Is it cheating??

[Mark75H]

If you don't understand the rules?

If everyone in your region is doing it?

If you are not getting caught?

If everyone who places in the top 3 in your class is doing it?

[Andrew 4CE]

I think cheating is to intentionally do it. Whatever they are doing would still illegal, but I wouldn't call it cheating unless they know about it.

[Tim Chance]

Was it Smokey Yunick that said: "It's not cheating if you don't get caught.", or something like that.

[Bill Van Steenwyk]

according to his autobiography (actually three separate books, some of the best reading you will ever do, he was a fascinating person and not only insofar as racing is concerned) his philosophy was basically "if it doesn't say you couldn't, I did. I just read the rule book carefully. If a nut, bolt, or part wasn't specifically mentioned, or a measurement wasn't given, I assumed those items were fair game. Even if they said "stock", what the hell did that mean? They needed to say "stock as of a certain day". Stock can change a lot depending on when and where a part was made. As a result of my reading of the rules, by 1970 half of the technical section of the Nascar rule book, was dedicated to me - quite an honor actually."

One example of his ingenuity was a Nascar rule that stated "nothing can be removed from the cylinder head". Smokey followed that to the letter of the law by not touching the head, but either decking the block or jacking up the pistons, thereby not breaking the existing rule, but still accomplishing the same thing performance wise.

I am sure that type thinking was not unique to car racing. Maybe some day someone will write a book like his about boat racing, and "pushing the envelope".

Thats why I always like the PRO category. A minimum of BS inspection and protest wise.

[Steve Litzell]

If you don't understand the rules?

If everyone in your region is doing it?

If you are not getting caught?

If everyone who places in the top 3 in your class is doing it?

Cheating is when anything is done aginst what the rules say. period! Like Bill Van's coment, If it does not say then it is fair game. That is what gets me about Stock Outboard, The rule say's stock but the front runners have perfect motors that the manufacture never made. Thus you have blueprinted motors for some but not all. This is why I believe that if you have a spec, then you should be allowed to grind, weld ,fill, or what ever to make the motor to manufacture min/max specs. In all types of racing there are rules, and in between the rules is where I like to play. I have made plenty Drag cars and boat engines by what the rules don't say rather than by what they do say. Race On! Steve

[88workcar]

If you don't understand the rules?Still illegal

If everyone in your region is doing it?are they winning

If you are not getting caught?still cheating

If everyone who places in the top 3 in your class is doing it?would have to be brought before the officials and ither made legal of disqualify all particpants
Just my thoughts

[Master Oil Racing Team]

My Dad and Henry Wagner had numerous discussions at the APBA National Conventions. My Dad, like you Bill Van, liked PRO because of the few hassles and simple, quick inspections. My Dad always said "If it's not in the rule book....you can do it." Henry always said "If it's not in the rule book you can't do it." Since PRO was the category with the least restrictions.....it was the only category to experiment in. Look at the advances with exhaust sytems, and loop charging, reeds, valves, heads, etc. According to the rule book prior to around 1975, hydroplanes were illegal because they used lifting devices. The Butt's Aerowing would have never ignited the picklefork advancements had the rule book been strictly adhered to. I am very much against cheating, but I am also opposed to legitimate progress being tied down in an open class. In stock, that's a whole different issue.

[Bill Van Steenwyk]

a whole thread could be devoted to Henry, if there isn't already. I seem to remember some stories about Henry on BRF, but don't know just where to find them right now.

I know Ron Hill would have some tales to tell about Henry, and there is one about Henry and Ed Thrilby clashing at Ackworth, Ga., in the early to mid 80's about the legality of a C Service engine that Eddie won a championship with and then was disqualified in inspection. I posted that myself and the discussion/disagreement about the legality of that engine was a sight to see.

Wayne's comment about how his Dad and Henry looked at the rule book really gives you the two extremes about how it can be looked at by two different people. I did not know Henry Wagner as well as some, but I knew him well enough I knew there was a very small chance in prevailing in a difference of opinion with him. Ed Thrilby was the only person who I can remember that ever did prevail, when I was around where he was inspecting, and there was a difference of opinion.

[Mark75H]

I'm not talking about "fuzzy" rules ... the ones that are bothering me right now are pretty clear.

For you alky guys ... suppose someone found a way to use nitromethane today and not be detected? I think its pretty clear in the rule book, that nitro is not allowed, right?

(This isn't what is happening, but its along the same lines ... not something that's stretching the letter of the rule, its pretty clear, just not detected - one racer told me, if it couldn't be detected ... it was legal.)

