Pocono Mechanical Protest

I was involved in a mechanical protest of a fellow ITA competitor's car this weekend. I wanted to offer the facts of the situation here first-person, in case there's any rumors flying around. Also, a couple of things happened, somewhat unexpected, that I didn't like and I wanted to pass along.

I and three other competitors - I'll let them offer their identities, as I did not ask them if I could post this - protested the Acura Integra of Windell Holmes for several items, primarily engine- and power-related (although there were some non-engine related items as well). What those specific items were is not particularly relevant, other than to say we were prepared to post the necessary bonds to partially disassemble the engine. Also note that we requested he be allowed to compete through the weekend, but we wanted his car impounded/babysat during that time frame.

We filed the protest immediately following Saturday's qualifying session. A court was convened to review our protest, and Windell was called up to the Stewards. After lunch the stewards came to us and notified us that Windell had chosen to withdraw rather than allow us to check his car, choosing to take the automatic 6 months license suspension and $250 fine. However, he further implied that he was not going to pay the fine, instead he was going to withdraw his SCCA membership and race EMRA and NASA exclusively from now on.

This wasn't necessarily surprising; we recognized that this was a tact he could take. It's not what we wanted: I certainly don't like the idea of a competitor simply walking away unhappy. I wanted Windell to compete with us; in point of fact, we welcome everyone. I also wasn't disappointed that I couldn't take a "shot" at him. The problem is, right or wrong, we believed that Windell's car was illegal and this is the only course of action we can take to verify it.

Further troubling, per the steward Windell said he felt like he was an outsider, that he wasn't part of "the clique". Therefore, I infer he felt he was being singled out and being told to go away by us. NOTHING could be farther from the truth. As noted above we welcome all competitors, and we welcomed Windell as best we could; it's just that we welcome him in a legal vehicle. If he was found during the protest to be legal I would have been the FIRST person to walk up to him, apologize, and make sure that all of his expenses were covered.

In the end, though, I'm left to simultaneously wonder if he ever was legal, and bemoan the loss of a good ITA competitor.

I'm really sorry it came to that.

Greg [/b]
Click to expand...

Greg, you have nothing to feel bad about, you didn't do anything wrong. Not only that but you said last year you approached him! F^*) the cheatin SOB. He proved he was cheating by slithering away under a rock to hide. Go let him cheat with nasa or erma. Last year while I was @ Mid O I heard some guys saying that they thought I had M3 cams in my car. If anyone thinks I'm cheating, bring their cash and I'll tear it down in front of them, with or without a protest. Greg, we lost a cheater and gained a more viable and honorable racing organization. You should be proud and if your not I'm proud of you. :D
 
Brian, we had planned this protest in advance of the event. We'd tried talking to Windell last year about our suspicions, but the discussions quickly turned into defensive posturing and were unproductive.
We'd decided well in advance to take this course of action; it had nothing to do with his qualifying position (nor should it...)
Click to expand...

See my response about court being held and a verdict determined even before the paperwork was filed. It was pre determined that #24 was illegal well in advance of Saturdays event.

Greg,
The fact that Mr. Windell believes NASA and EMRA will embrace him as a legitimate competitor, if they do, says volumes about those organizations and the integrity of their race programs.
Click to expand...

Really, no need to take a cheap shot at EMRA or NASA. This is an SCCA discussion and your comment is not relevant to #24 being legal or illegal.

Who are you??? It makes it a lot easier to accept your comments when there is a name attached to them.........
Click to expand...

Really not relevant to the discussion either....Are you implying that only if you know what my name is, you will accept my comments "a lot easier"?...come on Jeff. You know who I am....

Keep in mind my comments and thoughts about this protest are from someone in an entirely different class.
Click to expand...

YOU said right there Dave.

I refuse to get into any mud-slinging - especially with someone who is not willing to post their name in a response. I suspect you won't even in future posts.
As far as this weekend, a casual glance showed his front airdam WELL below legal limits...but that was my own personal viewpoint and one to be verified by the tech guys. It will never be known 100% why he refused to be torn down, take a fine and get a 6-month suspension. But I think it is reasonable to think that instead of standing tall and proving his legality, he chose to not allow anyone to see. That speaks volumes to me and eveyone who has asked me about this.
The witch hunt comments are obviously sour grapes. Last year, Greg and Joe 'manned up' and approached Windell about the perception of his car. As Greg has mentioned, things quickly deteriorated and nothing was accomplished. That was Windell's opportunity to talk about the issues which he neglected to take.
I am sorry he feels slighted in any way but this was a perfect opportunity to shove it right back up our a$$es by allowing a teardown and being found legal. I wonder why he didn't do that....
Click to expand...

