TBK-Light.com

That's the NASCAR way of doing things, if you pass the finish line first, you win.
If you cheated, you can pay another way.

It's far better for average Joe than the FIA way of doing things, the number of casual viewers I know that were left confused as to why Schumacher didn't start on pole in Monaco is a classic example.

Besides, don't the cars go through pre-race checks? So someone in an official capacity missed it rather than them just blatant cheating.

@

Woodski of course yes, my comment was in relation to the lack of spectators for the Truck race, which you'd think would attract a larger crowd than the Indycars, given where the event was being held.

But the question I would ask is if the fines were representative of the seriousness of the offenses?

_________________
BTCC Pick Em's Champion 2010
Formula Fun Cup Champion 2013
http://www.the-fastlane.co.uk

Depends whether the parts were on the car during scrutineering.



Sugests that they were, and someone missed them.

Plus.... Ed would be bankrupt if they were, surprised he didn't get fined for his whining on the radio during the race, NASCAR usually come down pretty hard... ah, wrong organising body

2 problems with that:
1. There are more "fans" than "causal fans", and the number of "fans" is not that much to begin with. Piss them off and have them talk bad about the series and that's a quick way to kill what you have.
2. In NASCAR the money is big. In IndyCar you basically pay to play. If the playing field isn't fair, why bother?
Quote: Mike Conway on Twitter today (now deleted) "@Mikeconwayindy @IndyCar where does this end? We may as well all run illegal if your only going to dish out fines..."

It can be both. IndyCar issued a tech bulletin at some time last week to the teams specifically to outlaw the piece found on Wilson's car after the race. It was legal @ Indy but to restrict pack racing and increase safety had to be removed at Texas. Amazingly Speedtv's marshall pruett took a photo of the piece on Wilson's car earlier before first practice and he says HE BELIEVES it went through Tech three times like that and it wasn't caught. It coudl be that they took it off before Tech and put it back on after, thinking a top 3 finish was unlikely and they wouldn't get caught.

If it's true it went through 3x and wasn't caught, that's pathetic especially when the part the Tech inspectors should have been checking on every car due to the tech bulletin. But even if they missed it, unfortunately it doesn't mean "the car is legal before it should be legal now". It just means lots of people should be punished!

They didn't fine the driver or dock him points, it was a team penalty. But the part was made illegal for safety and performance reasons. Cheating on safety should be a very serious offence, and the penalty even from a team standpoint is a joke. We don't know that half the field didn't cheat. What if they had? Should the fine be any less just because one or 2 cars were found to have cheated?

Pruett says performance-wise it didn't make a difference but if it gave Wilson a different amount of downforce to other cars who followed the rule, then who is he to say? He won by a relatively big gap but what if it'd been 1 car length? Would Pruett say it didn't make a difference then?

_________________
Greasemonkey TBK-Light Reload Page button

Has anyone explained yet, what was the difference between the "sidepod top deck aerodynamic element" with the one used in Texas and the one used at Indy?

I found it hard to see any difference between Wilson's car and others.

_________________
"Indy doesn't give you a second chance. You have to earn it."

I have to assume race damage (hence the lenient fine).

_________________
Ducks Angels Sounders Spurs

It's the carbon bit between the exhaust outlet and the sidepod hump.

Jon Beekhuis explains the differences between Indy car & Texas car in this video:


I explain here: can't see on first look, am blinded by the Dallara's ugliness.

The sidepod top deck cover (Wilson's infraction, his was found on the car) --
If taking them away makes the car slower (due to more drag) and less easy to drive in the corners (less downforce, car doesn't stick to the track so much), then having it on the car makes the car faster and easier to drive.

The rear wing wicker (Carpenter's infraction, his was taller than regulation) --


Look again at an earlier post-race article by Marshall Pruett:


And here's part of the Texas race recap on Ed Carpenter's website:
It continues "But by lap 137, Ed felt a vibration in his Dallara chassis" and he had to pit and went a lap down. He finished 12th, and was fined $5000 for his illegal performance-enhancing part and his team docked 1 owner point.

_________________
Greasemonkey TBK-Light Reload Page button

That cover is a drag co-efficient device, slapped on to increase the top speeds at Indy where the car was failing miserable, I'd say it's doubtful that it produces more downforce, it's not even shaped properly to do that, given how little downforce they were running at Texas, having a higher top speed might not have been a good thing.

Ed's "modification" would have been far more beneficial, although I did't get the "it made the difference between the car being drivable and not" statement in the pre-race unless they got the wording the wrong way round, cos usually sticking those flaps on increases downforce (hence why special Ed did it), it doesn't decrease it and make the car harder to drive (unless of course you put them on the bottom of the wing, which they didn't), then again, maybe Indycar managed to changed the laws of physics

About the way punishments are handed out, the FIA way of doing it is beyond stupid, NASCAR/INDYCAR isn't perfect either, but it's far better than the "carried forward" way the FIA do it, just exclude them from the result and take their prize money instead of handicapping them in the next race.

Ok, thanks for the pics and the video.

It's not much that Dale Coyne team did wrong, but when they had such a solid run, it makes you wonder if that made the difference.

What really is amazing, is that the car passed inspections three times!

I hope they check the regulations now to be more clear and make sure that the penalties for breaking them are justified.

Had this kind of penalty been given to a Indianapolist 500 winner (not just Dario, generally speaking), where the prize money and visibility are way higher, it would have caused a massive credibility problem for the series. Now we're just back at the New Hampshire 2011.

(Picture related)

_________________
"Indy doesn't give you a second chance. You have to earn it."

So I've finally caught up with the race, and I'll add myself to the list of people that like the new aero package. At the start I wasn't too sure; it almost seemed too spread out. As the race wore on, you could really see how much more of a handful the cars were. I don't know if it was a little difficult to follow another car in the corners, but you could pass around the outside anyway, so yay. Cracking finish to the race as well. What a shame for Graham.

The only person in the western hemisphere who disagrees with you/us/etc. is special Ed....

Nobody cares about what he thinks, anyway.

Tho, I'm proud that I have a picture taken with him (by him, I mean cardboard cutout).

_________________
Ducks Angels Sounders Spurs