rules meant to be broken

#21

[quote=“RRhodes” post=62649]I agree with you to a point Scott, but I’m not sure about your statement:

I’m an engineer and spend an inordinate amount of time dealing with the disagreements between various interpretations of ambiguous English and the precise functionality of devices defined by mathematics and physics. Seems like there’s almost always room for (mis)interpretation.

[quote](i.e. it will assume the characteristics of the car from which the
engine was donated).[/quote]

For instance prior to your post I would have interpreted the above to mean that no matter what chassis I used, when swapping in the '87 drivetrain I would now need the power windows too to meet the spirit and (arguably) the letter of the rules. Now you’ve introduced what seems like a valid argument that in fact it creates a loophole I could “exploit”. Makes my brain hurt.[/quote]

Fair point. If guidance is written ambiguously than there are going to be different interpretations.

You missed an episode a couple yrs ago re. what we could remove from the interior. The paragraph in question was unambiguous. The problem was it didn’t say what most everyone thought it said. My point is that when folks get their panties in a wad and start citing specific paragraphs in the rules, a person has to focus on what the paragraph really says, not what a casual reading seems to extract from it.

In the end tho, like Robert says, it comes down to the common sense of the Regional (or National) director. Also, we’re a fairly informal bunch that, with few exceptions, are entirely nice and reasonable guys. It’s common for a Regional director to ask at a racer’s meeting…“ok, < > has been brought to my attention and it could be a problem with the rules. Does anyone care about it” and then he looks for folks to speak their mind.

#22

Thanks Scott.
Can’t wait to go racing with my go fast brothers in the Southeast.

RP

#23

I’m thinking that getting my panties in a wad could be the highlight of a race weekend! Golly, all these nits to pick and barely any time left over to actually drive the car. Relax folks, don’t try to create an issue where none exists. Our rules have been parsed by all manner of well-educated grammarians, and yet there remain anomalies.

Life is short, so strap in, shut up, and hang on, as the bumper sticker says.

#24

[quote=“Ranger” post=62652][quote=“RRhodes” post=62649]I agree with you to a point Scott, but I’m not sure about your statement:

I’m an engineer and spend an inordinate amount of time dealing with the disagreements between various interpretations of ambiguous English and the precise functionality of devices defined by mathematics and physics. Seems like there’s almost always room for (mis)interpretation.

[quote](i.e. it will assume the characteristics of the car from which the
engine was donated).[/quote]

For instance prior to your post I would have interpreted the above to mean that no matter what chassis I used, when swapping in the '87 drivetrain I would now need the power windows too to meet the spirit and (arguably) the letter of the rules. Now you’ve introduced what seems like a valid argument that in fact it creates a loophole I could “exploit”. Makes my brain hurt.[/quote]

Fair point. If guidance is written ambiguously than there are going to be different interpretations.

You missed an episode a couple yrs ago re. what we could remove from the interior. The paragraph in question was unambiguous. The problem was it didn’t say what most everyone thought it said. My point is that when folks get their panties in a wad and start citing specific paragraphs in the rules, a person has to focus on what the paragraph really says, not what a casual reading seems to extract from it.

In the end tho, like Robert says, it comes down to the common sense of the Regional (or National) director. Also, we’re a fairly informal bunch that, with few exceptions, are entirely nice and reasonable guys. It’s common for a Regional director to ask at a racer’s meeting…“ok, < > has been brought to my attention and it could be a problem with the rules. Does anyone care about it” and then he looks for folks to speak their mind.[/quote]

I guess I’m not sure at this point why the questions can’t be simply answered. It is or it isn’t for most of this stuff.

#25

[quote=“ctbimmer” post=62654]I’m thinking that getting my panties in a wad could be the highlight of a race weekend! Golly, all these nits to pick and barely any time left over to actually drive the car. Relax folks, don’t try to create an issue where none exists. Our rules have been parsed by all manner of well-educated grammarians, and yet there remain anomalies.

Life is short, so strap in, shut up, and hang on, as the bumper sticker says.[/quote]

That’s great until you get DQ’d for something stupid and lose out on contingency money because you interpreted the rules a different way.

Didn’t this already happen a few times in this series?

#26

Top of mind, I can’t remember when someone was DQd for something ‘stupid’. Are there examples anyone can cite where this occurred?

Our rules, as a document, are not and never will be 100% unambiguous, which is why common sense needs to be part of the equation.

#27

We’ve got to start assigning mentors. Every 6 months we repeat the same endless circle jerks that result in the same answer. “If the rules fail to mention it, fail to screw with it. Now go race and worry about it later”.

This isn’t a criticism of you newbies. You don’t know that we’ve all gone thru this a number of times. And to you it’s a serious question. I promise you that after a couple yrs of racing you’ll be telling newbies…“oh for christ’s sake quit worrying about it and go race”.

