of penalties if the violation is deemed severve by the series director. Full throttle inches past a safety crew, running a 350 instead of a 305 or timing etc doesn't match your dyno sheet, Intentially taking someone out, etc. is a penalty of the full 100 points in addition to whatever else is currently done.

[michaelmosty]

I just don't like the fact that if you don't miss a race then a "dropable" zero is not even a slap on the wrist.
If we dictate a specific point deduction it will be a tough penalty but still won't kill the entire year.

I guess I'm confused. Are you saying we deduct more than 100 points?

Isnt that what a drop is - a droppable score that has a maximum 100 point value.

Give me an example.
I think on certain instances the deduction should be far less than 100 points.

Take weighing for example.
I weigh my car before 90% of the sessions. I weigh before qual to know how much gas to put in and alot of times I weigh before the race. The only time I don't weigh is if I know how much gas I burned in the previous session and do the math for the next session.
I thought the scales at MSRH at the first event were spot on. I always plan to be 10-15 lbs. heavy and that is what I was. Do I think it is fair that a competitor gets a DQ for "pushing it close" and coming up 2 lbs. light? NO.
I think that individual still should be punished but not to the extent of a DQ and a zero. I also don't think it should be a dropable zero. This IMO is far too light a penalty. I understand the instance at the first event this year and completely agree with the "addendum" to the rule for 2010. Do I want to see it happen this way moving forward? Absolutely not!!

In the Michael Mosty perfect world I would like to see a penalty that is harsh but not destroy an individuals entire season. Something to the effect of a 25 point penalty for a weight infraction.

[GlennCMC70]

So in place of a non-droppable DQ you want a non-droppable score w/ a 50% point reduction tied to it. or something like that.

Say I came up 10lbs light. I finished 1st. 100 points for the win, but I only get 50 of those points and that score is non-droppable. Do I have that right? This wouldbe for a first offence. 2nd offence is a 0 and is non-droppable.

Something along those lines?

[michaelmosty]

Something like that.
I could also see it like this:
The points for the race become a dropable zero with a 25 point (or 50 oint) penalty.
I don't think the individual should be able to keep their score for the race if they were under weight, but they should also have a penalty for the infraction in addition to the dropable zero.

[GlennCMC70]

Isnt the end result of mine and your idea the very same?

A zero you drop w/ another 50 point reduction is pretty close to a 50 point reduction to a score you cant drop.

[David Love AI27]

Something to think about... not a jab at JW but just the facts:

Had JW made it to Hallett, he most probably would have taken both poles and finished ahead of Gary and LiiR... just sayin' The DQ would have been a non issue...

Missing a ellow flag because you are in a battle and you can't see the flag station is an error and is a gray area, connecting a strut brace too close to roll bar mounting point is violating a "black and white" rule...

Human error should be given more leaway over a direct violation of a rule... just my 2 cents....

[GlennCMC70]

Back on topic.
There appears to be more changes in the points for CMC. Stand by.

Also, the season points have not been ruled official yet.

[RichardP]

connecting a strut brace too close to roll bar mounting point is violating a "black and white" rule...


Except that he built the car years before a few words were changed in a sentence to make his car illegal. Him missing the subtle change sounds a bit like the human error you mention...

Richard P.

[GlennCMC70]

Back on topic - again.....
Points sheet attachment updated to correct for an error in breaking a tie for 2nd in CMC. Season points ties are broken by overall points first, then by number of wins.
Sorry for the error.

[GlennCMC70]

connecting a strut brace too close to roll bar mounting point is violating a "black and white" rule...


Except that he built the car years before a few words were changed in a sentence to make his car illegal. Him missing the subtle change sounds a bit like the human error you mention...

Richard P.

There is a redlined version of the rules posted along w/ a list of rules modified each year when the rules are released. Human error yes, subtle.... not so much.

[RichardP]

There is a redlined version of the rules posted along w/ a list of rules modified each year when the rules are released. Human error yes, subtle.... not so much.


We are going to have to agree to disagree on that.


