Rules, Issues and Public Concerns

[JeremyH]

Jeremy, that is your state and your clubs. But how many clubs are in your state?

Our state has 5 recognized clubs. I do not know if other states function in this manner or not, but it sounds like maybe they should.

Our state had issues several years ago so the club leaders helped draft a set of rules on which we would run our state finals and how competitors and clubs qualify to run in state finals.


I just reviewed the rules for becoming a "recognized club" in the USRCCA and I noticed that it DOES NOT say anything about the club running in accordance to the rules of this governing body. Perhaps it is time that the USRCCA make the demand for all recognized clubs to abide by their rules (and hold a required amount of competitions according to these rules) or lose their recognition...

 

[The Violator]

.....NFL: teams across the NFL are playing the same rules in all their states so there are one set of rules that apply to all teams nationally.
In the end several victors are choosen to compete against eachother until there is one victor. These events are covered year long and funded primarily by sponsors and an audience base.
And because of the long term stability, it has grown........

Show me a single sport with a rule book that only has 1 page of rules and is a growing and prosperous group that has a future.

Last time I watched the super bowl ( I admit it has been 4 or 5 years and things might have changed) they did not let every team that showed up into the game and play for the title.

 

[EddieO]

Please don't use ROAR as an example for anything......they are the laughing stock of all the IFMAR blocks. Most of the national events have crap attendance compared to the private events like Snowbirds, Vegas, Winter Champs, etc. ROAR regionals are an even bigger joke, as some regions don't even get enough guys to run certain classes or entire events. Trust me, I was a ROAR regional director.......I even hosted the regionals at my track at a loss just so they would be ran....crap the 1/12th scale class had 3 entries....the guys agreed to remove their motors and roll their cars down the straight away, closest to the line was the regional champ.

Most tracks are NOT ROAR....the only reason they are typically is for the insurance. Why are most not ROAR? Too many rules.....Why are none of the big events ROAR? Too many rules.

The only reason ROAR is still around is because they are the IFMAR block for North America.....which means they are not going any where.

So Please, use another example....ROAR isn't a good one.

Later EddieO

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

so which is then?, should we add another class and extend the rules for SORRCA rules or should we lessen the USRCCA rules in hopes that the rules wont be bent?

I mean its funny how you respond depending on which side of the fence your on.

I respond in a way that I feel is in accordance with the topic. Scale classes should be focused on scale, comp classes should be focused on performance. I have never changed my stance on either.

I understand that there are people in either group that want to push the limits, and that is fine, but would allowing that to happen be of benefit to that group as a whole? Semantics aside, that I what I'm looking at.

How about this, if you want to be taken seriously (and this is not directed to just you) as a competitor, then please run the rules listed by SORRCA in all your clubs events and guide your club to Nationals.
If you dont like the SORRCA rules, dont run them! run with you buddies in GTGs having fun with no other expectation but to have fun. and dont expect anything in return or worry about how the SORRCA rules are written.

Fun is fun, comp is comp.
Simple reality of why there are rules for competing.

Agreed. I can't think of too many people that have been extremely successful in either the comp or scale scene that spent most of their time digging for loopholes and grey areas. The rules laid out are pretty simple. If you can't build and be competitive within them without feeling the need to "cheat" or try to get away with something questionable, then you suck.

At the same time, I can't see any issue with a local club being a bit lax on the national ruleset IF it brings in members and helps them grow. It should be on their mind that at some point they should swing back into being in compliance though.

 

[Fishmaxx]

People will ALWAYS look for holes in rules.
Thats why there are articles and articles of sublaws attached to laws.

Exactly!

Let me ask you .....why do you think the Rules Committee gets the blame for complicated and anti-fun rules when 90% of the reason the Rules grew from 1 pages to 8 in because of something some driver did then used its not in the rules as justification.

In the original rules we didn't have anything about not using your foot to stop your truck from falling, but more than one person tried to use it....even at Nationals!

If you give me time I can think of the situation where drivers actions forced a rules change or a new rule....not the other way around.

