71 replies to this topic

[Jamz14]

So you want a conversation about the non randomness of tech? Ok. Even though we hashed this out a long time ago. Let's do it again.

A long time ago I put forth the best plan I thought presented to date. Go search it, I don't feel like rewriting something that will never go anywhere. If random tech isn't, then you guys are accusing people of having it out for you. You want to split legal hairs, then prove it. The perception of guilt is not guilt.

Why don't you do something about it? The people here have the ability to ensure tech is random. Problem is that every schema they come up with still has them being torn down because they are winning!!! People bitching about tech procedures will always be going on and people getting torn down will never be happy. Jim is the most accepting person of all of you about being torn down all the time. Still, he isn't happy about it. But I THINK he us somewhat cool with it because there is no solution that will make everyone happy. Or it would be implemented by now.

But you guys have the power to fix it if you think it is flawed. So do it and stop complaining.

Or, is this a forum? Forums are where we bitch and wrestling pigs?

[FTodaro]

Although I applaud your attempt at bringing this back to topic, I believe the proper legal term for what you are describing is arbitrary, as I was not there I could not attest to the capricious nature of the ruling. 

True, to your point. I was trying to stick to the topic, which we are not doing. Now that you have opened the door a bit wider what ever the motive there with that NASA deal they dealt themselves a blow. 

[Steve Scheifler]

And people accuse me of abusing deceased equine.

As for non-random tech, I’m for it to a limited extent when someone has a history of rule violations, and when tech has been alerted to issues which may or may not already be on their radar and done by a particular person or shop. I’d even take a tip from the Russians. If it proves untrue, fine, the source loses some credibility but tech is free to check whatever they choose. Actual protests are just too expensive and too divisive to be the only means of exposing something. We already have highly invasive tech, if they decide a tip is worth investigating then so be it.

[MPR22]

And people accuse me of abusing deceased equine.

As for non-random tech, I’m for it to a limited extent when someone has a history of rule violations, and when tech has been alerted to issues which may or may not already be on their radar and done by a particular person or shop. I’d even take a tip from the Russians. If it proves untrue, fine, the source loses some credibility but tech is free to check whatever they choose. Actual protests are just too expensive and too divisive to be the only means of exposing something. We already have highly invasive tech, if they decide a tip is worth investitroating then so be it.

And the cork goes down.  

 

 

Now imagine a racing organization that had an axe to grind with a certain individual or shop, now imagine if they repeatedly tore down a certain individual or shops cars...  how long until people stop either A) racing with that organization or b> stop using that preps shops engines/services.  

 

There is clearly a large group of people who want to race with a specific organization over the other.   

 

It would be easier for said individuals to change banners on their windshields than to change organizations.  

 

And then random is not so random.  

 

Doubt its happening?  

[Steve Scheifler]

And the cork goes down.


Now imagine a racing organization that had an axe to grind with a certain individual or shop, now imagine if they repeatedly tore down a certain individual or shops cars... how long until people stop either A) racing with that organization or b> stop using that preps shops engines/services.

There is clearly a large group of people who want to race with a specific organization over the other.

It would be easier for said individuals to change banners on their windshields than to change organizations.

And then random is not so random.

Doubt its happening?

I’m probably just more dense than the aforementioned cork, but can you be a bit more clear? Just to be clear from my side, my comments were not at all about CV gate, though it might very well have begun with such a tip. It wasn’t even about slotted suspension parts, which I believe probably did begin with a tip even before the best known episode. Talk of what different shops and builders are doing gets around, some of it may even have a basis in fact as cars from one shop are sold and later serviced by another. And with or without that, if the “second string” cars from a particular shop have been lucky in the random draw for a long time, what’s wrong with a less than random selection occasionally? We are relying on the honesty and integrity of tech officials regardless of who they pull in or why and it’s certainly more fair than hitting the same drivers/shops over and over based solely on winning and chance.

[Ron Alan]

Parrots and pigs...very random. (come on Denny!)

[Martinracing98]

I am made of rubber, your made of glue whatever you say....

 

Never mind. That was another debate a looong time ago.

[MPR22]

I’m probably just more dense than the aforementioned cork, but can you be a bit more clear? Just to be clear from my side, my comments were not at all about CV gate, though it might very well have begun with such a tip. It wasn’t even about slotted suspension parts, which I believe probably did begin with a tip even before the best known episode. Talk of what different shops and builders are doing gets around, some of it may even have a basis in fact as cars from one shop are sold and later serviced by another. And with or without that, if the “second string” cars from a particular shop have been lucky in the random draw for a long time, what’s wrong with a less than random selection occasionally? We are relying on the honesty and integrity of tech officials regardless of who they pull in or why and it’s certainly more fair than hitting the same drivers/shops over and over based solely on winning and chance.

 

I’m probably just more dense than the aforementioned cork, but can you be a bit more clear? Just to be clear from my side, my comments were not at all about CV gate, though it might very well have begun with such a tip. It wasn’t even about slotted suspension parts, which I believe probably did begin with a tip even before the best known episode. Talk of what different shops and builders are doing gets around, some of it may even have a basis in fact as cars from one shop are sold and later serviced by another. And with or without that, if the “second string” cars from a particular shop have been lucky in the random draw for a long time, what’s wrong with a less than random selection occasionally? We are relying on the honesty and integrity of tech officials regardless of who they pull in or why and it’s certainly more fair than hitting the same drivers/shops over and over based solely on winning and chance.

It is 100% about the integrity of the tech official and the racing organization.  We have two organizations that have dealt with very difficult tech situations.  One of them has elected officials that are accountable to the membership, the other has dictators who are accountable to their own egos.  

 

I am 100% for podium or top 5 or whatever the number is getting as much invasive tech as necessary at the Run-offs or NASA Nationals.  The rest of the year we are racing for 5 trophies (and contingency).  At the big races we are spending $5k on the low end and more like $10k to compete on a level playing field for the win.  Add to that the prestige of the win and the prize and contingency $$$$ at stake and it gets real very fast. 

 

At these events we deserve a defined protocol for parts removal, impound and inspection practices.  

 

As for the rest of the year, we need a better system of "random". 

 

I know what you have said happens, whispers in the paddock about what builder A is doing, then tech feels they need to check those parts, then they check a car and find nothing, but the whispers continue so they pull more of those builders cars in and pretty soon the cost of builder A is not worth the price of admission for many of those customers. I truly feel random keeps more of the field in line with the rules. I have had to go past plenty of back markers and mid pack guys in the past and many more of those cars (IMHO) are not compliant than the group that keeps getting torn down. 

[Steve Scheifler]

I guess my main comment would be that any plan or process executed by incompetent or biased individuals is unacceptable, but that’s no reason to stop following possible leads to a reasonable extent or to dumb things down to pointlessness.

[SpecMiataManDrama]

Goddamn cheaters. Every last one of yous. Even us. 

[LarryKing]

"Goddamn cheaters. Every last one of yous. Even us."

Post of the year.

[Pat Mcg]

just get rid of tech except for safety..  so much crap out there anyways...   Cheat... such a BS word...  it should be called "Interpretation"...