I agree with you here. some of the closest racing ive ever had has been in the club events, partucularly in PCA or POC/PRC NASA events with 13/13 rules. everyone must understand its as close as pro racing, but harder in that you just cant bump your competitor when he is bugging you ! and yes, there are wrecks and bad judgment and lack of control... and if you hit someone, you both get 13/13s when you lose it yourself, you get one. in SCCA, there is NO 13/13, but the experience level is very high and rarely do we see serious contact, even minor fender rubbing is rare.

 

The rules for corners are clear - nothing has changed. The article addresses incidents where people had avoidable contact where the slower car simply assumed that he had no obligation to leave racing room when another car (that he was aware of) passed him in the straights.

 

Perhaps I am wrong, but the closing speed of a SPB on any class of 944 in PCA racing is rarely as quick as seen in this video. The 944 should realize that it is a moving pylon, and get/stay out of the way. The SPB should notice this difference in typical closing rate, and prepare for an inexperienced driver.

The unfortunate thing is timing/placement of the cars. A quarter second, further back, or further ahead for either car, and the outcome would have been completely clean.

A 13 for either car is harsh for an incident like this, in my opinion. Thus the reason why I do not have a preference for PCA Club Racing. I do like the cars however...

 

since the closing rate was SO great, and the experienced orange car knew that the pass was going to be on the right, he should have been to the right , much earlier. that way, he might have been seen, or at least had a much easier avoidance line if he wasnt. (and he wasnt ) this not about giving racing room at all

 

Because you can't compare a straight to a corner, especially the particular corner where this happened (blind etc) and the trailing car has to account for VARIABLES. From those that have driven MMC, the corner where this happened eats up a lot of cars. The facts are you have a slower class car, rookie (there should have been an X on the car) and a precarious corner where the rookie is probably fixated on taking that corner properly. The trailing car has to CALCULATE FOR ALL THESE VARIABLES. He made a poor choice and paid the price. I really see this as a black and white issue. Guaranteed a more seasoned racer would have taken these facts into account on approach to that corner.

 

See my edited prior response for the type of scenario I'm advocating.

That same assumption that the car ahead at turn in does't need to leave racing room is prevalent out there. That's the crux of the matter.

And why is a Cup car passing an SP1 on a straight or in a corner any different? The Cup still has the benefit of seeing what's going on ahead of him. Suppose it's two SP1's battling for position down the straight and the trailing SP1 pops out to make the pass and the Cup hits him? Shouldn't the Cup recognize what's going on in front of him? Pretty confident the SP1 is fixated on his competitor and the Cup should recognize that.

The passing rule as written only establishes who owns the corner at turn in but no one owns the corner so why is there a rule establishing ownership of the corner at turn in.

The other two sentences are not specific to corners ergo they apply everywhere on track.

The problem here and why the thread is on page 15 is because it's not clear. It's never been clear. I would welcome clarity.

My general point is that a chop should be looked at with the same level of scorn as the dive bomb.

 

I'm not a racer but I do have a law degree and I would strongly caution anyone reading the CRN article as being relevant to the videos in the OP to read the article again very very carefully. It's clear why the article anonymized the scenarios but including links to videos would have greatly added clarity to the article.

 

Not relevant to the videos specifically but relevant to the general question of coexistence on the race track in different scenarios. The problem is that while you see it as a black and white issue many won't and those interpretations tend to escape from their defined box and bleed into the decision making process of regarding a wider variety of scenarios. Often to the detriment of the PCA racing community at large.

For the record I've already stated that in the OP video he's (orange car) at fault but it has sparked a wider discussion.

I very much like some version of what Garrett posted:

1. The driver attempting a pass has the majority but shared responsibility to complete a clean pass.

2. If there is any overlap between the passer or passee, racing room must be given by both cars.

Now what we have is that the passer or faster class has the responsibility to make a clean pass in corners but not on straights.

Huh?

The discussion or culpability shouldn't necessarily end at turn in.

 

go to exactly 1:30 on this video to see what a chop looks like. ( in my opinion)


and go to exactly 1:10 on this video to show what you do if someone doesnt see you. (or what you need to be prepared to do)

at :10 seconds, there is a great example of a "chop".

 

No, passer still has the responsibility on a straight but if the lead car does something unusual then the passing car has a defense for why it's not his fault, despite the fact he is making the pass.

FOR EXAMPLE: I think it was you that gave the scenario of two SP cars fighting it out on a straight and one pops out to pass the other. If a faster car is about to pass them and one of the SP cars pops out in front of the passing car causing contact, I would find the passing car having a good defense insofar as the car popping out should have seen the car about to lap them IF:

1. The faster class car about to lap had established lane position off line
2. The SP car was still on line and went into the path of the passing faster class car without giving giving proper racing room (i.e. 3 wide down the straight).

 

Why do I get the feeling that the Driver's Meeting at the Schattenbaum Showdown at NJMP (or, insert your next PCA Club race here) will resemble a Senate discussion on the health care bill?!?!?

New PCA Club Racing Passing Rules:

1. Don't hit anybody
2. Don't put yourself in a position to be hit
3. Can't we all just get along?

 

I'm in the left/middle of the track approaching T1 at WGI with a car slowly gaining on me on the outside (that I seemingly don't see). My normal line is far left at the 200' marker and a dive to apex. Can I close the door on him at the last second and take my normal line and pretend I had no idea he was there or is it my responsibility to know what is going on around me? I put him into the wall, but hey, that's the line I take. I can't tell you how many times i've give up a position to a dive-bomber or chopper just for self-preservation in PCA racing. I swear most KNOW you will back out and use these "rules" on purpose.

 

Anytime there is overlap there should be an implicit understanding that a passing attempt is going to be made. Any body with a race under their belt should know that. But the rule only holds one person responsible for making the pass.

The fact is that this rule, it's wording, it's order, its validity and it's enforcement has been a topic of debate for the 9 years I've raced with PCA.

There is room to have a discussion about scenarios that aren't always black and white.

 

Not sure if this was mentioned (too many long posts) but watching the 2nd video at the end of the long straight, he tried to pass a car that was ahead of him at the 1st tight left turn chicane at the top of the hill, by totally straight-lining the right turn, jumping the curbing, and taking it completely inside of the apex, running people off the road and nearly causing another accident. That move was TOTALLY not in the spirit of PCA racing and should have gotten him at least a black flag. That confirms my vote that the orange car was at fault in the original post.

 

If I was the 44 I would say that racing for position is not unusual.