Tear down fee's

[Sage Wilkinson]

The $350 teardown fee seems a bit weak after being through the full teardown process, if you were just a racer without support or any mechanical ability past tire changes it would cost at least $1000, I know the cost needs to stay low enough to not scare racers away from a protesting suspected cheaters but on the other hand its a little unbalanced for the protested party. what sounds like a fair "full tear down" fee? WSMC is $1000, maybe its time to raise the fee's a bit?

Can I get a quote to put this back together -

http://www.sdsperformance.com/images/after-td.JPG

[Mark Bothe]

Have it be like a civil lawsuit. I can bring a lawsuit, but if I lose I have to pay for the lawyer fees, etc....

So, at the beginning of each year, we take the estimated dollar amount from 3 to 4 major shops/engine builders and have them estimate the rebuild of a bike. See what their estimates are and average them or take the second lowest price and use that as a baseline, say, $1200. Then the protesting rider would pay $500 to file, and if the protest is upheld, they get the $500 back, if the protest is denied then they have to pony up the balance, $700. The protested rider would get all the money and could do whatever they need to do with it.

Right now a rider could protest somebody right out of a championship. $350 is a set of tires and every weekend instead of buying tires and riding well, someone could just protest Alan Schmidt on every race weekend and make him tear down and rebuild every weekend at $1000 a pop. Now, that is if someone is so sinister, and would try to bust somebody's race budget and force them not to race. It's a club and it's club racing, we should not lose sight of that.

Just some ramblings of a Pharmacist with nothing to do on a weekend...:eek:

[Mike Gray]

All that "rambling" has been done year after year in Board after Board, and even in many of the rules committees. You've got a valid concern Sage and I appreciate you bringing it up (with the best visual demonstration I've seen!).

We try really hard to balance fairness to the protested rider with availability of protest to all, even those on a budget. One of the arguments on the other side of the coin is the shoestring racer who knows the guy beating him as not legal. But to protest and risk $1200 would be the end of his season. So he stays silent.

And Mark, I believe the referee or board has the discretion of designating your multiple teardown scenario "Frivolous" and deny the protests out of hand. This wouldn't be done lightly, but is a possibility if someone's obviously trying to use underhanded techniques to force a rider from the grid.

Know that we just raised the protest fees this year and will probably need to do it again eventually. Also please know that this process will NEVER be fair to all involved. If we could make it so, it would be already. But as several people have said, this is part of racing. Ya take it, ya swallow it, ya get back on the bike and twist the throttle.

[Luke Morgan]

All that "rambling" has been done year after year in Board after Board, and even in many of the rules committees. You've got a valid concern Sage and I appreciate you bringing it up (with the best visual demonstration I've seen!).

We try really hard to balance fairness to the protested rider with availability of protest to all, even those on a budget. One of the arguments on the other side of the coin is the shoestring racer who knows the guy beating him as not legal. But to protest and risk $1200 would be the end of his season. So he stays silent.

And Mark, I believe the referee or board has the discretion of designating your multiple teardown scenario "Frivolous" and deny the protests out of hand. This wouldn't be done lightly, but is a possibility if someone's obviously trying to use underhanded techniques to force a rider from the grid.

Know that we just raised the protest fees this year and will probably need to do it again eventually. Also please know that this process will NEVER be fair to all involved. If we could make it so, it would be already. But as several people have said, this is part of racing. Ya take it, ya swallow it, ya get back on the bike and twist the throttle.

+1. Well said Mike. The protest every weekend scenario is not remotely a real one. It could/would not ever happen. As for the fees. Mike is right on. Raise the fee higher and it only makes it easier for people to cheat. Most racers would never risk $1000 or more dollars on a protest. It will never be perfect. Go to some midwest circle track races where you can claim an entire motor for a few hundred dollars. Keeping the fee lower lessens the likelihood of cheating. The difficulty and cost of the teardown/rebuild keeps the engine builders and bike owners honest.

[Bill Cismar]

And a top 5 plate will never be decided based on the modified results of an 11 lap race,,,

Historically OMRRA had augmented the cost of rebuilding a bike found to be legal. Especially as many manufacturers contingency requirements state that OMRRA was supposed to do a minimum number of "inspections" to insure eligibility of those riders collecting contingency.

Because some one else at another time decided that the section admonishing riders not to lodge frivolous protests and allowing fines for those who go fishing with "full bike tear downs" would allow OMRRA to prevent the overblown disassembly from happening. That is how the section concerning OMRRA being limited in its liability to just oil, and gaskets came to be. The rules are laced together like strands in a web. You can't just selectively ignore one rule and enforce another without rendering the whole of the rules ineffective to their original intent.

The cost constraints are exactly why OMRRA doesn't have an axle to axle tear down, and should not have one. The rules are set up specifically to discourage such abuses. Anything outside the motor is a visual inspection. Inside the motor are two flavors, simple displacement check in the frame, and a crack it open and look. The referee's job being to regulate the tear down to reasonable requests.

Arguments that it can never be completely fair are spacious defenses of not making a sincere effort to make it as fair as possible. Unfair due to the cost of reassembly of the motor may not be able to be prevented under the conflict of trying to make protested a real threat against cheating by keeping it affordable to the protester, if you also restrict OMRRA's liability in supporting the cost of the tear down.
However;
To pile on to that unfairness the additional unfairness of an even more extensive tear down that is described by the rules, and admonished against by the clearly paramount section L1 is a double injustice.
And to further pile on that with a delayed tear down requiring additional travel, lodging, and work interference is a triple injustice.

OMRRA needs to return to being responsible for reasonable cost above and beyond the $350 tear down fee to reassemble a bike in a timely fashion. Yes that may mean paying a premium shop rate.
The fee should not be raised so as to completely discourage protests in an effort to protect OMRRA from the cost and responsibilities of adhering to the spirit and letter of the rules.

OMRRA does have a dog in this fight and "Racing isn't fair" isn't a motto that OMRRA should endorse.

When it isn't fair it is the responsibility of the board to MAKE IT FAIR not to make it worse.

[Mike Gray]

And a top 5 plate will never be decided based on the modified results of an 11 lap race,,,

Arguments that it can never be completely fair are spacious defenses of not making a sincere effort to make it as fair as possible.

When it isn't fair it is the responsibility of the board to MAKE IT FAIR not to make it worse.



I'm going to make a "sincere effort" to skip the rest of this thread. Thanks for the positive input Sage, Mark, and Luke.

[Bill Cismar]

I'm going to make a "sincere effort" to skip the rest of this thread. Thanks for the positive input Sage, Mark, and Luke.

And yet you still feel the need to make a non value added reply?

By inference I am not appreciated for my input,,, ah yes the passive aggressive scorn.

I repeatedly refer to the actions only of the board and not individual members until I've been attacked directly, or as in this case, through the back handed snide remarks.

Why?

Could it be because none of those self appointed mouth pieces are able to speak on the issues and stay on topic? Of course that would require having a defensible position.

Go ahead and ignore me Mike. Your practice of ignoring rules and bylaws should have given you plenty of practice.

