IMSA Race 2015 Rolex 24 at Daytona

[schmidder]

If they have a rule book..they should apply it as written or change the rules. I would bet turner would agree.

[GT-Eins]

We did some performance comparisations regarding the D24:
http://www.gt-eins.at/cms/index.php?...=9893&Itemid=1

Top-Speed as Example here:


More of this will follow in our extensive race-report:
http://www.gt-eins.de/Berichte2015/2...a/daytona.html
(scroll down to the very bottom of the page)

[TF110]

Think that shows just how low on power Mazda is. Near 10mph down on the Fords. Shank looked more than 5mph slower while watching the race, but the hpd was slightly faster according to your graph.

[Dodge_Swinger]

Originally Posted by Lagunaseca_4life

Dodge_swinger

Chill out a bit,no body called anyone stupid.
And Mike isn't one to do that either.i don't know what you're bitter about,but relax.....it's just racing.

......never mind maelochs got it handled....

I'm bitter because I used to invest a lot of my free time following this type of racing. I used to follow F1 in the 80s and early 90s, mainly because I lived in England for five years (former Air Force) and got to see the Senna/Prost/Mansell et al battles first hand, but lost interest about mid-way through the Schmacher era. I went to Road Atlanta in the spring of 81 and was hooked. My home town is just south of Hampton, GA, which is home to Atlanta Motor Speedway (the NASCAR track). I went to race in 1977 and other than the fact that my friends and I were able to just walk up and sit on the pit exit wall with our feet dangling about five feet from cars exiting the pits, I wasn't impressed enough to be a fan. I also followed Indycar from the late 80s up to the CART/IRL split.

It's not "just racing" to me. Although my degree isn't in electrical engineering, it's the work I perform in support of military aircraft. (The title is "military contractor", but I prefer the more politically correct term "war whore".) I guess I'm not a "racing" fan, because I only follow endurance racing. I like it for two specific reasons: The cars are almost as high tech as the aircraft I work on and I feel like it's the last bastion of "pure" motor sports. Sure, even Le Mans isn't quite as wide open as it used to be, but the P1 cars are beyond awesome and the ACO doesn't consider cars winning by several laps to be a problem.

I used to plan a significant amount of my vacation time around attending ALMS. I've attended every Petit except the Monsoon and 2013. I've been to Sebring eight times. I thouroughly liked the "product", even when car counts were down.

All things must change. I look in the mirror and see it more and more every day. However, I hope that underneath the lost hair and wrinkles, I've maintained the "core" of who I am, at least the "good" parts. I hope for the same with endurance racing.

I understand the financial realities of racing at the level of Audi, Toyota, Porsche, etc. It appears that few, if any people in the US are willing to step up to that level. GM is content to slap bodywork on an existing chassis and call it a Corvette, which reminds me of those body kits that turn a Pontiac Fiero into a Ferrari or Lamborghini. GM calls it "high tech". I call it "urinating on my head and telling me it's raining".

The wave-by procedures are more liberal. More than one commentator has mentioned it. Scott Atherton calls it "strategic". More warm precipitation, IMO.

I'm a bit curious to see what IMSA's response will be to the petition regarding pit procedures. I agree that there is a safety aspect to the petition and I support that. I also believe that the petition has a second agenda, which is to restore tire strategy to the equation. I support that, too. For me, it restores something I like about endurance racing. I predict that IMSA will come up with a reason not to implement this change. Whatever it is, it won't be for the real reason, which is that it will upset their carefully devised BoP. In other words, I'm forecasting rain.

Yes, I'm bitter. Some aspects of TUSC are due to harsh reality, i.e. funding. It's disappointing, but no more disappointing than seeing that Racquel Welch (those of you under 40 use Google) is "mortal" and ages just like the rest of us, although in her case, it's aging like a fine wine. I accept that and I think that most reasonable people do, too. The things I have issue with are those that TUSC chooses to do, yet calls them something else. In TUSC Land, a Fiero with a body kit IS a Ferrari.

Yes, I'm bitter.

[Coach Ep]

Originally Posted by Dodge_Swinger

I understand the financial realities of racing at the level of Audi, Toyota, Porsche, etc. It appears that few, if any people in the US are willing to step up to that level. GM is content to slap bodywork on an existing chassis and call it a Corvette, which reminds me of those body kits that turn a Pontiac Fiero into a Ferrari or Lamborghini. GM calls it "high tech". I call it "urinating on my head and telling me it's raining".

