Bourdais whining [Archive] - Off Camber Forums

Ed_Severson

07-01-07, 04:39 PM

Bourdais definitely jumped the start. On the video, it's pretty clear that the lights are synced with the main camera, but even without the lights, it's pretty easy to see -- Bourdais moved well ahead of the rest of the field. Statistically, it's just not possible that his reaction time is that far ahead of everyone else, which would be the only explanation possible if he didn't jump the start.

However, the race was not in any way altered by the start. Bourdais finished 2nd behind Robert Doornbos; if he didn't jump the start he would have finished 2nd behind Robert Doornbos. There was no need for a penalty, given the circumstances.

The best analogy I can give you is jaywalking. Most cities have laws prohibiting jaywalking, primarily for the purpose of preventing pedestrians from posing a danger to unwitting drivers. Penalizing Bourdais for this start would be analagous to citing someone for jaywalking at 3 AM on a street with absolutely no traffic. Sure, the jaywalker violated the letter of the law, but he also caused none of the consequences the law is intended to prevent. No harm done. Had the start gone off a bit differently and they managed to keep it green, Bourdais likely would have been penalized for gaining time. But, as it was, he gained no positions (thanks to Power stalling) and no time (thanks to the ensuing yellow) by jumping the start, so there's no sense in penalizing him for it. You don't ruin someone's race if they have not negatively influenced anybody else's.

jonovision_man

07-01-07, 05:18 PM

Disagree.

If he hadn't jumped it maybe someone else overtakes him into turn 1, you can't say for sure he didn't gain an advantage. He was on the dirty side, it's entirely possible that he loses positions if he doesn't jump it.

Should have been penalized, not entirely sure why he wasn't.

jono

Ed_Severson

07-01-07, 05:29 PM

Disagree.

If he hadn't jumped it maybe someone else overtakes him into turn 1, you can't say for sure he didn't gain an advantage.

Highly unlikely, and that's exactly the sort of thing the stewards would be looking at. Given the start the guys behind him had, nobody was going to get him into T1. If someone immediately behind him had rocketed off the line, it would have been a different story.

And I should add that "maybe someone could have gotten by him into T1 if he hadn't jumped the start" is the functional equivalent of "maybe someone could have gotten by him if he hadn't cut the chicane." If the lead driver goes in too deep to prevent a pass, cuts a corner, and comes back onto the track in front, the only penalty assessed is to give back any time gained by shortcutting the circuit -- at least the first time it happens. Giving that time back was accomplished by the yellow anyway.

Thinking back to the Servia/Glock deal at Montreal in 2005 is a good example. First time Glock cut the chicane, they made him give the time back and warned him that the next occurrence would result in demotion. It wasn't until he shortcut the circuit a 2nd time that shortcutting resulted in a loss of position.

Methanolandbrats

07-01-07, 05:31 PM

I'm so sick of that French *****. If he does'nt win, it's :cry: :cry: :cry: And there was'nt any "blocking". **** him and Craig Hampson.

Indy

07-01-07, 05:43 PM

I have to disagree, Ed. You jump the start, you should be penalized. I am not a believer in the Seabass/Cotman tin foil hat conspiracy theories, but that was bush league all the way.

Insomniac

07-01-07, 05:43 PM

Highly unlikely, and that's exactly the sort of thing the stewards would be looking at. Given the start the guys behind him had, nobody was going to get him into T1. If someone immediately behind him had rocketed off the line, it would have been a different story.

And I should add that "maybe someone could have gotten by him into T1 if he hadn't jumped the start" is the functional equivalent of "maybe someone could have gotten by him if he hadn't cut the chicane." If the lead driver goes in too deep to prevent a pass, cuts a corner, and comes back onto the track in front, the only penalty assessed is to give back any time gained by shortcutting the circuit -- at least the first time it happens. Giving that time back was accomplished by the yellow anyway.

Thinking back to the Servia/Glock deal at Montreal in 2005 is a good example. First time Glock cut the chicane, they made him give the time back and warned him that the next occurrence would result in demotion. It wasn't until he shortcut the circuit a 2nd time that shortcutting resulted in a loss of position.

I'm with jono on this. And this is why ChampCar officiating is so inconsistent. They apply a different standard to every incident. What would've happened if Will Power didn't stall and Wilson got to go straight off the start? Or maybe he stalls it waiting for the right time? Should've been assessed a drive through penalty for jumping the start. It's his own fault whether he did or did not get an advantage from it. Next time everyone knows what happens if you jump the start.

jonovision_man

07-01-07, 05:44 PM

Highly unlikely, and that's exactly the sort of thing the stewards would be looking at. Given the start the guys behind him had, nobody was going to get him into T1. If someone immediately behind him had rocketed off the line, it would have been a different story.

And I should add that "maybe someone could have gotten by him into T1 if he hadn't jumped the start" is the functional equivalent of "maybe someone could have gotten by him if he hadn't cut the chicane." If the lead driver goes in too deep to prevent a pass, cuts a corner, and comes back onto the track in front, the only penalty assessed is to give back any time gained by shortcutting the circuit -- at least the first time it happens. Giving that time back was accomplished by the yellow anyway.

Thinking back to the Servia/Glock deal at Montreal in 2005 is a good example. First time Glock cut the chicane, they made him give the time back and warned him that the next occurrence would result in demotion. It wasn't until he shortcut the circuit a 2nd time that shortcutting resulted in a loss of position.

I'd prefer consistency. It should always be a penalty. IMO, if you jump the start you should get a drive-thru.

Whenever decisions are left to ChampCar officials discretion we get ambiguity, blown calls, accusations of favouritism...

jono

Ed_Severson

07-01-07, 06:02 PM

I'd prefer consistency.

Why not both? There hasn't been any other incident of this type that was ruled upon in a different way, so the accusation of inconsistency doesn't make sense.

It's definitely a matter of preference, but I don't see an awful lot of point in writing rules and blindly enforcing them in all situations regardless of circumstance. That's something that CART did a lot of and it got them in trouble several times. The reality is that a set of rules which give the same consequences in every situation is just as dangerous as a set of rules which gives different consequences in every situation. What Champ Car is trying to do is write rules that make sense and then enforce them with some perspective on whether assessing the penalty serves any actual purpose other than upholding the letter of the law with an iron fist. I think the company has done a pretty good job accomplishing that, and they've been quite consistent in taking that approach.