[Bill Van Steenwyk]

Sam:

I know little or nothing about stock rules, BUT it seems to me that how the rule book is interpreted would be key:

i.e. do your inspectors, as Wayne brought out in his comments about his Dad and Henry Wagner, have a disagreement in philosophy about "if it is or isn't spelled out, it is either legal or illegal", or has that ever been determined? If by omission (your example about the nitro additive) it is not definitively spelled out it is illegal, or says that pump gas for example is all you can run, then it would seem to be pretty clear.

To give you an example, back in the 70's, nitrous oxide, BY OMISSION, was legal in the PRO category. When it was determined that some were experimenting with it and there were good power gains to be made with it's use, it was specifically, BY NAME, prohibited from use in the PRO Category, but until that time as there was no specific rule prohibiting its use and it was OK to use it. I don't know of any specific instance where there was usage and a protest filed and a decision rendered, but the commission acted on the advise of those who were trying it and the problems/expense that was being incurred with it's use. I think the way the rule finally ended up was whatever fuel used "had to exist as a liquid at atmospheric pressure." I was on the commission at the time and that is the way I remember it. There were other additives being used at that time also such as propylene oxide, so the way the rule was written covered other additives/fuels than just nitrous.

I think to most of us who have been around for any time at all, we think of the "Stock" category as using parts that came on the motor, made by the original mfgr, and not anything else except if specifically authorized by the commission or governing body, as has been the case in some of the classes because OEM parts are no longer available.

Mod rules at first glance or thought would seem to need to be even more clearly written, as the word "MOD" indicates some modifications allowed, but again they would need to be specific as to what IS allowed and what is NOT.

PRO of course is completely different, as you just basically have a bore and stroke dimension and pretty much anything else goes, except with the Antique's and K-PRO. That is why you do not see Flatheads still competing all these years later, as they have been obsoleted by more modern engine designs, just because the only real governing rule is bore and stroke.

All that being said, to some, rule books are there to followed strictly by the letter. If it is not forbidden, then you can do it. To others, unless it is allowed it is forbidden. That is why it would be important to know if that way of looking at the rule book has ever been established as to whether calling it out as allowed or forbidden, or being legal by omission, would be important in this case. Think the lawyer's call it "establishing a precedent". Maybe ask Eddie, he's a lawyer and a stock guy also, I am sure he would have an opinion anyway.

ADD: To your original question:

If there is a rule specifically prohibiting something, such as the Nitro rule you use as an example, and it is prohibited by name and description, it seems to me that whether it can be detected or not is key. CAN YOU PROVE IT?? Just because a Cop stops you and says he THINKS you looked like you were speeding, most Judges would throw that out in a minute without definitive proof of some type such as radar, laser, etc. If someone is using a prohibited part, fuel, etc., and you can't prove it, then how do you prove him outside the rules. Seems there has to be a way to prove something illegal, if there is a rule against it, before you can say he was cheating. If you can't prove it, then you can't very well penalize him just on suspicion. If suspensions, disqualifications were made on suspicion alone, would not be a very good atmosphere to compete in.

Don't know how much help this is, but it is the best I can come up with right now.

[Ron Hill]

If that is true...Probably good thing Harry Bartolmei isn't with us anymore.....Harry, nitor and 12 OZ. of oil to five gallons was Harry's main speed secret...

I have serious knowledge that there are gasolines out there that are faster than others and they can and do get around the digatron meter!

[russhill]

I've probably had more "discussions" relative to rules with Henry than anybody. But that's 23 different stories.
"Cheating" is an unnecessary issue. How or why a the person is illegal is academic. If a rule were violated, the contestant should be disqualified.
Basically, the rules are simple. If it doesn't say you can't, it's legal. As a contestant, I always said show me the rule I'm breaking. As an official, I always pulled out the rule book, found the rule and asked the participant, "Is what you did in violation of the rules?"
After the participant calmed down and said yes, then I would say, you know what that means, don't you?
And as for "letting somebody off", that sounds like a nice thing to do, but it's an un-nice thing to do to the competitor/s behind him/her.

[Mark75H]

The rule I am concerned about is clearly written. Detecting violators is difficult, so its basically not tried.

I am truly disappointed that racers that I thought were winning via skill, testing and hard work are just using a loophole in inspection process to beat other racers who are following the letter of the rules.

[Lee Motorsports]

Sam,

Without going into detail, are we talking SO, MOD, PRO, or OPC?

Thanks.

