Rules 2006
 

Are OSS and SBI keeping on track with the rules like this year or are there going to be major changes in order for unification to happen?
pat W

Re: Rules 2006
 

The rumor mill is in full swing this time of year and from what I am hearing PARITY seems to be the new buzz word.

What I am hearing is that there will be only one drive allowed next year in SCL. I am assuming SV as well.

What one series does effects the other. SBI allows my drives and transmissions. Unification is being stepped on in the rules.

Even if the two series never get along you still have to let them race head to head when the racers want to.

If you want PARITY have a foot race.

pat W

Re: Rules 2006
 

Interesting...................so much for having rules locked for several years. It's a good thing those #6's are so inexpensive. :rolleyes:

Re: Rules 2006
 

If #6's are required there will be a smaller fleet in SV....... Talking big $$$$

Re: Rules 2006
 

I heard that there are 600 reasons to change to the #6.

Re: Rules 2006
 

More bad info again. No one is OSS has said anything about making SV a # 6 drive only for next year!
Also the class would have to vote on that before any rule was changed. And if that was what the class wanted whats wrong with that? You guys are just looking to sling more mud on a subject that has absolutely no bearing on you. If you had a boat and raced in OSS then you would be entitled to your vote on this ,but you dont so shut up already.
MD :mad:

Re: Rules 2006
 

Maybe it is bad info - we will see. For a class rule change, does it take a majority vote, or does it have to be unanimous? No mud slinging, just a simple question.

Re: Rules 2006
 

Shifter,

Earlier this year a group of OSS SV Owners approached Mike Tomlinson regarding a rules change limiting the gear ratio on the #6 drives to 1.50:1. The OSS SV Owners who proposed the rules change where seeking to address parity concerns regarding the Spiderman boat.

During a OSS SV Class Owners conference call to discuss this matter, Mr. Tomlinson informed the SV Owners that unless there was a unanimous vote, he would not recommend any rules changes to the Board for the current year. The Board has ultimate authority to make rules changes. Mr. Tomlinson did however say that he would make a recommendation for the 2006 race season if there was a majority vote of the class Owners. The Owners, or at least most of them, where under the impression that they where entitled to make decisions on parity issues. They where informed by Mr. Tomlinson that they where not…parity issues where under the purview of the Technical Committee.

The OSS SV Owners voted by majority to limit the #6 drive gear ratio to 1.50:1 for the 2006 race season.

Shortly after the SV Owner’s vote, the OSS Board issued revised rules incorporating the statements made to the SV Owners by Mr. Tomlinson. Under the revised rules, the Technical Committee considers parity issues and makes recommendations to the Board for final approval.

At this point, no SBI SV Owners have suggested a similar rules change through the SBI/APBA Class Owners program.

I hope this information is helpful in your quest for knowledge.

Ken Doyle
Owner/Throttles
OSS #10
SBI/APBA #10

Re: Rules 2006
 

Thanks Ken.

pat W

Re: Rules 2006
 

Pat,

I wouldn’t expect the rules to vary much between OSS and SBI. Have you ever noticed those binoculars on the counter at the gas station? They use them to check on the competition and adjust accordingly.

SBI and OSS watch each other very closely, they are competing for the same race team base. Any move that would make a team or group of boats ineligible (or eligible) under the rules would be very calculated, and most likely only be made to gain a competitive advantage.

If you look at the technical rules, the primary difference between the two organizations is the source of legal equipment. SBI tends to be more open in allowing various manufacture’s equipment, while OSS sticks pretty close to Mercury. At the same time, both have very aggressive technical inspection programs. The last thing either wants is for a team, or group of teams, to gain either a real or perceived advantage over the rest of the Class.

Look for innovative ideas and programs to come out of each organization…in an effort to gain competitive advantage, not to alienate an existing customer base.

Re: Rules 2006
 

Well said Ken , and some good information...Thank You

Re: Rules 2006
 

We have had good dialog with John C about the future products we are working on right now.

The problem I have is when we put all this effort into a product and it is excluded for no good reason besides a small kickback.

Over the last 10 years the rules have been in favor of one manufacturer and the sport has been decaying slowly.

We are working on solutions to the problems that are occuring with the current drive types as well as new products.