Ed_Severson

07-01-07, 06:04 PM

They apply a different standard to every incident.

I very strongly disagree. They apply the same standard to every incident -- it just isn't the same standard you apply on your own, so you don't always get the same result they do.

Insomniac

07-01-07, 06:55 PM

I very strongly disagree. They apply the same standard to every incident -- it just isn't the same standard you apply on your own, so you don't always get the same result they do.

By your explanation they look at the circumstances in determining the penalty for the same infraction. Sometimes it's no penalty, sometimes it is yielding a position, sometimes it's an extra X seconds added to a pit stop, sometimes it's a drive through penalty for the same infraction.

Sure, it might be from judgment, but the judgment should be left to, "did the competitor commit an infraction?" Not how did it affect the race or other competitors. It's ambiguous at best.

Insomniac

07-01-07, 07:00 PM

Why not both? There hasn't been any other incident of this type that was ruled upon in a different way, so the accusation of inconsistency doesn't make sense.

It's definitely a matter of preference, but I don't see an awful lot of point in writing rules and blindly enforcing them in all situations regardless of circumstance. That's something that CART did a lot of and it got them in trouble several times. The reality is that a set of rules which give the same consequences in every situation is just as dangerous as a set of rules which gives different consequences in every situation. What Champ Car is trying to do is write rules that make sense and then enforce them with some perspective on whether assessing the penalty serves any actual purpose other than upholding the letter of the law with an iron fist. I think the company has done a pretty good job accomplishing that, and they've been quite consistent in taking that approach.

I can't remember the trouble they got into, but if it was any more than drivers/teams crying, boo hoo. This is the exact reason there isn't a normal rolling start, people blocking and doing whatever else they can get away with when the likelihood is the penalty isn't going to be a penalty. It's bad enough the action on the track is limited by all the computer power, they don't need to compound it.

I'd love to see the iron fist and upholding the letter of the rule book.

Besides, what harm is there if PT calls Cotman a circus clown? :)

Ed_Severson

07-01-07, 07:10 PM

By your explanation they look at the circumstances in determining the penalty for the same infraction. Sometimes it's no penalty, sometimes it is yielding a position, sometimes it's an extra X seconds added to a pit stop, sometimes it's a drive through penalty for the same infraction.

And that's the same standard every time, across the board ... does the action harm anyone else's race? If the answer to that question is "no," then the result is no penalty. If the answer is "yes" then the extent to which harm was done is related to the severity of the penalty. In this case, the answer was "no."

I can't remember the trouble they got into, but if it was any more than drivers/teams crying, boo hoo.

That's kind of the point. Earlier you provided "next time everyone knows what happens if you jump the start" as a justification for handing down a penalty for the start today. You can't have it both ways. You want to make the argument that not penalizing Bourdais somehow cripples Champ Car's ability to assess penalties for jumping the start in the future, but it doesn't. If somebody jumps the start and gains an advantage from it, they will be penalized. If they refuse to serve the penalty, Champ Car will stop scoring them, and "you didn't penalize Bourdais at Mont Tremblant!" will not get you your points restored. What happened today has no impact on Champ Car's ability to enforce the rule in the future; all it does is make it likely that someone will bitch about it afterwards.

Boo hoo. ;)

Dirty Sanchez

07-01-07, 07:30 PM

it was a blown call, imo. it's pretty simple... jumping the start is an unfair advantage. if he doesn't jump it we don't know if he'd have an average start, a bad start, etc. you can't only base a decision on whether or not he hurt someone else's race. in this case, he unfairly helped his own race.

it's not the end of the world... but it was definitely a mistake.

it was a missed opportunity on the part of the race broadcasters or the post-race interviewer to take him and/or his team to task over this as well.

Insomniac

07-01-07, 07:52 PM

And that's the same standard every time, across the board ... does the action harm anyone else's race? If the answer to that question is "no," then the result is no penalty. If the answer is "yes" then the extent to which harm was done is related to the severity of the penalty. In this case, the answer was "no."

IMO, that's the problem. The whole standard is what if's and assumptions. For every assumption/what if that his jumping the start made no impact, there's another that it did. The FACT is, he jumped it, and I wish that is what they would use in assessing a penalty.

That's kind of the point. Earlier you provided "next time everyone knows what happens if you jump the start" as a justification for handing down a penalty for the start today. You can't have it both ways. You want to make the argument that not penalizing Bourdais somehow cripples Champ Car's ability to assess penalties for jumping the start in the future, but it doesn't. If somebody jumps the start and gains an advantage from it, they will be penalized. If they refuse to serve the penalty, Champ Car will stop scoring them, and "you didn't penalize Bourdais at Mont Tremblant!" will not get you your points restored. What happened today has no impact on Champ Car's ability to enforce the rule in the future; all it does is make it likely that someone will bitch about it afterwards.

Boo hoo. ;)

I don't want it both ways. That statement is as simple as it is. The penalty, while "excessive" by recent standards (give up the advantage) makes the entire field think twice about jumping the start in the future, because the penalty is far worse that what you might gain.

I also in no way was trying to say that CC has now lost the ability to penalize in the future. I'm not even sure how you read that much into it. If anything, the way I said they officiate, they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, for whatever reason because nothing is in stone.

Ed_Severson

07-01-07, 08:12 PM

Not to nitpick, but this ...

Should've been assessed a drive through penalty for jumping the start. Next time everyone knows what happens if you jump the start.

... and this ...

The penalty makes the entire field think twice about jumping the start in the future, because the penalty is far worse that what you might gain.

... pretty much imply that nobody knows what the rules are and the drivers will be under the impression that anything goes -- in other words, Champ Car has lost the ability to police the starts. For obvious reasons, I reject that idea. If any of the competitors are confused, they are more than welcome to ask for clarification, and they'll be told that if you jump the start and gain any advantage, you'd better be prepared to serve the penalty. :)

Dr. Corkski

07-01-07, 08:16 PM

Even Hampson told him to stop whining and drive.