The Rules Committee doesn't sit around thinking What can we FX$? with next? Almost every rule I can think of has some basis is a REACTION to drivers actions that upset large portion of other drivers at competitions.

If people stopped looking for cracks I guarantee you we would stop TRYING to fill them I promise you. Then we can get back to having fun also.

For 6 years every one knew what a body was now it seems we have to define that it...because its not in the rules.

I agree we need more public input in how the rules get decided, but IMO that's not going to make the rules less complicated. Only people not trying bend them will do that.

 

[ROCKEDUP RICKY]

As a matter of a fact, I know that not every club or state does this.
.

We 2 clubs in Arkie-saw and we have a crawl off, MO has 4 oe 5 clubs and has a crawl off.

Exactly!

Let me ask you why do you think the Rules Committee gets the blame for complicated, anti-fun rules when 90% of the reason the Rules grew from 1 pages to 8 in because of something some driver did then used its not in the rules as justification.

In the original rules we didn't have anything about not using your foot to stop your truck from falling, but more than one person tried to use it. At Nationals even.

If you give me time I can think of the situation where drivers actions forced a rules change or a new rule.

The Rules Committee doesn't sit around thinking What can we FX$? with next? Almost every rule I can think of has some basis is a REACTION to drivers actions that upset large portion of other drivers at competitions.

If people stopped looking for cracks I guarantee you we would stop TRYING to fill them I promise you. Then we can get back to having fun also.

For 6 years every one knew what a body was now it seems we have to define that it...because its not in the rules.

I agree we need more public input in how the rules get decided, but IMO that's not going to make the rules less complicated. Only people not trying bend them will do that.

I wish I would have said this, very well put. "thumbsup" I agree 100%

 

[rock hard]

Agreed. I can't think of too many people that have been extremely successful in either the comp or scale scene that spent most of their time digging for loopholes and grey areas. The rules laid out are pretty simple. If you can't build and be competitive within them without feeling the need to "cheat" or try to get away with something questionable, then you suck.

At the same time, I can't see any issue with a local club being a bit lax on the national ruleset IF it brings in members and helps them grow. It should be on their mind that at some point they should swing back into being in compliance though.

I dont think bc was "looking" for a loophole
and far too often, if someone tries something that isnt "specifically" illegal acourding to the rules, they are accused of attemting to manipulate, or search the grey.

alot of it is a matter of perception, what "the individual" innvisionns when they read the rules.

There are rules commiitee members who have said his truck its illegal....plain and simple
there are also rules commitee members who have said its legal....plain and simple.

so its a matter of perception, depending on who you ask.

so please, when refering to a person who has attempted sommething like bc, dont refer to them as cheats, or accuse them of manipulation.....
I also have had a different view of the rules.....I dont consider myself a cheat for it.

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

I dont think bc was "looking" for a loophole
and far too often, if someone tries something that isnt "specifically" illegal acourding to the rules, they are accused of attemting to manipulate, or search the grey.

alot of it is a matter of perception, what "the individual" innvisionns when they read the rules.

There are rules commiitee members who have said his truck its illegal....plain and simple
there are also rules commitee members who have said its legal....plain and simple.

so its a matter of perception, depending on who you ask.

so please, when refering to a person who has attempted sommething like bc, dont refer to them as cheats, or accuse them of manipulation.....
I also have had a different view of the rules.....I dont consider myself a cheat for it.

I wasn't accusing any specific person of anything, nor do I think BC was trying to pull a fast one, but I've seen plenty of people who have.

There is a difference between those who innovate at the edge and those who exploit the edge for their own advantage.

 

[rock hard]

I wasn't accusing any specific person of anything, nor do I think BC was trying to pull a fast one, but I've seen plenty of people who have.

But many feel exactly that way....that your cheating for doing something "they" feel is "clearly" against the rules.

In the case with bc.....krawlfreak said the key words

"even though I dont like it"

he had the ability to admit its legal per the rules, even though he didnt like it.