From the new rules announcement posted by Al:



The 2010 CMC rules are posted in our rules section and will be on the national site shortly!!! Thanks to everyone that submitted their thoughts and to our directors for taking the time to discuss and decide how to go on each. I wanted to take a little time to explain the reasons for the changes, as well as some logic around the things that were submitted but that we didn’t accept into the rules. So, in order of appearance in the rules:
- We established all directors as equals other than the Chief National position. It just makes more sense this way, since all regions have a right to be represented in the decision process. We’ll still volunteer folks to help at the track, but our intent is to have a director in every region.
- We moved the penalty text from the driver’s infraction section down to the points section. This will reduce confusion around what constitutes a zero drop DQ.
- The dyno certification section got a little bit of cleanup, but no fundamental change in purpose.
- We added an option for running a diagonal across the roof in T-top and convertible cars instead of a straight bar down the center. This should be easier to retrofit and actually makes the whole structure stronger.
- We are allowing CMC2 3rd gens to run an LT1. This is not “instead of” resolving the TPI issue, as we are still going strong with that testing, rather it is another option which might make a lot more sense for some folks.
- We are increasing the minimum weight of 99-04 Fords that opt for an aluminum block or a 302. These engine choices result in much less engine mass, resulting in a balance advantage. This same logic was applied to the LS1 cars, so it makes sense to be consistent.
- We’re adding a class designator on the front and rear glass to help people identify the class and reduce out of class racing.
- We’ve modified the chassis brace rule to close a loophole that could result in what amounts to a true “through the firewall” cage. This is a cost reduction measure to keep folks from feeling the need to spend incremental money on chassis stiffness.
- We’re allowing C6 PBR calipers where C5s were allowed since for some reason these are cheaper.
- Of course we incorporated the items that were in the tech bulletin around CMC2.
.


I wouldn't have gotten that his car was illegal from that description. I very much consider that subtle.

The redlined version was promised for later and supposedly it was posted later. I never saw it and it certainly isn't available now.


Richard P.

[mitchntx]

Human error should be given more leaway over a direct violation of a rule... just my 2 cents....

And then we are right back to gray areas ...

Because Glenn and I fight all the time and it pisses Al off, do I get less leeway than Randy does because Al and Randy work together?

Working around the rules leads to more issues.

If the rules are not what everyone wants, then lobby to change the rule, instead of multiple interpretations.

I still stand on the ground that a violation is a violation.

If I'm too lazy to read the rules and get caught doing something illegal, whether it be by accident or not, it's not the rule's fault ... it's not the director's fault ... it's my fault.

[RichardP]

So, Jeff’s car was illegal, black and white, per the current CMC rules. Jeff was responsible for reading, knowing, and making sure that his car complied 100% to these rules. He failed on that and that’s not fair to the other competitors who do show up and compete with a 100% legal car. He should have been penalized for his non-compliance and been required to correct the issue. I think we are all good on that. However, there does seem to be a bit of question on the level of penalty handed down.



As for a DQ being a season ending deal, your right. But w/ 4-5 drops per season, some guys will take the chance to only get caught less than 4-5 times and use those for their drops. Not something we want. So the idea was to "make it hurt" so the penalty for one offence was far worse than the reward if not caught.


I agree with this. If there is no effective penalty, people will push the bounds. It’s a risk/reward thing.

On the other hand, Jeff’s case doesn’t seem to fall under this. When he welded the subframe connectors on, did he have in his mind that the extra performance benefit of the intermediate spot welds was worth the small chance that he would be caught and penalized? I don’t know the answer but I have a pretty strong opinion. I just don’t see a risk/reward payoff here. I’m guessing he had no idea that his car was illegal and if he did he would have corrected the problem. Again, his fault 100%.

So what other rules are people violating and what penalties are being handed out for these infractions? At a minimum, I have noted multiple infractions of CMC rules 7.2.2 and 7.2.3. I was asked by Todd to help with tech at an event earlier in the year and handed Todd a list of vehicles in violation of one or both of these two rules (non-compliances by 3.5 of the CMC rules). The current CMC rules as written require a non-droppable DQ for these violations. I do not believe any penalties were handed out for these violations.

Actually, looking through the event photos from Eagles Canyon (I didn’t make the event because I was instructing at TWS), it seems like there were still vehicles in violation of these rules.

[As a frame of reference, in my engineering judgment, I believe that the performance benefit between Jeff’s rule violation and the violations I listed above are of the same order of magnitude. That’s my opinion, of course. ]

We are either going to follow the rules or we aren’t. I think it’s great that we are following the rules and checking for non-compliance. If we follow the rules, the penalties for violations need to be fair, reasonable, and most importantly consistent.