If someone wants to have an adult debate on the issues I'm here and willing.

And of course, if you want to make it a mud slinging name calling contest, I can oblige you in that as well.

[Chris Blythe]

I'm sure that everyone would love to make this simple, but this isn't. Bill has brought to light a very valid point and we have the responsibility to address the whole issue. Lets keep on track and not dismiss such a well informed point.

[Nathan Hester]

It is simple $1,000 for a full tear down, and 24 hours to tear the bike down.

[Bill Cismar]

It is simple $1,000 for a full tear down, and 24 hours to tear the bike down.

Just curious Nathan. Could you answer the following questions?

Would you really be upset if $500 came from the protester and OMRRA paid an additional $600 to cover the extra assembly cost and your cost to come back later for the inspection and to recover the bike?

Do you think there would still be protests for apparently illegal bikes if the protest fee was as high as $1000?

[Nathan Hester]

I'm going to make a "sincere effort" to skip the rest of this thread. Thanks for the positive input Sage, Mark, and Luke.

I really don't get why you have your "unmentionables" in a bunch or why you don't appear to want to find a solution to this problem. Bill has valid points which you won't even hear out. Why not solve the problem now? I would like people to not get so personal and show a little interest.

[Nathan Hester]

I think people would start leaning on the club to do not so random inspections. Luke told me Mark wanted the club to tear me down when Luke declined you know the rest. I think there would be less two at a time protest happening.

[Luke Morgan]

I think people would start leaning on the club to do not so random inspections. Luke told me Mark wanted the club to tear me down when Luke declined you know the rest. I think there would be less two at a time protest happening.

I think this is as much of the solution as anything. I am not up to speed on what Suzuki, Yam, Kaw,Honda require for contingency, but my guess is that they do have some teardown requirements. If we only did what we are "required" to do as a club I think there would be little need for protest beyond visual and it would be a good deterrent for in depth cheating.

[Mike Gray]

I really don't get why you have your "unmentionables" in a bunch or why you don't appear to want to find a solution to this problem. Bill has valid points which you won't even hear out. Why not solve the problem now? I would like people to not get so personal and show a little interest.

I've got my unmenitionables in a bunch because another civil conversation with very valid points has been brought down into the gutter by a frustrated poster.

I've not only heard the valid points, but also the mudslinging at the board. As to showing a little personal interest on this subject and finding a solution, we dealt with this in the last rules committee and brought the fee increase to the board and the membership, at which time it was increased. As to hearing Bill's valid points, I've been listening to them for years and supporting him when he's not being vindictive. But I will sign off when the flamethrowers come out.

My point over and over and over again is that you can put the positive suggestions out here without trashing this person or that person or the board or assit or anyone. Just get your idea out here in a positive way and let it be. The negative stuff just wears out all those who are trying to help you for free. And when you fully wear them all out, there won't be anyone left to help you go racing.

[Bill Cismar]

I've got my unmenitionables in a bunch because another civil conversation with very valid points has been brought down into the gutter by a frustrated poster.

I've not only heard the valid points, but also the mudslinging at the board. As to showing a little personal interest on this subject and finding a solution, we dealt with this in the last rules committee and brought the fee increase to the board and the membership, at which time it was increased. As to hearing Bill's valid points, I've been listening to them for years and supporting him when he's not being vindictive. But I will sign off when the flamethrowers come out.

My point over and over and over again is that you can put the positive suggestions out here without trashing this person or that person or the board or assit or anyone. Just get your idea out here in a positive way and let it be. The negative stuff just wears out all those who are trying to help you for free. And when you fully wear them all out, there won't be anyone left to help you go racing.

Yeah right.
You've been so interested in open honest debate that the first words you penned in reply to something I wrote, were an attack calling me petty and back biting for daring to question the board for not complying with the bylaws. The remainder of your post was only a refusal to discuss anything, just as you did here.

But I don't feel so all alone. I over heard you respond to another member who asked about the plans to fix the 11 lap issue in the rules committee by telling them that you didn't want to talk about it because it is settled. If you hadn't turned your back on them you would have noticed their mouth gaping in disbelief behind you.

And I could ask you to show where I dragged anything into the gutter, but that will not produce anything meaningful. you apparently consider anyone who questions the board a subversive low life, and I consider anyone who issues proclamations without the ability to defend and explain themselves to be even more unsavory.

Let that then be settled law.

Sure I may attack your logic, I may ridicule your reasoning, such is debate. But I have never attacked YOU or anyone else until they attacked ME. If you don't like mud slinging, then don't go flinging it.

Are you able to discuss the very important topics or not? Are your arguments strong enough to withstand the clash with other ideas, or do they need to be shrouded in some sort of protection?

[Bill Cismar]

I think people would start leaning on the club to do not so random inspections. Luke told me Mark wanted the club to tear me down when Luke declined you know the rest. I think there would be less two at a time protest happening.

That is an interesting perspective that I had not considered Nathan. I guess I was looking 180 deg the other way, into letting the riders choose who to protest but aiding them in funding the tear down.

Things I like about your idea:
If OMRRA is made to be responsible to select and complete routine tear downs, they can do so in a way that grantees there is no "politics" involved. for instance with a lottery of the top few bikes of a specific make, looking for specific infractions.
OMRRA could position themselves to be prepared to complete the entire inspection at the track by bringing the needed experts, tools and technicians.
OMRRA could control the cost of repairs to the bikes by being targeted in just exactly what they are looking for and how far into the minutia they dive.
If a rider still felt someone was getting away with something they still have the personal protest route, albeit at a much higher cost. But that hight cost certainly does enforce Section L1, doesn't it.

But there is the other side:
As Luke said in the other thread, this will cost OMRRA more $ than our current system. In fact I think it would cost more than my suggestion of simply having OMRRA make Innocent riders whole.

However, on balance, I think there are more positives to your concept *if* OMRRA were to commit to doing the tear downs and funding all the associated costs.

Your way is the better, most fair way. My way is the cheaper but still fair way with some bugs to work out. The current way is unfair, subject to abuse, a pain in the azz to everyone concerned, broken way.

[Luke Morgan]

That is an interesting perspective that I had not considered Nathan. I guess I was looking 180 deg the other way, into letting the riders choose who to protest but aiding them in funding the tear down.

Things I like about your idea:
If OMRRA is made to be responsible to select and complete routine tear downs, they can do so in a way that grantees there is no "politics" involved. for instance with a lottery of the top few bikes of a specific make, looking for specific infractions.
OMRRA could position themselves to be prepared to complete the entire inspection at the track by bringing the needed experts, tools and technicians.
OMRRA could control the cost of repairs to the bikes by being targeted in just exactly what they are looking for and how far into the minutia they dive.
If a rider still felt someone was getting away with something they still have the personal protest route, albeit at a much higher cost. But that hight cost certainly does enforce Section L1, doesn't it.

But there is the other side:
As Luke said in the other thread, this will cost OMRRA more $ than our current system. In fact I think it would cost more than my suggestion of simply having OMRRA make Innocent riders whole.