Andy, see my note to Jeff about posting my name. You guys all know who I am so why an issue all of the sudden?? Does posting my name in my signature make me one of the "boys"???........if so, I decline. Last time I checked, we were still a free country with the ability to make most of our own choices. This I hope will not become a mud slinging match and stay somewhat on topic.
I am also impressed Andy that with a "casual glance", you were able to determine right there that the spoiler was out of spec. I would hate to think what you would have seen if you actually looked closely. I however applaud you by also STATING that that was ONLY your opinion and had to be verified with tech. It still does not negate the fact however that you has also boldly stated "ILLEGAL EXTERIOR PARTS" implying that you knew they were illegal ...........EVEN though you know for a fact that you were merely speculating based on a casual glance and presumably here say.
You know Andy, not everyone thinks the same way. While it might be "normal" for you to want to shove something up someone's a$$ to get back at them for whatever, FORTUNATELY, we do not all think that way. Seems to me that you are implying that the #24 was illegal and had convince you and others that he was illegal because he did not seize the opportunity to shove it up your a$$. Yes???NO???

This isn't even remotely sensible or logical! He didn't leave because his feelings were hurt! Pulleeeze! He left because he made a call in his head, that opening up to the protest would be more expensive, in whatever terms that mattered to him, (money, time, reputation, whatever) than taking a 6 month suspension.
Court was NOT held and decided in advance! Where do you come up with that!?? Nobody goes to the trouble to write a protest unless they really are darn sure the car is illegal. But .....the protester doesn't "Decide" the case. Heck, illegal cars squeak through protests because the protest was improperly written. The judge is the Steward, and the Steward made no ruling on this in advance, as far as I know.
Shane (Hawthorne) has come back to race, but unfortunately he's been dogged with mechanical issues. I heard...but it was second hand, that his motor blew on one occasion, and something happend on a second race, but thats all I've heard. Oh, and he got married, I think, so that might be keeping him busy, (and broke, LOL)
Click to expand...

Jake, we've butted heads on this before, so this is just a continuation. I actually agree with you that Windell did not leave on Saturday because someone hurt his feelings, but DISAGREE 100% with your statement " He left because he made a call in his head, that opening up to the protest would be more expensive, in whatever terms that mattered to him, (money, time, reputation, whatever) than taking a 6 month suspension.
My disagreement comes from your inability, in logical terms, to be inside of Windells head (on Sautrday or any day for that matter) knowing his thought process at that time and ultimately his reason(s) for his decision.
So when you begin your response with a statement such as" This isn't even remotely sensible or logical! you should keep your own spoken (in this case typed) words in your mind as you proceed.

In addition, using your vast knowledge and understanding, you indicated that apparently, #24 continously blew motors/heads whatever, implying and strongly suggesting that it was because he is/was illegal. You also indicated that Shane H is back but unfortunately is being dogged by mechanical issues. This is the same Shane who is now supposed to be racing "legal" . Well using your logic, apparently Shane has not been rehablitated because if he is also dealing with mechanical issues, then he must still be using illegal parts. Correct????? Or is it that he is breaking for reasons other that being illegal???? (Not including tying the knot as that can break things as well).....Or is it cars with legal motors can INDEED have mechanical issues?? You decide because you are in a "know" position. Shane, this is not taking a "shot" at you...

Which brings up anpother point. I can't speak for these four guys, but the post above seems to indicate that this was a gang up. Protests of this nature are often done by a group, as it's a very good way to share the expenses, which can be significant.
Click to expand...

See my note about a witch hunt. Protests can indeed be expensive and usually are only done by those having the means and willing to foot the cost. How many guys do you know outside of the top 5 ITA drivers in the NE who are in a position to do this???? Just think of how many people it would take to file such a protest against someone like Greg or Andy. That would indeed take a 'GANG" and it would probably never happen. You know that as well as I do.