[Bill Van Steenwyk]

it is so difficult to check. No checking tools or equipment, or something that can be put right or within the rules before the competitor comes to inspection? In other words, what makes it difficult to determine if a violation has taken place?

Not saying there is a solution, but possibly a little more information about what is suspected might generate some solutions to the problem.

If nothing else, perhaps a little "publication of suspicion" might make someone think twice if they thought someone might be on to them and more folks watching.

[russhill]

If a rule leaves room for "interpretation", it's a lousy rule and I can probably beat it. Rules should be clear, concise and quantifiable. A rule is like "keep a safe distance" it is not a rule. If a rule says "Three 3 feet is a safe distance" it's a better rule, but unless there is a clear cut way to measure the three feet, the rule still sucks. It needs to be something that both competitors and all rational officials, anywhere in the world can measure.
For example, in fuels, unless nitro is specifically NOT allowed, then it's legal. If the rule is "no XYZ" but we don't how to measure it, I'm going to run it, if it makes me go faster. Pushing the state of the art is what racing is all about. If you're not pushing the state of the art (within the rules), then you're only playing around, not racing.

[miss argo]

If that is true...Probably good thing Harry Bartolmei isn't with us anymore.....Harry, nitor and 12 OZ. of oil to five gallons was Harry's main speed secret...

I have serious knowledge that there are gasolines out there that are faster than others and they can and do get around the digatron meter!

exactly Ron! ELF makes one that is insanely expensive.....but when was going fast ever "cheap"??

[Tim Chance]

If you don't understand the rules? Not cheating, but the punishment should be the same regardless.
If everyone in your region is doing it? Yes it is cheating.

If you are not getting caught? Yes it is cheating.

If everyone who places in the top 3 in your class is doing it? Yes it is cheating.

In the first example, perhaps the rule needs to be rewritten more clearly.In the second, perhaps the rule needs to be changed. The third - inspection needs to be better. And, again in the fourth, perhaps the rule needs to be changed.

[Mark75H]

The rule is clearly written. The confusion is that it is generally only taken to the letter/exact clause in cases of protest.

This makes some racers think it doesn't apply because they never see it being considered at a local race

[sst45jefff]

I would say the easiest way to start getting it detected or dealt with is to put it out there for all to know/ Use and then the process for detecting dealing with it will be expedited because you have many more brains with vast knowledge & connections to figure out how to detect it or right the rules to enforce it.
Or in a worst case scenario every one starts doing/using it and the playing field is leveled again.

If you like having a elite group bending the rules and getting away with it because it cant be addressed, than just leave it in the dark and wait for it to slowly come to the light and get fixed.
In the mean time the rumors will spread and good honest racers will get fed up and leave the sport.

Just my two cents from what I have seen in the past.

[nightwing]

sam can i ask what rule or rules u are talking about? so maybe i or someone can help u better.

[Roy Hodges]

How about the rule about 2 boats approaching a turn? there's an over taking rule. How bout some one trying to push another boat out &into a crash on the bank or ,in my case when A guy in Sport E , back in 1979 tried to push me into the floats in front of the Stockton Rod&gun club, in the middle of straightaway ,because he did not have the speed to pass me ,afterwards ,nobody said a word about "Bob". (the guy from Suisun. ) hint hint.

[Joe J]

If an inspector is going to through me out, I want to see exactly what rule he is using. No rule, no DQ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Mark75H]

Its in the rule book and clearly written.

APBA's rules are very clear that YOU are responsible to read and KNOW the rules. No one else is responsible to explain or show you the rules.

[Rusrog]

around this stuff longer than I but having sat through more than a few rules meetings and being involved in more than a few technical inspections....

The truth really is that if you aren't getting caught, you ain't cheating. Some of our more tech intensive classes gather some VERY sharp minds. Both in engine building and in reading comprehension. LOL! Some of these guys spend more time reading what is not in the rule book than they do reading what IS in it...

it makes for lively banter at the rules committee meetings and you can see the faces of some of the racers who, when a new rule is changed or added to close up a hole in the rule book, suddenly realize that maybe they were getting beaten for a reason. It makes it fun being in a position of power when it comes time to make a ruling at the race site.

[russhill]

Joe J said: If an inspector is going to through me out, I want to see exactly what rule he is using. No rule, no DQ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And I say Amen. They better also be able to specifically the offense. "You came too close." or "I didn't like the looks of.." Will not hold up under my appeal

[Mark75H]

The truth really is that if you aren't getting caught, you ain't cheating.

So, if I am at a club race where there will not be tear down inspections, I am not cheating if I run a 500+cc Konig that appears to be a 350?

