<puts down 8k remote>
<pulls up chair>
<listens intently>
Printable View
<puts down 8k remote>
<pulls up chair>
<listens intently>
Ok, I will stand as Dictator and I proclaim "point bys" or else! :lol:
David has hit a point that I support, a benevelent dictatorship ruling the series by the letter of the CCR and AI revision is what is needed. Once we all come to common ground on any gray areas the CCR does not specifically bring up such as grid arrangements, ONE person should run things as dictator. Now as a dictator and to be fair to the group, that person should NOT be a participant in the series or be a friend of any of the competitors....that's not his job.
In the words of rodney king...why can't we just all get along? or just get in the cars and race and race hard!
I can't wait for TWS....I am bouncing in my seat!!!!!
Throttle back Turbo... there can be only one Sherriff in this here town. 8) :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by AI#97
Not sure why I just fell out of my chair laughing ... but I did ....Quote:
Originally Posted by CMC17
:lol:
Who the hell told you about my new turbo motor?! Somebody has been snooping around the garage I guess.... :?Quote:
Originally Posted by CMC17
I'm going to try and cover a few points that have been brought up.
1. Directors at an event - There are two directors for AI/CMC - Todd and myself. It's been that way since 2003. If only one director is present at an event, that's who is running the show for the weekend.
Hallett is the only event a regular series director wasn't present - ever. I was there in the morning, but a family emergency called me back to Dallas. To complain about a director not being present for this event in particular, based on the circumstances, doesn't give any justice to Todd or I.
There are 2 directors for a reason - 1 person can't do the job alone, and there has to be a contingency when one director can't make an event.
Richard Pedersen and David Donovan were acting series directors that weekend, as they've been a huge asset in the past with series items. You all owe them a "thanks" for their support.
MSR-C in April was a tough one due to NASA Texas getting a handle on contact. Was it perfect? No. Did we all learn a valuable lesson? Yes - how do we know? Contact issues have dropped dramatically since.
MSR-H in May wasn't rough at all from a series perspective ( tech issues of Nomex socks and the fines aside ), IMO, with the exception of a few people being very dissatisfied about having to weigh after qualifying. For those who thought it was pure BS the AIX cars had to weigh after qualifying on Saturday...here is a quote from the 2006 AI/X rules:
Section 8.4 - Impound
Using the argument "We've never done that before!' is irrelevant. We will continue to change things up regarding tech inspections from time to time to keep everyone on their toes. It's the right thing to do for the series.Quote:
All finishing drivers in both classes must proceed to impound immediately after any race or qualifying session unless released by a NASA official. Failure to do so may result in penalties being imposed on the driver. It is purely the driver’s responsibility to report to impound with the vehicle and vehicle’s logbook at the proper time. If the vehicle is unable to report to impound, the driver must report to impound and remain until released by a NASA official.
2. Dictatorship - interesting point of view. In the past, when we ( the series directors ) have made a decision/decisions that is, in our opinion, in the best interest for the series, but is unpopular amongst a few racers, a vote has been demanded. That has caused our ship to veer off course when we are working so hard to steer in the right direction for the series.
So....some want a dictator, some want to vote on everything. Makes it confusing, huh?
As to the comment of the directors alientating some drivers - each racer has their own reasons for racing/not racing. We do our best to encourage each person to come and race with us, but fully realize that we aren't going to keep every single racer 100% satisfied.
It's unfortunate, and it bothers Todd and I greatly, but that's the reality. We aren't giving up, and we aren't leaving as directors.
To some specific points/people now:
David Armstrong - it's clear you feel I've done a very poor job as a series director. It's unfortunate you feel that way, but I disagree with your assessment. I'm always open for a phone call to discuss - that goes for ANY competitor. Has since 2003.
Matt White - as I alluded to above, we've worked hard to make the right decisions for the series, even when that means it won't be the right decision for a particular competitor. We have to keep an eye on what's right for the group as a whole, which is what keeps the series strong, and brings in new cars/drivers. As I've mentioned before, the CCR's and the AI rules do not cover running the series - that's what you have series directors for.
Whoa Adam! Not intending to push buttons here but asking questions only. The dictatorship comment was meant as a suggestion once we iron out the gray areas with a vote. From that point on, lead with an iron fist of consistancy.
sorry if it sounded like I was bitching... Heck, i wasn't even there to have anything to complain about!!! :lol:
Adam,
I don't think you have done a poor job. You have a thankless job. I think things have grown out of hand. There was not enough control in the beginning when the series was small. Now that NASA has pushed a bunch of cars into the series, there is anarchy.
