13 replies to this topic

[EPrill]

Dear SM drivers-

 

SCCA has had multiple discussions about how to best handle instances of contact in its road racing program. The SM community has brought this issue to the forefront, but it is not unique to SM alone.

 

We have had conversations with many of you, the leadership of the SMAC and at Mazda Motorsports. The SCCA staff has taken this to our Executive Stewards and Race Directors. We are listening and are formulating the best approach to address this.

 

The Executive Stewards, the GCR Committee and the Club Racing Board are working on a “What do you think?” for the next issue of FasTrack, but I wanted to get some informal/unofficial feedback in advance of that going out to the full membership. I am aware that there is a lengthy thread about a Track Compliance Chief already, but I wanted to capture some responses to specific questions here.

 

First off, at all future Hoosier SCCA Super Tours starting with Buttonwillow, the Race Director will require any driver involved in contact to report to impound immediately following the session. The contact will be discussed and then a determination made if action is required, either by the Race Director, the Stewards of the Meet or by one of the drivers in the form of a protest.

 

Phase two is where we need feedback. Before we jump in, I think it’s important for everyone to understand SCCA’s penalty process and the license points system that currently exists. It is section 7 of the GCR. The current GCR is here: https://www.scca.com...pdated-may-2017 and it begins on page 56, with the penalty points on page 57.

 

To summarize, the Stewards of the Meet (SOM) or second court – the Court of Appeals (COA) may assign points. The Race Director/Chief Steward has the power to place someone on probation, but not assign points. Points may come with a penalty for the race or season and may include probation or suspension. The points accumulate and stay on your license for three years. Once you hit 11 points on your license over a three-year period, you automatically go on probation for 6 months or 6 events. If you hit 15 points, you are suspended for 6 months. Keep in mind that you could already be placed on probation or suspension for an individual infraction by the SOM or Court of Appeals. The 11 and 15 point totals are just what happens cumulatively.

 

Questions:

 

1.      In order to discourage contact of all kinds, should points be assigned in all instances of contact? Should everyone involved receive a point or points, regardless of their role? This assumes the point assessments need not be equal.

 

2.      Should the Race Director or Chief Steward have the power to issue 1 point “Reprimands” (#2 on the penalty points list) without having to go to the Stewards of the Meet (SOM)? This would be in the form of a Chief Stewards Action (CSA) and be protestable. The thought here would be primarily for instances of contact that are typically considered “Racing Incidents” and generally go unreported by drivers. The Race Director or Chief Steward could still do a Request for Action (RFA) to ask the SOM to review the incident if more than a reprimand may be required.

 

3.      Is the point structure, including the points associated with the penalty as well as the timeline appropriate? For instance, points stay on your record for three calendar years from when incurred. Is that duration appropriate? Should this be based on weekends, instead? Should probation kick in more quickly if points are accumulated more quickly?

 

4.      Should things that might affect another driver indirectly (spins, oil downs, etc.) be assigned points?

 

Thanks in advance for the feedback. The goal is to make the SCCA experience as enjoyable and fair for everyone as possible.

 

Eric Prill

VP/COO, SCCA

[Caveman-kwebb99]

Question... If points stay on your license for 3 years and you get a 6 month probation, after you serve probation then you still have points high enough to be on probation?

If so that makes no sense... Probation needs to come after less points then it currently does but after probation points need to be removed maybe halved or removed totaly. That rewards good behavior and promotes the right kind of actions...

Imo this whole contact thing needs to be worked from the ground up from penalties and defined infractions etc.

Also I believe strongly in letting the drivers decide if no penalty is warranted. Ex I am fighting for a podium spot I get into a corner to hit hit the guy ahead of me cause almost no damage but we both lose some spots and the the other driver says to stewards it's racing after all, it's not worth penalizing let's just move on. The fact that we mostly work this stuff out between drivers is one of the things that attracted me to scca over the alternative!

[Parity]

1.      In order to discourage contact of all kinds, should points be assigned in all instances of contact? Should everyone involved receive a point or points, regardless of their role? This assumes the point assessments need not be equal.

 

This I would definitely not support. If a driver is punted or involved in contact where he had not fault, no points or penalty should be issued. At summit point there are routine deer wrecks. Other contributing factors such as fluids on track, mechanical failure etc, should be taken in consideration as well.

[FTodaro]

Eric Thanks for you post. I sent you a PM.

 

The problem with the current process is that neither Drivers or Stewards like the protest process so therefore bad driver behavior is not addressed. The alternative of a contact impound would force driver behavior to be reviewed.  The focus should be on mentoring and teaching drivers better judgment on the track, not issuing a penalty or points. Of course that should and could happen for problem drivers but that should not be the norm.