Thanks for a 'bitter' post with a rather personal touch to it - I certainly share quite a bit of your bitterness but hope not all is gloom!

I singled this part of your comment out cause with the freshly introduced Nissan effort it seems that there's a genuine US program lined up - although under a 'global' banner and done by a Japanese manufacturer as opposed to one of the big American ones but nevertheless. And IF Nismo will succeed to successfully challenge their P1 competitors - and more importantly, manages to exploit that feat commercially - it might just sparkle GM to change their strategy...???

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by Dodge_Swinger

GM is content to slap bodywork on an existing chassis and call it a Corvette, which reminds me of those body kits that turn a Pontiac Fiero into a Ferrari or Lamborghini. GM calls it "high tech". I call it "urinating on my head and telling me it's raining".

Originally Posted by Dodge_Swinger

Whatever it is, it won't be for the real reason, which is that it will upset their carefully devised BoP. In other words, I'm forecasting rain.

But anyway, well put together post. Having extremely negative things to say about altered product doesn't make you 'whiner' if you have reasons for it and have had to, well, much alter your own lifestyles in exchange

Coach, I believe more likely scenario would be that the P1 manufacturers want to go back to the big US races eventually and try to lobby IMSA to allow them in. I'd think their word would have more value than GM's alone (Ford's going away anyway), certainly if it was more than Audi alone. I'd give that 0,2% chance of succeeding during the next decade, slightly more than with your GM scenario. However both still have bigger chance of happening than WEC establishing anything more than their Grade 1 six hourers...

[ATLFalconsFAN]

I agree with everything Dodge Swinger said. I was emotionally and financially tied into what once was. In the sense that I obsessed and thought about it constantly, and planned my vacations around the races I attended, spending many thousands of dollars to attend them.

I am bitter, but even worse than that I am sad. Sad that something I loved was taken away, drug through the mud and is now advertised as being even better, even though it clearly isn't.

[skycafe]

Originally Posted by EricS

Do they have to give up the 3rd place trophy? Or since the podium pictures were already taken, they get to keep it? I forgot if that was a TUSC rule or one from the GA/ALMS days

I'm sorry, but what sort of team would keep a trophy from a finish they have been excluded from?

[Ephaeton]

Originally Posted by skycafe

I'm sorry, but what sort of team would keep a trophy from a finish they have been excluded from?

A team racing in a series whose VPs have publicly stated, supposedly speaking for the series, that the on-track-fan experience of a podium ceremony is worth more than having results with integrity. In that light, it is already surprising that they've actually changed the points outcome of the race and the team forfeited the prize money for 3rd. I feel the question was quite legit, seeing as which dubious of organization was being talked about.

[BullMan]

IMSA isn't really doing themselves any favors here:

http://sportscar365.com/imsa/tusc/ba...ime-violation/

BAR1 fails to meet minimum drive time and loses ALL points, except the one they got for starting the race. Same type of infraction as WTR, yet the penalties are completely different.

I understand LMPC is a pro-am class, and having a am driver not meet drive time is a big issue, but I don't think they should get the death penalty while WTR was coddled.

[Salamus]

But, they're different infractions.

This is a farce. Favoritism at its finest.

[chernaudi]

Only thing I can think of without IMSA/NASCAR dropping the ball is that WTR is in the NAEC and BAR1 isn't.

Of course, that doesn't make much sense, either, because though TUSCC and the NAEC are separate championships, the same sanctioning bodies run both and they run to the same sporting and technical regs.

Still, seems on paper to be two different rulings for the same basic rules violation. I'd like to see an explanation from Dagys or Pruett on what reasoning for the different rulings are. Not to mention that it sucks that IMSA couldn't make an announcement within a day of the race ending unless WTR or BAR1 filed appeals that we don't know about.

I mean, for example, Delta-ADR/G-Drive were DQ's from LM in '13 for an oversized fuel tank, and the ACO and FIA announced that shortly after the race ended. G-Drive filed an appeal which was turned own by the ACO a couple of weeks later, but the whole process was made public by the ACO, the FIA, and the team.