But let's keep whining about rules in a thread about a driver whining about rules. :rofl:

jonovision_man

07-01-07, 10:18 PM

Even Hampson told him to stop whining and drive.

But let's keep whining about rules in a thread about a driver whining about rules. :rofl:

I intend to. :)

I'm curious what ChampCar's explanation is for the non-call.

jono

jonovision_man

07-01-07, 11:05 PM

Here's the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QTR5Tp5Q38

jono

Wally

07-01-07, 11:09 PM

Classy interview for a series Champion.....:shakehead...:yuck:

gerhard911

07-01-07, 11:18 PM

I never expected anybody to eclipse FMA's level of whineritis but congrats to Hampster :cry: & Boordaisy :cry: for raising the bar to a level not likely to be matched in my lifetime :thumdown:

To the fans at the track :thumbup:

opinionated ow

07-02-07, 01:34 AM

I have to disagree, Ed. You jump the start, you should be penalized. I am not a believer in the Seabass/Cotman tin foil hat conspiracy theories, but that was bush league all the way.

spot on again indy. you jump the start, you get penalised. that is how it is in every other category

opinionated ow

07-02-07, 01:37 AM

Not to nitpick, but this ...

... and this ...

... pretty much imply that nobody knows what the rules are and the drivers will be under the impression that anything goes -- in other words, Champ Car has lost the ability to police the starts. For obvious reasons, I reject that idea. If any of the competitors are confused, they are more than welcome to ask for clarification, and they'll be told that if you jump the start and gain any advantage, you'd better be prepared to serve the penalty. :)

sooooooo if i was a driver and was on the filthy side of the track (ie starting P2) and new I would get swamped, by leaping early and having that unfair advantage over everyone else and thus maintaining my 2nd, I could get away with it? it doesn't look like I gained an advantage but I sure as hell did. champ car has gone soft again. standers will be just like rollers when it comes to quality of them...

Hard Driver

07-02-07, 03:13 AM

Here's the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QTR5Tp5Q38

jono

Clearly jumps the start.. close, but in rules, that is still a jump start... hence he got away with something.

Which makes his whining about "blocking" worse. Come on Bourdais, you had nothing for him, he was pulling away, there was a yellow to bunch you up, and he was pulling away again. Give the guy credit for a good drive. :cry:

Spicoli

07-02-07, 08:09 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsR2lyzZu6k&NR=1

@ 5:15 on the video.

also:

http://www.champcarworldseries.com/content/photos/2007/By800/20070701P_0054.jpg

http://www.champcarworldseries.com/content/photos/2007/By800/20070701P_0064.jpg

:rofl:

bobby Doorknobs rulez.:thumbup:

Spicoli

07-02-07, 08:14 AM

http://www.offcamber.net/forums/showthread.php?t=11553&highlight=hate+newman+haas

NismoZ

07-02-07, 08:31 AM

Everything turned out OK in the end. Our hero and Linda are now dating!;)

NismoZ

07-02-07, 08:33 AM

And...who replaces Bourdais next season?

Spicoli

07-02-07, 08:51 AM

And...who replaces Bourdais next season?

Who cares!

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 08:53 AM

if you jump the start and gain any advantage, you'd better be prepared to serve the penalty.

by leaping early and having that unfair advantage over everyone else and thus maintaining my 2nd, I could get away with it?

http://funnypics.free.fr/explorer/public/gifs/reading-rainbow.gif

Insomniac

07-02-07, 08:53 AM

... pretty much imply that nobody knows what the rules are and the drivers will be under the impression that anything goes -- in other words, Champ Car has lost the ability to police the starts. For obvious reasons, I reject that idea. If any of the competitors are confused, they are more than welcome to ask for clarification, and they'll be told that if you jump the start and gain any advantage, you'd better be prepared to serve the penalty. :)

You're reading more into what it says than I intended. The drivers all know what the "penalty" will be. In a rare occasion, it might actually be tough (Doornbos drive through at Cleveland), but will most likely just be give back the advantage.

I have never said ChampCar has lost the ability to police anything, nor do I think they did.

TKGAngel

07-02-07, 09:09 AM

bobby Doorknobs rulez.:thumbup:

I would love to know what was being said on that podium. Power looks like he was having a great time up there with the two of them going at it.

And RM says Wilson and CDW to replace Bourdais next year. I thought Mario was pushing for Marco to go there?

TrueBrit

07-02-07, 10:05 AM

I intend to. :)

I'm curious what ChampCar's explanation is for the non-call.

jono

Me too...it looked fairly bloody obvious to me....

Warlock!

07-02-07, 10:12 AM

Black and white... he jumped the start, a penalty shoulda been given. This shouldn't be a judgment about gaining an advantage or not.

Fio1

07-02-07, 10:17 AM

Ya that was funny, what was his problem? If it happened on the last 10 laps PK< but he was talking about when they were 6th & 7th, probably 40 laps ago...:shakehead

Besides, didn't he jump the start? Standing starts in CCWS look a lot like standing starts in F1 in the 70's early 80's were everyone jumped the start.

opinionated ow

07-02-07, 11:16 AM

ed, you missed the point. you implied that as he didn't appear to get an advantage he was not penalised. he did get an advantage. no matter how early you start, if you start before the lights you gain an advantage. bourdais gained an advantage and if what i am led to believe is correct (whoever started 3rd nearly had him in turn 1) than he has gained an advantage. champcar again showed inconsistency that will undermine what credibility tony cotman had left.

let me go through my example again-clearer.

My name is Joe and I join the champ car world series. My first race is Mont Tremblant. I qualify 5th and see Bourdais jump the start and thus preserving his second position. It goes unpunished So next race (whatver it is) comes around and I decide I am on the dirty side and am going to protect my position and jump the start. I get penalised, and myself and my team cry foul, citing the bourdais/tremblant incident. We are then apologised too for this inconsistency. Everybody else then decides that they might as well jump in the next race. All of a sudden you have a situation where Cotman has no control or respect again and your product is as poor as last year's Surfers Paradise start.

actually on second thoughts, let that happen. then we might get rolling "championship racing" starts back

Elmo T

07-02-07, 11:30 AM

I thought Mario was pushing for Marco to go there?