If you look at the solution of the 1.50 ratio. I do not think that is the correct solution. If Spiderman is that good it is because of the ratio and prop combination that makes it handle so well. If you bump the ratio the other way the boat will not handle as well as it did. I realize that there is not a good way to have parity but racing is not a sport that everyone is a winner.

The idea behind racing has always been to improve safety and reliability the products for the everyday consumer and to show who is the best.

pat W

Re: Rules 2006
 

Racing is and I’m afraid will continue to be controlled by a single manufacturer. This, regardless of how people want to express it is the way it is in one of the sanctioning bodies.

Parity, this seems to be a hot word, but it really kills competition among manufacturers.

If someone has produced the best combination (hull and power package) the manufacturer is not rewarded with more sales as one would think as the other teams get to penalize the good ones till they are no longer any faster.

I know the reasoning is that the organizations want closer racing, but the manufacturer’s design newer boats that are continuously faster and faster as a means of increasing their product life cycles, which makes them more $ which insures they will be around in the future. The parity rules do not really allow the manufacturers to reap the benefits of their new designs unless they are only marginally faster.

A new boat company really cannot compete in this model even if it has a better design as the others seem to penalize it to maintain parity. This of course removes any incentive of the general public to purchase that particular manufacturers product if they do not see that it is clearly a better product.

It would seem that the laws of natural selection do not apply in racing. Why purchase a great boat and power package when you can have the officials slow it down to match your boats current speeds.

Cost seem to be ignored in all of this as well as if you check the pricing, a 525/#6 package cost more than a Super Cat engine/#6 package. Lack of competition in the 525 engine series has allowed the prices to swell to un-believable levels especially when you consider the economies of scale the 525 enjoys over the Super Cat engines would mean that it should be reversed.

The racers as well as the general public deserve an alterative of choices.

Re: Rules 2006
 

Interesting........thanks-

Re: Rules 2006
 

I would say that MTI has come out as a "NEW boat company" and done quiet well. There SuperCat has made Skater go back to the drawing boards for a new race boat. MTI is enjoying greats sucess as a pleasure boat builder too , I would think do into some part from there sucess on the racecourse. I do agree that the parity rules do limit the technology into boat racing. Companies like Arneson, Weismann, Sterling, Herring, and more have improved racing in many ways over the years, but it all comes at a cost which hurts some racers. Like a few years ago when Zero Defect was running the only set of trannies in the US or now when they are guys that would give there first born for the right set of Herrings. At some point the spending and speeds have to be limited. Remember what happened to "OPEN CLASS" we can't let this grow into that. There is nothing wrong with slowing the boats back down as long as all the boats run the same. I wouldn't care if they put 200's back on our "STOCK" boats as long as we all the same thing. Personally I wish I was a 10th as smart as some of the engineers in our business. But obviously I'm not , as I make stickers for a living. My point if there is one is yes the technology is great but the only place it is going is into record boats, PX, superboats, and pleasureboats. In all forms of racing there are limits including, F1, Cart, IRL, Nascar, BUSCH, etc. We all love NEW tecnology but it cost money and when one guy can afford it and the next guy can't well that pushes racers away, which the sport can't afford to do. Sorry for rambling, I hope this made some sense.

Re: Rules 2006
 

From what I"ve heard and from racers in OSS that I have spoke to the SCL class will be running #6"s next year. It also lookis like the SV class will follow.
SBI will have no changes in their rule book next year (2006) in the SCL,SV,or SVL classes as far as drives.Bravo, and #6 both will be an option,,,

Re: Rules 2006
 

Frankie,
Congratulations on the new boat.I think if you are building a new SCL than it must have #6's.If you have a boat that has bravo's,I think is grandfathered in.I believe the new rule is for parity and so the boats last the whole race.

Wil

Re: Rules 2006
 

Willie,
Thanks the new boat is running well and I think with alittle time we should be able to dial it in better.
Yes you are correct that is the way it was explained to me...

Re: Rules 2006
 

Technology does not have to be “Expensive” as some might think. Obviously nothing is extremely cheap or free but if it last and produces results then you essentially get more for your $$.

As for parity and MTI, MTI entered the picture way before this parity issue came about. Look no further than “Skater” as a new company in the V bottom market.

Their boat is clearly fast if not faster than others, yet with the weight penalty people feel that the other boats are as fast or faster. No one is beating down Skaters door to get one and the field is not made up of Skater V bottoms like the success and speed would seem to warrant. To date there is only one Skater V bottom in the class.