Right now, as the rules are written, a sticker violation is a non-droppable DQ offense while “accidently” punting off a competitor so he doesn’t get the points he needs to pass you in the championship is a droppable DQ. Maybe this could be adjusted in next year’s rules.


Richard P.

[Rob Liebbe]

Since rule changes have crept into this conversation, I'll add an observ ation and request. Dave Balingit's DQ at Nationals was due to the fact that he did not catch a rule change and subsequently did not update his car to be in compliance. I think the majority of us at Nationals were surprised by the "class indentifier" sticker rule which changed in June 2010. The air dam/radiator deflector caught at least on competitor off guard at Nationals.

Is there a problem with the rules update system that can and should be addressed. About a week before Nationals I printed out a copy of the CCR and the CMC rules. When I got back from Nationals I happened to notice that one of them had changed. I don't recall which one, but there is a version number on the top of the document in big numbers and it had a higher revision number than the one I printed two weeks earlier. I received no notification of this change other than I happened to be checking the rules at a random time. I assumed that the rules were changed at the off-season and not changed again until next year, but that does not appear to be the case.

My point is that even throughout the middle of the year, the rules change. Are the changes notified to us somehow? Is it on one of the forums? Which one? I can only follow a limited number of forums. If I missed the notification, someone please let me know what forum or e-mail list I need to get on. If this is not happening with any kind of structure so that the competitors know about it, then I request that this be done as soon as possible.

[GlennCMC70]

As a frame of reference, in my engineering judgment, I believe that the performance benefit between Jeff’s rule violation and the violations I listed above are of the same order of magnitude. That’s my opinion, of course.

So how does missing/wrong sized graphics increase/decrease chassis rigidity? I'm honestly cunfused as to how these two hold the same "order of magnitude" w/ regards to on track performance. I do not think I'll ever hear someone say I beat them due to my illegal graphics package. However, I can see how folks would say the car is faster now that I've increased chassis rigidity. Please help me understand.

From what Jeff said, he didnt know his car was that way. He dropped off the sub's w/ the car to the cage builder and it was all done at the same time. I too feel there was minimal gain from the mod (I think it should be legal) and I would do it in a heartbeat if I could.

From past comments you have made, you felt the lexan windows should have resulted in a DQ, no matter how poorly implimented. But in this case, you feel as though the penalty should not be a DQ, even if it was poorly implimented. Do I have that right?

I do think this is exactly what you said -
"So it's OK to have illegal parts if you implement them poorly???"

I'm not trying to be a dick w/ you Richard and I have alot of respect for you, but I need some help seeing your perspective.

[GlennCMC70]

Since rule changes have crept into this conversation, I'll add an observ ation and request. Dave Balingit's DQ at Nationals was due to the fact that he did not catch a rule change and subsequently did not update his car to be in compliance. I think the majority of us at Nationals were surprised by the "class indentifier" sticker rule which changed in June 2010. The air dam/radiator deflector caught at least on competitor off guard at Nationals.

Is there a problem with the rules update system that can and should be addressed. About a week before Nationals I printed out a copy of the CCR and the CMC rules. When I got back from Nationals I happened to notice that one of them had changed. I don't recall which one, but there is a version number on the top of the document in big numbers and it had a higher revision number than the one I printed two weeks earlier. I received no notification of this change other than I happened to be checking the rules at a random time. I assumed that the rules were changed at the off-season and not changed again until next year, but that does not appear to be the case.

My point is that even throughout the middle of the year, the rules change. Are the changes notified to us somehow? Is it on one of the forums? Which one? I can only follow a limited number of forums. If I missed the notification, someone please let me know what forum or e-mail list I need to get on. If this is not happening with any kind of structure so that the competitors know about it, then I request that this be done as soon as possible.

As far as I know, the CMC rules are only updated once a year - in the off season. Al always uses the "Tech Bulitin" post to update mid-year changes.

The CCR on the other hand is totally different. I have complained directly to JWL about this. There is NEVER a notice that the CCR is updated. In fact, when I ask where the change is when mid year updates happen, I cant get an answer. I bet the CCR gets updated 10 times a year.

----Sorry. I just looked and I'm 3 versoins behind and there is a list on the cover page listing what rules were changed. My 2009 copy is not that way, so it seems this is a change for 2010. This is likely something CMC can adopt.