I thought RM said as much on the Speed Report or Windbag after Cleveland...

Chiphead_Dave

07-02-07, 11:34 AM

The wife and I were laughing our heads off during the post race
(first post race of Borwhiney we have watched in years).

1. He jumped the start. No ifs ands or buts. This shouldn't be
(but apparently is) a judgement call by the officials:thumdown: .
I equate jumping the start to being pregnant, either you are or
you are not. Blocking I see as a judgement call but jumping the
start, pit speed violations and some others are not.

2. SB is a whiney SOB. Him and Hampstered make me want to
turn the TV off. That and the fact that SB whines like a 2 year
old:cry: :thumdown:

3. If you have a problem take it to the officials. Don't play
like you are Paris Hilton and pretend to be all uptight while
you pour your heart out to the press:thumdown: .

4. He may have been blocked but the fact of the matter is it was
a rain race and people were all over the place looking for grip.

5. Even if he was blocked he didn't have anything for Dornbos at the
end.

I am glad that for the second week in a row SB didn't run away with it.
Also a very interesting race with problems to overcome and actual "racing
smarts" in effect.....and no drawn out fuel saving mess.

Here is my new slogan "ANYBODY BUT SB IN 2007!"

07-02-07, 11:40 AM

As a rolling start it was pretty ragged.;)

Besides, SB at the back of the pack is entertaining as hell!

back OT:

Last week, I was going to post something about SB whining, sort of defending him against the haters.

REALLY glad I didn't!:laugh:

All champs whine, even St. Vasser when he dun wunned. (JeemyDaWeasel, was his nickname in my circle of fans).

jonovision_man

07-02-07, 12:33 PM

bobby Doorknobs rulez.:thumbup:

:rofl: :thumbup:

Consider me a fan. :)

jono

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 12:46 PM

Ah, hell. Nevermind. It's not worth the effort.

Ray Scar

07-02-07, 01:29 PM

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 01:34 PM

I understand your premise of having the punishment fit the crime. I might even agree with it IF... The officials would at least announce there was an infraction. Let the driver, team, and the fans know something was wrong. Then, instead of a drive through, fine 'em and give the money to CARA.

No acknowledgment that Sea Bass jumped the start is the same as saying he DIDN'T jump the start. $10,000 fine means exactly what you're suggesting the official do.

I understand where you're coming from, but don't confuse Race Control with the people on TV. The incident was reviewed, I'm almost certain -- pretty sure I saw that on Race Director. I don't know why that wasn't mentioned on TV.

Chiphead_Dave

07-02-07, 01:39 PM

I understand where you're coming from, but don't confuse Race Control with the people on TV. The incident was reviewed, I'm almost certain -- pretty sure I saw that on Race Director. I don't know why that wasn't mentioned on TV.

I hope I get the same type of "reviewing" if I ever get stupid enough
to run a red light and get caught by a red light camera.

extramundane

07-02-07, 01:41 PM

I hope I get the same type of "reviewing" if I ever get stupid enough
to run a red light and get caught by a red light camera.

Just explain to the cop that it's OK, because there's a stop sign just up the same road. Because you didn't gain anything from it, it never happened. :gomer:

Chiphead_Dave

07-02-07, 01:42 PM

Just explain to the cop that it's OK, because there's a stop sign just up the same road. Because you didn't gain anything from it, it never happened. :gomer:

:rofl: I tried something like that once as a kid....didn't work.

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 01:43 PM

Just explain to the cop that it's OK, because there's a stop sign just up the same road. Because you didn't gain anything from it, it never happened.

Swing and a miss, big guy. ;)

Chiphead_Dave

07-02-07, 01:55 PM

Swing and a miss, big guy. ;)

I'd call that a bases loaded home run myself;)

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 01:59 PM

Chiphead_Dave

07-02-07, 02:39 PM

If not for the fact that nobody has claimed it never happened, you might be right. But hey, we've got a pretty good history of arguing down things that nobody actually said in this thread, so who am I to stop the fun? ;)

Actually Ed people are running down Champ Car for things you said they did.

Bourdais definitely jumped the start. On the video, it's pretty clear that the lights are synced with the main camera, but even without the lights, it's pretty easy to see -- Bourdais moved well ahead of the rest of the field. Statistically, it's just not possible that his reaction time is that far ahead of everyone else, which would be the only explanation possible if he didn't jump the start.

So right here you state that he jumped it.

However, the race was not in any way altered by the start. Bourdais finished 2nd behind Robert Doornbos; if he didn't jump the start he would have finished 2nd behind Robert Doornbos. There was no need for a penalty, given the circumstances.

So you are saying that if SB had won they would have penalized him for the start:\ ?

The penalty should have been applied at the time of infraction ireguardless of the circumstances.

The best analogy I can give you is jaywalking. Most cities have laws prohibiting jaywalking, primarily for the purpose of preventing pedestrians from posing a danger to unwitting drivers. Penalizing Bourdais for this start would be analagous to citing someone for jaywalking at 3 AM on a street with absolutely no traffic. Sure, the jaywalker violated the letter of the law, but he also caused none of the consequences the law is intended to prevent. No harm done. Had the start gone off a bit differently and they managed to keep it green, Bourdais likely would have been penalized for gaining time. But, as it was, he gained no positions (thanks to Power stalling) and no time (thanks to the ensuing yellow) by jumping the start, so there's no sense in penalizing him for it. You don't ruin someone's race if they have not negatively influenced anybody else's.

By your stance anything you do that doesn't affect your position on the track is forgivable. I call total :thumdown: on that.

So if I steal $1Mill from a bank, go out and play the ponies with it and win another $1Mil then I give the original money back to the bank am I guilty or not. According to you not guilty.

Chiphead_Dave

07-02-07, 03:00 PM

Here is SB comments from the post race.

================================================== ========
SEBASTIEN BOURDAIS: Well, I guess in our bad luck we got a little lucky in the conditions, getting out of sync, cycling back to the front helped us. It's a bit of a shame. Obviously the McDonald's car was really, really good under dry conditions. Had it stayed this way, I think it was going to be a really, really good day for us. The boys had done a terrific job and the car was very, very good. We were getting good fuel mileage and good pace.