However, on balance, I think there are more positives to your concept *if* OMRRA were to commit to doing the tear downs and funding all the associated costs.

Your way is the better, most fair way. My way is the cheaper but still fair way with some bugs to work out. The current way is unfair, subject to abuse, a pain in the azz to everyone concerned, broken way.

This is almost exactly what we discussed earlier this year, and the predeccesor was the 40 bike random visual I did earlier in the year. We just need to figure out the cost and logistics. Again, JW is the contingency guy and knows better than I. But I think this is basically what is required by some if not all of the manufacturers and would allow us to honor out agreements and keep racers honest without having the protest issue amongst competitors.

[Bill Cismar]

This is almost exactly what we discussed earlier this year, and the predeccesor was the 40 bike random visual I did earlier in the year. We just need to figure out the cost and logistics. Again, JW is the contingency guy and knows better than I. But I think this is basically what is required by some if not all of the manufacturers and would allow us to honor out agreements and keep racers honest without having the protest issue amongst competitors.

The thing is, such a method is strategic. It only works to raise protest fees to $1000 *if* OMRRA also employs regular random tear downs of it's own *and* covers the extraordinary cost for reassembly (especially for those riders OMRRA selects and tears down). If we only raise the fees then we just discourage tear downs all together and the balance swings too far the other way and encourages illegal mods.

As I've said before, the rules are like strands in a web or a net, they only work in concert with each other, not alone.

[Jim Wilson]

I have no idea what manufacturers' requirements are ref. contingency eligibility, but Luke mentioned something earlier: bike/motor claiming. Seems to me that cheating would cease instantly, as the loss risk would be too great---and OMRRA would have to pay nothing, just do the inspections. I have no idea what fee(s) should be on the line to initiate that type of a claim process. Just an idea----
(Don't shoot me!)

[Bill Cismar]

I have no idea what manufacturers' requirements are ref. contingency eligibility, but Luke mentioned something earlier: bike/motor claiming. Seems to me that cheating would cease instantly, as the loss risk would be too great---and OMRRA would have to pay nothing, just do the inspections. I have no idea what fee(s) should be on the line to initiate that type of a claim process. Just an idea----
(Don't shoot me!)

I'm not sure you know how the claiming process works. Forgive me if you do.

The claim process is based on the concept that every competitor has a right to use the same equipment as the other competitors, and to that end, any competitor can buy the equipment being used by his competition for that equipments fair market stock price.

Therefore someone should be able to look in Suzuki's parts catalog to get the list price for a Suzuki GSXR1000 motor and write your son Dan a check and "claim" his motor. OMRRA would not inspect anything. Dan would just go home with a check and an empty frame. Or they could just claim the whole bike and let Dan start over with a new one.

The claim process works great at keeping people from investing a lot of time and fine tuning or special parts *when claiming is commonly done*. Otherwise it is totally ineffective or when you do do it, it's just a great way to really piss off your competition

[Jim Wilson]

You are correct. I had no idea how "claiming" worked. It sure would not work in our scenario. Thanks for the info.

Still---if we could find a disincentive big enough, it would be insane to cheat.

[Sage Wilkinson]

I think $1000-$1200 is a fair price for a full tear down reguardles of how the protested rider gets paid, WSMC seems to have it pretty good -

valve cover - $250
remove head - $500
split cases - $500 (+ the $500 for head removal)

with pulling the head for $500 you can check bore/stroke, cams & head porting & EFI which is where 90% of the cheating will be found and only the head has to come off

And to say if the protest cost is too high people will be scared to protest is a bit messed up because as it stands the protester has 4:1 odds, even if your competition is legal you can still cost them 3-4 times what you put in, the protested is a loser all around, if you protest and lose, you lost $350 but cost your competitor $850 (after receiving the $350 protest fee). Just dosent seem right.

how about fines for cheating?

cams/porting - $250 fine / loss of points / 1 race weekend ban
big bore - $500 fine / loss of points / 2 race weekend ban
etc....

higher protest fees scare the protesters and penalty's for cheating scare the cheaters?

[Brian Moe]

I think $1000-$1200 is a fair price for a full tear down reguardles of how the protested rider gets paid, WSMC seems to have it pretty good -

valve cover - $250
remove head - $500
split cases - $500 (+ the $500 for head removal)

with pulling the head for $500 you can check bore/stroke, cams & head porting & EFI which is where 90% of the cheating will be found and only the head has to come off

And to say if the protest cost is too high people will be scared to protest is a bit messed up because as it stands the protester has 4:1 odds, even if your competition is legal you can still cost them 3-4 times what you put in, the protested is a loser all around, if you protest and lose, you lost $350 but cost your competitor $850 (after receiving the $350 protest fee). Just dosent seem right.

how about fines for cheating?

cams/porting - $250 fine / loss of points / 1 race weekend ban
big bore - $500 fine / loss of points / 2 race weekend ban
etc....

higher protest fees scare the protesters and penalty's for cheating scare the cheaters?

I like the fine idea. Right now I think the rule book implies loss of points and awards in N-6. But there is no fine and it is not definitive. I think the rulebook should allow for some amount of judgement to be imposed by the referee...but adding some sort of monetary fine would certainly discourage someone from cheating and thinking they could get away with it.

Seems like we have TWO issues that we can probably look at seperately instead of together. (1) what is the fair protest fee that allows people to protest when someone is cheating yet makes it so no one gets out of hand with it...i.e. High enough to make it a risk to me...low enough such that if I really feel someone is cheating that I can afford it. and (2) what can the club do to ensure the protested isn't getting screwed. The third being...how do we do this without bankrupting the club.

As far as protest fees. I think WERA and WMRRA have similar fees to what you're stating for WSMC, albeit a little lower.

WERA:
# Visual protest requiring no disassembly - $25
# Some disassembly (seat, bodywork and gas tank removal) - $50
# Removal of Valve Cover - $150
# Removal of Cylinder Head - $300
# Disassembly of the Bottom End - $500

WMRRA:
# Visual protest (no disassembly see L-9)
# Some disassembly (seat, bodywork, gas tank and air box removal) $25.00
# Removal of Valve Cover $50.00
# Removal of Cylinder Head $250.00
# Disassembly of the Bottom End $500.00

So moving the OMRRA rulebook so its more inline seems to make sense when you consider our protest fee for a teardown is almost the same as WERA for just cylinder head removal.

As far as not screwing the protested....maybe we can come up with a rule suggestion or clarification around L-6. Doesn't really state how the protested gets around to getting this additional reimbursement. And with the word material in there....does this exclude any labor? Can the protest fee cover labor then protested rider gives OMRRA the bill for parts? How does this work?

[Ben Waller]

If OMRRA is going to pay a large $ amount toward protested bikes what is to stop teammates from protesting each other and having OMRRA supplament their engine rebuild?

[Bill Cismar]

Seems like we have TWO issues ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, The third being... I love how you accountants count. ;)
As far as protest fees. I think WERA and WMRRA have similar fees to what you're stating for WSMC, albeit a little lower.

