Don't miss the AMA Flat track showdown!

With Bryan Smith's DQ from New York reversed, the points battle is now winner takes all at the final round! 3 points separate Bryan Smith, and Jared Mees going to the Santa Rosa Mile Sept 25th. May the best man win.

http://www.amaproracing.com/flat-track/news/view/64705

 

Good to see....Lesson Here: 1st Rule of Winning by using the rule book and not the race track, when u got yer ass kicked on the track.. Make sure the guy was actually cheating before you protest....

(Maybe you should believe him when he says "they said I could run it"...)

 

Hmmm, might have to go photograph a race this month.

 

Fanschoice will stream it live. The race should be good and it will be the first race for the new Indian FTR750.

 

No kidding!

 

Will be watching on fanschoice.

 

With Joe "Cool" Kopp onboard. He should be able to give it a good run.

 

I don't blame Mees, nor Smith, and I don't believe he should have been allowed to run the wheel.

If the modification is that far into gray area that it results in a protest, then a DQ, followed by a reversal, it's clear that something is wrong.

Smith got the AMA's blessing on the wheel, you can't blame him for running it, and you can't blame Mees for protesting when he's looking at something that obviously isn't right.

 

He (Mees) was told... It was allowed by the AMA...

Also if you look at the intent of the rule.. The weights added to the wheel were clearly done in a very safe manner.. Not re-bar hose clamped to the spokes..which was the reason the rule was pen'd in the first place..

 

What's the goal of adding weight to the rear wheel?

 

Less wheel spin. Better traction.

 

So it's similar to adding weight to the flywheel.

 

Yup. Easier.

 

Wow! The times they are achanging in AMA Flat track. This was just broadcast out to the public by AMA Pro. I've never seen such a public display of mea culpa from AMA Pro.
==============================================
An Open Letter from Michael Lock, CEO of AMA Pro Racing
Dear AMA Pro Flat Track Community,

I am writing to you a day after we concluded the appeals process for the Central New York Half-Mile disqualification of Bryan Smith, rider #42. As you may have read, the appeal was upheld and Smith's 2nd place finishing position and points were restored. Many will feel that justice was done and that the business of deciding the championship will take place on its rightful place; the racetrack. Others may feel that his bike was illegal and that he has escaped on a technicality. It's a partisan sport and that's the nature of things.

I want to share with you the conclusions we have come to within AMA Pro Racing and, hopefully, shed a little light on how we proceed from here.

It became apparent yesterday to the board in the appeals hearing that this was not primarily a case of whether the rear wheel on the #42 bike was within the rules or not. Instead, they focused on the communication between AMA Pro and Team #42 since the issuance of the 2016 rule book.

They found that the team had formally inquired whether their proposed rear wheel construction would conform to the rule, 3.22.h Weight Limits, and that AMA Pro Racing had given written approval for it at the end of March, 2016. AMA Pro Racing took the view, at that time, that the modifications to the wheel rim that the team proposed were within the spirit of the rule and that the additional material attached to the rim constituted a structural component. The team proceeded accordingly and used the rear wheel at select rounds of the championship over the spring and summer.

Subsequent to the AMA Pro Flat Track round at COTA in April, where rider #27 was disqualified for an overweight wheel (42.9 lbs. versus maximum permissible of 40 lbs.), AMA Pro Racing observed that the additional material affixed to rider #27's rear wheel did not fall inside the scope of rule 3.22.h and a bulletin was published reiterating both rules and revising the maximum wheel weight from 40 lbs. to 35 lbs. Many teams gave feedback to the Advisory Group that running heavy brake rotors could easily cause a rear wheel assembly to register at 38 lbs. or more. With hindsight, and with the advice of the Advisory Group, AMA Pro concluded that the bulletin was ill-prepared (in respect to the reduction to 35 lbs. maximum) and a revised bulletin was published maintaining the 40 lbs. maximum. The confusion was compounded by the postponement of the bulletin's effective date to 2017.

With the issuance of the bulletin and subsequent verbal conversations between AMA Pro Racing staff and members of the #42 team, it was felt by AMA Pro Racing that the permission to run the modified rear wheel had been rescinded. It transpires, though, that team #42 felt that without a written reversal, they were free to continue to use the approved wheel.

It is this issue which the appeals board considered to be critical to consider. They concluded that the written approval given to the team should have been rescinded in writing, specifically to team #42. They also concluded that the burden of responsibility for resolving this rested with AMA Pro Racing, as the sanctioning body, not with the team.

