John - Thanks for letting Walsh off the hook and for the contact info - I guess from this distance Pennsylvania and New York look pretty close to each other so I just sort of assumed PA was in John's bailiwick. Main point tho was that when drivers have a legit beef with steward conduct they should take it up with higher authority and not just let it go.

enzo wrote:Don't hold your breath waiting for the track to make any changes for the SCCA racers, their attitude has always been "we make more selling popcorn at a NASCAR race than we make off of an SCCA weekend". That's a quote from one of the track personnel from a few years back.

The track does fix things, but it's always after there's a scary crash or someone gets hurt. That's just flat out negligent.

Thanks Jeff. I can only hope my car continues to run as well as it has at the Runoffs in a few weeks.

The Pocono infield runoff situation has been less than ideal for several years, as several have noted. Whether SCCA has ever asked the track to address the previous jumps and bumps I can't say. My sense from speaking with George Bloeser after the event is that the stewards were previously unaware of the problems and, therefore, have never expressed concerns. But now, with the track's recent changes to make infield RV parking more attractive, the off track runoff situation is terrible. We might actually be better off with unprotected walls (ala Three Rivers) because we'd, at least, know what we were dealing with.

It is the "not knowing what we're dealing with" part that I view as an SCCA failure. When I was a motorcycle road racer, we were often informed by race officials of situations (including at Pocono, incidentally) that they felt presented safety issues that we should be alert to. They would describe the situation and then tell us we should each make a judgment whether we were comfortable racing. If not, we were able to withdraw and recieve a complete entry fee refund. We were also allowed to walk the track and see the situation for ourselves before making a judgment. Hardly anyone left, but we knew what we were dealing with and could only blame ourselves if a known problem bit one of us.

Here, the track environment had apparently changed significantly since any of us had last been there, and we were not informed of the changes. I do not know whether SCCA was informed of the changes. Irrepective, it is the responsibility of the stewards to tour the track and its surrounds, to identify possible problems, and bring them to the drivers' attention if they cannot be addressed directly. This was not done.

We've had to deal with cones at Pocono forever. Never before, however, do I recall full course yellows because one or more cones was hit. I can recall cones lying right on the line in previous events and being faced with the choice of either hitting them or trying to drive around them. No big deal either way.

Why did the stewards feel that a change had to be made? Because of the exit of the chicane, we were told, for safety reasons. Ok, but our first full course yellow wasn't because the exit of the chicane cones had been hit. That yellow was entirely unnecessary as a safety matter. The second full course yellow was, we were told, because three of the exit cones were hit. I don't know that they were, because by the time I got back to the chicane, at the head of the pack shortly after picking up the pace car, they were back in place. There was no safety reason why we could not have taken the green at that point. So why no green for the last three laps? Because Chuck Dobbs was pissed off that we had disregarded their instructions not to hit any cones?!?!? Quite plainly, we were denied 4 or 5 laps of racing, that we paid for, because "we" misbehaved; not because there was an unsafe condition. Does this stuff happen with NASA?

I chatted with Walsh yesterday evening, and although not his responsibility, I believe he'll follow up.

Michael Hausknecht (NE#60)

BTW - congrats to Mike H on the win.

LeeHill wrote:John - Thanks for letting Walsh off the hook and for the contact info - I guess from this distance Pennsylvania and New York look pretty close to each other so I just sort of assumed PA was in John's bailiwick. Main point tho was that when drivers have a legit beef with steward conduct they should take it up with higher authority and not just let it go.

ABSOLUTELY.

If you are unhappy with the way that any event official treats you, speak with the Chief Steward, who is the operational executive for the weekend. He/she can often resolve the problem.

Depending on the particular situation (e.g. if an official penalized you for something), you may protest any official action, unless specifically exempt from protest, per the supps or GCR.

If you are dissatisfied with the Chief Steward's (non-)action, escalate it to the Division Executive Steward. The Exec likely cannot change the event results, but can deal with official misconduct.

Do not suffer in silence (or simply complain later on a forum - this is roughly equivalent to suffering in silence). Raise the issue, politely and coherently, to your Exec. This does not make you a sh*t-disturber; it is your right as a member.

If you need help or advice, I offer a Driver Advisor on Call service (see: driverinfo.johnnesbitt.com). I can explain the rules and process, give you contacts, and generally help you get started.

If you're interested in seeing what the off-track conditions at Pocono mean you can see photos of Mike Amy's incident here:

https://plus.google.com/photos/118018812831304048651/albums/5778548106312545041?authkey=CLaOsZ688K7eiAE

Note that he is only about one car width off the track when he hits the RV access road.

Mike, I hope you don't mind me posting these...but you have to admit, they are pretty spectacular.

Tristan

I'm glad to hear everyone is alright.

In my opinion, SCCA/NESCCA needs to put pressure on the track to do something about turns 2 & 3.

In 10 years of on/off racing at Pocono I've probably seen 15-20 serious accidents at that corner (including maybe one or two myself, both in FM and SRF) including about 5 cars go end over end there, and glad Mike Amy didn't do it. Those were scary pics.

The problem is the asphalt 'lip' between the track and the grass/dirt. Once you just drop a slight wheel off, the car goes completely off balance and you become a passenger, only to then re-hit the track where it turns, essentially creating a jump.

Attention to the issue may not be as hard to get as we think. if I remember correctly .. Jerry Wannarka himself rolled his car there a few years ago in a TC class.

I quit racing at Pocono for far more pedestrian reasons. The Men's room stunk. I was firmly convinced if the water closet was pissy - then the track was crappy.....

Congrats Mike on your win.

I live about 30 minutes from pocono and know the president and vp who are now directing the track. Their intent is to improve conditions with the infield tracks. For many years, the conditions have continued to degrade, but based on my conversations, changes are in the works. I will discuss the accidents that occured in turn one/two with them the next time we are together and let them know the level of dissatisfaction that is prevalent. Due to my proximity to the track and the abundance of time I spent there with the Roos Racing School/series, I chose not to run there because of the overall condition of the facility relative to our road racing. I am not ready to give up on it totally as I truly believe good things are on the horizon.

George Bloeser of Tri-Region Race Group is also going to be talking about the dangerous infield condition with Pocono track management and he will ample photo and video evidence to show them.