WERA:
# Visual protest requiring no disassembly - $25
# Some disassembly (seat, bodywork and gas tank removal) - $50
# Removal of Valve Cover - $150
# Removal of Cylinder Head - $300
# Disassembly of the Bottom End - $500

WMRRA:
# Visual protest (no disassembly see L-9)
# Some disassembly (seat, bodywork, gas tank and air box removal) $25.00
# Removal of Valve Cover $50.00
# Removal of Cylinder Head $250.00
# Disassembly of the Bottom End $500.00

So moving the OMRRA rulebook so its more inline seems to make sense when you consider our protest fee for a teardown is almost the same as WERA for just cylinder head removal. So do we know if these fees sum? In other words, removal of the head requires the two prior bullets so are they summed into the fee to remove the head resulting in a $325 fee to remove the head?
As far as not screwing the protested....maybe we can come up with a rule suggestion or clarification around L-6. Doesn't really state how the protested gets around to getting this additional reimbursement. And with the word material in there....does this exclude any labor? Can the protest fee cover labor then protested rider gives OMRRA the bill for parts? How does this work?
My first year on the board a protested rider provided the board with an itemized bill for reassembly and the board paid most of it. I was too green to follow much of the reasoning for the decision process at the time and what I remember most was feeling really bad for the rider. I think it was Underwood, and his motor was nearly worn out, and completely stock. There were some on the board who didn't want him to "profit" from the protest by coming out of it with a better motor than he had. I argued, and felt, and still feel, that he had endured false accusation, lost time, anxiety (it was a used motor, who knew it's history?) and then he had like two days before the next race to get the parts back into his builders hands and it all paid for. Allowing him to replace worn out bearings and rings seemed reasonable. But someone rightly pointed out that you could slip your buddy the money to protest you and then you would get your motor rebuilt for 1/2 price if OMRRA didn't limit just what parts and labor OMRRA paid for. So we set a limit of liability for "materials" and left the labor undefined so that each case would be reviewed by the board leaving them leeway instead of being bound by the rules.

[Bill Cismar]

If OMRRA is going to pay a large $ amount toward protested bikes what is to stop teammates from protesting each other and having OMRRA supplament their engine rebuild?

HA!

I was just covering that.

Takes a while typing with one hand.

I think the answer is in there.

A lot of the despised "gray" in the rules is by intent not oversight. There are specific sections of the rules that spell out the spirit of the rules, and then the board and the ref is left to interpret the rules within that spirit.

I'm more of a structure and procedures kind of guy, and would rather it be more specifically spelled out, even though I can see the wisdom in letting the human glue do what humans do best, and adapt to each situation as it presents itself.

[Tyson Silva]

I like Sage's idea. I think it is great to impose $$$ fines for those caught cheating.

[Brian Moe]

I love how you accountants count. ;) So do we know if these fees sum? In other words, removal of the head requires the two prior bullets so are they summed into the fee to remove the head resulting in a $325 fee to remove the head?
My first year on the board a protested rider provided the board with an itemized bill for reassembly and the board paid most of it. I was too green to follow much of the reasoning for the decision process at the time and what I remember most was feeling really bad for the rider. I think it was Underwood, and his motor was nearly worn out, and completely stock. There were some on the board who didn't want him to "profit" from the protest by coming out of it with a better motor than he had. I argued, and felt, and still feel, that he had endured false accusation, lost time, anxiety (it was a used motor, who knew it's history?) and then he had like two days before the next race to get the parts back into his builders hands and it all paid for. Allowing him to replace worn out bearings and rings seemed reasonable. But someone rightly pointed out that you could slip your buddy the money to protest you and then you would get your motor rebuilt for 1/2 price if OMRRA didn't limit just what parts and labor OMRRA paid for. So we set a limit of liability for "materials" and left the labor undefined so that each case would be reviewed by the board leaving them leeway instead of being bound by the rules.


If OMRRA is going to pay a large $ amount toward protested bikes what is to stop teammates from protesting each other and having OMRRA supplament their engine rebuild?

Definitely good points to take into consideration. One thing that Bill does bring up that was not discussed directly is the timeframe and impact that this whole process (whether it is protest based or 'random' driven by the organization) might have on the race season. We could potentially be ruining someone's year if we protest or tear down and expect that the bike is going to be back into functional mode within one week or less. What if their motor builder is busy and they have the race the next weekend. Conceivably this year someone could have protested on Sunday 7/15...with some intent that maybe his rival won't get the bike back in running order by 7/28. Or if WMRRA and OMRRA have back to back weekends?

As far as accounting...I'm not really an accountant anyways....but how else do you think big corporations get to make big profits without some....creative...counting.:)

Don't know if the fees are additive. Probably something for us to include if we're going to alter the fees as a clarification? Should they be? To me it makes sense that they are additive...but I guess its a question we can ask other orgs.

Not sure how to word any sort of rule change proposal to prevent someone from using the system to get a motor rebuilt? Maybe something about some sort of referee discrection in accepting the protest? I don't know...start throwing things out. I guess it might be too much to hope that two people can be trusted not to do something totally dishonest that is detrimental to the organization.

[Sage Wilkinson]

If OMRRA is going to pay a large $ amount toward protested bikes what is to stop teammates from protesting each other and having OMRRA supplament their engine rebuild?

I think certain parts should not be covered under a protest unless said part gets dropped / damaged in the teardown process.

Also if people are going to protest each other to help a buddy offset labor in a engine refresh and it goes public then ban all people involved for a year and pay back the money? Pretty sleazy move IMO

[Brian Moe]

OK...so I'm taking a shot. Not wanting to see all the good input go to waste. Here is my take on any rule changes discussed here. Obviously list Pro-Cons so we can get it on the ballot. If you have edits feel free. If you want to call me names or make it personal I'll just remember the next time I get the idea to help out and take initiative.

Ultimately we have to get this into the Rules Proposal thread so its 'officially' submitted. Then keep in mind the Rules Committee gets to play with it...the board has to approve it being on the ballot....THEN members get to vote on it.

(N-6)
Current: The following violations may result in the loss of all awards, points, and prize money earned in that class that race day:
- Passing under a waving yellow flag (J-6)
- Class machinery infractions
- Failure to bring a machine, under protest, to the impound area
Proposed addition: The following violations may result in the loss of all awards, points, and prize money earned in that class that race day as well as potential fines as indicated below:
- Passing under a waving yellow flag (J-6)
- Class machinery infractions.
- Failure to bring a machine, under protest, to the impound area.
- Rule violations involving cams/porting $250 fine and 1 race ban.
- Rule violations involving displacement $500 fine and 2 race ban

(L-4)
Current: A non-refundable protest fee of $10.00 (except a "visual" protest, see L-7) must accompany all protests involving the frame, wheels, brakes, tires, forks, bars, race conduct, etc., or race organization or decision.
- A protest fee of $25.00 for two-stroke and four-stroke engines will be assessed if the protest is regarding displacement only and can be measured by introducing oil into the cylinder with the motor remaining in the frame. $250.00 for four stroke engines in the frame, and $250.00 for four-stroke engines out of the frame must accompany all protests involving engine teardown or disassembly.
- The following items - where applicable - will be inspected during an engine teardown: bore and stroke, compression ratio, camshafts, valve size, porting work, carburetors, and ignition. Any other illegal modifications discovered during teardown will count toward upholding protest.
- Following the submission of a written protest and the proper protest fee, the referee will notify the rider and/or owner of the machine in question. The rider, owner, or pit crew member is then required to bring the machine under protest immediately to the impound area designated by the referee.
- Failure to bring the machine to the impound area will automatically uphold the protest and result in loss of rewards, prizes, and points for the machine under protest as well as forfeiture of the above in any other events entered by the rider or owner that day.