To carry that analogy to its logical conclusion, in our case "the witch" committed suicide by running and jumping into the fire the moment she heard someone scream the accusation, long before any trial was convened...and we didn't even get to see if she floated...GA
Click to expand...

Fortunately Greg, the #24 witch did not commit suicide. The hunt was planned and crafted to perfection as you stated....You said you also knew what the response would be as you guys had already discussed the #24 options when the plan was revealed. Obviously, you guys put a lot of time and effort to ensure that you obtained the desired result. See my note to Andy about the opportunity to shove something up someone's a$$ regarding committing suicide and floating.

It sounds to me like Greg tried reason last year but ran head first into that ego. I wish someone else had made another effort. I doubt whether we'll see him again. I do respect him for being so honest in his discussions on rules compliance, but it seems like that honesty should have provoked more friendly discussions with his competitors than it actually did.
Click to expand...

Sure sounds like Greg "tried" to reason last year, does'nt it, but was confronted by ego. Well its all #24's fault then. He (#24) was the bad guy and everyone else was the goody guys...the goody guys always win, right. This is not a disagreement with what you are saying. Who knows how the "reason/discussion" really went down? Was it done in a threatening and or confrontational manner? Was it done in a " hey Windell, lets talk about the illegal stuff on your car??? Was it done in a "we/I would like to look at your car (feel free to look at mine)??? Or was this just thrown together and done on the fly??? Look I am not saying that Greg did anything incorrectly because I was not there at the time he and Windell had the "talk". I am sure you were not present either. We only know what we know based on what Greg stated.
None of that makes any difference at this point. It is already a done deal. Goal was to eliminate the #24. Goal accomplished.


Keep in mind that all TRUE stories (protests) have two sides and this one is no exception. I've heard his version and it would surely make you scratch your head a bit. I suspect that the "real true story" lies somewhere in the middle of the two versions.
Click to expand...

^^Enough said. I do not believe we will have the opportunity to hear a complete and unbiased version of either side, not that it matters now. At this point, it is a combination of second, third, fourth and fifth hand versions of this past weekend and all the pieces which lead up to it. I am confident that the NE region ITA group will go on smoothly without #24...at least until the next threat shows up.

All that being said, lets hope the reasons the competitor refused to have his car torn down had nothing to do with cheating. You are leading by example and for that Greg you should be congratulated.
Good luck this year.
Click to expand...

I think it is safe to say that the reason(s) #24 refused to have his car torn down HAD nothing to do with cheating. You would have to look beyond the refusal for a tear down and fine/suspension to see that with the addional steps taken, realize that this was way more than just that.

See you guys at the track. :birra: :eclipsee_steering:
 
Can we please stop referring to this individual as "the #24?" There are other #24s out there racing and personally, I don't want to be confused with this individual. What's wrong with names?
 
Andy, see my note to Jeff about posting my name. You guys all know who I am so why an issue all of the sudden?? Does posting my name in my signature make me one of the "boys"???........if so, I decline. Last time I checked, we were still a free country with the ability to make most of our own choices. This I hope will not become a mud slinging match and stay somewhat on topic.[/b]
Click to expand...

You know what it does and doesn't do. It lends credibility to your statements when you sign your name. I didn't make the connection until Dick posted the link. Birds-of-a-feather...
I am also impressed Andy that with a "casual glance", you were able to determine right there that the spoiler was out of spec. I would hate to think what you would have seen if you actually looked closely. I however applaud you by also STATING that that was ONLY your opinion and had to be verified with tech. It still does not negate the fact however that you has also boldly stated "ILLEGAL EXTERIOR PARTS" implying that you knew they were illegal ...........EVEN though you know for a fact that you were merely speculating based on a casual glance and presumably here say. [/b]
Click to expand...

Well, these things aren't hard to determine. The rear spoiler last year was blatent and just stupid. My 'casual glance' this year was on the front spoiler. The rule states it can't be lower than the lower wheel lip...my glance showed it clearly was...no issues - he ran.
You know Andy, not everyone thinks the same way. While it might be "normal" for you to want to shove something up someone's a$$ to get back at them for whatever, FORTUNATELY, we do not all think that way. Seems to me that you are implying that the #24 was illegal and had convince you and others that he was illegal because he did not seize the opportunity to shove it up your a$$. Yes???NO???[/b]
Click to expand...
So how DOES he think? How do YOU think? If you are protested, do you run and hide or do you stand up and prove your legality? My comments were tongue-in-cheek. What that clearly meant was that if you were legal, this was a perfect opportunity to get proven so. When you intentially avoid such compliance checks, the belief that the car in question is illegal is not only fostered, but some would say proven. Not me, but most. I wanted to see for myself how what I see on the track can be possible legally. It's that what the protest process is for, no?

See my note about a witch hunt. Protests can indeed be expensive and usually are only done by those having the means and willing to foot the cost. How many guys do you know outside of the top 5 ITA drivers in the NE who are in a position to do this???? Just think of how many people it would take to file such a protest against someone like Greg or Andy. That would indeed take a 'GANG" and it would probably never happen. You know that as well as I do.[/b]
Click to expand...

Yes, these things can be expensive...but only to the party that is wrong. I have no problem with my car getting torn down...legal cars get a free rebuild! If you are illegal, it will cost you. If Windells car was legal, the group that protested would have to pay the costs. Simple really. Legal? No cost to you. Inconvienient? You bet - but a small price to pay to hush the naysayers.

Fortunately Greg, the #24 witch did not commit suicide. The hunt was planned and crafted to perfection as you stated....You said you also knew what the response would be as you guys had already discussed the #24 options when the plan was revealed. Obviously, you guys put a lot of time and effort to ensure that you obtained the desired result. See my note to Andy about the opportunity to shove something up someone's a$$ regarding committing suicide and floating. [/b]
Click to expand...

I love this standpoint. The reason it was done ahead of time is because these things are difficult. We wanted it to be as easy as it could be for everyone. That is a difficult task but we tried our best.

Sure sounds like Greg "tried" to reason last year, does'nt it, but was confronted by ego. Well its all #24's fault then. He (#24) was the bad guy and everyone else was the goody guys...the goody guys always win, right. This is not a disagreement with what you are saying. Who knows how the "reason/discussion" really went down? Was it done in a threatening and or confrontational manner? Was it done in a " hey Windell, lets talk about the illegal stuff on your car??? Was it done in a "we/I would like to look at your car (feel free to look at mine)??? Or was this just thrown together and done on the fly??? Look I am not saying that Greg did anything incorrectly because I was not there at the time he and Windell had the "talk". I am sure you were not present either. We only know what we know based on what Greg stated.
None of that makes any difference at this point. It is already a done deal. Goal was to eliminate the #24. Goal accomplished.[/b]
Click to expand...

Actually, Joe was there as well so he can verify. I talked with another guy yesterday about Windell and he said he belived the attitude. "Why?" I asked, because the guy telling me this isn't even in Improved Touring. He goes on to tell me that he was in the Registration line at Pocono either last year or the year before and he turns to make small talk. Introduces himself and asks Windell his name and what he drives. The short of it is that Windell basically told him it was none of his business. Real nice - but consistant with the other data.

The goal was not to eliminate Windell. The goal was to verify the legality/illegality of the #24 Integra. Really quite simple. What was predicted was that he would leave without verification because he knew he was illegal. I ask you - WHY DID HE LEAVE and take the fine and suspension instead of allowing his parts to be checked?

I think it is safe to say that the reason(s) #24 refused to have his car torn down HAD nothing to do with cheating. You would have to look beyond the refusal for a tear down and fine/suspension to see that with the addional steps taken, realize that this was way more than just that.
[/b]
Click to expand...

HA HA! This could be the funniest thing I have read from you yet. How was he to know how much 'planning' had gone into the protest? Bottom line? He had a chance, and he didn't take it. We all know why.
 
See my response about court being held and a verdict determined even before the paperwork was filed. It was pre determined that #24 was illegal well in advance of Saturdays event.[/b]
Click to expand...

That leap of logic would be capable of clearing a tall building. While it may be true that the competitors who filed the protest were convinced that the car was illegal well in advance of the event, the legality of the car has yet to be determined. The teardown itself is what determines the legality. And frankly, if I reach the point that I am willing to protest a competitor for cheating, then his qualifying position for the race isn't going to change my view - particularly if I believe that sandbagging has been used in the past.

Goal was to eliminate the #24. Goal accomplished.[/b]
Click to expand...