Prior to the AMA Pro Flat Track round held at Central New York, on August 20th, AMA Pro Racing had not sent specific written communication to team #42 that the modified rear wheel was out of compliance. At the conclusion of that event, team #1 submitted a protest against #42 and AMA Pro Racing was obliged to inspect the wheel. It was found to be in compliance regarding maximum weight but it was adjudged to fall foul of rule 3.22.h, with regards to 'the addition of chassis ballast as rotating mass to the wheels.' The wheel was confiscated and competitor #42 was subsequently disqualified and lost both purse and points.

The appeals board took the view that, while the wheel construction may potentially have been out of compliance, AMA Pro had not carried out due diligence by inspecting the wheel to determine its eligibility prior to giving written approval, nor had they rescinded approval in an appropriate (written) manner. They concluded that this was sufficient to uphold the appeal and restore #42's 2nd place status, points and purse from the Central New York Half-Mile.

I have reflected on the board's findings and, as the non-voting Chairperson, I was present for both team #42's submission and the AMA Pro Racing Competition Department's defense. My own conclusions are as follows:
* AMA Pro Racing accepts fully the conclusion of the appeals board and warmly thanks the members for giving freely of their time and wisdom.

• AMA Pro Racing can find no fault with either team #1's protest or team #42's appeal. The actions of both teams were both appropriate and professional throughout this process.
• AMA Pro Racing regrets that the two teams, the rest of the paddock and the loyal fans of Pro Flat Track racing have been inconvenienced by this issue. It is not what should be dominating the headlines in the run up to a dramatic season finale at Santa Rosa, CA.
• The permission given to team #42 to run with a modified wheel has now been rescinded in writing and that wheel construction method, while ingenious, is considered not to be within the scope of the rule book. It will not be allowed to run at Santa Rosa, nor at any Pro Flat Track races in 2017.
• In advance of the 2017 season, AMA Pro Racing will institute new procedures for teams to submit inquiries concerning clarification of technical rules and to propose new components or assemblies that may constitute a potential variance, and all submissions and any responses will be documented. Any successfully approved submissions will be approved by the Chief Executive Officer and will be published to the general Pro Flat Track paddock in a log.
• All verbal conversations between AMA Pro Racing staff and the paddock community regarding technical compliance or the approval of proposed variances will be followed up by said AMA Pro Racing staff with a confirmation email and/or written notification to the concerned paddock community members.
• The rule book is currently going through final edits, prior to being distributed in redline form to the Advisory Group. Upon receiving their feedback, AMA Pro Racing will finalize language and make the rulebook available to the wider paddock community subsequent to the 2016 Awards Banquet, being held in Santa Rosa on September, 25th. The rule book has been widely updated for 2017 in anticipation of the new class structure and with modernized practices. It has also undergone a comprehensive review for the purposes of simplifying language and creating a more intuitive flow.

AMA Pro Racing is both the sanctioning body for the sport and the guardian of its interests, on behalf of its stakeholders. A sanctioning body is like a government. People may have mixed feelings about the government, but everyone should have respect for its competence and its mission. It is my job to deliver a strategy and an organization that commands that respect.


If you have made it this far in reading this open letter I thank you for your endurance and want to communicate that we are in process to deliver a better level of service to the Pro Flat Track community moving forward. That process will be strengthened and accelerated with your support and participation. Already, the efforts of our Advisory Group have been extremely helpful in navigating the challenges of a competitive sport and a paddock full of passionate people. The sport has a growing number of admirers and is poised to reach new levels over the coming years.


I look forward to joining you at an extremely exciting finale in the Sonoma Wine Country in just over a week. We are assured a dramatic end to a dramatic season.
Yours faithfully,

Michael K Lock

CEO, AMA Pro Racing

 

Does anyone have any pics/info on the wheel design in question? Was this some sort of bolt on ring they were using?

Hey Rob.. I was told Joe Kopp ran an 80 lb rear wheel at Lima and embarrassed the fuck out of everyone a while back... is that just bullshit? And wouldn't the wheel weight effect handling way more than just flywheel weight??

 

Only the team seems to have documented it. So no one has come up with a picture, yet. It sounds like it was actually inside the rim, covered by the tire.

80 lbs? Might be a bit much, but they use to fill the tire with water, occasionally. There's a rule about it now.
I'm not Rob, but, dynamics of "handling" are different between dirt track and road racing. I'm betting they do a number of things in dirt track that a road racer would scratch their head over. Beyond taking the front brake off, crazy f-ers!

 

You'd better take that front brake off, or else you won't pass tech.

 

Also, Luddington is out. I wonder if that is related to this Tech disagreement.

 

LOL yea lets just say there are some very distinct differences in setup and sneaky stuff.

Speaking of tech regs, I just saw Al is no longer with DMG.... Not sure how I feel about that as hes always been fair to me and i have been on both sides of the coin with him...

Still a few things over the years that made me happy when he would notice "stuff" and just smile