Proposed:
- A non-refundable protest fee of $10.00 (except a "visual" protest, see L-7) must accompany all protests involving the frame, wheels, brakes, tires, forks, bars, race conduct, etc., or race organization or decision.
- A protest fee of $25.00 for two-stroke and four-stroke engines will be assessed if the protest is regarding displacement only and can be measured by introducing oil into the cylinder with the motor remaining in the frame.
- A protest fee of $25.00 is assessed to any protest requiring some disassembly. To include but not limited to seat, bodywork, gas tank and air box removal.
- A protest fee of $50 will be assessed for a protest requiring removal of the valve covers.
- A protest fee of $250 will be assessed for removal of the Cylinder head.
- A protest fee of $500 will be assessed for complete engine removal and disassembly (i.e. engine tear down).
- The following items - where applicable - will be inspected during the above protests: bore and stroke, compression ratio, camshafts, valve size, porting work, carburetors, and ignition. Any other illegal modifications discovered during teardown will count toward upholding protest.
- Following the submission of a written protest and the proper protest fee, the referee will notify the rider and/or owner of the machine in question. The rider, owner, or pit crew member is then required to bring the machine under protest immediately to the impound area designated by the referee.
- Failure to bring the machine to the impound area will automatically uphold the protest and result in penalties per N-6.
- Protest fees outlined above are NOT cumulative.
- The Referee has discretion under L-1 to deny any of the above protest request in which case fees will be returned to originating party. Any penalties to be assessed for violation of L-1 are at the referees discretion under (N-4)

(L-5)
Current: If, after inspection the protest is upheld, the rider will forfeit any awards, prizes, and points earned by the machine that day in the classes for which the bike was in violation and at the discretion of the referee, may forfeit ALL season points earned by the machine in the class protested. The rider or owner must prove to the satisfaction of the referee that the machine meets the rules of the class before it can be re-entered.
Proposed: If, after inspection the protest is upheld, the rider will be subject to penalties listed in N- 6 for the classes for which the bike was in violation and at the discretion of the referee, may forfeit ALL season points earned by the machine in the class protested. The rider or owner must prove to the satisfaction of the referee that the machine meets the rules of the class before it can be re-entered.

(L-6)
Current: If the protest is upheld, the protest fee will be returned to the protesting party. If the protest is not upheld, the protest fee will be given to the protested rider/owner.
- If a protest is not upheld and the material costs involved in re-assembling a machine exceed the protest fee, then OMRRA will reimburse the protested rider for the difference in cost.
- OMRRA's liability shall only extend to oil, oil seals, and gaskets. Piston rings, bearings, cost of honing cylinders are specifically not covered.

Proposed: If the protest is upheld, the protest fee will be returned to the protesting party (Unless specified as non-refundable). If the protest is not upheld, the protest fee will be given to the protested rider/owner.
- If a protest is not upheld and the costs involved in reassembling a machine exceed the protest fee, then OMRRA will reimburse the protested rider for the difference in cost up to $500 upon presentation of documented costs. (i.e. receipts, competitive quotes, etc.)
- OMRRA's liability for materials shall only extend to oil, oil seals, piston rings and gaskets. Bearings, cost of honing cylinders are specifically not covered.

[Bill Cismar]

Good job Brian.

I like everything you've captured.

I would only ad one more consideration; the timeliness of the inspection.

OMRRA can not expect to hold a bike indefinitely, nor should a rider be expected to be at OMRRA's beck and call during a protracted or open ended protest period.

I'm not intimately familiar with the current challenges for our Canadian racers, but I can easily imagine them facing a great deal of difficulty when they return home with a different load than they left with.

Racers who live more than a few miles out of the area should be allowed to collect some travel cost when the inspections are delayed beyond a 24 hour period IMHO.

Perhaps it would also be appropriate to require the protesting party attend so as to equalize the disturbance to each parties normal life? Just thinking out loud here.

[Brian Moe]

Good job Brian.

I like everything you've captured.

I would only ad one more consideration; the timeliness of the inspection.

OMRRA can not expect to hold a bike indefinitely, nor should a rider be expected to be at OMRRA's beck and call during a protracted or open ended protest period.

I'm not intimately familiar with the current challenges for our Canadian racers, but I can easily imagine them facing a great deal of difficulty when they return home with a different load than they left with.

Racers who live more than a few miles out of the area should be allowed to collect some travel cost when the inspections are delayed beyond a 24 hour period IMHO.

Perhaps it would also be appropriate to require the protesting party attend so as to equalize the disturbance to each parties normal life? Just thinking out loud here.

Good point. Another thing I just thought about was should it be a requirement for the Rider Rep to be notified as well? I think its generally practice but its not defined.

[Mike McDonough]

Brian,

I really like the ideas in your post,and agree that the time frame must be adressed, if we change race day to a different schedule we might have time at the end of the day or add tear down to occur with in ......... we also need to have a more defined way of securing bikes if kept over night, a little out of the box question, could say a engine builder have a offical (referee)pre-inspect his engines and then have tamper proof tape put on it, this could be done when first built and if not disturb would be a way to show it has been inspected. ( i know alot of logistics would need to be thought out But....) With the budget in mind how is OMRRA going to cover its portion of cost ? what if we had say 3-4 full protest in a weekend and all were found legal?

[Brian Moe]

...a little out of the box question, could say a engine builder have a offical (referee)pre-inspect his engines and then have tamper proof tape put on it, this could be done when first built and if not disturb would be a way to show it has been inspected. ( i know alot of logistics would need to be thought out But....)

Now THIS sounds like a really kick ass idea if we can sort the logistics.

[Bill Cismar]

Brian,

I really like the ideas in your post,and agree that the time frame must be adressed, if we change race day to a different schedule we might have time at the end of the day or add tear down to occur with in ......... we also need to have a more defined way of securing bikes if kept over night, a little out of the box question, could say a engine builder have a offical (referee)pre-inspect his engines and then have tamper proof tape put on it, this could be done when first built and if not disturb would be a way to show it has been inspected. ( i know alot of logistics would need to be thought out But....) With the budget in mind how is OMRRA going to cover its portion of cost ? what if we had say 3-4 full protest in a weekend and all were found legal?