Then under the yellow, when the track started to get wet, you know, in some places, and they decided to restart the race, I was like, oh, boy that's going to be tough. I was the first one to discover the slippery conditions and I made a mistake. I went for the restart in 14. I wasn't really quick, but the car went straight and ended up in the gravel.

That was disappointing, but I knew the race was going to be long and we kept fighting for it. After that, the condition kept getting trickier and trickier. All of a sudden we saw ourselves in wets and close to the front. So it was looking fairly good.

Just Robert passed me very cleanly on the track. Just left the door open. I was kind of hoping he was going to do the same when at some point I was a little quicker behind him. But that's not what he did. That's the only reason I was very unhappy with him. Still is, obviously.

But that's the way it is. Apparently his F1 experience is playing a little bit. He's not quite used to the way we should be behaving on the racetrack when you're not supposed to move, which he done on three occasions. Race control let it slip. That's fine.

Anyway, he had the faster car. He seemed to do a great job. It's just a shame that as good a driver as he is, he had to do it this way. I think it would have been a much nicer win had he not done it.

But congratulations to all my competitors. I think it was a great race, and obviously a great show. When the conditions are like this, it's always very enjoyable to watch, I guess.
================================================== ======
The way I read that he was mad because RD wouldn't let him pass without
fighting for the position (edit) although he did say later in the interview that RD tried to put him in the grass earlier in the race.

What an ass. (edit) still an ass

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 03:01 PM

Some awfully big stretches there, Dave. You're not even in the ballpark on what I've said.

Chiphead_Dave

07-02-07, 03:31 PM

Some awfully big stretches there, Dave. You're not even in the ballpark on what I've said.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 03:34 PM

Since you totally misinterpreted just about everything I said, I think that's a good option. ;)

Chiphead_Dave

07-02-07, 03:43 PM

Since you totally misinterpreted just about everything I said, I think that's a good option. ;)

Maybe you need to speak in smaller sentences.

I just will never agree with you that a clear infraction of the rules
can be blown off by saying he didn't get any advantage out of it.

Insomniac

07-02-07, 03:47 PM

Here is SB comments from the post race.

My favorite part that will endear him to fans:

"In these conditions, you can't predict what is going to happen," Doornbos said. "If Sebastien feels he could have passed me, he should have done it. I felt I was quicker."

"Unbelievable," Bourdais muttered under his breath.
I'm sure he was blocked (though they never showed it on TV) given the way Doornbos drove in Cleveland, but whining in the media isn't going to help your cause.

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 03:57 PM

I just will never agree with you that a clear infraction of the rules can be blown off by saying he didn't get any advantage out of it.

Fair enough. Have fun obeying every law in existence for the rest of your life. ;)

All I'm saying, Dave, is that the benefit gained by breaking the rule and the punishment meted out for breaking the rule have some relation to each other. If Champ Car decides there wasn't any benefit to this particular infraction, then they're not going to assess a penalty. I think that's a reasonable approach, and one which does not in any way imply that jumping the start will never be punished. And, for that matter, there is almost certainly some information that they know that we don't know that influenced the decision. All I'm giving you here is a semi-educated guess at the process. You don't have to agree with it; I'm just trying to help explain it.

extramundane

07-02-07, 03:58 PM

Swing and a miss, big guy. ;)

Is it? Not penalizing him "because he didn't gain anything" isn't much different than pretending it never happened in my book. If you jump the start, you should get a penalty, period. The subsequent events are irrelevant. The severity of the penalty might well be dictated by subsequent events, but the fact that an infraction occurred should not be.

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 03:58 PM

I'm sure he was blocked (though they never showed it on TV) given the way Doornbos drove in Cleveland, but whining in the media isn't going to help your cause.

I didn't really even understand at what stage of the race Bourdais thinks he was blocked. If it was during the rainy portions, meh. Guys drive all over the track looking for grip in the wet; what looks like blocking under dry conditions suddenly becomes normal.

Chiphead_Dave

07-02-07, 04:03 PM

Fair enough. Have fun obeying every law in existence for the rest of your life. ;)

You will never never never hear me moan about getting caught
and paying the penalty for some law/rule I break and get fairly (and
obviously) caught at.

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 04:07 PM

The severity of the penalty might well be dictated by subsequent events, but the fact that an infraction occurred should not be.

The fact that an infraction occurred wasn't dictated by subsequent events. The severity of the penalty was. Like I said earlier, effectively, the penalty in this case is to give back the time and distance gained. Sometimes in racing, you get lucky and somebody/something enforces the penalty for you. In this case, the yellow flag had it covered.

I think "jumping the start = no penalty" is some pretty faulty logic, and seems to be the premise for about 98% of the posts in this thread. Just because no penalty was assessed in this instance doesn't mean there wouldn't have been one regardless of circumstance. Under a green flag, it's a completely different story.

Chiphead_Dave

07-02-07, 04:09 PM

The fact that an infraction occurred wasn't dictated by subsequent events. The severity of the penalty was. Like I said earlier, effectively, the penalty in this case is to give back the time and distance gained. Sometimes in racing, you get lucky and somebody/something enforces the penalty for you. In this case, the yellow flag had it covered.

I think "jumping the start = no penalty" is some pretty faulty logic, and seems to be the premise for about 98% of the posts in this thread. Just because no penalty was assessed in this instance doesn't mean there wouldn't have been one regardless of circumstance. Under a green flag, it's a completely different story.

I will say that short cutting a corner or a chicane is a time and distance
sort of event.....jumping the start IMHO is not.

What does the rule book say about the penalty for jumping a start.
With rolling starts they used to do it again.

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 04:10 PM

You will never never never hear me moan about getting caught
and paying the penalty for some law/rule I break and get fairly (and
obviously) caught at.

Will I see you complaining to law enforcement for not ruling with an iron fist if they don't cite you for breaking the law when you do it? Unless the answer is "yes" then your sense of racing justice and your sense of real world justice don't match up. That's fine, but at that point you pretty much just have a different law enforcement philosophy than Champ Car does. That doesn't make Champ Car wrong; just different.