That out of the way…let’s talk about oil pressure. I’ve been thinking and…

#28

[quote=“Foglght” post=62655]
I guess I’m not sure at this point why the questions can’t be simply answered. It is or it isn’t for most of this stuff.[/quote]
What question has gone entirely unanswered?

#29

i bet steve can :slight_smile:

#30

Sorry to have stirred up old controversies. The question was a little rhetorical because, being genetically inclined to laziness, I usually automatically follow Ranger’s advice. [quote]if the rules fail to mention it, fail to screw with it[/quote] But no matter how many times I read the rules I realize I’ve missed something, forgotten something, or not understood that I needed to check and see if something was covered. Plus there’s the misinterpretation thing. I’m pretty much guaranteed a valid interpretation if I ask a bunch of folks who have already had to wrastle with it rather than just sit here in a dark room and argue with myself. My wife inexplicably finds this disturbing. Anyway thanks for the education, again.

#31

My wife also finds it disturbing when I argue with myself. Even though I’ve explained that arguing with yourself is only bad if you loose the argument.

#32

My wife usually feels the need to pick a side at which point I get confused about who’s going to end up sleeping on the couch.

#33

9.3.13.22. The following interior components may be removed: carpeting, seats, headliner (to
include the leading plastic panel), console, radio/cd/cassette/navigation/trip computer
systems, OEM seat belts, speakers, glove box door, panels under the dash, grab
handles, [color=#ff0000]driver and passenger door (front and rear) window glass and mechanisms[/color],
heating and cooling system interior ducts, rear passenger compartment trim panels (side
panels and fabric package shelf) and sun visors. The third brake light shall remain in
place and a custom bracket may be used to secure it to the steel package shelf.

7.4.2. The driver or drivers’ last names shall be placed in block print letters approximately three
inches tall on each rear quarter panel window or rear door window and on the lower
passenger side front windshield.

Who’s going to see my name if my rear windows are in a box in the garage. When I showed up at CMP to be a corner worker I realized that hey everybody has rear windows so I should probably put them back in.

#34

[quote=“turbo329is” post=62665]9.3.13.22. The following interior components may be removed: carpeting, seats, headliner (to
include the leading plastic panel), console, radio/cd/cassette/navigation/trip computer
systems, OEM seat belts, speakers, glove box door, panels under the dash, grab
handles, [color=#ff0000]driver and passenger door (front and rear) window glass and mechanisms[/color],
heating and cooling system interior ducts, rear passenger compartment trim panels (side
panels and fabric package shelf) and sun visors. The third brake light shall remain in
place and a custom bracket may be used to secure it to the steel package shelf.

7.4.2. The driver or drivers’ last names shall be placed in block print letters approximately three
inches tall on each rear quarter panel window or rear door window and on the lower
passenger side front windshield.

Who’s going to see my name if my rear windows are in a box in the garage. When I showed up at CMP to be a corner worker I realized that hey everybody has rear windows so I should probably put them back in.[/quote]

The reference to rear windows is in the context of doors. It’s a 4 door issue, not applicable to coupes. But the point remains that a 4 door doesn’t have a wing window large enough to put a last name more than a couple characters so there’s a weakness there.

#35

Are you saying that with a four door I have a choice whether to run rear door windows or not. That is how I originally interpreted it but after not seeing a single se30 without rear door windows I assumed it was a mistake in the rules and put them back in.

#36

Only Carter and the Regionals were privy to the discussions on the wording of that rule change. IIRC it was me requesting that particular paragraph get changed because it’s predecessor was just causing confusion. If I had to guess I’d say that they allowed the removal of all door windows and forgot about the need for realestate to put the driver’s name.

To solve it they can either direct us to leave the rear windows in place or tell us that in this scenario we can put our name just below the rear passenger windows.

We talk about requesting rule changes a lot, but I rarely hear of someone actually doing it. If you can make a good case for a rule change, and have a specific recommendation for the new text, it has every chance of getting approved. I’ve gotten >10 changes approved.

#37

You’ve solved my confusion about that rule I think except that if it’s legal why hasn’t anyone done it.

#38

Well, and I’ll try to say this diplomatically, most of the guys that have been racing a while just can’t be bothered with this rule minutia. They check the rules when they first come out each year for problems. Then 12 months will go by before they can be bothered with the rules again. It’s the newbies that are obsessing over this (rule minutia, not windows).

#39

This is the right time of year if not a little late to bring up rule changes. My name is already on the windows in white lettering so I’m not taking them out now. Just need to find the American flag decals and my stickering is complete.

#40

Removing the windows destroys the aero.