You could put a bike cover on the bike, the type with metal eyelets around the bottom, then run safety wire through the eyelets and make a lead swedge seal to seal the bike. Such seals are available from various specialty shops and could be custom made. You could even double bag the bike by rolling it onto one bag and pull it up seal at top, then pull another bag on from top down and seal at bottom.

Taa Daa - tamper proof bike storage.

Or buy one of the metal shipping crates that a popular shipping company sells and plop a seal on it.

Safety wire and a lead swedge seal!

[Bill Cismar]

Sorry I missed the last part of your question about OMRRA affording the costs of multipule tear downs. That is the point of L1 as I've pointed out several times.

[Dave Salmi]

This is great stuff, exactly the way to have a rulebook rewrite to vote on with all this off time.

Another aspect that may/should be addressed is the actual procedure of tearing the bike down. Some rules to follow would be good here to, maybe?

Observing my first protest teardown left me with questions as to the proper way it should be done. Who gets to see what, who inspects what and how. The whole idea is to have a competent inspection without revealing "tuning secrets". I'm sure we all can agree on that.

It's not ideal when the protested party has to let a competing builder watch the degree wheel with the dial indicator on the cam lobe while the engine is rotated from open to close and allowing the timing events to be calculated, a tuner's "secret" revealed.

In my mind, ideally, the bike gets torn down by the protested mechanic under the watchful eye of the Ref. If necessary the ref can appoint a neutral helper(mechanic) to aid in viewing and to gather information(such as cam lift, duration, ect.). This should never be the protester's mechanic or represenatitive, who's viewing angle through out disassembly should be of no advantage professionally speaking. Of course they should have the right to question or ask for a part to checked a certain way, but in reality, a competitng mechanic has no business inside someone else's motor. That is what the ref and his unbiased assistant mechanic should be for.

Also, the only person knowing and writing any spec numbers down should be the Ref. Comparision of actual readings from engine parts to book specs should be done only by the ref/helper mechanic and then he can announce if within spec or not. Yes it passes or no it doesn't is all anybody really needs to know. No reason for a competing mech. to be privy to any spec number or to have a full spec. buleprint to take home at the end of the evening.

This is just ramblings of a non-mechanic, I'm sure the professionals have an opinion or two on this one.

Thoughts?

[Brian Moe]

This is great stuff, exactly the way to have a rulebook rewrite to vote on with all this off time.

Another aspect that may/should be addressed is the actual procedure of tearing the bike down. Some rules to follow would be good here to, maybe?

Observing my first protest teardown left me with questions as to the proper way it should be done. Who gets to see what, who inspects what and how. The whole idea is to have a competent inspection without revealing "tuning secrets". I'm sure we all can agree on that.

It's not ideal when the protested party has to let a competing builder watch the degree wheel with the dial indicator on the cam lobe while the engine is rotated from open to close and allowing the timing events to be calculated, a tuner's "secret" revealed.

In my mind, ideally, the bike gets torn down by the protested mechanic under the watchful eye of the Ref. If necessary the ref can appoint a neutral helper(mechanic) to aid in viewing and to gather information(such as cam lift, duration, ect.). This should never be the protester's mechanic or represenatitive, who's viewing angle through out disassembly should be of no advantage professionally speaking. Of course they should have the right to question or ask for a part to checked a certain way, but in reality, a competitng mechanic has no business inside someone else's motor. That is what the ref and his unbiased assistant mechanic should be for.

Also, the only person knowing and writing any spec numbers down should be the Ref. Comparision of actual readings from engine parts to book specs should be done only by the ref/helper mechanic and then he can announce if within spec or not. Yes it passes or no it doesn't is all anybody really needs to know. No reason for a competing mech. to be privy to any spec number or to have a full spec. buleprint to take home at the end of the evening.

This is just ramblings of a non-mechanic, I'm sure the professionals have an opinion or two on this one.

Thoughts?

So seems like THIS along with the timeframe needs to get defined. Again...just throwing things out there. Feel free to EDIT yourself. The wording is a bit awkward so it probably needs clean up. But it gets us started. The only other thing I can think of is if teh Referee is recording things...where should those records be kept in case of an appeal? Who has access, etc. Don't know how to really insert that as I don't think we have a policy or definitions on where protests, protest results, and records are kept? what has traditionally be done?

So how about this:

Proposed additions to L-4
Proposed:
- A non-refundable protest fee of $10.00 (except a "visual" protest, see L-7) must accompany all protests involving the frame, wheels, brakes, tires, forks, bars, race conduct, etc., or race organization or decision.
- A protest fee of $25.00 for two-stroke and four-stroke engines will be assessed if the protest is regarding displacement only and can be measured by introducing oil into the cylinder with the motor remaining in the frame.
- A protest fee of $25.00 is assessed to any protest requiring some disassembly. To include but not limited to seat, bodywork, gas tank and air box removal.
- A protest fee of $50 will be assessed for a protest requiring removal of the valve covers.
- A protest fee of $250 will be assessed for removal of the Cylinder head.
- A protest fee of $500 will be assessed for complete engine removal and disassembly (i.e. engine tear down).
- The following items - where applicable - will be inspected during the above protests: bore and stroke, compression ratio, camshafts, valve size, porting work, carburetors, and ignition. Any other illegal modifications discovered during teardown will count toward upholding protest.
- Following the submission of a written protest and the proper protest fee to the referee, the referee will notify the rider representative, rider, and/or owner of the machine in question. The rider, owner, or pit crew member is then required to bring the machine under protest immediately to the impound area designated by the referee.
- It is responsibility of the Rider Representative and Referee to ensure that the protest is resolved within 72 hours of submission. Failure to do so will result in non-acceptance of the protest. Protesting party's fee will be returned. Protested party's machine to be returned.
- During protest only the Referee, Referee designated personnel, Rider Representative, Protesting and Protested parties will be allowed to attend. Only the referee will be allowed to record measurements for comparison to specification. At no time will competing engine builders be allowed to measure, handle, or in any other way examine in detail any portion of the parts being examined.
- Failure to bring the machine to the impound area will automatically uphold the protest and result in penalties per N-6.
- Protest fees outlined above are NOT cumulative.
- The Referee has discretion under L-1 to deny any of the above protest request in which case fees will be returned to originating party. Any penalties to be assessed for violation of L-1 are at the referees discretion under (N-4)

[Dawnette Hale]

[snip]- During protest only the Referee, Referee designated personnel, Rider Representative, Protesting and Protested parties will be allowed to attend.

[snip
I have been skimming the ideas and will take more time later to read the proposals word by word. The above caught my eye.


I am not in agreement on this part of the proposal.

I believe the inspections should be open to members - similar to the board meetings. But I see no reason for anyone and everyone to hover unless they are part of the inspection process. I think it prevents the rampant spreading of rumors and helps to create confidence in the process when it is open to the "public."

[Dave Salmi]

So seems like THIS along with the timeframe needs to get defined. Again...just throwing things out there. Feel free to EDIT yourself. The wording is a bit awkward so it probably needs clean up. But it gets us started. The only other thing I can think of is if teh Referee is recording things...where should those records be kept in case of an appeal? Who has access, etc. Don't know how to really insert that as I don't think we have a policy or definitions on where protests, protest results, and records are kept? what has traditionally be done?