 

So Have a mandatory contact impound, let the drivers discuss the cause of the crash, if they can agree, they turn in the paperwork and move on. If they cannot agree the steward steps in and reviews the crash, the video and rules on the cause.

 

Just getting drivers to have to face each other will improve their driving in time. getting into an elaborate point and penalty process is the wrong direction. This needs to be about understanding and accepting responsibility, and recognizing bad decision making.

 

This needs to be simple to work.

[Parity]

Eric Thanks for you post. I sent you a PM.

 

The problem with the current process is that neither Drivers or Stewards like the protest process so therefore bad driver behavior is not addressed. The alternative of a contact impound would force driver behavior to be reviewed.  The focus should be on mentoring and teaching drivers better judgment on the track, not issuing a penalty or points. Of course that should and could happen for problem drivers but that should not be the norm.

 

So Have a mandatory contact impound, let the drivers discuss the cause of the crash, if they can agree, they turn in the paperwork and move on. If they cannot agree the steward steps in and reviews the crash, the video and rules on the cause.

 

Just getting drivers to have to face each other will improve their driving in time. getting into an elaborate point and penalty process is the wrong direction. This needs to be about understanding and accepting responsibility, and recognizing bad decision making.

 

This needs to be simple to work.

 

This is exactly what I just said in my knee jerk reaction short terse kind of way.

[MotoFusi]

Frank is exactly right. It works in NASA. Why reinvent the wheel?

[Steve Scheifler]

With respect to allowing drivers to work it out between themselves, yes and no. One reason protests don't happen a lot is peer pressure and not wanting to be "that guy", and that's OK up to a point. Quite often there is just not enough clear evidence to determine the degree of fault, and other times the mistake is clear but minor and understandable. In those cases I agree with Webb, allow the drivers to wave it off. But the appropriate official should be allowed and even expected to overrule and assess points when the infraction is serious and the evidence is clear.

Defining contact that requires reporting will be important . Minor side-to-side contact where control is not lost is fairly common especially in the first lap or two. Little if anything is done about it now but if it requires even minor paint repairs it can get old fast. Leave that up to the drivers to report or not?

This will quickly become the same debate as last time (which was
useful but already done). So to the specific questions:

1. No, do not assess points to all involved regardless of apparent fault. Tracking cases of non-points involvement might be useful to spot trends but only if some details of each are included.

2. Yes, allow the RF or CS to assess points. This is a little risky and may not work, and might just end up with every case being challenged, but worth a try I think.

3. Without recommending specifics just yet because all the pieces must fit together, if there will be closer scrutiny and likely more points assessed, I think the 3 year span is way too long. It should probably be more like X event weekends. We do very few races compared to some but even for us that seems like a long time. Should it take for 40 or 50 events for those guys to drop the points from a mistake? Way too long IMO. Maybe too complicated, but if there are no new points then maybe they drop after say 10 events but stay on the license longer if more are accumulated.

4. Points for non-contact issues, probably not though I sometimes think so for the Prod classes dumping oil . If I were aware of more problems of that type in this class I might want some way of tracking such things so repeat offenders would eventually get points, but probably not for individual incidents. Unfortunately we've all been on one or both sides of really stupid moves that had a big impact on someone's race without any actual contact. I suppose that I would not object to points for those if they are brought forward by a driver or corner worker and the evidence is clear.

[Jim Drago]

Questions:

 

1.      In order to discourage contact of all kinds, should points be assigned in all instances of contact? Should everyone involved receive a point or points, regardless of their role? This assumes the point assessments need not be equal.

 

Yes, any contact that results in damage that requires repair should be written up and points assigned. If there is minor contact and no"real" damage, IMO it should not be written up, especially if both agree. If there is damage that requires repair and both drivers agree it was a "racing incident and not upset with the other, they both get 1 point.  If it is clearly the fault of driver A, driver A gets 2 points

 

2.      Should the Race Director or Chief Steward have the power to issue 1 point “Reprimands” (#2 on the penalty points list) without having to go to the Stewards of the Meet (SOM)? This would be in the form of a Chief Stewards Action (CSA) and be protestable. The thought here would be primarily for instances of contact that are typically considered “Racing Incidents” and generally go unreported by drivers. The Race Director or Chief Steward could still do a Request for Action (RFA) to ask the SOM to review the incident if more than a reprimand may be required.

 

yes, see above

 

3.      Is the point structure, including the points associated with the penalty as well as the timeline appropriate? For instance, points stay on your record for three calendar years from when incurred. Is that duration appropriate? Should this be based on weekends, instead? Should probation kick in more quickly if points are accumulated more quickly?

 

IMO, the points should wash yearly and 6 "contact" points is probation, 10 or more some type of suspension. 

