Salt Cat

[Stan Back]

Tom --

As you know, the Rule Book is addressed at least annually.

I believe most of the problems come from the fact that the SCTA is more open than other associations.  The Rule Book is written from the point of view of telling competitors what they can't do in a class, rather than what they MUST do.

You and I have seen this problem surface before on this forum -- where a newbie ask about what rear end (or tire) he MUST use -- or something along that line.

(Reading this back over, I'm not sure I've made my point clear.  What I'm trying to say is the Rule Book is not a set of specs that must be adhered to -- like having your body and chassis offset .060".)

So problems come up when new ideas have not been officially endorsed are presented -- especially in the Vintage Categories.

Stan Back

[jdincau]

Keep in mind that this has NEVER been done before for ANY of the countless other incorrectly classed entries over the years.  The board decided to follow the precedence of not allowing cars to change class after the fact as if the car had magically ran in the correct class to begin with.  You have to physically run in the class to get the record.  No paper work racing.

At the same meeting:
• Car 433 Classification Issue – Car 433 a 1968 Camero (CGALT) has been running in the wrong class for the past 3
years. The original owner passed away (and used to do all the paperwork) and the current team is still running it in his
name. It should be running in the GALT class, not classic. Mike Waters made a motion to swap the car into the correct
class and to recalculate the points gained to date. The entry will be able to keep accumulating line up points. Seconded:
Steve Davies. 1 Against. Motion Passed.

[saltcatracing]

Keep in mind that this has NEVER been done before for ANY of the countless other incorrectly classed entries over the years.  The board decided to follow the precedence of not allowing cars to change class after the fact as if the car had magically ran in the correct class to begin with.  You have to physically run in the class to get the record.  No paper work racing.

At the same meeting:
• Car 433 Classification Issue – Car 433 a 1968 Camero (CGALT) has been running in the wrong class for the past 3
years. The original owner passed away (and used to do all the paperwork) and the current team is still running it in his
name. It should be running in the GALT class, not classic. Mike Waters made a motion to swap the car into the correct
class and to recalculate the points gained to date. The entry will be able to keep accumulating line up points. Seconded:
Steve Davies. 1 Against. Motion Passed.

Amazing...simply amazing...

[desotoman]

Keep in mind that this has NEVER been done before for ANY of the countless other incorrectly classed entries over the years.  The board decided to follow the precedence of not allowing cars to change class after the fact as if the car had magically ran in the correct class to begin with.  You have to physically run in the class to get the record.  No paper work racing.

At the same meeting:
• Car 433 Classification Issue – Car 433 a 1968 Camero (CGALT) has been running in the wrong class for the past 3
years. The original owner passed away (and used to do all the paperwork) and the current team is still running it in his
name. It should be running in the GALT class, not classic. Mike Waters made a motion to swap the car into the correct
class and to recalculate the points gained to date. The entry will be able to keep accumulating line up points. Seconded:
Steve Davies. 1 Against. Motion Passed.

For General Information,

I just went back through the El Mirage Results for car 433. From 2008 to present at El Mirage, they are not even close to a record. On a 200 record the best they have run is around 180 and I am rounding that up. This car in this time frame has not set any records at El Mirage.

By recalculating their existing speeds on the new class record which is higher at 205 they are going to lose starting line position points.

Tom G.

[1212FBGS]

yep.... and if i remember correctly Nate voice question about precedence for comparison in the salt cat issue and Waters questioned Tom Evans about the Indian that got stripped of 3 years worth of records last year.....  Amazing and painful are both fitting words, some people at these meeting realize these kind of decisions hinder progress and hurt credibility, others are there to just punish and bust balz.... In my opinion the board should have followed the committee's recommendation.... but all this is set in stone and no going back.... Salt Cat is above all that petty game playing and is coming back to kick some records  
see ya there
Kent

[4-barrel Mike]

I don't have a dog in the fight, but from what I have read on this forum, I understood that entry of the wrong class on your entry form was absolute loss of points.

http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,7482.0.html

Mike

[saltcatracing]

Kent - You got it!  We're are all getting excited about our 3rd trip to the Salt - this year!  Yesterday the guys checked the compression in all of the cylinders, #8 - not so good.  So they pulled the engine this morning and confirmed #8 cylinder is done!  Upwards and onwards, they're cleaning her, fixing her up and we should be tuning by Monday - with time to spare before we head to the World Finals to tackle the two classes we have our sites on!  Hum...which head will we use?  We have three you know...the green head...the Henry Head...and the red head.  Just taunting - there is no way the Henry Head will be on the block - we're saving that for another day   Looking forward to seeing you on the Salt!