So how about this:

Proposed additions to L-4
Proposed:
- A non-refundable protest fee of $10.00 (except a "visual" protest, see L-7) must accompany all protests involving the frame, wheels, brakes, tires, forks, bars, race conduct, etc., or race organization or decision.
- A protest fee of $25.00 for two-stroke and four-stroke engines will be assessed if the protest is regarding displacement only and can be measured by introducing oil into the cylinder with the motor remaining in the frame.
- A protest fee of $25.00 is assessed to any protest requiring some disassembly. To include but not limited to seat, bodywork, gas tank and air box removal.
- A protest fee of $50 will be assessed for a protest requiring removal of the valve covers.
- A protest fee of $250 will be assessed for removal of the Cylinder head.
- A protest fee of $500 will be assessed for complete engine removal and disassembly (i.e. engine tear down).
- The following items - where applicable - will be inspected during the above protests: bore and stroke, compression ratio, camshafts, valve size, porting work, carburetors, and ignition. Any other illegal modifications discovered during teardown will count toward upholding protest.
- Following the submission of a written protest and the proper protest fee to the referee, the referee will notify the rider representative, rider, and/or owner of the machine in question. The rider, owner, or pit crew member is then required to bring the machine under protest immediately to the impound area designated by the referee.
- It is responsibility of the Rider Representative and Referee to ensure that the protest is resolved within 72 hours of submission. Failure to do so will result in non-acceptance of the protest. Protesting party's fee will be returned. Protested party's machine to be returned.
- During protest only the Referee, Referee designated personnel, Rider Representative, Protesting and Protested parties will be allowed to attend. Only the referee will be allowed to record measurements for comparison to specification. At no time will competing engine builders be allowed to measure, handle, or in any other way examine in detail any portion of the parts being examined.
- Failure to bring the machine to the impound area will automatically uphold the protest and result in penalties per N-6.
- Protest fees outlined above are NOT cumulative.
- The Referee has discretion under L-1 to deny any of the above protest request in which case fees will be returned to originating party. Any penalties to be assessed for violation of L-1 are at the referees discretion under (N-4)

Brian you did a great job of summing up my rambling! BRAVO! I'd really like to see some engine builders weigh in on this aspect with their insight.

[Dave Salmi]

As for my first GONG show of a protest. I found the whole "group" gathering a terrible thing for BOTH parties.

IMO teardowns should be.

Protester (rider MUST be required to be there)
"" mechanic

Protestee (rider MUST be required to be there)
'''" mechanic

ONLY OMRRA BOARD MEMBERS!

NOT members. NOT friends. NOT advisory board members. ETC.

Should have been that way to keep it more calm, professional and straight forward like the others i have been protested in.

What I saw were MY observations, and they appear to be different than your interpretation. So be it. I'm not here to argue any of that, and I doubt anybody wants or needs the drama. I sure don't.

You were put in a sticky situation, no doubt, and again from my observation, did the best you could with the situation. It is something that should not happen again, would you agree? OMRRA needs to have it laid out on what is acceptable and what isn't. My intentions for my post is to help with the rules, sorry if you took personal, but it MUST BE ADDRESSED or the rules won't change. If I could have presented them in a better way, then I should have.

Now, the last part of your post is EXACTLY what I was looking and asking for, thank you. You've done a bunch of teardowns and I knew you would have insight/opinion that should be heard.

One point that I've heard differing views on is who is allowed to attend. I'm have mixed thoughts on that and would like to see more discusssion.

[Sage Wilkinson]

Sometimes i dont get you dave. you throw things out there just to be a xxx...and yes to me. You can pretend all you want dave, but more and more i realize your stance on me. fine. whatever. NOW..here's the FACTS dave...

AS I RECFXXXKINGCAL i was the one that said OUT LOUD BEFORE WE STARTED to check cam timing "Now, chris stand on this side of bike, i dont want to see his numbers, nor do i care too. The protesters mechanic does not need to see the numbers....just add the closing and opening number to 180 and see what that number is"

Dave...DID i see the degree wheel? NO
Dave...DID I see his squish, or measure his deck height? NO
Dave...DID I check his bearing clearences? NO

I DID see that he had the clutch pak installed wrong. but is that a trick? NO. Dave, you really need to stick to riding and bashing me. your better at those things. leave the mechanics to us. I PROMISE you two things would happen if sage and i were standing at the shop with 2 bone stock ZX6RR's and had to s/s build them

1. They would both be setup fairly similar (there is ONLY so much you can do, and the cam timing only works so much in a small range...i guessed without even seeing his numbers what he might have ran..HELL i even wrote it down and QUIETLY showed him..he chuckled and said close.. dude there is no BIG huge secret to a ZX6 motor...unless its your first one

2. They would make within 1-2% hp. I know cause ive dyno'd rons bikes, ami's bikes (ok they are down alot), speedealers bikes, and yes...some of sage's bikes. Most the time the other shop/tuner does not know. I know it happens to me all the time as well.

REally pisses me off, and if Sage thinks i got anything from it, or even TRIED too...then you can both you know what!!!

HOW MORE PROFESSIONAL AND RESPECTFUL OF SAGE AND HIS MOTOR (hell even the rider!) COULD I HAVE FXXXXKING BEEN?



As for my first GONG show of a protest. I found the whole "group" gathering a terrible thing for BOTH parties.

IMO teardowns should be.

Protester (rider MUST be required to be there)
"" mechanic

Protestee (rider MUST be required to be there)
'''" mechanic

ONLY OMRRA BOARD MEMBERS!

NOT members. NOT friends. NOT advisory board members. ETC.

Should have been that way to keep it more calm, professional and straight forward like the others i have been protested in.

:confused: no ware did I read into Dave's post "lets bash Eric now", he did ask for a mechanics point of view which only leaves a few people to answer, lets get back on track developing a better refined system

BTW, I do all my clutches wrong, its a good way to look confused when tech finds 2 intake cams - "dude, look at my clutch! that means sombodys bike has 2 exhaust cams...... damn late nights"

[Bill Cismar]

Sage asked that I be there because of my background in the rules and in officiating.
If one of the party's feels they need an expert to assist them then they should be allowed to have them there. An owner of the bike certainly has a right to be there. Remember, this is a specific point by which this whole thing blew up, when certain people were being banned by one party from attending.

I can understand the desire to keep the "work area" a limited access zone. I can also understand wanting to keep the whole process from turning into a circus side show. But once a protest has gone public and has been tainted as controversial, then it needs to go exactly the way it did and become an open meeting where any member may attend and observe.

I do think the protesting rider/mechanic/representative should be able to take any individual part in hand to inspect and measure. However Eric's argument that he could have had the rods split so that he could get the crank journal measurements and then check to see what bearing were used points out exactly when/why an opposing mechanic should NOT be allowed to handle some parts. The choice of bearing to use is a legal choice to make within the rules, and would constitute a builders secret.
The protection of an engine builders methods is a valid concern that should be imparted into the rules in some way. It does put a greater responsibility on the referee to filter just what how much info is communicated to the protesting party. I would say that any measurement numbers taken in a tear down should be held by the referee and the only info communicated to the protesting party should be "pass" or "fail".