I don't understand why it should take complaining before change is made in a positive direction. Anticipation of a problem followed by a smooth transition keeps everyone happy.
example:
1. Impound: techs should tell everybody what is going on and allow us to rehydrate. What is the need for secrecy? That is my only complaint. Impounds are good. Plain and simple. It keeps the field honest. I don't have an issue with teching cars.
2. Inverted starts: I don't know how many times I have heard you are not racing the field. Why then put AIX behind AI? Why not allow us to start in front of AI? There are less AIX cars for the AI group to pass. You can bet if I don't feel like keeping pace with the front AI cars, I will let them by me. I have done it at MSRC during the 40 minute race. No problem with pride to wave someone by me.
Those are my only complaints. I don't care about the politics of this series. I don't care who is running this ship. I want to race. I want to race in a relatively safe environment. Added risk is not necessary.
I have never cared about the rules of CMC or AI. That is why I moved my car to AIX. I don't want the headache of those two classes. I want to do what I want to to my car and for the most part be left alone. I have that freedom in AIX.
Again, I don't care about the politics. I just want a safe, organized, and consistant race weekend. That is it.
Sincerely,
David Armstrong
I'm not going to comment on the other great stuff you wrote in the message, but I want to comment back on the AIX weigh in at MSR-H.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Ginsberg
The bit about AIX having to weigh at MSR-H was BS and I believe you heard that from a number of people that day, including a few women. So that alone is a perception in your eyes, and you and I both know we never see eye to eye and probably never will. You have always and I mean always said everyone must weigh or top 5 and we all are usually pretty good about coming to the scales. But when AIX got to the scales in the past events AIX was always turned away.
So when David (AIX) did not show up to the scales he gets DQ’d, that was total BS!
You did that exact same thing the next day, second time you wanted everyone to weigh, and David came over and to the scales you said just AI and CMC only. You were holding the white board that said “everyone”!
Please Note: I had no problem with me getting DQ'd for not showing up after qual. I understand and know I should have come in. I was just too busy working on my car and trying to work out issues and just didn't think about it.
No, it wasn't. He was told multiple times on the grid that all cars were required to weigh after qualifying. All cars, including AIX. It's unfortunate he didn't come to the scales, but it's his responsibility to do so when directed by a Series and/or NASA official.Quote:
Originally Posted by chicane23
And, for clarification, only is qual time was thrown out. He was not DQ'd from the race.
He was NOT told including AIX on grid....that is a total lie! We were told everyone must weigh after qual.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Ginsberg
So how do you explain the screw up at the end when you were holding a sign that said everyone must weigh? And when David showed up you said no just AI/CMC top 5 and your board didn't say anything about just AI/CMC????????
what the reason for AIX to hit the scales? no HP:wieght. no minimum wieght. i'm a little confused here.
Glenn,
Yeah, there is a minimum race weight. 2650 with driver. My car is no where near this minimum.
It was my fault for missing the scales at MSRH. I was told at the grid by someone just before qualifying. And it is my fault for forgetting about it after the session was over. I will not make that mistake again. I apologized to Adam for getting upset at that event.
J.G.,
Please let that issue go. I am not upset about it anymore. Lesson learned.
Sincerely,
David Armstrong
FYI: I thought it was going to happen again at Hallett. I came off the track and went straight to impound. There was no one at impound. So I drove over to my pit, only to look back and see NASA officials running toward impound. If I had been DQ'd for that, I would have lost my temper and never found it again. :?
Not a problem I will drop it DA.
I would have never made a remark if the instigator didn't bring it up! ;-)
Understood.
Sincerely,
DA
I think that radios in our cars would solve a bunch of those problems. Once the qualifying/race is over, NASA could brodcast AND have a sign (belt and suspenders) on who is going to impound.
Now, we just need to find a way for NASA and Boudy to work out the radio thing...
Whoa..."Adam the Terrible" really jumped out there with his dictator outfit on, didn't he?!?!?! :lol:
You guys are coming in at a "10" and I need you at a "2". Let's kick it down a few notches and try to talk rationally because I think it's obvious there are some raw nerves exposed right now.
David, I don't mean to make an example of you...but I'm going to use your quote to try and explain something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garbage
In a nutshell, this is a prime example of some of the frustration on the part of the directors. Let's all put our reasonable hats on now and think about the "AIX cars to the scales" order by the Dictator.
1) There IS a minimum weight for AIX.
2) Everyone knew DA's car was no-where near 2650 last year (when there weren't any other AIX cars running) and he was never req'd to scale his car. It didn't make sense to.
3) This year there looks to be some great competition in AIX and car count is picking up.
