Is APBA "Arachnephobic"??
06-06-2003, 03:28 PM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Is APBA "Arachnephobic"??
•Fines: Team Spiderman $750; Douglas Skater $7,500;
•25-point deduction from current national point standings;
•250 lb. weight penalty;
•etc., etc., etc.
The recent penalties imposed on Team Spiderman and Skater for the changes made to the boat (i.e. strakes) seem completely unfair. I know for a fact that the changes were made AFTER verbal authorization by Andrew Corn and that the changes were also submitted in writing (in fairness, I’m not sure that they were submitted EXACTLY on time, but that’s not the issue here). Regardless, with some familiarity of Peter’s boat-building history, it’s clearly a homologation issue ($$) that APBA has with Skater. Take a good look around the Super Vee class: Lucas Oil is clearly not the same boat it once was; Ettore is a “42”, but measures 39 after they shortened the transom; and then there’s Donzi – when Jack Carmody died, APBA said there could no longer be twin canopies, so how did Donzi get homologated with their F16’s? (Hmmm … could it be because they are the title sponsor??) These are just a few examples.
I’m also curious as to why the fine isn’t Skater’s alone? Why is Team Spiderman being fined as well?
Just doesn’t make sense to me … but then, I’m just a ‘chick’
•25-point deduction from current national point standings;
•250 lb. weight penalty;
•etc., etc., etc.
The recent penalties imposed on Team Spiderman and Skater for the changes made to the boat (i.e. strakes) seem completely unfair. I know for a fact that the changes were made AFTER verbal authorization by Andrew Corn and that the changes were also submitted in writing (in fairness, I’m not sure that they were submitted EXACTLY on time, but that’s not the issue here). Regardless, with some familiarity of Peter’s boat-building history, it’s clearly a homologation issue ($$) that APBA has with Skater. Take a good look around the Super Vee class: Lucas Oil is clearly not the same boat it once was; Ettore is a “42”, but measures 39 after they shortened the transom; and then there’s Donzi – when Jack Carmody died, APBA said there could no longer be twin canopies, so how did Donzi get homologated with their F16’s? (Hmmm … could it be because they are the title sponsor??) These are just a few examples.
I’m also curious as to why the fine isn’t Skater’s alone? Why is Team Spiderman being fined as well?
Just doesn’t make sense to me … but then, I’m just a ‘chick’
Platinum Member
06-06-2003, 04:48 PM
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Duchess, contrary to your accusations and insinuations, you will find there is no conspiracy against any team or favoritism toward any team from this office, past, present or in the future.
1) You will never find "anyone with any creditability" that will tell you “ I” have ever verbally authorized any changes to any registered boat......ever...... regardless of person, class or station in life. It is “untrue” that I authorized any change to the “Spiderman” verbally. Anyone that has told you contrary has compromised their own creditability.
2) You will also find that I have never authorized or approved any changes by any manufacture or owner to any homologated boat without written application and drawings.
3) You can find the below clipping in the 2003 APBA Offshore Technical Rules that deals with hull changes.
Hull Bottoms –
The approved hull bottoms must be identical to those produced from a manufacturer’s production line mold with no changes allowed unless approved in writing by CRE. Subject to the requirements set forth below, an owner or manufacturer may upgrade the bottom of a pre-existing boat bottom design to new factory standards that have been approved through the homologation process. These upgrades must be precise so as to allow the updated hull to fit into the new factory molds. No backdating is allowed without the written permission of APBA. All such change requests must be submitted in writing at least 60 days prior to competition with the precise measurements to CRE.
4) Existing boats that are not homologated by a manufacture in the Super Vee class are legal under the "non-conforming boats" 2003 APBA Technical Rules and have registered accordingly. I have included the clipping from the rules for you convenience.