[gt40]

The CCR on the other hand is totally different. I have complained directly to JWL about this. There is NEVER a notice that the CCR is updated. In fact, when I ask where the change is when mid year updates happen, I cant get an answer. I bet the CCR gets updated 10 times a year.IMHO changes to the rules (CCR or series,) need to be published and a notification needs to go our at the same time. It is important to notify everyone of a change to give them as much time ti adapt to the new rules as possible.

Putting a notification on a forum won't work because that means everyone has to check that forum regularly. That's no better than going to the national web site to see of they got updated. Both require action by all the competitors.

Instead, there needs to be an email distribution list that is used ONLY for official rules updates and notifications. At least with that, all the competitor has to do is check their email, which, in this modern age, everyone should be doing at least daily.

If it were two weeks before nationals and I discovered a significant rule change I'd be pretty pissed.

And yes, any change in the rules needs to be CLEARLY identified in the rules document.

[RichardP]

So how does missing/wrong sized graphics increase/decrease chassis rigidity? I'm honestly cunfused as to how these two hold the same "order of magnitude" w/ regards to on track performance. I do not think I'll ever hear someone say I beat them due to my illegal graphics package. However, I can see how folks would say the car is faster now that I've increased chassis rigidity. Please help me understand.


My point is: How do a couple of spot welds along the length of thin/relatively flat/out of plane sheet metal have any measurable effect on the stiffness/performance potential of a fully caged race car? In my engineering opinion, the attachment in question has no ability to react loads in a direction that would have any effect on either the torsional or bending stiffness of the car.

This is certainly not to say that subframe connectors have zero effect or that subframe connectors that attach to the sheetmetal underneath the car couldn’t be designed to have a real effect on the stiffness of a race car.

Since the illegal attachments have, in my opinion, no effect, they have the same performance advantage as missing or incorrect stickers. I.E… none.

Or not.

If I didn’t know that you were in my class, I wouldn’t race you the same way as if I was fighting for position in class. That is the whole point of the sticker rules. This is especially important since there are some people who don’t consistently race in the same class from event to event or race to race.



From past comments you have made, you felt the lexan windows should have resulted in a DQ, no matter how poorly implimented. But in this case, you feel as though the penalty should not be a DQ, even if it was poorly implimented. Do I have that right?

No you apparently don’t get it.

We have one guy who put forth 100% effort in preparing himself and his car, did everything he knew how to do to legally challenge all comers and triumphed in a spectacular and honorable fashion on the racing surface. We call him… disqualified. We have another guy who showed up just to have fun (which I’m OK with) and didn’t prepare himself or his car, didn’t appear to read, understand, or respect the rules by which we race, and had a non-inspiring performance on track. We call him… National Champion. Forever now known as the best of the best among all of the racers who strive for excellence.

Disqualify them both or disqualify neither. The national champion’s issues were noted to him in plenty of time to correct the issues. Had the other schmuck been given the same courtesy, he would be National Champion.

I’m OK with disqualifying Jeff for his violations, but only if everyone else is treated similarly for their violations. Also, if it was a droppable DQ, there would be no discussion here.

Disqualifying for sticker violations is a bit silly so maybe we should let it go if the problem is rectified quickly once noted. Jeff fixed his issue immediately after being notified. He has much more honor over those who went all season without putting forth the effort to correct their issues…


Just to clarify, did you get the theme of “consistency”?


Richard P.

[GlennCMC70]

One thing to point out is the welded area was the pinch weld seam sticking down along side the connector. Plenty of rigidity there.

And at some point change needs to be made to be more consistent (its what was asked as recently as Nationals 2010). The best path is to follow the rules 100% as they are written. But that is more times than not too harsh. Once the written rule is not follwed and we do what we feel is right, it takes us down a path of subjective judgement calls. To get back on track, penalties that do not reflect past penalties will be handed out.

Sometimes the limits in the CMC rules don't make alot of sence. "Why was the limit placed here and not there?" I get asked alot. Sometimes the limit is placed considerably removed from the point in which a gain is measurable. Why? Because it is a much easier position from which to enforce the rules more times than not. This is one such rule. It clearly states in the rules (a rule that has not changed since I have been reading the CMC rules from way back in 2004) that subs can only be welded front and rear. No welding in between those two points. That is where the line has been drawn in the sand.