Way to many times, it seems to me that "some" people will call it elligal just cuz they "feel/think" it "should" be, or say it "clearly" against the rules, even though its not clearly expressed within the rules.

and fish is right, as people "see" things not previosly seem within the rules, the rules will change.
If the new idea is accepted, its not deemed illegal ( dig ) if it is not accepted its deemed illegall and rules are written to suit ( extending chassis )

There is probably at least one guy the 1st time he saw a truck with dig say
"LOOK AT THAT CHEATING SOB"
but it was accepted, even though in the begining it clearly made the truck stretch out past the 12.5 as teched, which is why the new methode for teching whell base came about....it took a few yrs but still..

 

[krawlfreak]

For 6 years every one knew what a body was now it seems we have to define that it...because its not in the rules.

here is where we dissagree.

you can define a body all you want but bc's truck meets every rule for bodiless. so defining a body would still not make his truck illegal.

i also dont believe he is trying to cheat...nor is anyone else pushing on the rules for that matter. this is the inherent problem with "competition" the most competitive are always going to find a way to push harder.


i believe the most simple way to handle it is not making more rules to limit people, but to define minimums that are not open to interpretation.

example 1:

overall height is vague in its description and it assumes all building tecniques are the same but the are not.

this is why you could essentially use a severely angled skid to meet the minimum with a under sized truck.


example two:

overall lenghth has the same issue. technically i could build a truck a 5" long and use a skid plate that is 8" long to meet said discription.


the way i see it, giving a well defined minimums and where to measure from (that doesn't exclude any particular truck deemed legal today) could eliminate what people are calling "grey area"

also like rock hard says there is perception to the rules, and with that comes the percieved notion that something is illegal when in fact it does meet the written rules.

 

[jpboy]

I don't know about other states, but in Texas, since we have multiple clubs and are required to have an annual crawloff, we put together a set of rules outlining what is required of each club to participate in the state finals. Running a minimum of 4 USRCCA comps (using the rules written by USRCCA) per class is required. When our state finals rolls around, we tech trucks according the the current USRCCA rules.

We also chose our current state RC rep as a group. He was not appointed by anyone except those in this state.

We have 5 clubs in Missouri and that's the exact way we do it.

 

[JeremyH]

We 2 clubs in Arkie-saw and we have a crawl off, MO has 4 oe 5 clubs and has a crawl off.

We have 5 clubs in Missouri and that's the exact way we do it.

It would be interesting to see how many other states do the same. I am willing to bet that number is higher than expected...

 

[team3six]

So how about this.
How does one write the rules so they can not be percieved?

Answer: make them laws
You can only run this, you can only run that, you can modify this and this is the limits.
If any truck runs out of those quals, they are eliminated.

There has to be a way to deem verbage as meaning this only and no exception.
Doesnt NASCAR do that? The have exact definitions and an approved list of materials and products.
You simply can not go astray of that list?

Look at it this way.
If everyone ran a stock XR10 in a class.
Thats it. No room for error.
Battery/motor/and reciever is your only change to compete with.

So how do you cap a modified class? Change the structure, your disqualified!

Make those rules so they stick, this way you better think good and hard if you want to gamble with a
Foriegn design. Becsuse youll make a trip down "thanks for coming lane"

This is exactly why I dislike Jake from CKRC.
He cheated, he knew it, and tried to make people swallow it.
In return it brought out the worst in people.

 

[redbaron]

IN only has one club, but we always have used and followed USRCCA rules.

 

[jammin311]

It would be interesting to see how many other states do the same. I am willing to bet that number is higher than expected...

5 clubs in Nor-Cal we all run said rules and have a shoot out in the end to see who gets invites."thumbsup"

 

[rock hard]

So how about this.
How does one write the rules so they can not be percieved?

Answer: make them laws
You can only run this, you can only run that, you can modify this and this is the limits.
If any truck runs out of those quals, they are eliminated.

There has to be a way to deem verbage as meaning this only and no exception.
Doesnt NASCAR do that? The have exact definitions and an approved list of materials and products.
You simply can not go astray of that list?

Look at it this way.
If everyone ran a stock XR10 in a class.
Thats it. No room for error.
Battery/motor/and reciever is your only change to compete with.