Insomniac

07-02-07, 04:14 PM

I didn't really even understand at what stage of the race Bourdais thinks he was blocked. If it was during the rainy portions, meh. Guys drive all over the track looking for grip in the wet; what looks like blocking under dry conditions suddenly becomes normal.

Just reading/hearing his statements, unless he's completely exaggerating things, they didn't show any of that on TV. I understand people are searching for grip, but they still have to be mindful of cars already in the space they're moving into. Unless Doornbos completely changed how he drives, I'm inclined to believe Bourdais when he says Doornbos pushed him off into the grass. On a straightaway, they should not be "searching for grip". It's one thing to not have it and you slide over, but another to swerve looking for it and conveniently using the wet conditions as an excuse.

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 04:25 PM

What does the rule book say about the penalty for jumping a start.
With rolling starts they used to do it again.

It just says that a penalty will be assessed, but does not specify what the penalty is. That is left to the discretion of the officials.

I would imagine that if one standing start is waved off, we would not do it again. Repeating it could put the engines at risk of overheating, and there is a provision in the rulebook for reverting to a rolling start after an aborted standing start.

Insomniac

07-02-07, 04:25 PM

You will never never never hear me moan about getting caught
and paying the penalty for some law/rule I break and get fairly (and
obviously) caught at.

Maybe they should just not refer to it as a penalty, and call it an "unfairly gained advantage correction". Then the competitors will know they might as well give it a shot. Worst case, ChampCar puts them where they think they would've been before the advantage was gained. It's not really a penalty or a punishment when the rule breaker is treated like if there's no harm, there's no foul.

Mind you, from my perspective, there should be a penalty/punishment for every rules violation. That is, the driver should be worse off than they were before they broke the rule. So maybe a drive-through is excessive for Bourdais jumping the lights, at a minimum, he should've been told to let the car behind him by in my opinion. I'd personally prefer the "iron fist" as Ed calls it. Sends a much better message to the whole field.

I like the harshness of F1 in assessing penalties. I did disagree with the Sato one last week. I think not finishing the race is penalty enough, so carrying it over to the next week seemed quite odd. You see a lot less rules violations in F1. Now if they'd only adopt the ChampCar blocking rules (no defensive move)... :)

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 04:31 PM

Just reading/hearing his statements, unless he's completely exaggerating things, they didn't show any of that on TV. I understand people are searching for grip, but they still have to be mindful of cars already in the space they're moving into. Unless Doornbos completely changed how he drives, I'm inclined to believe Bourdais when he says Doornbos pushed him off into the grass. On a straightaway, they should not be "searching for grip". It's one thing to not have it and you slide over, but another to swerve looking for it and conveniently using the wet conditions as an excuse.

True, but if Doornbos drove Bourdais into the grass, don't you think that would have shown up on the broadcast in some form? (Insert joke about TV production quality here). I'd like to think Bourdais wouldn't say it if it wasn't true, but he's been known to exaggerate things before. And, further, Bourdais wasn't the only guy pushing Doornbos during the race, but nobody else had any complaints.

I don't know ... he might have a legitimate gripe, but I'm inclined not to think so. Either way, though, he certainly could have handled it in a much more professional manner.

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 04:35 PM

I'd personally prefer the "iron fist" as Ed calls it. Sends a much better message to the whole field.

I'm not sure it's a better message; just a different one. Sometimes when I see the stuff NASCAR does I shudder ... I'd hate to see us start handing out $100,000 fines for failing pre-practice technical inspection on Friday. To me, the sanctioning body can either be combative towards the participants, or it can try to work with the teams as much as possible. I like that Champ Car wants to work with the teams. Of course, there's always the "he needs a parent, not a friend" argument, and that's valid to some degree. I just think it's better suited for dealing with kids than adults.

Chiphead_Dave

07-02-07, 04:41 PM

Will I see you complaining to law enforcement for not ruling with an iron fist if they don't cite you for breaking the law when you do it? Unless the answer is "yes" then your sense of racing justice and your sense of real world justice don't match up. That's fine, but at that point you pretty much just have a different law enforcement philosophy than Champ Car does. That doesn't make Champ Car wrong; just different.

My point is that if (maybe when) I get caught I don't want you coming to
court for me claiming that it's all ok because what I did didn't affect anyone.
Because you won't hear me complaining.

He jumped the start (obviously IMHO), the evidence is on video. How about
a penalty that actually means something.

I still just don't understand how you can defend ChampCar's decision (or lack of one) to not penalize SB for this.

Let me throw out another analogy.

Person SB (a very talented guy but a bit childish in personality) regularly runs red lights but never hits anyone or causes any other problems. A few times he gets pulled over but the cop doesn't do anything
because "no body got hurt".

Then person SB runs a red light (because nothing bad ever happens when I run a red light) and kills a pedestrian.

At the trial SB tells the judge that he only does it because "nothing bad ever happens".

Who is at fault here.

I say it is person SB and the cop. Admittedly person SB is ultimately at fault
but had the cop done his job before the person MIGHT have learned his lesson. By not enforcing the law the cop "taught" SB that his actions were OK.

I would argue that we have the same situation here. ChampCar regularly lets SB get away with anything so he learns that anything he does is OK.

He develops a god like superiority complex because "nothing bad ever happens to me".

When things don't go his way he throws a temper tantrum and usually then gets his way.

How long will it be before some "pedestrian" gets run over.

Insomniac

07-02-07, 06:18 PM

True, but if Doornbos drove Bourdais into the grass, don't you think that would have shown up on the broadcast in some form? (Insert joke about TV production quality here). I'd like to think Bourdais wouldn't say it if it wasn't true, but he's been known to exaggerate things before. And, further, Bourdais wasn't the only guy pushing Doornbos during the race, but nobody else had any complaints.

I don't know ... he might have a legitimate gripe, but I'm inclined not to think so. Either way, though, he certainly could have handled it in a much more professional manner.

That's why I said they didn't show it on TV. And I can't even say where the area he was talking about is (Turns 8 and 10) because they couldn't be bothered to show the entire track map (turn-by-turn) before the race and during it they bailed to cover the green flag (well, not really, they bailed in the graphics and caught Bourdais heading through the T1 chicane).