Non-conforming Boats (“Grandfathering”)
Pre-Existing canopied boats registered in any year from 1997 –2002 Super Vee, Super Vee Light, Outlaw A or Outlaw B Classes, may be approved for competition in 2002 – 2005 provided that the owner submits a written request for approval and said request is approved by APBA, in it’s sole and absolute discretion, at least 30 days prior to competition. Notwithstanding the foregoing, these boats shall not be eligible for competition beyond the 2005 season unless they comply with these rules. Registered equipment ownership changes will be allowed on approved, registered and currently competing non-conforming boats. Hulls and decks racing under this "grandfather rule", which become lost or destroyed, must be replaced by equipment that meets the then current rules for Super Vee.
6) Furthermore your insinuations of granting an allowance for any competitor, manufacture or sponsor are also untrue. With regards to canopies as you have described I have included that section of the rules for your convenience.
Canopies –
Compliance with Lavin Guidelines - All Super Cats constructed after January 1, 2001 must use canopy safety systems that comply with the latest Mark Lavin Foundation R.R.C./E.R.C. Cockpit Guidelines.(“Lavin Guidelines”). It shall be the sole responsibility of the owner of the race boat to maintain a copy of the applicable Lavin Guidelines. Further, all Super Cats constructed after January 1, 2002 must have canopies located in the center of the boat. Boats with canopies located in the sponson will not be approved for competition.
Andrew Corn
Certified Racing Equipment, Inc. (CRE)
1) You will never find "anyone with any creditability" that will tell you “ I” have ever verbally authorized any changes to any registered boat......ever...... regardless of person, class or station in life. It is “untrue” that I authorized any change to the “Spiderman” verbally. Anyone that has told you contrary has compromised their own creditability.
2) You will also find that I have never authorized or approved any changes by any manufacture or owner to any homologated boat without written application and drawings.
3) You can find the below clipping in the 2003 APBA Offshore Technical Rules that deals with hull changes.
Hull Bottoms –
The approved hull bottoms must be identical to those produced from a manufacturer’s production line mold with no changes allowed unless approved in writing by CRE. Subject to the requirements set forth below, an owner or manufacturer may upgrade the bottom of a pre-existing boat bottom design to new factory standards that have been approved through the homologation process. These upgrades must be precise so as to allow the updated hull to fit into the new factory molds. No backdating is allowed without the written permission of APBA. All such change requests must be submitted in writing at least 60 days prior to competition with the precise measurements to CRE.
4) Existing boats that are not homologated by a manufacture in the Super Vee class are legal under the "non-conforming boats" 2003 APBA Technical Rules and have registered accordingly. I have included the clipping from the rules for you convenience.
Non-conforming Boats (“Grandfathering”)
Pre-Existing canopied boats registered in any year from 1997 –2002 Super Vee, Super Vee Light, Outlaw A or Outlaw B Classes, may be approved for competition in 2002 – 2005 provided that the owner submits a written request for approval and said request is approved by APBA, in it’s sole and absolute discretion, at least 30 days prior to competition. Notwithstanding the foregoing, these boats shall not be eligible for competition beyond the 2005 season unless they comply with these rules. Registered equipment ownership changes will be allowed on approved, registered and currently competing non-conforming boats. Hulls and decks racing under this "grandfather rule", which become lost or destroyed, must be replaced by equipment that meets the then current rules for Super Vee.
6) Furthermore your insinuations of granting an allowance for any competitor, manufacture or sponsor are also untrue. With regards to canopies as you have described I have included that section of the rules for your convenience.
Canopies –
Compliance with Lavin Guidelines - All Super Cats constructed after January 1, 2001 must use canopy safety systems that comply with the latest Mark Lavin Foundation R.R.C./E.R.C. Cockpit Guidelines.(“Lavin Guidelines”). It shall be the sole responsibility of the owner of the race boat to maintain a copy of the applicable Lavin Guidelines. Further, all Super Cats constructed after January 1, 2002 must have canopies located in the center of the boat. Boats with canopies located in the sponson will not be approved for competition.