I observed how Eric instructed Chris on collecting cam duration numbers. It was clear to me that Eric was making no attempt to acquire the cam timing numbers. However, having the protesting party instruct the referee on step by step procedure to get any number was sketchy. The referee should not be taking instructions from anyone. I understand Chris may not have known how to accomplish the specific task being asked, and Eric was just trying to move things along, but ideally, that shouldn't happen, and it quickly led to an impasse when the method used, passed verbally to the referee, resulted in unexpected values.

We need to insure there is insulation between the build of the bike and the information gleaned by the protester.


PS. When I check Cam duration, I put a slightly too thick feeler gage between the cam lobe and the follower to zero clearance it, and then measure the rotation from trailing to leading edge. Numbers with valve lash will always vary, and number of degrees off depends on the steepness of the rise. So the variation on the intake, will not match the exhaust.

[Dave Salmi]

WHAT EXACTLY...EXACTLY DID YOU FEEL I DID WRONG OR SHOULDNT HAVE DONE?

Please, i wanna know what you think was wrong??


I think Bill summed up my concerns, and what should be the concerns of the membership.

I have no beef with you, and at this point am not concerned about the specifics, but rather the manner in which it was handled. More importantly I am not pointing a finger at you, just that the method needs attention. Again, I'll say you were forced into an uncomfortable situation, and I am NOT holding you accountable for anything that transpired during the teardown.

Additionally, I should add that I am NOT bashing Chris (I think it is obvious that I am bashing no one). He did the best he could as did all the other officials.

If we had a better outline in the rule book, much of this could have been avoided. Call it constructive criticism or whatever you want.

I however, will not be silent when I see that issues need addressed. Sorry that this one happened to involve you.

[Dawnette Hale]

[snip] I can understand the desire to keep the "work area" a limited access zone. I can also understand wanting to keep the whole process from turning into a circus side show. But once a protest has gone public and has been tainted as controversial, then it needs to go exactly the way it did and become an open meeting where any member may attend and observe.
[snip]

Rules should allow for some variances from the norm as well as for standard or typical procedures. The engine tear down protest process for Sage's bike was an exceptionally tension filled near debacle. Had there been a rule in place preventing members, etc. from attending it could have become even more dramatic than it was already.

[Brian Moe]

So sounds like since there are differing opinions....the best we can do is break up the proposal so it can be voted on individually.

We need to get a list of the pro's and con's to put on the ballot.

[Sage Wilkinson]

pro - gets costs a little more in line with real world pricing & fines cheaters

con - may discourage teardowns because the fee is high

[Sage Wilkinson]

I dont recall ever cying about it. Thats racing.

why is asking for a positive change crying? and why is it your really the only one who's being an a$$ while the rest of us are trying to work out details for an "idea" nothings set in stone, its all just talk at this point so act like a grown up at the table or sit on the porch with the kids.



pro - cost will NEVER get in line with real world pricing nor hurt cheaters more

con - may discourage teardowns because the fee is high

Now if I read your pro's & con's right it sounds like your opinion is leave it alone, your fine with building engines every now & then for $350 P/L and spending a few hours tearing a bike apart over a few beers and laughs, writing it off as advertising expense and the people who have the money to cheat will have the money to pay fines so its a wash and they will cheat anyways?

[Sage Wilkinson]

sage grow up and settle down. you HAVE been crying/bitchin/complaining NON STOP about the fee's all over the internet since it ended.

if thats what you call wanting change and showing a picture of what a teardown looks like along with examples of what it would cost an unsupported racer then so be it. I know if the tables were turned and Salmi protested Gulin you'd have a full ad campaign on "how our competitors couldn't hang so they protested" and bla bla bla, in all my "crying/bitchin/complaining" have you heard that once from me? Nope, didn't think so. Did you hear me taking my personal experience with the club and trying to form a better system for something that will happen again to another racer down the line? Maybe you didn't but it seems other people have interpreted my "crying/bitchin/complaining" as a actual issues that needs to be cleaned up.

I'm glad you've been with OMRRA for 10 years, sorry I've only been with them for 5, I guess that makes you twice as important right?

[Sage Wilkinson]

..........

[Rob Tatom]

When Black Flag Racing took over this site a couple months ago it perked up for a week. Where on about 2 weeks of OMRRA site action now.---------------------SWEET!!

[Sage Wilkinson]

When Black Flag Racing took over this site a couple months ago it perked up for a week. Where on about 2 weeks of OMRRA site action now.---------------------SWEET!!

people bitch about the drama but if you look at the thread views they are #1 & #2 on the site, I just went to a bike night in Redmond with about 45 non racers and a few people asked WTF is going on and also asked about OMRRA and how to get into road racing :eek: might sound funny but people come to watch the fights and now want to race......

Also its good to keep the "Days of our OMRRA" drama hour on this site vs dragging it onto SB.WS

[Jason Merritt]

I agree, keep OMRRA drama on the OMRRA forum. Drama generally brings more traffic. Just keep it clean guys. :)

[Tyson Silva]

Jeezus Dorn, if you think Sage was crying, what do you call what you've been doing everywhere else? "I dont care what happened, my bikes are the fastest!" "Have you seen Mark, he's the biggest guy racing the smallest bike....never had a chance" Ever seen Gulin and Hester side by side...pretty close in size and Hester legal supersport handed your claimed 138rwhp 640 its ass. Dude, I ran into you at Motocorsa the other day and you said,"I cant believe Mark through me under the bus like that with the protests". Are you fooking kidding me? You had a typed up spec sheet with all these things to check at the protest. Do you honestly think that anyone in attendance or anyone here believes that Mark typed up that list of things for you to check? Mark is one of the nicest guys out there and a great rider, why campaign against your own guy like that? You fail to remember that a few of us have been around you and OMRRA for quite a while. You've driven the same bus into Barry, Salmi, Ancien, Tamer and now Mark. You whined LOUD AND HARD about Todd's bike getting protested as well as the "mistake" at WMRRA. You cried last year with the issues with that superbike when Ancien had to pit. You are the loudest whining, crying man in this small world called OMRRA, so why hide from it. Embrace the title and even celebrate it. C'mon buttercup, Black Rock Art Festival has the "Burning Man" and we have the OMRRA "Crying Man". At least the EDR bus doens't need flashing lights or a horn. You can hear the driver whaling and gnashing his teeth from a mile away.

[Bill Cismar]

You owe me a Keyboard Tyson. Next time advise people to swallow their coffee before reading.

How the heck did I get left out of this? By now I'm am usually accused fo somehow fomenting the whole spectical.
I do have the marks from being run over by that same bus you know Tyson.


I'm still so ashamed. No not of running the number 7, but for all the business I pushed that way and the money I spent there only to get tossed under that bus.