Parity has made the existing as well as the new boats in that class competitive. Like I stated, why buy the Skater when the racer’s current boat, with adjustments made, is just as fast.

Count how many new V bottoms entered the race circuit this season and you will see that the majority of new boats were not a Skater.

Skater has not been rewarded with more sales as a result of Parity.

This is just an example.

Re: Rules 2006
 

I for one am dead set AGAINST adding weight to boats that are winning. I realize that no one wants to come in second all the time but thats the fact of it. If you don't have a better mouse trap then do something about it or expect to stay out of the winners circle. Its that simple to me! As an example Skater builds a super fast good running SV that no one could catch this year. So if you want to run with the big dogs then you should buy a Skater SV and pay the big money for it. If you cant spend that kind of money then drop down a class and buy the best boat in that class. If you dont do that then I dont know why you should feel the need to have someone else penalized for him spending more money and buying a better engineered product.

On the other side of the coin I do agree on giving some assistance to some slower boats where the old tec is not keeping up. I would not agree to give them an edge to be able to win but maybe run mid pack at best. and this is only for a limited time.
MD

Re: Rules 2006
 

Who's the customer? The racer or the fan? Answer that question first, then the other answers become clearer.

Why do you think NASCAR slows down cars that win too often?

Winning by one second is great. Winning by 20 seconds is not, at least from a fans standpoint.

Re: Rules 2006
 

Who is the customer?

Easy, the racers are. They are the only ones making a purchase of any kind in this sport. The race is not dependant upon a single fan showing up, rather the number of racers showing up.

There are no ticketed sales and there are no revenue streams that make this NASCAR.

Re: Rules 2006
 

i would agree with Rik... i go to the races and give no money to the sanctioning body... i might buy a t-shirt from one of the teams and the city makes money off us being there, but we are not customers... if the racers go away, then it doesn't matter at all how many sit on the beach for free...

Re: Rules 2006
 

The fans don't pay the bills,the only way the sanctioning body make money is from sponors and TV, and ofcourse the money they contact with the city for.Thats why everyone is so worried about huge boat count, that isn't always the anwser, so cities only want 30-40 boats and can't handle more, and every city is different. The only ones u hear screaming are the fans and they don't pay the bills...

Re: Rules 2006
 

Frank, great points and all very true, and that explains why there's no money spent to educate the public that a race has come to town.

But if there were more people watching, even for free, wouldn't it help with attracting sponsors if there were more people watching the race? Also, fans spend money in the town and stay in hotels.

Wouldn't you agree that when fans are roaming around the pits and watching from shore, it's an overall better event? After all, why would a city pay for a race, if no one comes to see it? I never understood that one.

Thanks in advance.

Re: Rules 2006
 

Ryan,

In 1995 Zerodefect was famous for being a filler in open class until the accident at Key West with the C boat. Laith was not a happy camper.

With some help from us,JT and TNT ,Don Q,Sterling, he went 11 for 11 in 96. His investment to make that boat a winner was slight compare to buying a new hull and starting from scatch. It also quadroupled the resale value of his old 46.

Competition breeds cost reduction. They are not interested in fixing the problems they have they are just cashing in on a Monopoly.

We have a bravo type drive in the works, Arneson has a conversion. We have a #6 type replacement and I know Arneson does too. I am pretty sure that there are several other people out there that are working on there solution. If you open the rules up it will create openings and sponsorship and more people trying to make a go of it.

Look at IRL they don't even have bump day anymore. Why?

Why not open the rules and let us play to even the field. You might find some fans will show up to watch the little guy smoke the big guy.

pat W

Re: Rules 2006
 

Frank,
I must strongly disagree with you when you say that the fans don't pay the bills because if it wasn't for the fans the cities where you race would not have the income recieved to help sponsor the race(and believe me the City of Orange Beach sponsors the race) from tax dollars spent and monies spent in hotels/condos, food sales, gas sales, toll collections, need I go on... If it was not for the fans that come to the races there would not be ANY incintive for the cities to agree to permit and allow the local promoters to come in and pay the sactioning fees (I know what it costs to produce a race). I am on the Board of Directors of the promoters in Orange Beach and I can promise you if it was not for the fans, who include EVERY owner of EVERY sponsor and potential sponsor that has brought 5 races to this town since 2003 there would never be a race here. Just food for thought from a fan, City Employee, promoter, sponsor, and staff member of sacitoning body, I think I cover all the bases.