I'm sure things can happen on the track that are missed by either incomplete coverage of the track with cameras, or panning the cameras to follow other cars. Race car drivers are famous for exaggerating, but it seems like it would be a leap to make all the incidents up. Maybe they weren't as bad as he claimed.

Contrast him to PT, and PT probably would've said screw it and tried the pass. If we both get taken out, we both get taken out instead of whining later. Then we'd have a 3 page thread on PT. :)

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 06:25 PM

I'm sure things can happen on the track that are missed by either incomplete coverage of the track with cameras, or panning the cameras to follow other cars. Race car drivers are famous for exaggerating, but it seems like it would be a leap to make all the incidents up. Maybe they weren't as bad as he claimed.

True enough that the coverage misses a lot. In Race Control, they have dedicated monitors and cameras to cover every corner, and people watching the footage for anything screwy. I guess that's what inclines me to dismiss Sebastien's complaints as exaggeration. If he felt like he had been wronged, Newman/Haas would have sent a complaint to Race Control and one of the stewards would have gone back to have a look at the video. Had it merited mentioning, a replay probably would have made its way onto the broadcast.

Insomniac

07-02-07, 06:26 PM

I'm not sure it's a better message; just a different one. Sometimes when I see the stuff NASCAR does I shudder ... I'd hate to see us start handing out $100,000 fines for failing pre-practice technical inspection on Friday. To me, the sanctioning body can either be combative towards the participants, or it can try to work with the teams as much as possible. I like that Champ Car wants to work with the teams. Of course, there's always the "he needs a parent, not a friend" argument, and that's valid to some degree. I just think it's better suited for dealing with kids than adults.

A $100k fine in ChampCar might bankrupt the team. ;) In all seriousness, that is the prize money for the winner, so it would be quite excessive. AJ Allmendinger, a model of suckitude in NASCAR already has $601,244 in winnings.

In my opinion, being hard on them will improve the racing. Babying them and trying to keep them happy will allow them to keep doing it. I truly believe if they sent a car to the back of the grid for messing up a rolling start, they would have much, much better rolling starts from that point forward compared to simply waving it off or putting a car behind another. The punishment needs to outweigh the crime to serve as a deterrent in the future. The first guy and his team will cry, but if they're warned before hand, they have no one to blame but themselves. And it's not just starts, it's everything.

NismoZ

07-02-07, 06:29 PM

Sorry, I haven't read all 76 replies but I think Jon said it best, with laughter in his voice, that it was unenforceable anyway (the blocking rule) because EVERYbody was driving all over the place looking for the best line in the wet. I've only seen the race once but several times in the wet Bourdais and Bobby D were widely separated with 2 very different approaches to taking the same turn. Maybe this was the blocking referenced byThe Champ?

Insomniac

07-02-07, 06:30 PM

True enough that the coverage misses a lot. In Race Control, they have dedicated monitors and cameras to cover every corner, and people watching the footage for anything screwy. I guess that's what inclines me to dismiss Sebastien's complaints as exaggeration. If he felt like he had been wronged, Newman/Haas would have sent a complaint to Race Control and one of the stewards would have gone back to have a look at the video. Had it merited mentioning, a replay probably would have made its way onto the broadcast.

I thought the video in race control was all the video on broadcast. In other words, they don't have any additional cameras, but can see all the ones in use for TV. So if someone can't dig it up on tape to show as a replay, there is no way ChampCar officials would see it. They'd have to rely on corner workers, who I believe do not report things like that.

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 06:34 PM

A $100k fine in ChampCar might bankrupt the team. ;) In all seriousness, that is the prize money for the winner, so it would be quite excessive. AJ Allmendinger, a model of suckitude in NASCAR already has $601,244 in winnings.

Yes, I realize that. I mentioned the dollar figure to (hopefully) underline how utterly ridiculous it seems to penalize a team for having an illegal car that never turned a wheel.

The punishment needs to outweigh the crime to serve as a deterrent in the future. The first guy and his team will cry, but if they're warned before hand, they have no one to blame but themselves. And it's not just starts, it's everything.

The flipside of that, though, is that taking this approach colors everything else the teams do. Now, instead of sending us drawings and asking "are these brake duct blockers OK or is this a no-no?" they think "**** those guys, if they aren't willing to work with us, let's do whatever the hell we want and force them to catch us." Now they're out there getting caught running illegal brake duct blockers, costing themselves fine money and the money and time spent to produce illegal parts. It's a two-way street, and in a lot of ways the teams do just as much to make things easy on Champ Car as Champ Car does to make things easy on the teams. With the number of teams we have now, and the limited resources many of them possess, I think it's prudent to be as cooperative as possible. Once we get some sponsors and manufacturers involved, then we start cracking the whip.

But that's just me. There's room for everybody. :)

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 06:40 PM

I thought the video in race control was all the video on broadcast. In other words, they don't have any additional cameras, but can see all the ones in use for TV. So if someone can't dig it up on tape to show as a replay, there is no way ChampCar officials would see it. They'd have to rely on corner workers, who I believe do not report things like that.

Not exactly. If you ever get the chance to go to Race Control, do it. They've got a huge number of TVs -- generally about 20 per race -- to monitor the TV feed, in-car cameras, and stationary cameras at every corner. They also have DVRs that allow them to go back and review any camera frame by frame on demand. Every camera available to Race Control is also available to go out to the TV feed, but they certainly are not sitting there just watching the TV feed. All cameras at all corners are viewable at all times from Race Control.

Typically the corner workers report on debris, contact, shortcutting, and funny sounds/smells. Blocking isn't really their domain. Those sorts of things get investigated because the driver bitches about it and his team sends an IM to Race Control requesting a review. One of the stewards pulls it up on DVR, watches the video a few times -- including previous laps by the driver accused of blocking to get a sense of his "normal" line -- and then if the steward thinks the complaint has some merit, he'll get the Race Director's attention and they review it together.