As far as the rulings from Nationals and your issues w/ them, don't let those reflect on me. I was not there and I do not agree w/ all of the calls made. Al and Todd both know this. But it wasn't my call.

Looking forward to 2011, alot more of these type of calls will be made.
You have an issue w/ the scales not being w/in 30lb of repeatability? I would add 30lbs to your car or run the risk of a DQ.

Just as you say JW's sub's have no measureable effect on track, I too say the 5hp extra my car made on the dyno post season in 2005 had no measureable affect on my cars performance lap time wise. But in reality, my issue did as well as JW's issue. The level of detail required to determine if that is true is the part that is debatable.

Stiffer = better
More HP = faster

The line was drawn 5hp behind me and I was DQ'ed over it.
JW's line was 6 stich welds (about 2-3" in length each) behind him. He too was DQ'ed.

Was he faster because of it? Not so much so that the race results would have changed. But then there we go being subjective again. Did the 3/8" thick lexan w/ lots of 3/8" bolts holding them in w/ each one having a cast aluminum marine air duct in each one make the CMC Champs car lighter? Faster? I feel fairly confident that the answer is no. So it really falls in line w/ the class designators and number size issues. Its wrong, but it hurts no one other then the person doing it.



Your right though. We should just agree to disagree w/ all this.

[Fbody383]

The best path is to follow the rules 100% as they are written. {But} Sometimes the limits in the CMC rules don't make alot of sencs. {And enforcement} is more times than not too harsh. Once the written rule is not follwed and we do what we feel is right, it takes us down a path of subjective judgement calls.

Cut and paste/mix and match are mine. I'm slowly getting to the point of "the rules are the rules" though I sometimes disagree with them.

I DO have a concern that "we" missed JW's subframe connectors and Balingit missed his brace. Especially since I think "we" checked subfame connectors at the first event.



Your right though. We should just agree to disagree w/ all this. Nah; I really think the answer is in the middle. I've had my share of fix-its and STILL don't know for sure if my dash cover is legal for Nationals.

Does it suck to DQ anybody but a cheater? Yes.
Are the majority of rules fairly clear? Yes
Have Directors offered repeatedly to discuss rules concerns? Yes.
Is there room for improvement without upsetting the cart? Yes.

Look at the bright side, the recent events have probably caused, or will cause, everyone to get more familiar with the rules.

[mitchntx]

Look at the bright side, the recent events have probably caused, or will cause, everyone to get more familiar with the rules.

Rookies ... :roll:

[GlennCMC70]

I've had my share of fix-its and STILL don't know for sure if my dash cover is legal for Nationals.

If it was my call alone, the answer would be no. It would also be "no" on a regional level as well. The accomadation made for you has moved the "line in the sand" for at least you if not everyone. If we dont let everyone do what you have done, then we are not being consistant, even if they have the OEM part already.

[Al Fernandez]

Nobody has ever been DQd for aesthetics violations, and that will contninue. Fix it tickets and agreement as to when the issue will correct the problem is sufficient for this.

Any time a technical violation is found outside of post race tech the driver is informed and given the chance to resolve. Some times the issue can be resolved immediately, sometimes it cant. When it cant, there are three options: fun runs until its fixed, waiver until its fixed, fun runs unless all other drivers agree to a waiver until its fixed. We've had all three. The officials determine which option best fits the situation because not all situations are the same. All drivers have the option to challenge an official decision via a request for action / appeal.

Any time a technical violation is found during post race tech there is a penalty. For weight we decided the first time of the season you got a zero and a start from pit lane. For all others you got a DQ.

Once upon a time post race tech would sometimes result in fix it tickets. That went away at nationals and this region followed suit...or the other way around, dont remember. 8)

[mitchntx]

Geez, Al ... you've just validated all the BS that's going on around the country.

So in a nutshell ... ultimately you decide on compliance and penalties.



Any time a technical violation is found outside of post race tech the driver is informed and given the chance to resolve. Some times the issue can be resolved immediately, sometimes it cant. When it cant, there are three options: fun runs until its fixed, waiver until its fixed, fun runs unless all other drivers agree to a waiver until its fixed. We've had all three. The officials determine which option best fits the situation because not all situations are the same. All drivers have the option to challenge an official decision via a request for action / appeal. We've had all three in recent history.


Jeff, forgive me, but I want to see how the above logic tree applied in your case.