Wow... I thought the goal was to determine the legality of the car. If the goal was to eliminate him, then a tap in the rear at the correct part of the track would have ended his day and possibly the car's career.

Sorry, but a refusal to submit to a teardown is prima-facie evidence that the car is illegal, particularly if one has not been subjected to prior protests regarding the legality of your equipment.
 
Go let him cheat with nasa or erma because they don't care if you do or not.[/b]
Click to expand...

I have attended one EMRA race and sadly was not able to race due to a mechanical but I have been racing with NASA for years and involved with them for even longer. Stating that we do not care if drivers are cheating is a bold statement. Cheating is unacceptable anywhere. If you feel something is out of compliance you should approch the individual face to face rather then speculating as a group. Quite often there are items that are overlooked and easily rectified with a short friendly conversation. There are some who will go out of their way to legitimately cheat and use illegal parts. They know who they are and will have to deal with the fallout when they do get caught.

It is our jobs as racers to keep everyone honest regardless of sanctioning body.
 
[Really not relevant to the discussion either....Are you implying that only if you know what my name is, you will accept my comments "a lot easier"?...come on Jeff. You know who I am....
[/b]
Click to expand...



Ummmmmm, Einstein??? I really have no idea who you are... <shrug>


"Maybe" not relevant but anyone can be a chicken sh*t and make flaming remarks without using their name........


Be a man...............
 
It lends credibility to your statements when you sign your name. I didn't make the connection until Dick posted the link.[/b]
Click to expand...

Exactly. Most of do not know who you are. It sure is easy to hide this way.

Keep in mind my comments and thoughts about this protest are from someone in an entirely different class.
[/b]
Click to expand...

YOU said right there Dave.[/b]
Click to expand...

Meaning I do care about the legality of cars, especially those within our category. Would I consider protesting someone in another IT class if I truly believed they were cheating? Yup.

Have you ever even given the slightest amount of consideration how cheating and taking short cuts impacts others? Because it does in many ways.

It was mentioned that Windell (# 24 as you refer to him) thought that everyone else was cheating and thus in his mind, he had reasons why it was acceptable for him to cheat. There's a trickle down effect with all of this. When he and I had our memorible chat, I was someone fairly new to the sport. I looked at him as someone who was experienced in racing, and was shocked to hear his viewpoints about cheating - that it really isn't that big of a deal if it's done, cause it's just club racing. After that conversation, he lost my respect.

Like I've said here before, if the car is legal, there's nothing to worry about. Out of curosity, was a total bond amount ever agreed upon or if not, what figure did you come up with that this would cost (if you don't mind sharing this info.)?
 
GTRacer15....I was going to go though your post and do the whole quote thing, but honestly, it's not worth the time.

In the linked thread regarding the sale of your car with it's lightened flywheel, you clearly have indicated that legality isn't that much of an issue to you, and that we should all mind our own business. That speaks volumes about how you handle yourself, and your integrity.

And you're too chicken to sign your name....really racking up the points now.

Suffice it to say that you haven't provided any real information that has added to Windells situation. As a matter of fact, you're hurting his case, LOL. (Here's a guy, who's known for his not so legal car and a bad attitude, telling everyone that they're all wrong about windell! Too funny!)

But a couple points-

- The "court" hadn't come to ANY decision ....and still hasn't. Get your terms straight. The court is the Stewards of the Meet (SOMs). The Drivers felt strongly something was amiss, and made a charge to the court for verification. Windell was asked, essentially, "Would you like to defend yourself?" ANd he relied "No". And left. All the drivers wanted was verification, yes, or no. I've been there, I know. I wanted proof...yes or no, is this guy running straight? If he is, I will walk over and apologise, and take whatever he wants to say to me. Thats the "bet" you make withyourself when you protest someone...you could be wrong, and if so, you must be prepared to apologise and accept his thoughts. If he's not straight, then he shouldn't be racing. It's really that simple. Lets not try to spin this and create internet truths that are far from reality.