What about a Stock race running a "fuel of the day" race where the allowed reading on the Digitron meter is +30 ... can I run a -70 gasoline doped with nitromethane to read +30?

You guys keep going off on the tangent of "bending" or "interpreting" a rule. I am not talking about unclear fuzzy rules ... I am talking about clearly written rules.

How about a minimum boat length ... suppose an inspector checks your boat and says ... your boat is illegal because it is too short. The inspector has no responsibility to tell you how long your boat is required to be, nor what page you will find the rule on.

Its black and white, and each racer's responsibility to know the rules that apply to him or her.

[fyremanbill]

Sam, I think cheating is wrong even if you don't think you'll get caught. Just because nobody's inspecting the boats doesn't make it OK.

[Steve Litzell]

So, if I am at a club race where there will not be tear down inspections, I am not cheating if I run a 500+cc Konig that appears to be a 350?

What about a Stock race running a "fuel of the day" race where the allowed reading on the Digitron meter is +30 ... can I run a -70 gasoline doped with nitromethane to read +30?

You guys keep going off on the tangent of "bending" or "interpreting" a rule. I am not talking about unclear fuzzy rules ... I am talking about clearly written rules.

How about a minimum boat length ... suppose an inspector checks your boat and says ... your boat is illegal because it is too short. The inspector has no responsibility to tell you how long your boat is required to be, nor what page you will find the rule on.

Its black and white, and each racer's responsibility to know the rules that apply to him or her.
In The Pro ranks all technical aspects of the boat, motor and safety is on the inspectors lap. What you are talking about is fuel. pro does not have this problem except for K pro OSY and all service and racing anitque classes. in these classes it is up to the inspector how far he wants to go as with all other aspects of his job. It is the ruling bodies job to stand behind the inspectors. If you think that a inspector at a nationals race or a local race is not doing his job, then there is a protest policy in all catagory's to police this. All that has to be done is persue this by the rule. as a inspector for over 20 years I had simple procedures that all drivers understood, the ones that thought they could get by me paid a high price. If you think that you are playing in a unfair or against the rules game, or the inspector is not doing his job by RULE, then it is your response to see that the race committee does their job and a solution is reached, including a meeting with the commission/ commissioners. This is how it works. And if the persons involved are cheating, then not only through the scoundrels out but embarass their *** in front of the other competitors. I have no use for cheaters, but I shake hands with and slap the thinkers on the back. In my years of inspecting , I have found some bogus stuff. usually this junk did not win but was third or fourth. after i through them out I told them in front of their friends and competitors that they were too stupid to race with and against their fellow competitors and i always done my best to make them feel like the low life's that they are.If you have a problem and it is not detected with the tools of the day, Then it is a clean shoot that time, and shame on the inspector. Sounds like you are bitching about a fuel deal, and that is why I think you all should run a race gas only as it will pass the meter test every time. This is the problem with "Pump gas rules". another way is to go methanol and problem solved!:D

[Joe J]

Sam, a question back at you:

Why don't you put up a $100 bill for a protest? If it's that clear in the rule book, you will get it back.

Not trying to be a smart a**, just asking a question.

Joe

[MN1]

You could mention the rule in question to the inspector before the race and voice your concerns so it can be brought up at the drivers meeting. If the inspector is good, he will help to make sure everyone is playing by the same rules.
Mark N

[Mark75H]

Its not in my class or even my division (that I know of) pretty sure you can't file a protest unless you were in the same race ... it still makes me unhappy. It doesn't make any difference to you? It could be in your class ... you might have even raced against someone taking that unfair advantage.


My hours vary from week to week; in any particular month, I have no idea how much money I will make. If things turn around, I may offer to fund someone if they want to file a protest but feel like they can't afford it - even if means I can't afford the next race. At this point in the year ... I don't even know if I will be racing or watching next year anyway.


Something to think about if you are using that stuff that "beats the meter" ... its an automatic 2 year suspension if you are caught

[Mark75H]

You could mention the rule in question to the inspector before the race and voice your concerns so it can be brought up at the drivers meeting. If the inspector is good, he will help to make sure everyone is playing by the same rules.
Mark N

On a fuel test, I think someone has to pay. The way I read the rules, an inspector can send anyone's fuel out to be tested completely at his discretion, but then I think the club has to pay the lab costs.

I think the inspectors are already onto this ... I thought I saw some "extra" equipment at a race last summer.

[T2x]

Good discussion......

Two things come immediately to mind, one simple and the other far more complex.....