After re-reading what you wrote, I think we're pretty much saying the same thing. :)

TedN

07-02-07, 07:33 PM

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a58/TedN/sebass.jpg

Insomniac

07-02-07, 09:03 PM

The flipside of that, though, is that taking this approach colors everything else the teams do. Now, instead of sending us drawings and asking "are these brake duct blockers OK or is this a no-no?" they think "**** those guys, if they aren't willing to work with us, let's do whatever the hell we want and force them to catch us." Now they're out there getting caught running illegal brake duct blockers, costing themselves fine money and the money and time spent to produce illegal parts. It's a two-way street, and in a lot of ways the teams do just as much to make things easy on Champ Car as Champ Car does to make things easy on the teams. With the number of teams we have now, and the limited resources many of them possess, I think it's prudent to be as cooperative as possible. Once we get some sponsors and manufacturers involved, then we start cracking the whip.

But that's just me. There's room for everybody. :)

So ChampCar does that so teams won't cheat? Three of the teams are owned by series owners, and I'd venture that the only team left that could afford "costing themselves fine money and the money and time spent to produce illegal parts" is N/H/L. That seems like a terrible reason.

Insomniac

07-02-07, 09:05 PM

After re-reading what you wrote, I think we're pretty much saying the same thing. :)

OK, so it is entirely possible it happened, just wasn't on camera.

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 09:23 PM

So ChampCar does that so teams won't cheat?

Oh, goodness no, but it's a nice benefit. I just threw that out there as an example. In large part, the guys making the decisions on rules and rules enforcement have spend significant time working for teams, so they tend to be sympathetic to the team perspective.

Ed_Severson

07-02-07, 09:24 PM

OK, so it is entirely possible it happened, just wasn't on camera.

Possible, yes, but I think improbable that it would have been nearly as bad as Bourdais made it out to be, if it happened at all.

Insomniac

07-02-07, 10:18 PM

Oh, goodness no, but it's a nice benefit. I just threw that out there as an example. In large part, the guys making the decisions on rules and rules enforcement have spend significant time working for teams, so they tend to be sympathetic to the team perspective.

They need people sympathetic to the fan perspective. :D

Rogue Leader

07-02-07, 11:54 PM

I didn't have much respect for him before, and now It is all gone after those c*nty comments. Yeah cause Doornbos can block him 150 feet in front. Go back to France, I hope you never make it into an F1 seat, Robert Doornbos is MUCH more deserving of it than you!

07-03-07, 12:15 PM

Thanks for your informative explainations, Ed. Some cool stuff. :thumbup:

Oh. You're wrong. SB should have been penalized for the start.

Here or elsewhere, you are asking for responses as to "why" he should have been penalized.

Standing starts are new. A lot of diehard fans are waiting, with dread, for the starts to be complete clusters. So far, those fans have been pleasantly surprised. They have been awesome, IMO. Can't speak for the rest of the diehards, but it's never stopped me before!

TPTB know that they are being watched, the drivers KNOW that they are being watched, all involved know that there is a lot (relatively speaking) riding on them pulling this off. So far, outstanding!

SB violated a pretty clear rule. In front of God, the police, the fans, and even TF'ers. He gets no slap. Next time, just watch, everyone will sneak out a bit early. Watch.

As far as the police analogy, let's see. If I were in a situation, say a roadside safety check (that's another topic all to itself!), or near a bad accident, or, say, in the parking lot of a police Order convention center, whatever, where I KNEW the police presence is everywhere, and I broke the law, even something small (rolling stopsign, 2 mph over the limit, etc.), I would EXPECT a ticket.

As far as the tech inspections, if a team "punished" you for their actions on the track and ensuing penalties, then that team is a bunch of *******s. Bust their ass!

Ed_Severson

07-03-07, 02:06 PM

As far as the tech inspections, if a team "punished" you for their actions on the track and ensuing penalties, then that team is a bunch of *******s. Bust their ass!

It's not really about "punishment" at all on our end. It's just that if the cooperative relationship Champ Car has with the teams goes away, then Champ Car has to do a lot more work to police the competitors. That's not such a big deal to us -- it's one of our primary functions, after all -- but the more of a pain in the neck it is for us, the more of a pain in the neck it is for all of the teams, including the ones who weren't causing problems in the first place. It's a delicate balance, for sure.

I think there's definitely a time and place for more authoritative officiating; in my view, the higher the stakes, the less cooperative the relationship between teams and officials should be (although I'll be the first to opine that NASCAR is far too draconian, despite the amount of money invested in that series). Right now, nobody is spending enough money to have an awful lot of incentive to cheat; six or seven years ago in the multiple-manufacturer era of CART, there was still a lot of money being spent, which in some ways encourages teams to push the limits of the rulebook to make sure they are getting the results needed to satisfy their sponsors and keep the cash flowing. That, in my own opinion, is a big reason why the officiating now is so different than it was in the CART era.

On the penalty, I'll add one thing and then be done. I wouldn't assume that the lack of penalty on Sunday will lead to some sort of anarchy this weekend. Knowing Tony (who is very frank with the competitors) and knowing Bourdais (who would come to the truck to bitch at Tony even after winning a race by 3 laps) I would bet my last dollar that Cotman let him know in no uncertain terms that the only reason he was spared a penalty was because of the yellow flag. The fact that nothing was mentioned on television should not be taken to imply that nothing was said or done behind closed doors. I might be wrong about that -- I might be wrong about all of this -- but I'd be shocked if that particular topic didn't come up in the post-race conversation between those two.

07-03-07, 02:11 PM

On the penalty, I'll add one thing and then be done. Thanks for your viewpoint (seriously!).

(even though you're wrong :p )

Al Czervik

07-03-07, 03:40 PM

Sebastian Bordeaux???

cameraman

07-03-07, 09:34 PM

Knowing Tony (who is very frank with the competitors) and knowing Bourdais (who would come to the truck to bitch at Tony even after winning a race by 3 laps) I would bet my last dollar that Cotman let him know in no uncertain terms that the only reason he was spared a penalty was because of the yellow flag.

At a minimum without a strong public reprimand (especially if no penalty is assessed) Champ Car loses credibility with the fans for not saying or doing anything about a blatant jump start. There is no way it would be allowed to slide in F1, GP2 or the local Kart track. It should not be publicly ignored by Champ Car.

Keeping silent about it is the worst thing Champ Car can do.