So how do you cap a modified class? Change the structure, your disqualified!

Make those rules so they stick, this way you better think good and hard if you want to gamble with a
Foriegn design. Becsuse youll make a trip down "thanks for coming lane"

This is exactly why I dislike Jake from CKRC.
He cheated, he knew it, and tried to make people swallow it.
In return it brought out the worst in people.

there is perceptions/dicagreement is what our nations laws are.

judges who "know" the law often have "thier" desission overtured by higher courts.

Our nations own suprem courts justices have different "opinions/perception"
of our constitution.

You can not remove personal perception from anything....there is 360* in a circle, which meansn people will be reading/perciving the rules from many....many....angles...

We all know its hard, and impossible for the rules comitee to forsee all the different views that may come up in the futur.....
They dont have a crystal ball with them when making teh rules.

BUT
when I situalltion like this comes up.....the reps should consullt thier states laeaders ( our state rep wil start a poll for leaders on such topics )

then the comitee should listen to the reps ( without attempting to sway them in a position in opostion if their state )
and then vote on it.

populare vote wins

if bc truck is deemed legal.....no rule change is needed
if its deemed illegal, then the rules will have to be clarified

its prety simple really, but it wont happen overnight
I think the publics inability to WAIT ( even me ) is a reason for alot of drama

look, fish needs time to restrucure his commitee
the commitee needs time to consult its region

its not gonna happen over night

 

[jammin311]

So how about this.
How does one write the rules so they can not be percieved?

Answer: make them laws
You can only run this, you can only run that, you can modify this and this is the limits.
If any truck runs out of those quals, they are eliminated.

There has to be a way to deem verbage as meaning this only and no exception.
Doesnt NASCAR do that? The have exact definitions and an approved list of materials and products.
You simply can not go astray of that list?

Look at it this way.
If everyone ran a stock XR10 in a class.
Thats it. No room for error.
Battery/motor/and reciever is your only change to compete with.

So how do you cap a modified class? Change the structure, your disqualified!

Make those rules so they stick, this way you better think good and hard if you want to gamble with a
Foriegn design. Becsuse youll make a trip down "thanks for coming lane"

This is exactly why I dislike Jake from CKRC.
He cheated, he knew it, and tried to make people swallow it.
In return it brought out the worst in people.

That would kill this hobby really fast.

I like all the different desgins I like the ingenuity that said rules allow now.

 

[krawlfreak]

Answer: make them laws
You can only run this, you can only run that, you can modify this and this is the limits.
If any truck runs out of those quals, they are eliminated.

.

sounds like a few communist countries.....:roll:

 

[Fishmaxx]

here is where we dissagree.

you can define a body all you want but bc's truck meets every rule for bodiless. so defining a body would still not make his truck illegal.

So what you saying there is now way to distinguish, so there for everything should be measured the same way.

Saying a body can't be distinguished from a bodiless is one thing, and saying body/bodiless specs should be the same is another. The end result might be the same, but its 2x different arguments IMHO.

So how about this.
How does one write the rules so they can not be percieved?

Answer: make them laws
You can only run this, you can only run that, you can modify this and this is the limits.
If any truck runs out of those quals, they are eliminated.

Like I said I thought if you run a body your specs must X would be pretty fool proof, but apparently its not. I welcome you to submit any of your ideas(actual wording) on how these laws can be made unquestionable, and uncomplicated. I have been trying for 6 years, and according to some I suck at it.

 

[rock hard]

You know, there is alot of public opinion that the rules for bodiless and body should be aligned.

I dont agree with that....

but maybe that should be a top topic for the commitee?

If the answer is yes, then there is no worries if its bodied/bodiless/unibody or a hybrid of the 3
simple diminsions that fit all types.....

I'm sure that most people crawling would want the width and length of bodiless used
and the hight for bodied used...

One simplified set of dimensions......it would no longer matter what kind of chassis or body or mix of the 2....
so long as it meets deminsions.

BUT when deciding such things....I think it should be made by the community ( through its reps ) with the interest of the community at heart.....not commercial vendors....( just my opinion )