Who is the customer? Easy, the local promoter and the sponsors. They pay a fee for a race to be brought to their city and expect a return on that investment. Believe me I am the first to make sure the racers are cared for and the red carpet rolled out for, you can ask them, but if it was not for the local promoters that want the product there woiuld never be a sale.


-sam jackson
Board Member Gulf Coast Power Boat Association
OSS Angel 4
City of Orange Beach Fire/Rescue Firemedic

Re: Rules 2006
 

Ron,
The big picture for a true sponsor isn't people on the beach looking at a decal on a boat that they have no chance of seeing at all offshore running at 80 MPH. TV is what they are truly looking for and number of homes that you can truly verify. That is the main problem with offshore and why we don't have as many sponsors as we should. They look at the big picture,not 2,000 people on a beach. They also what to know the demographics of the people watching the TV show and if they can afford what they are trying to sell, and if they are even hitting the right market place.
Thats why its is important to be with the right TV station, if you aren't hitting a certain number of house holds you are wasting your money even trying to put a show together.Data is so important for sponsors....

Re: Rules 2006
 

We are making a new drive right now. We are looking at racing it right away to prove it works.

We are doing the same thing that the boat manufactures are doing but we are not allowed to participate in most of the classes.

I would like to have Extreme Boats do an article on it release it to the world. I talked to Casey and the boys last month. Another little guy trying to get a foothold.

If I cannot race the drives/transmissions it takes 3 to 6 times longer to sort out the bugs. That means I am not going to advertise and I will concentrait on other racing fields.

I do not see why the boat manufactures can make any amount of mods and intrduce new models. It should be the same for all manufactures.

We have no problem following guidelines.

pat W

Re: Rules 2006
 

Pat,

Have you submitted a request to SBI/APBA or OSS to homogolate your product?

There should be no problem racing your drive in one of the P-Classes offered by the various organizations.

Re: Rules 2006
 

if you want exciting tv then take racing more offshore in rougher waters. as a fan flat water racing is not as exciting on tv.

Re: Rules 2006
 

Ken,

I have talked to John Carbonell and it was a very simple conversation. I do not have any problem with SBI/APBA we are legal.

I do not know who to talk to at OSS. I know that Linder was writing the rules but I also hear the racers make changes for their class. I really do not know who to talk to over there. The Class or Linder?

P class is ok but why can't we run head to head in SV or SC or SCL or SVL? We have been pushing innovative set-ups for safety,durability and cost. That is clearly been pushed out in the rules but I cannot get a straight answer why.

In P class we could run Vee vs Cat and there is no clear reason why we won. We like the Apples to Apples racing.

Most of the guys would run and do run Saturday and Sunday and we would not be able to run Sunday. It is very hard to get a sponsor to come on board for a P class only. I have not seen much race footage of the P races on OLN.

pat W

Re: Rules 2006
 

Pat,
I will be working on the path you would like to see very shortly.I believe
that it will happen with the right persuasion. How can they argue the point?
lets get this first deal done on the new project and go from there..We can always unbolt those weismans and try something new. ill call you tomorrow
Stay optimistic!!! Tony

Re: Rules 2006
 

Pat,

I'm a little confused. Are you saying that your drive is only legal in P-Class for SBI/APBA?

As for who to contact with OSS, I would suggest contacting their national office to get the names of the Class Reps. You could also get an Owner/Member to bring the matter before the Class.

It is my understanding that the OSS Board of Directors has final say on any rules changes. However, I also understand that it is OSS polcy that a rule change with a unanimous vote by a Class Owners group becomes effective immediately.

I understand that SBI/APBA will also recognize a rule change that has a unanimous Owner vote.

Do you plan on a race team support program for teams who would run your drives?

Ken Doyle

Re: Rules 2006
 

OSS General 34: OSS RULE CHANGES
A. Technical Rules

1. Technical Rule Changes may be initiated in one of the following ways:
a. By the Technical Chairman
b. By the Technical Committee
c. By a current member or group of members in good standing from a specific OSS class (rule changes must be for that class only)

2. Technical rule changes may be made at anytime, but will not become effective until January 1 of the following racing season.