 

4.      Should things that might affect another driver indirectly (spins, oil downs, etc.) be assigned points?

   Spins yes.. mechanicals no.. 

 

We should take it one step further.. if contact is caused by a driver and it causes other drivers not to complete a session oor hinders there session whether is be a race or qualifying there needs to be a penalty associated. If I hit driver b in qualifying and he is forced to pull in early.. I lose my best time or the entire session and I get points. In the race, if driver A causes Driver B to end early, driver A is docked positions or moved to last in class

 

Thanks in advance for the feedback. The goal is to make the SCCA experience as enjoyable and fair for everyone as possible.

 

 

I will add letting drivers sort it out is a good start, but wont work. Usually after an apology of some sorts it all goes away. If we have individuals involved in several of these instances, and we do.. they need to be getting points assigned. As it gets closer to their probabtion or suspension, i can assure you they will change the way they are driving

 

Jim

 

 

 

 

Eric Prill

VP/COO, SCCA

  

[davew]

I have a long opinion on this, but not enough time to type.

 

It all starts with respect. The drivers need to respect each other. And even more importantly, the drivers need to respect the officials/stewards. Due to a poor history of bad calls, many drivers have lost respect for the officials. That lack of respect/trust has kept many from protesting what should be no brainer decisions.

 

Oil downs, crashes etc. that end a session and then cause the following sessions to be shortened/delayed/cancelled should result in the offending group getting their session shortened/cancelled. If the wings and things group causes a 20 minute delay, Every other group ends up with a shortened session. Only the wings and things group should get their session shortened so everyone else can get their full track time.

 

Dave

[john mueller]

NASA's ain't perfect but works pretty well 

[BNaumann]

I'm suprised with 280+ posts in the other thread you haven't gotten much feedback.  Hopefully everyone is just busy with last minute pre-season prep or already into their season.  I have only have a short season of SM experience, but a bit more racing experience otherwise and since I appreciate you taking the time to come here for input, I'll try to answer your questions.

Dear SM drivers-
 
SCCA has had multiple discussions about how to best handle instances of contact in its road racing program. The SM community has brought this issue to the forefront, but it is not unique to SM alone.
 
We have had conversations with many of you, the leadership of the SMAC and at Mazda Motorsports. The SCCA staff has taken this to our Executive Stewards and Race Directors. We are listening and are formulating the best approach to address this.
 
The Executive Stewards, the GCR Committee and the Club Racing Board are working on a “What do you think?” for the next issue of FasTrack, but I wanted to get some informal/unofficial feedback in advance of that going out to the full membership. I am aware that there is a lengthy thread about a Track Compliance Chief already, but I wanted to capture some responses to specific questions here.
 
First off, at all future Hoosier SCCA Super Tours starting with Buttonwillow, the Race Director will require any driver involved in contact to report to impound immediately following the session. The contact will be discussed and then a determination made if action is required, either by the Race Director, the Stewards of the Meet or by one of the drivers in the form of a protest.


Just curious if this impound is on the honor system or if the corners are calling it in. Long ago I did a little bit of flagging. IIRC all "metal-to-metal" contact was called in. After the session there was sometimes a request for an incident report from the corner if someone on the other end deemed further investigation was necessary. Do they still do this or were they overwhelmed by "Spec Pinata" and "Spec Wrecker Ford"? I trust the corner workers judgement on what consititues a reportable incident. Of course you would have to go to impound to find out if it was called in or not, I am just wondering if there is a record of who didn't report besides another driver. 
 

Phase two is where we need feedback. Before we jump in, I think it’s important for everyone to understand SCCA’s penalty process and the license points system that currently exists. It is section 7 of the GCR. The current GCR is here: https://www.scca.com...pdated-may-2017 and it begins on page 56, with the penalty points on page 57.
 
To summarize, the Stewards of the Meet (SOM) or second court – the Court of Appeals (COA) may assign points. The Race Director/Chief Steward has the power to place someone on probation, but not assign points. Points may come with a penalty for the race or season and may include probation or suspension. The points accumulate and stay on your license for three years. Once you hit 11 points on your license over a three-year period, you automatically go on probation for 6 months or 6 events. If you hit 15 points, you are suspended for 6 months. Keep in mind that you could already be placed on probation or suspension for an individual infraction by the SOM or Court of Appeals. The 11 and 15 point totals are just what happens cumulatively.


I just read that again for the first time since drivers' school and the whole thing is confusing as hell. So basically you pretty much only receive points if you've already been penalized? Or does a "reprimand" actually get recorded regularily. I've never heard of anyone getting points, but again I haven't been around much. I think for the contact thing we need an accumulation of points before any penalties take place.