4) DA's car had an extreme make-over and showed up to the event with bad-ass carbon-fiber nose, doors and decklid for his first event of the season.
5) DA knows his car isn't anywhere near the limit (because he's checked) and many are frustrated why an AIX car should be made to go to impound....OK, but his competitors and the series dictators don't know if he is anywhere near the limit of the rules now....until he reports to the scales!
#5 is what I want to make my point. We are having a number of issues right now because individuals (all of us) are of the belief that "I" know what is right and why can't everyone else see that as clearly as I can?!?! "The sooner you come around to my way of thinking the better this series will be." This is leading to a lot of frustration on the part of racers AND directors. We're not COMMUNICATING and we're not COMPROMISING....and we're going to fix it.
In order to fix it, we will need to all put our baggage down and look forward with a clean slate and big picture perspective such as was the case with #1-5 above. Directors need to consider racer's needs....and racers need to consider Director's needs...for the general interest of the series.
We'll get there...
-=- Todd
Todd/Adam:
Sounds like things are getting closer to resolution via communications but I also still see some of the examples where the info gets lost or confused and some angst sets in.
Example from AG's post above:
It's not "irrelevant" to the participant. It's a change that may have been unexpected or not understood. Either way, calling it irrelevant is not the best word choice IMHO. Taking an extra 5 seconds to explain that "Hey, it's the start of the season and your AIX car hasn't been on the official NASA TX scales to ensure you are above the AIX min weight" would have probably handled the issue and helped the competitor understand the reason for the change.Quote:
Using the argument "We've never done that before!' is irrelevant.
Todd, your post is excellent as usual but you also say:
Seems to me that the very thing that causes frustration for the competitors is causing frustration for the directors - COMMUNICATION ABOUT CHANGE.Quote:
In a nutshell, this is a prime example of some of the frustration on the part of the directors.
Now we've picked up on a new buzzword, CONSISTENCY. I too like the sounds of it and I'm sure you do as well. But we can't be perfectly consistent when there are variables like car count, missing equipment, short staffing etc. which I'm sure all the competitors understand. So, that causes the need for change. I think we need to focus on the COMMUNICATION ABOUT CHANGE in addition to our efforts to find CONSISTENCY and most of these bumps should smooth out IMHO.
Now, given that, I'd like to broach a few more topics that I'd like to see resolved with NASA TX on race weekends:
1.) Mixing Group 5 and 8 - I like racing with Mr. Rierson but TBH I thought we had achieved a level of car count that enabled AIX/AI/AIV/CMC to run alone. Has that CHANGED? I very much do not want to race with ASC/Corvette/Porsche/Honda. Just my preference.
2.) Inverted starts - Did something CHANGE? Does it need to CHANGE? AIX behind AI or not - I never saw an official answer? TBH, I dislike inverted starts, and it seems to me that most of our incidents happen during them.
3.) Scales - Maybe we can go over again a CONSISTENT plan for weighing cars? Top 5 in each class after race 1 and 3 every race weekend? Something easily remembered by the competitors and directors? Also, can we get a commitment from NASA TX that the scales will be at every event? They are very important to CMC/AI rules.
4.) Race Schedule - Here's my biggie. I think we need a consistent date for release of the schedule (4 days prior, 5 days, pick a time) and not have it CHANGE so much? Also, time between rounds should be 1.5 hours IMHO, is that possible?
5.) VOTE or POLL - Personal again, seems we get "asked" to take a poll and then, regardless of the results, NASA TX makes a decision. Either don't bother with the poll and tell us you'd like some "input" before you make your decision or stick with the results of the vote.
I'm still pretty steamed that I voted for 4 x 20 but AFTER NASA TX decided to do 3 races at Hallett (based upon the poll results) I looked at the schedule and decided to quit wrenching on my car only to find out a day later they flip-flopped back to 4 x 20 due to possible temp issues in OK in June. When did Heat become a revelation or surprise?
Again, CONSISTENT vs. CHANGE vs. COMMUNICATIONS helps folks understand the who/what/why of the decisions made. OK, I'm off my soap box.
As usual, excellent points, Mike
On this point I thought it was crystal clear ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Bell
We had voted and it was decided that we would do a 40 minute race on Sunday in order to get everyone out by a reasonable time.
The weekend prior, the heat caused a LOT of car and driver issues with 30 minute sessions. That same heat was forcast for NASA weekend.
So, in the eyes of safety, it was decided to make it 2 20s on Sunday.
A couple days later, a front comes barrelling through and cooled everything off. Changing AGAIN would have made a bad situation even worse.
