Results, rumours and inuendo...

It is my understanding that the only thing checked on the ITB and ITC cars was gear ratio's. I would certainly like to see more checking across the board at this event. Tech was too busy at the time checking the Spec Miatas.

Les Chaney
[/b]
Click to expand...

+1 I would've loved for them to break out the cam doctor for us at least. It really felt like they brought us in because they had to. They were still finishing the impound tech inspection on SM on Sunday when I was loading up to go home, SM was the first race Saturday morning.

Congratulations to Bowie and Derek, Condolences to Trevor that was not a nice way to end a race.
The ITB race was awesome with some evenly matched cars battling for the top spots lap after lap. You do wonder sometimes though when hearing about at least one sideways slide and one off how a guy can recover and motor back to the front in a short sprint like that.
 
I'm glad they did the gear check on the Golfs, as Kirk has mentioned that is one area that would be easy to cheat. It is too bad they didn't do anything else; like you said, having the cam doctor there... Hopefully next year they'll do a more through inspection.
 
It seems like also they would do a cursory check for compliance with the IIDSYCYC rule. like a 4 door should be able to roll down it's rear windows. Most cars are shipped with two wipers bolted to the cowl, you know, stuff like that.
 
I wouldn't want to be the guy that went to the Tech guys to ask them to do more work than they did. I noticed some of them coming into the Chalet for dinner about an hour after the last of the food was gone. And this was after working thru lunch.
How do we talk people into doing this stuff? Big Thanks, Scruitneers!
 
The ITB race was awesome with some evenly matched cars battling for the top spots lap after lap. You do wonder sometimes though when hearing about at least one sideways slide and one off how a guy can recover and motor back to the front in a short sprint like that.
[/b]
Click to expand...
Not picking on you specifically here - but the online IT racing community in general seems to have assumed from the first session that Beran was cheating, and talked thier way around it without coming right out and accusing him.

There is no requirement in the rule book that we search out other racers online and get to 'know' each other (although I sure enjoy doing so, and look forward to meeting a lot of you guys at events in the future - next year will be my 'go race in other divisions' year). You can in fact be fast and have other people not know you well.

I don't know they guy, but I think the inuendo is crappy. Write paper if you think a guy is cheating.
 
so was Jeremy's attendence mostly in an effort to continue checking Miata's??? How well were the other IT classes checked?

Raymond [/b]
Click to expand...

Understand that SM is goig to a compliance fee just like SRF. This type of attendence and conpliance checking by Jeremy and his team is exactly what that money is for.

For events like the ARRC and ITSpecTacular, I would be willing to bump up my entry fee by as much as $10 in order to have this level of scrutiny for those key IT races.
 
so was Jeremy's attendence mostly in an effort to continue checking Miata's??? How well were the other IT classes checked?

Raymond
[/b]
Click to expand...


From what I saw I would say Yes to your question.

Les Chaney
 
Not picking on you specifically here - but the online IT racing community in general seems to have assumed from the first session that Beran was cheating, and talked thier way around it without coming right out and accusing him.

There is no requirement in the rule book that we search out other racers online and get to 'know' each other (although I sure enjoy doing so, and look forward to meeting a lot of you guys at events in the future - next year will be my 'go race in other divisions' year). You can in fact be fast and have other people not know you well.

I don't know they guy, but I think the inuendo is crappy. Write paper if you think a guy is cheating.
[/b]
Click to expand...

We didn't want to throw any paper, because we were giving the impound process a chance to work, but they did not check ITC or ITB for anything but trans ratios, then we waited and waited, assuming that we were waiting for the miatas to be finished, next thing we know is that we are being released. we actually did encourage the scrutineers to check our engines, but they did not. I am very thankful for the workers and officials, and I know that they worked hard, and I appreciate that. But from my perspective of having a dog in the fight in ITB and wanting the track record not to be awarded to an illegal car and so on, it really did seem like ITC and ITB competitors were basically informed that they weren't important enough to spend any time on. I've spent countless hours trying to build a fast and legal ITB car, years actually, and had I known that we weren't going to be checked I would have initiated a protest probably, to preserve the validity of those hours and years of hard work.
I can tell you there was a lot of low hanging fruit on that car, I could stand 10 feet from it and list at least three things that I would consider illegal.
 
I was driving the Conover car this weekend.

I made the decision to NOT throw paper at the 0 car. There were several things missing from the car, but none were major, all were "ticky-tack" little things. I didn't want to win that way. I didn't want to win the way we did, either, but the stewards made a tough decision, and I am quite positive they did not take it lightly.

Especially since he is not active on the internet, I plan to contact the driver of the 0 car personally and invite him back to the ARRC next year to try again. When we talk, I will mention each of the several things we saw and ask him to go over his car carefully before bringing it back. I did not mention this to him Saturday afternoon in person, as with all that was going on it didn't feel like it was the right time.

The ARRC is our National Championship, and it is doing a disservice to our class, our sport, and our community as a whole to show up with a car that laughs in the face of our rule book, even on little things like that.

edit: this will be my only input on this discussion. I can only hope it does not turn into an internet war that will distract from the great racing that happened this weekend.
 
Fair enough. Also, considering that you two raced directly against that car for much of the race - you do have more room to comment than anyone else. It just seemed like a lot of people were painting that picture from the get-go, often from a spectating position.

Congratulations on the win!
 
How well were the other IT classes checked?

Raymond
[/b]
Click to expand...

I went to the tech shed after the group 6 race, ITR and ITS. Only the winners in each class were brought into the shed. The 2nd and 3rd cars were held outside. The ITR winner, a 944 S2, was checked for bore and stroke through a spark plug hole (whistler?). The ITS winner, RX7, was asked to remove his exhaust for a port check (lollypop). I believe the whole process was less than 45 mins. Meanwhile, the tech guys were still busy with the Miatas.....
 
This sounds just like the bitching that happens after the Runoffs every year -- "tech didn't check the #xx car, and it had stuff I knew about!"

Folks, this is a competitor-policed sport. Expecting an impound check to find what you know about it asking WAY WAY WAY too much. If you know about something, write paper. It's that simple. If you don't write paper, you have no rights to bitch. YOU knew, and YOU didn't tell anyone. ("You" is used in the generic sense here, I'm not talking to anyone in particular.)

And doing it publicly about a particular car is really unfair.
 
From a spectator standpoint, watching one ITB car run ITA speeds down the back straight was kind of "wierd". As was watching said ITB car driving literally around the other ITB cars down the back straight, not having to draft or otherwise, while getting a worse exit speed.

I'm not "saying", I'm just saying....

-Tom
 
This sounds just like the bitching that happens after the Runoffs every year -- "tech didn't check the #xx car, and it had stuff I knew about!"

Folks, this is a competitor-policed sport. Expecting an impound check to find what you know about it asking WAY WAY WAY too much. If you know about something, write paper. It's that simple. If you don't write paper, you have no rights to bitch. YOU knew, and YOU didn't tell anyone. ("You" is used in the generic sense here, I'm not talking to anyone in particular.)

And doing it publicly about a particular car is really unfair.
[/b]
Click to expand...


Yes, but when they have done complete tear downs the last couple of years, you kind of expect it.........Plus, this IS the ARRC. How could they have written paper if they didn't know there wasn't going to be tear downs until they were released??
 
Yes, but when they have done complete tear downs the last couple of years, you kind of expect it.........Plus, this IS the ARRC. How could they have written paper if they didn't know there wasn't going to be tear downs until they were released??
[/b]
Click to expand...


There has not been teardowns for the last couple years. The race has gotten so diluted with so many non IT classes I suppose that it would be all but impossible to do teardowns across the board. I for one hate to see what this race has turned into.

Les Chaney
 
This is the first year the heads haven't come off all the top IT cars, right? But it's also the first year for gear ratio checks. I like surpises when it comes to tech.

But...I'd rather have MORE checks, than less.

Maybe we should create a compliance commitee, and seek assitance in scrutineering, perhaps from HQ. I imagine everyone would or should be willing to pay an increased entry.
 
No if I am not mistaken this is the second year at least that the heads have not come off the cars.

Les Chaney
 
This is the first year the heads haven't come off all the top IT cars, right? But it's also the first year for gear ratio checks. I like surpises when it comes to tech.

But...I'd rather have MORE checks, than less.

Maybe we should create a compliance commitee, and seek assitance in scrutineering, perhaps from HQ. I imagine everyone would or should be willing to pay an increased entry.
[/b]
Click to expand...

I would think that a modest increase in entry fee should be tolerated if it ensures that things will actually be checked. Which protects the interest of those showing up with legal cars expecting some nice clean and close racing. Jeff has me pegged, they were pulling the heads on the miatas, they pulled heads on ITA, I expected the same treatment, I found out we weren't getting that by them releasing us, and at that point it's too late. . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top