Questions:
 
1.      In order to discourage contact of all kinds, should points be assigned in all instances of contact? Should everyone involved receive a point or points, regardless of their role? This assumes the point assessments need not be equal.

Yes. As we know lots of things are "racing incidents" but if the same people keep ending up in the pile time and time again perhaps they need to reevaluate their level of acceptable risk. If you are "taken out by the other guy" 12~15 times in three years you either have the worst luck ever or are contributing to the problem. I hope it goes without saying that this needs to be limited to bent sheetmetal and not just a rub.

2.      Should the Race Director or Chief Steward have the power to issue 1 point “Reprimands” (#2 on the penalty points list) without having to go to the Stewards of the Meet (SOM)? This would be in the form of a Chief Stewards Action (CSA) and be protestable. The thought here would be primarily for instances of contact that are typically considered “Racing Incidents” and generally go unreported by drivers. The Race Director or Chief Steward could still do a Request for Action (RFA) to ask the SOM to review the incident if more than a reprimand may be required.

Yes. I think what we are asking for is *anyone* in an official capacity to keep a closer eye on what's going on out there. To be honest I'm not familiar with the specific responsibilities of all the titles, but if someone wants to take their time to do this it is appreciated.

3.      Is the point structure, including the points associated with the penalty as well as the timeline appropriate? For instance, points stay on your record for three calendar years from when incurred. Is that duration appropriate? Should this be based on weekends, instead? Should probation kick in more quickly if points are accumulated more quickly?

It seems reasonable, but I only ran 4 regionals last year. Maybe try it like this: "Raise your hand if you would have unfairly lost your privilege to race under the current points structure if points were assesed for every incident of metal-to-metal contact." "No one?" "OK, we'll stick with that for now." Seriously, there are appeals and whatnot.

4.      Should things that might affect another driver indirectly (spins, oil downs, etc.) be assigned points?

No. That's way too grey area. Just the bowling ball antics through the pack.

Thanks in advance for the feedback. The goal is to make the SCCA experience as enjoyable and fair for everyone as possible.

 

Thanks for your time.  It doesn't seem too bad out there right now.  Let's keep it that way.
 
Eric Prill
VP/COO, SCCA

P.S.  I spent a bunch of time breaking up the quote blocks with BBCode and then it told me too many quote blocks.  Hope the bold/orange stands out as my input.  I hate editing quotes...

[steveracer]

I have a long opinion on this, but not enough time to type.

 

It all starts with respect. The drivers need to respect each other. And even more importantly, the drivers need to respect the officials/stewards. Due to a poor history of bad calls, many drivers have lost respect for the officials. That lack of respect/trust has kept many from protesting what should be no brainer decisions.

 

Oil downs, crashes etc. that end a session and then cause the following sessions to be shortened/delayed/cancelled should result in the offending group getting their session shortened/cancelled. If the wings and things group causes a 20 minute delay, Every other group ends up with a shortened session. Only the wings and things group should get their session shortened so everyone else can get their full track time.

 

Dave

Common sense, what a concept.

[Todd Green]

This I would definitely not support. If a driver is punted or involved in contact where he had not fault, no points or penalty should be issued. At summit point there are routine deer wrecks. Other contributing factors such as fluids on track, mechanical failure etc, should be taken in consideration as well.

As others have pointed out, the reasoning behind this (in NASA at least) is that if you get a single mandatory point because you were the victim it is no big deal and will drop off your record.  I'll have to admit that I was a bit livid when it happened to me.  It feels like salt in the wound when you get punted, lose the race (or position(s)) and then get "rewarded" with a point on your license.  But when you have the same guy who has contact with everyone else and is always the "victim" the wisdom of the system can start to be seen and appreciated, IMO.

[Topher]

Eric,

 

Thank you for taking action on this issue and requesting our input.

 

1) No. A driver who is deemed faultless should NOT receive points.  Racing incidents where both drivers are at fault (body damage results or it affects the outcome of the race) should have points distributed evenly.

 

2) Yes. This empowers the Stewards and Race Directors to determine driver culpability. Less paperwork and reduces the likely hood that contact will be brushed off as a 'racing incident.'

 

3) Setting a number of races may be more appropriate. Utilize the number of majors races in each conference per year as a benchmark (6 weekends, 12 races) then add the June Sprints and Runoffs.

 

Total of 8 weekends or 16 races. Reset sooner. Every two seasons or 32 races.

 

Otherwise the system is negatively weighted toward drivers who race more frequently, and may not punish drivers who race less but are more prone to incidents.

 

How strict should the system be? No easy answer.

 

A driver found at fault (assume 2 points per incident) in 1/3 of the attended races (16 majors races) for a given year. That is 12 points (rounded up) accumulated over a 16 race season. 

 

 

4) Yes, if it results in significant contact for another car.