I do agree with those who think that there's more than one thing butt-backwards and befuddling about how IMSA arrived at these conclusions and why IMSA waited for over a week with WTR and nearly two with BAR1 to announce any penalties for something that would seemingly be black and white and easy to determine if a rule was broken or not.

[joeb]

Continuing with the strange rules theme, if you look at the Series Points standings, and scroll to the bottom to see who is leading the GTD Manufacturers champ you will see Dodge is nowhere to be found. I guess they didn't make the appropriate payments?

[fieldodreams79]

I wouldn't mind the long delays on rulings if the rulings seemed more consistent. Not sure they can see the forest for the trees.

[J Jay]

Well at least this year's race was kind enough to not give major reason to complain until after the chequered flag ...

Originally Posted by fieldodreams79

I wouldn't mind the long delays on rulings if the rulings seemed more consistent. Not sure they can see the forest for the trees.

It's the relative lack of clarity that is the most bothering. I don't doubt that the teams involved would fight tooth-and-nail to argue the decision, but shouldn't that mean IMSA are even more determined to make sure the rules are applied correctly in all cases?

[Mike Hedlund]

The only thing that's troubling to me is that the penalty for WTR was clearly described in the rule book, and yet... they decided after the fact to ignore it. That really bothers me.

-mike

[seanyb505]

Curious as to conclusions you've come to as a result...

[Maelochs]

Did TUSC fell too much affection from the fan base and get scared, causing the retreat into repeating past bad behavior?

[Lagunaseca_4life]

Originally Posted by joeb

Continuing with the strange rules theme, if you look at the Series Points standings, and scroll to the bottom to see who is leading the GTD Manufacturers champ you will see Dodge is nowhere to be found. I guess they didn't make the appropriate payments?

Yup! Ben keating openly came out and spoke his mind about this when he was planing his 2015 program.he said that he really didn't want to do gtd because he was worried about getting unfair treatment in rules and bop because he is running a car that's not a manufacturer partner anymore.

If you notice bucklers aston martins are not listed there either.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

Originally Posted by BullMan

IMSA isn't really doing themselves any favors here:

http://sportscar365.com/imsa/tusc/ba...ime-violation/

BAR1 fails to meet minimum drive time and loses ALL points, except the one they got for starting the race. Same type of infraction as WTR, yet the penalties are completely different.

I understand LMPC is a pro-am class, and having a am driver not meet drive time is a big issue, but I don't think they should get the death penalty while WTR was coddled.

Ughhhh like I said throwing a bone to a grand am favorite! I swear my disdain for than team grows bigger race after race.and the thought of Wayne Taylor going up on the sebring hall of fame is disgusting.

[Salamus]

Originally Posted by Mike Hedlund

The only thing that's troubling to me is that the penalty for WTR was clearly described in the rule book, and yet... they decided after the fact to ignore it. That really bothers me.

-mike

Exactly! I have never heard of any series or sports league change a ruling during an event. If you see a problem with the rule, change it after the event so it doesn't screw over the next team. WTR knew the rule, it's their fault and they should get the proper punishment.

[Lagunaseca_4life]

Originally Posted by Salamus

Exactly! I have never heard of any series or sports league change a ruling during an event. If you see a problem with the rule, change it after the event so it doesn't screw over the next team. WTR knew the rule, it's their fault and they should get the proper punishment.

NFL!

[Salamus]

Originally Posted by Lagunaseca_4life

NFL!

Is that a sports league? I thought it was part of the entertainment gossip industry

[TRspitfirefan]

Originally Posted by Mike Hedlund

The only thing that's troubling to me is that the penalty for WTR was clearly described in the rule book, and yet... they decided after the fact to ignore it. That really bothers me.

-mike

^ That.

[TRspitfirefan]

Originally Posted by Mike Hedlund

You guys realize that the lap down wave-by isn't a guarantee, rite?

It only happens if you're between the pace car and the overall or your class leader.

Some of you are getting so worked up over things you clearly don't understand -- Relax and take a breath.

-mike

"Not understanding" is not the problem here. The second wave-by (LDWB) is for cars that wound up between the pace car and the overall leader, by simply not pitting when the lead lap cars do. Then after regaining a lap by taking the LDWB teams are allowed to pit before the yellow is ended.
How is this not a free lap back?