[1212FBGS]

right on buddy.... you guyz know what its gonna take to get the job done this time and hammer down 
See ya there
Kent

[NathanStewart]

You guys are talking apples and oranges and coming up with banana splits.

As it was already pointed out, the issue with car 433 was specific to El Mirage and had nothing to do with a record being set.  They had been running in the wrong class and needed to recalc their points so they'd have the correct starting line position.  They could have entered their Camaro as a streamliner if they wanted to.  It doesn't having any bearing whatsoever unless they qualify for a record.

I don't have a dog in the fight, but from what I have read on this forum, I understood that entry of the wrong class on your entry form was absolute loss of points.

http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,7482.0.html

Mike

Mike, you and your dog read it wrong.  The rule says that if someone were to go out and qualify for a record (keep in mind this is El Mirage we're talking about) but be entered in the wrong class then that qualifying run would be looked at as if it never happened.  No points, no record.  You can't switch the class designation on the paper work after the fact to make good and pretend like you ran in the class you meant to run in.  Like I said, you have to physically run in the right class to get the record.  The old way was that you were done for the weekend if you did this.  Someone apparently thought this was a little harsh so now you can re-pay, re-number, re-tech, re-run, re-qualify, and re-certify if you're really so set on setting a record in the right class.  The points race is a big deal for some.

Those of you with a discerning eye will recognize that the above is exactly the same situation as the Salt Cat ordeal.  Same deal, two different venues, same basic rule.  Wow, imagine that.  Consistency. 

I personally don't understand where the expectation for the SCTA to bend its rules and break protocol when a mistake is made comes from.  If you don't like being part of an organization that actually respects the integrity of the rules that they live by then you might want to find somewhere else to race.  Apparently, from the comments I've seen on this thread, it sounds to me like there is another sanctioning body that will let anything fly to make their participants happy.  Sounds like a racers utopia to me.  No rules.  Free records for everyone.  Everyone gets a trophy.  No such thing as a mistake.  Nothing but back pats and atta boys for everyone! 

That last part was sarcasm by the way for those that couldn't read the sarcastic tone in my voice.   

Nonetheless, best of luck to the Salt Cat guys.  Go get 'em.

[RichFox]

I think part of the point you are ignoring here is, who made the mistake? The Salt Cat guys realizing they might be getting into a grey area inquired of a very well known and knowledgeable SCTA official. Said official gave them what I think was the correct interpretation of the rules and only then did they act upon it. To the tune of lots of work and not a small mount of entry fees. I don't think the board would have been out of line backing up a very hard working official by saying "He was wrong, but no one is harmed by treating these runs as if you had received correct direction." But the Salt Cat guys seem to have accepted the ruling and moved on. So tell me, where is this magic association where everybody wins?

[NathanStewart]

Rich, you highlight something that I think could be another problem that might easily be changed. 

First, procedure.  The Salt Cat guys admittedly got the okay from Dan to run this head in XO while in impound a year ago.  Do you think talking to Dan about a specific classing issue while he's running around impound at the end of a long hot day is a good idea?  They presented only a verbal description of the head with no photos or drawings or anything else that shows beyond verbal wordage what they were talking about.  Wouldn't a better way of going about this have been to talk to someone on the vintage engine committee?  Wouldn't it have been better to send someone a few pictures showing exactly what was done to the head?  Or better yet have someone physically look at the head before a decision is made?

Second, expectations.  Is it fair to expect one person to be all knowing of all potential engine and body class combination and make faultless decisions when certify a record?  Dan is not a robot or machine.  Dan is a human like the rest of us and like the rest of us he can make mistakes.  Why do we constantly rely on only one person to do what should be done by two or three people?  Why is Dan, the record certifier, expected to be the go-to man for classing questions?  That's what the committees are for. 

I'm not trying to fault Dan for this.  I see fault in the system.  Why not have a representative of each committee be present to verify that a record setting vehicle is in fact legal for the class that it's entered in?  If there's a tie vote, the Committee Chair or Board can make the final decision.  Then no one person can be at fault for a mistake.  We have the committees.  Why don't we use them?

Why does the record certifier have to be present at road's end at 5 am to let everyone on the salt?  Anyone can do that.  Why does the one record certifier need to be in impound all day?  Anyone could do that too.  In my mind, the only thing the record certifier should be doing is certifying records.  So, we have one person who's more or less expected to work a 14-18 hour day for a week straight out on the salt in the middle of August.  Considering all of that, I'm surprised more mistakes haven't been made.  Maybe we should re-think how we do this because it's probably not fair to have all of this on one person and I think it's an unrealistic expectation that the SCTA should have to bend the rules when mistakes are made.  IMO There is an easy solution to this simple problem.