Andrew Corn
Certified Racing Equipment, Inc. (CRE)
06-06-2003, 05:25 PM
#7
Enjoy the show
VIP Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Joisey Shore
Posts: 10,353
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, those are called rules. They come from a rule book.
The funny thing about APBA is they expect racers to follow the rules and somehow it always catches people by surprise when they get caught not following the rules.
The funny thing about APBA is they expect racers to follow the rules and somehow it always catches people by surprise when they get caught not following the rules.
06-06-2003, 06:04 PM
#8
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Santa Clarita,Ca,UAS
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Weight Penalty? (250lb)
I though that weight was not used as a PENALTY ? I understood
that weight was only used as a tool for competitive equality! In other word if one manufacture hull was faster another's weight
would be added to maintain comparable speeds ?
I though that weight was not used as a PENALTY ? I understood
that weight was only used as a tool for competitive equality! In other word if one manufacture hull was faster another's weight
would be added to maintain comparable speeds ?
06-06-2003, 07:26 PM
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hey, "ACORN" ... are you NUTS?
First of all, you must not be familiar with the female beast, or you would know that condescending to us just makes us more defensive. The truth is that bantering turns me on! So here we go …
I’ve followed the circuit for a long time, and after reading through the ‘blah, blah, blah’ of your post, let’s just get real here for a minute about there being no “favoritism toward any team from [your] office past, present …”. For your convenience, let me point out just a couple of examples to the contrary:
1) At last year’s World’s, Donzi’s F2 (again ,TITLE SPONSORS) were caught with illegal props, per a direct quote from Mike Tomlinson. The props were Hering blades welded on a Mercury hub – very illegal. Yes, the APBA gave them a 15-minute penalty, but GAVE THEM BACK THEIR PROPS. According to the “rulebook”, weren’t the props to have been confiscated??
2) In 1999, Formula’s F2 (382) REMOVED the strakes on their boat, and the APBA allowed them to race anyway, as long as they wrote a letter stating that all boats from then on would not have the strakes. Note there was no fine involved, nor was there a 250-lb. “penalty” imposed. This is basically the same situation that Skater is in right now, except that Skater ADDED the strakes, and in addition to prior written submission of their changes, Skater also furnished you with a notice that they will continue to have strakes on all boats from there on out. Interesting that Formula was TITLE SPONSOR that year.
And what IS the deal with the 250-lb. penalty? Out of what hat did THAT get pulled? Maybe Skater should fork out some cash and become a title sponsor in order to be competitive in the APBA? And while they’re at it, they can buy me a new tiara!!!
I’ve followed the circuit for a long time, and after reading through the ‘blah, blah, blah’ of your post, let’s just get real here for a minute about there being no “favoritism toward any team from [your] office past, present …”. For your convenience, let me point out just a couple of examples to the contrary:
1) At last year’s World’s, Donzi’s F2 (again ,TITLE SPONSORS) were caught with illegal props, per a direct quote from Mike Tomlinson. The props were Hering blades welded on a Mercury hub – very illegal. Yes, the APBA gave them a 15-minute penalty, but GAVE THEM BACK THEIR PROPS. According to the “rulebook”, weren’t the props to have been confiscated??
2) In 1999, Formula’s F2 (382) REMOVED the strakes on their boat, and the APBA allowed them to race anyway, as long as they wrote a letter stating that all boats from then on would not have the strakes. Note there was no fine involved, nor was there a 250-lb. “penalty” imposed. This is basically the same situation that Skater is in right now, except that Skater ADDED the strakes, and in addition to prior written submission of their changes, Skater also furnished you with a notice that they will continue to have strakes on all boats from there on out. Interesting that Formula was TITLE SPONSOR that year.
And what IS the deal with the 250-lb. penalty? Out of what hat did THAT get pulled? Maybe Skater should fork out some cash and become a title sponsor in order to be competitive in the APBA? And while they’re at it, they can buy me a new tiara!!!