I agree that consistency or the lack of surprises should be paramount. But I also realize that some flexibility ON BOTH SIDES has to be factored in to account for unforseen circumstances.
As far as Rierson and the gang running with us ....
Car count at Hallett was disturbingly low. Only 3 run groups. The Group 8 cars run about the same times as the faster CMC cars. And they have too much mass to put on track with the Legends. There was only 2 or 3 of them. I think it was a logical move. I don't see this single incident as a trend, rather a case by case decision.
I recall Rierson coming up to Glenn and letting him know that he wouldn't be factor in his race with Jeff or Corey. He was aware of potential and adequately communicated that.
Of course, from your position, on the couch drinking a Corona, you couldn't have known that. So, on paper, it might not be such a grand thing. But the reality of it was it was a non-factor.
JMHO
Mitch, it was Bud-Light but you nailed it. :)
We like the flexibility of NASA TX yet yearn for consistency. That's got to be fun for those running the show, lol.
Why not just drink water? 8)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Bell
I think I'll have a home brewed creme ale this evening while watching my lovely bride mow the grass.
Don't even get me started on this one.... This BS decision, as if heat was an unknown safety item in the middle of f'n JUNE, to make a poll, have a majority vote of 3 races and then change it 4 days prior to a race is MF'ing stupid. And yes, I got fucked. Had it stayed 3 races, I would probably still have a very narrow lead in the points race (which strengthend my decision), now I am 56 points in the hole barely clinging to second ahead of Mr. Lyons....Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Bell
My point over all is that as we all agree there is a serious lack of consistancy. The bigger problem is that quick, short sided decisions keep getting made to "catch Up" on what should already be the "Norm". The bigger problem is that we have been sitting around "discussing" this for what, 4 months now since I have been around and it seems it was a sore spot long before I got here. How difficult is it to take notes, pull them together, write a plan and make it happen and stick to it over and over and over??? Honestly?! From my newbie vantage point, the folks running the series are running it as an after thought and they only really begin to think about the next event MAYBE 4 days prior to loading up the equipment and heading out.....I mean really, HOW ON EARTH do you NOT bring scales to an AI/CMC event???? That's like driving cross country and leaving all 4 tires at home... or how about conducting a thorough CMC tech inspection and NOT know the f'n rule book....?!
Part of me is glad I chose not to attend Hallet because I think if I had, I would be soured 10x more than I already am....even if I had been successful and still on top in the points. From what I have read here in the last 4 days, it seems we made ZERO progress forward, and just took a huge giant leap backward. We have settled into a pattern of a good event, then a bad event, good, bad......that means TWS should be good, but MSR-H will end the season on a bad note.....
I will close with this..........CONSISTANCY!
thanks again! Have a wonderful day and smile! :?
For the record, I'm not saying it was a BS decision and I'm not saying anyone is MF'ing stupid.
I said I was still pretty steamed by the decision. No further than that for me, thanks.
Well, that was not meant to offend or include MB on my side....but I have said it and I meant it. Hate me for it if you will but something has to be said if we are going to make a change. Being passive, being agressive and being an a-hole hasn't worked to date......so I am open to suggestions on how to change things......maybe the suggestion is that NOTHING will change and the tide will come and go.....? :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Bell
I like inverted starts and lamps...
I totally agree with all the points on Consistency...however....there has to be some element of surprise when it comes to tech.
If we consistently tell folks we'll only weigh cars on R1 & R3......guess what...R2 & R4 results now become suspect.
If we consistently tell folks we'll only weigh certain cars, then the other car results now become suspect. Trust me...it happens...I can tell you stories.
If we consistently don't weigh after qualifying...guess what....pole positions now become suspect.
For 90% of the items, like race writeups, weekend schedules, driver meetings, etc. Consistency is King. However, some things in regards to tech do need to be changed up to keep everyone honest.
-=- T
i agree w/ you on those points todd. no reason to tell people when they will not get caught cheeting.
....
Could we be told "before" we go out that we will have to report to scales so we can have water waiting to help "beat the heat"???
It's "I love lamp.".....get it right!!! :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by donovan
What's funny is that inverted starts are no longer part of this hijacked thread!!!
how could I mess that up... damn it...
That's alright, I ate your chocolate squirel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by donovan
I am going to hide the tridents so you don't have to go into hiding from the law! :wink:
You don't have any hand grenades do you?! :shock: I could just picture you dropping them out of your car at me on the inverted starts!!! :wink: :lol:
Do you "guys" need to get a room?Quote:
Originally Posted by donovan
:oops: :?
Nah! We are just doing our worst at trying to break up all the bitching and complaining with a little tasteless humor.....should we change movies now?Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchntx