ALMS Round 8 Mosport Aug. 21-24, 08

[Canada ALMS fan]

Ridiculous penalty on the 71 Tafel car! That was clean, hard racing and both boys were nudging each other for several laps. ALMS better be careful with the penalties not to ruin the show, after all these guys are professionals - it's not Grand Am!

[Nick Koske]

Originally Posted by Canada ALMS fan

Ridiculous penalty on the 71 Tafel car! That was clean, hard racing and both boys were nudging each other for several laps. ALMS better be careful with the penalties not to ruin the show, after all these guys are professionals - it's not Grand Am!

Nothing clean about it...with that said...by itself, IMO, would not have garnered a penalty. But, both cars were warned a few laps prior about contact. After that point you need to drive clean and by clean I mean not touch the other guy. If your the one who initiates contact after the warning...guess what...you get penalized.

This isn't Grand-Am which is precisely why IMSA needs to stay on top of avoidable contact. IMSA seems to want to send the message that contact to get by someone is not acceptable, which I agree with completely. The #71 shoving the #45 off the track to pass means he couldn't have made the pass clean and was using the #45 to stop him from going off the track. Risi got by both the 87 and 45 twice without making contact, so it seems it's possible.

[HORNDAWG]

Sorry, I do not think a penalty was warranted in the situation. And as it was, the Tafel car got to the inside of Jorg, was door handle to door handle and at a relative pace, so Jorg actually turned into the Tafel car rather than breaking.

[Canada ALMS fan]

Originally Posted by Nick Koske

Nothing clean about it...with that said...by itself, IMO, would not have garnered a penalty. But, both cars were warned a few laps prior about contact. After that point you need to drive clean and by clean I mean not touch the other guy. If your the one who initiates contact after the warning...guess what...you get penalized.

This isn't Grand-Am which is precisely why IMSA needs to stay on top of avoidable contact. IMSA seems to want to send the message that contact to get by someone is not acceptable, which I agree with completely. The #71 shoving the #45 off the track to pass means he couldn't have made the pass clean and was using the #45 to stop him from going off the track. Risi got by both the 87 and 45 twice without making contact, so it seems it's possible.

This incident was nothing when compared to the Jorg & Melo incident at Sebring '07 which was hard but fair racing. Agreed they were already warned but 2 cars touching doors when Muller had the apex should not warrant a penalty. Jorg would have done the exact same thing if the 2 cars were reversed. Ok, if it was Enge or Melo I agree the penalty could have possibly been handed out but Muller & Jorg are 2 of the cleaner guys out there.

[Nick Koske]

Agree with both of you guys...alone it probably passes...but with the warning a few laps prior, what are they suppose to do? IMSA does not want contact when passing other cars and it's up to the guy passing to do it cleanly, IMO, the #71 did not.

Originally Posted by Horndog

And as it was, the Tafel car got to the inside of Jorg, was door handle to door handle and at a relative pace, so Jorg actually turned into the Tafel car rather than breaking.

So when someone is side by side you coming out of a corner, your suppose to brake to let them by? I'm not sure how Jorg turned down on him as Jorg was being pushed to the outside and off the track with his left side tires, he was trying to make the corner. Giving racing room goes both ways and the car being passed should not have to give way to the passer.

Sure I'm a bit biased...I'm a Lizard fan. Ferrari had the better car at Mosport and Risi got by the #45 twice without contact the same should be expected of Tafel.

[Canada ALMS fan]

The F1 race was boring with no passing. Start penalizing ALMS drivers (regardless of team) for going for it towards the end of the race and we'll end up with the same type of processions. I understand they had been warned but that doesn't mean stop racing. Jorg was not going to open a door for Dirk so he had no choice. If Jorg spun or was T-boned absolutely give him a penalty but a little nudge is part of sportscar racing. Look how often the prototypes nerf the GT's off the track, now that is not cool (and expensive). Nick as a Lizard fan I understand your frustration because it is odd how often the Lizards are the ones getting hit?? On a positive note, GT2 is having an epic season with 4 top teams: Farnbacher-Loles, Flying Lizards, Tafel, & Risi. I am loving it!

[HORNDAWG]

Originally Posted by Nick Koske

Agree with both of you guys...alone it probably passes...but with the warning a few laps prior, what are they suppose to do? IMSA does not want contact when passing other cars and it's up to the guy passing to do it cleanly, IMO, the #71 did not.
So when someone is side by side you coming out of a corner, your suppose to brake to let them by? I'm not sure how Jorg turned down on him as Jorg was being pushed to the outside and off the track with his left side tires, he was trying to make the corner. Giving racing room goes both ways and the car being passed should not have to give way to the passer.
Sure I'm a bit biased...I'm a Lizard fan. Ferrari had the better car at Mosport and Risi got by the #45 twice without contact the same should be expected of Tafel.

Well as shown in this video Müller already had the line going in and Jorg turned down into him. And yes if you are outside in a corner and even with the car on the inside you lose. The car on the inside has the line, it has been that way forever, including the brief 25 plus years that I raced. Had the Tafel car stuffed it in there it would be a different story, but it was done at a reasonable pace, with a late breaking move. Jorg did not defend the line!! There is more referrence material on the subject here.

[Nick Koske]

Well like the Lastturnclub's two observers I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

I will conclude had there not been warnings to both...it most likely would have gone un-penalized. But you can't give warnings for contact and not punish one person if contact occurs again. Warnings that come without punishment will not change a undesired behavior. IMSA had to penalize one car, right or wrong, they had to do it.