(As for Shane.....to my knowledge, which may be wrong, he has returned twice, and had mechanical issues, one of those I understand was engine related, the other, I am unaware of. So, he's got one possible engine related issue. Thats far from a trend. Trust me, I would love to know Shanes point of view, but he's never voiced it publicly. I'd like to think he was unaware of his issues, and I wish he had just come clean, and entertained the discussions that occured before his protest was lodged. But thats water under the bridge. I'm going to assume that when he returns, he will have bent over backwards to ensure his car is legal, because he wants to be legal. I say this because in your post, you indicated you thought I was implying that Shane was running illegal parts, by way of logical inference. But the logic fails as the difference between the Windell situation and Shanes is many degrees.)

Windell has demonstrated his engine oil and other parts for all on the track to see on multiple occasions over the years. But...is that proof he's illegal?? Of course not..There are many possible and good explanations, like he's not a great mechanic, or the parts he's using are inferior...and on and on

Windells engine issues were just one of the many reasons his car was thought to be illegal. Nobody is going to protest someone because they blow up frequently! Thats just not a good bet.

So, tell us, WHY do you think, (or know) he refused to have his car inspected?? If you're going to say stuff, make it substantial, not just blanket statements like:

"I think it is safe to say that the reason(s) #24 refused to have his car torn down HAD nothing to do with cheating. You would have to look beyond the refusal for a tear down and fine/suspension to see that with the addional steps taken, realize that this was way more than just that."...[/b]
Click to expand...
..

:rolleyes:

Oh, that, and signing your name would help your case too. Your choice of course.
 
Greg, you have nothing to feel bad about...<SNIP>... Go let him cheat with nasa or erma because they don't care if you do or not.[/b]
Click to expand...

Do we know each other? Have you run any EMRA events lately? Those are pretty strong words, and compleatly untrue. I take particular offense to because I am the EMRA Chief of Tech. Much as Zephyr said, and more eloquently than I, EMRA does not tolerate cheaters in any shape or form.

Perhaps we haven't got the legions of manpower and rules that you are used to with the SCCA, but that doesn't mean we don't get the job done, or tolerate cheaters in any form or fashion. Just like in any of the other sanctioning bodies mentioned here today, it is our jobs as racers to keep everyone honest. If you EVER have concerns about any car you see at an EMRA event (including my own) I invite you to find me or any other EMRA Official So And So immediately to discuss it. We'll review the facts with you and the competitor if need be, and resolve the issue as quickly and as fairly as possible.

I would suggest you not make such statements without considering the facts.

We now return you to the scheduled rant already in progress....
 
Hey, I've got EMRA's back also. Raced with them several times and they put on a great event. Folks should not be disparaging both EMRA and NASA because somebody who's accused of cheating plans to race with those clubs.
 
I really think that comment was not meant to disparage but was to demonstrate the SCCA rules have a documented process for a racer to follow if he believes that a competitor is cheating while the other groups handle this in an informal manner. No should cry foul when they are protested in the manner described in the rule book and if they don’t like the protest process they race where the protest process is not part of the rules.
 
Even so, I would think that if I were racing EMRA, or NASA, knowing what happened regarding Windell in SCCA, I'd be pretty quick to have a chat with Rob regarding Windell, if thats where Windell feels the rules aren't important. (Judging by his comments to the stewards as reported by Greg in the early posts)
 
Do we know each other? Have you run any EMRA events lately? Those are pretty strong words, and compleatly untrue. I take particular offense to because I am the EMRA Chief of Tech. Much as Zephyr said, and more eloquently than I, EMRA does not tolerate cheaters in any shape or form.

Perhaps we haven't got the legions of manpower and rules that you are used to with the SCCA, but that doesn't mean we don't get the job done, or tolerate cheaters in any form or fashion. Just like in any of the other sanctioning bodies mentioned here today, it is our jobs as racers to keep everyone honest. If you EVER have concerns about any car you see at an EMRA event (including my own) I invite you to find me or any other EMRA Official So And So immediately to discuss it. We'll review the facts with you and the competitor if need be, and resolve the issue as quickly and as fairly as possible.

I would suggest you not make such statements without considering the facts.

We now return you to the scheduled rant already in progress....

[/b]
Click to expand...



Bob, I just noticed what I typed and I want to apologize to ERMA & NASA for the comment I made. I honestly didn't mean to say that because I DO know NASA cares about cheaters, I've seen them DQ some. I'm also glad to see that you care about cheating as well. If I would have proof read my statement more carefully, I assure you I would not have posed it and have since edited my statement.

Sincerely,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top