Because Jeff had the tools to resolve the issue, he got a DQ.

Had no one had a cut-off wheel at the track, it would have been up to the group to decide.

I hardly see how that is fair and/or applied consisently.

Let's look at other possibilities ...

Jeff didn't have the tools, but some one else did. Jeff said thanks but no thanks I want to fix it correctly in my shop and at home. DQ or no DQ?

Jeff didn't have the tools nor did any one else have or offer tools. DQ or no DQ?

Your logic, Al, exemplifies everything that is wrong with this series. No one knows what to expect or how to be treated.

[Al Fernandez]

Mitch did you miss the "outside of post race tech" part of that statement?

[mitchntx]

No, I saw it, but don't see a difference in penanlties.

So that I completely understand ...

A violation found during tech is a DQ ... a violation found any other time is a fix-it ticket or public vote?

How is that fair and consistent?

[RichardP]

Mitch did you miss the "outside of post race tech" part of that statement?


When are these sessions and how do I sign up for one?


Richard P.

[Al Fernandez]

You got two out of three Mitch... violations that surface outside of post race tech result in either a fix it ticket (waiver determined by the officials) or a vote (maybe a waiver, maybe not, determined by the other drivers) or fun run until its compliant.

I dont understand your question Richard. Glenn, Todd, and I make ourselves available just about all the time. Any time you want any of us to go through items on the car with you we're more than happy to. Hell, at nationals we even had that on the schedule and required people to do a pre race session! Some welcomed it, for some it was like getting a tooth pulled... :lol:

[mitchntx]

You got two out of three Mitch... violations that surface outside of post race tech result in either a fix it ticket (waiver determined by the officials) or a vote (maybe a waiver, maybe not, determined by the other drivers) or fun run until its compliant.


Sorry ... I still don't get it.

A violation is a violation ... period. Either you want to enforce the rules or you don't.

[Fbody383]

I've had my share of fix-its and STILL don't know for sure if my dash cover is legal for Nationals.

If it was my call alone, the answer would be no. It would also be "no" on a regional level as well. The accomadation made for you has moved the "line in the sand" for at least you if not everyone. If we dont let everyone do what you have done, then we are not being consistant, even if they have the OEM part already.

And I respect that ~ the way the rule is currently written.

But we're talking about a part now in limited production that several, including yourself, have commented on as being a potential safety hazard.

If it was $20... heck maybe even $50, I could understand. But it's a $200 part new... brittle when you find them used and SOLELY FOR APPEARANCE IN THE PITS. Crazy that those brushed aluminum block off plates or missing glove box lids are kosher.

When I buy one, I'll just paint it in pink camo.

[GlennCMC70]

The glove box doors/lids will be addressed.

[ShadowBolt]

The glove box doors/lids will be addressed.


$hit!


JJ

[marshall_mosty]

Get ready to start fabbing some OEM Airbag covers boys... Looks like NASA is going "big league"...

[cobra132]

What happened, did I get redirected to an SCCA site???

[Fbody383]

The glove box doors/lids will be addressed.
$hit!
JJ

Cheaper than a *** **** ** * **** ****.

<<self edit>> I didn't want to throw anybody under the bus. Well, not this time.

So we gonna "grandfather" anything or take EVERY car to EVERY aspect of the rules?

We should move this to the Rules Silly Season thread so I can find it later.


What happened, did I get redirected to an SCCA site??? Not unless everybody has to go to a carb.

[GlennCMC70]

The intent has always been there that the only hole in the dash were left from things like HVAC and radio removal. Folks took it too far when the glovebox doors were removed. The airbag panel was always a "well crap" point w/ regards to the Fords. The wording is suposed to get cleaned up to say that any holes left from parts that are legaly (written in the rules) removed need to have cover placed over them.

This issue was pushed when some CMC Direcotrs required the 4th gen to have the interior trim panel between the dash and the windshield in place (remember - rules allow interior trim panels to be removed) saying that it looks bad w/ it removed and the dash should/must have a neat appearance. At the same time allowing other platforms to to remove similare panels and have huge gapping holes in the dash. If one platform needs to appear neat, they all do.

None of this is official and is only as good as the verbal "hand job" given to me at the time. The rules silly season will have to play out in due time.

[BlueFirePony]

<useless post...please ignore....as you were />

[GlennCMC70]

Points are final.