[saltfever]

I have worked with Dan and have seen him make more decisions that affect people’s wallets in one day than I make in one year! He rarely makes a mistake but Dan isn’t perfect and Dan knows that. I have seen Dan approve a record only to have a competitor protest it. Dan, in consultation with others, later upheld the protest and removed the record from Dave Freiburger, Hot Rod Magazine. It didn’t even have go to the board or a committee. It ended there at Speed Week. Mostly because Dave, like the Salt Cat guys, was above it all. These guys are racers. They have confidence in them selves and will succeed.

The biggest mistake here is asking Dan in the first place. XO is essentially “stock-like” porting. XXO is for all the other stuff. Lets get real. Converting a 12 port head to 16 ports and expecting to stay in a stock-like configuration . . . that is a stretch. As Nathan said, finding Dan in impound during the busiest time of year and expecting him to make an infallible decision on such a significant modification is naïve. If you are “pushing the envelope” or spending significant money or time, at least take Dan’s opinion as a starting point and use it to get further approvals.

The other issue is who wants any single person to have absolute dictatorial authority over setting records. If there ever was a question I would want an dedicated, experienced, committee voting. I would expect a ying and yang of opinions. Hopefully, with the majority on my side! Dan is really an interpreter of the rule book. A text that has been crafted by hundreds of people, time, and tradition. It is unfair to expect him to bat 1000 on every nuance, page and paragraph. But in particular the rule book is a catalyst for creativity in thousands of people. It takes many committees to channel all that creativity into an acceptable outcome . . . not a single person.

[RichFox]

I am in no way faulting Dan. Dan gave what he could, under the circumstances. An opinion. Not a decision. As it happend I think Dan's opinion was the correct one. Since the other two Vintage engine classes allow additional ports, it seems that in the interest of continuity within the rules, XO would be the same as XF and V4F. But that was not the committee or boards ruling. So be it. I do agree with the Vintage committee that the Salt Cat guys did what they thought was right. And it seems were lead to believe was right. Only to find they had spent lots of time and money in the wrong class. I fail to see how anyone or any tradition would have been harmed by following the committee's recommendation. I understand it is the competers responsibility to enter the correct class. But when the chief scrutineer opinions that you have the right class, it's a different situation than if I just write down the wrong computer code. And don't start me on computer codes.

[twinturbo496]

In the XO Classes they were our own records - we simply were bumping them up - quite a bit.  There was no "protest" filed.  Someone simply saw a picture of our engine on the internet and contacted SCTA Board Members with "concerns".

Are you considering to run that setup in XXO-BGCC next year? 

[Dean Los Angeles]

Well, I read this whole thread.

Nathan, you are correct, and politically correct.

My view is that the entire rule book is a load of crap infested with "interpretation", "spirit", "intent" and saddled with a bunch of crabby old farts that know how the entire world should run . . . At least in their head. (Kent! How am I doing?)

In my first year neophyte world I grabbed a rule book and read it. Cover to cover. And again. And again. My interest was motorcycles. I read the car stuff too. Any other rules organization in the world would laugh at the huge holes in this rule book.

Rules either specifically exclude or specifically include. This rule book has many areas that do neither. The problem is that if you spend money like Saltcat did after carefully analyzing the rule book and asking questions you then get analyzed after the fact with nothing to base it on. What rule was violated and define to those poor guys the EXACT wording. Oh, they violated the "spirt" or "intent" of the rule?

BULL CRAP.

I asked Tom Evans about running oxygen. It's not a fuel, it's an oxidizer and isn't expressly banned, making it legal. "Oh, no, you can't run that". I asked why not. "It's not legal." I asked him to point out where in the rule book that might be covered. The answer? "It doesn't matter, it wouldn't be allowed."

I sent in a suggestion to reorganize the rule book in the motorcycle section to make it readable. Didn't change the rules at all. I explained in full the methodology behind what I was doing and why it would improve the process. No response what so ever.

I sent in a rookie orientation sheet based on my first year difficulty trying to figure out how on earth you start running at El Mirage. I spelled out the entire set of steps in detail so that maybe, just maybe, the next guy wouldn't have the crappy experience I had.

Roy Creel at least responded. He wasn't interested because "figuring it out was part of the fun". Typical of the assholes that run the place.