1. I attended a kids' go cart race a few years ago with supposedly identical box stock motors, A friend of mine and well known Offshore throttleman was just getting into the sport with his son. I noticed that the faster carts had a very different and more throaty sound then the rest of the pack. I wandered over to the pits of the 3 carts with the odd sound (2 from the same family)...and noticed that the exhaust manifold bolts had been loosened allowing the exhaust gases to by pass the pipe and escape out of the engine at the cylinder head. I returned to my buddy's pit and suggested he try it and see. His reply was interesting. "I will try it at home while testing to see if there really is some advantage, but I don't want to teach my son to cheat". His take on it was that if those bolts had come loose on their own..it would be legal...but if you did it intentionally...not so.

2. The bigger issue goes right to the heart of our sport. Many of our iconic drivers and engine builders made their reputations by "living on the edge" of the rules. Why in the world would you send your supposedly sealed "stock" motor to a "champion builder" if he didn't know how to get more power out of it than when it came from the factory? This usually is the same builder who won't discuss exactly what he did to your engine so as not to divulge his "secrets". If the purpose of a stock class is to level the playing field this clearly violates the "spirit and intent". How do you increase your winning percentage to God like levels without the thinnest prop, with the quickest profile, running off a gearcase that is set up optimally, using the lightest weight oils, at the perfect prop height, (all legal so far), with a powerhead that puts out at least as much (or more) power than your opposition? The answer is you look for every advantage you can find and sometimes that involves a shady bit here and there.

To me the bottom line is that if you are looking for only black and white in this world you might find it monotonously boring. It is all the colors in between that makes life interesting, frustrating, and not always fair. Racing is much like life in that respect.

Merry Christmas

T2x

[Mark75H]

All true, but again, this thread is not about "a shady bit" ... its about black and white and being on the other side of legal, the manifold bolt that isn't loose, but too long to ever tighten and hold the header pipe tight against the motor ... not a secret that everyone would do if they knew ... a secret that puts you on the shore for 2 years the first time and forever the second time.

[T2x]

All true, but again, this thread is not about "a shady bit" ... its about black and white and being on the other side of legal, the manifold bolt that isn't loose, but too long to ever tighten and hold the header pipe tight against the motor ... not a secret that everyone would do if they knew ... a secret that puts you on the shore for 2 years the first time and forever the second time.

Ahhh Sam....now you aren't talking about rules...but rather about ENFORCEMENT. This is a whole different animal. Over the years we have had every level of adherence to the rules from Edgar Rose (anal) to SBI Offshore (non existent). Because of the politics and economics in our sport I beleve that we need uniform enforcement across the spectrum, but that would require an intense cultural and political shift in our sport IMHO. There have always been allegiances, ignorance and weakness in many pits throughout the APBA, UIM, and other sanctioning bodies. Even Nascar only seems to step up when the pack stretches out too much and impedes the closeness of competition. Formula 1 allows one team to play with air ducts for a few races and then either bans the changes or opens them up to others. You only see people banned when the media publishes some piece of malfeasance or another before the powers that be can clamp a tight enough lid on it.

Bottom line...Can we have straight up rules enforcement....? Yes.

Are we willing to pay the price of losing boat racers? Probably not.

T2x

[Rusrog]

In our org we have some very clear rules as far as intentional or gross infractions(not necessarily the same thing and one can gross but not necessarily intentional). Without going into specifics we take each infraction on a case by case basis. For instance... If you fail at the scales and don't meet the minimum weight by a small margin, you were just pushing it too far and we disqualify you for the day. Over 30#'s is a gross infraction and you are out for the rest of the year. Now in the deal descried earlier about the exhaust pipe... that is where you have to have competent leadership in the org. My opinion would be this... If it is not specified in the rule book but the tech notices that this is a trend, it needs to be addressed at the driver meeting in no uncertain terms. Then an amendment made to the rule book for the following season. Let's face it, racers are always going to be digging for the last 100th.
We had a situation where the rule book states no metal removal from either case half, cylinder heads, pistons, rods or crankshaft. We then had guys working over the upper bearing cap to give them another degree of spark advance. So we made an announcement at the next drivers meeting that you CANNOT remove metal from the bearing cap either. At the next race, after all the racers in that class were busying with a bearing cap changing party, we discovered that some were grinding the PLASTIC arm of the stator to accomplish the same goal. Another entry into the rule book was made declaring that there was no MATERIAL REMOVAL from these surfaces. Someone will eventually come up with another way to do it but we will watch closely as will our engine tech and the chase will continue...