3. Technical Rules may be changed during the season only if 100% of the currently registered boat owners in the affected class vote in favor of the proposed change.

4. Upon notice of a proposed rule change, the Technical Chairman will draft the proposed rule change, prepare a ballot and distribute it to all members of the affected class. (A phone conference call may be substituted for a ballot and a
verbal vote taken over the phone during the conference call)

5. Technical rule changes must be voted on and approved by a 3/4 majority of the currently registered owners of the class affected by the rule change.

6. If the class approves a rule change, the Technical Chairman will present the rule change to the OSS Board of Directors (hereinafter referred to as the Board) for
final approval. Board approval is accomplished by a simple majority vote of the Board. No rule change shall be considered final until approved by the Board.

7. The Board may approve all rule changes approved by a class vote but shall have the authority to override a class vote if the Board determines that the proposed rule change will be detrimental to the class or OSS. A ¾ majority vote of the Board is necessary to override a class vote.

8. Upon approval by the Board, said rule change shall become effective in accordance with these rules.

9. Approved rule changes shall be posted on the official OSS website immediately upon approval by the Board.

Copied From This Link

Re: Rules 2006
 

Pat,

There is your anwser...
Even if a class votes on a rule change, and approves a rule change, the board has the final say not the class or owners.

Re: Rules 2006
 

Can anyone give me the names of the BOD of OSS, and the tech chairman and committee via email if not here.

Ken, Our drive(s) and gearboxes are legal in SBI/APBA/UIM (Super classes). P class is still open to anything as far as I know.

If track support is what is needed that is not a problem. If it is about service that is not a problem either. There are several people around that have experience with our products and we work closely with our customers to make sure that they know how to check and maintain our products. Our products have no special tools or fixtures to work on them. We take great care in making things simple to work on.

TNT- Matt and Lupe, Leon from Fountain, Nick and John from Lucas, Tom from Ettore, Ray and George from WHM, Coabella, Vern with Gentry, just to name a few I can count on. We have always supported everyone that has raced our products in anyway possible. I have never needed a semi full of parts yet but we aspire to be in that league some day.

Tony, :D
See you soon.
pat W

Re: Rules 2006
 

So, In other words, nothing but Mercury products will be allowed in OSS, or be allowed to compete against Mercury in OSS? I think we've seen that game show before.
Rik made some great points. Sounds like he's also seen this show before. He also says the Racers are the customers, Bad2bone says the local promoters and sponsors are the customers, and Ron P thinks the fans are the customers. Personally, I think you're all right. BUT, if you look at the continued NASCAR reach, NASCAR had a product to sell before it became the popular sport it is now. When the racing got closer TV coverage got better. Potential sponsors, (advertising agencies who look at TV ratings) saw the number of folks watching NASCAR on TV and next thing you know everyone from Tide to Viagra jumped on board. Now NASCAR is second only to NFL, and not far behind at that. SO, you gotta have teams racing to have a show, then you gotta have producers and promoters to sell the show. The fans are out there, and as we've seen they're hungry for hot competition, heated controversy, names they recognize, bad guys to boo at, good guys to cheer for, and general mass hysteria. Once the show gets out there and the fans get on board the sponsors will come. One big snowball. Sounds easy right? Well folks, as long as you have one company trying to monopolize the sport, it will continue to take one step forward and two steps back. The lines are black and white. YOU read between em. ;)
Of course, that's just my opinion...

Re: Rules 2006
 

As far as I know any tech rule that has had a 100% support factor by a class has "NOT" been over ruled by board. As far as drive rule Bravos on existing boats are grandfathered in. New boats must have 6's. As far as OSS cat light class anyway. The biggest factor in this has to due with saftey as most accidents recently have envolved gimble ring failure on Bravo based drives. Although some would argue that the gimble failure came post accident as a result of the accident. Did that sound right?
sw

Re: Rules 2006
 

I have more questions regarding the rules for this year. On 6-29-06 there was a change to the rules for drives. Make a 100 units a year to get in the class, make sure it is as bad as the current drives on the list? Funny.

There was also a ruling on our Weismann dry-sump #6 drives not being allowed on the new peppers Skater. They were allowed on the previous peppers Skater. The peppers team already have the expence of a new boat,rigging and props. Now they are having to pick up new engines and drives. There was nothing wrong with the old ones.

I have requested a reason but I have not received one yet. Can someone explain?

pat W