D'Aprile was fifth, if he'd won he'd still be fifth. Stott was 30 points out of the points lead, Why risk an oildown, which could have made him come up five points short of the lead. Why play games - it was a business decision and they made no bones about it. This ain't week one, it's week 10 of 11 and not to have team orders in that situation is just plain stupid.

I enjoyed it, everybody in the tower enjoyed it - and since we were almost the only spectators, the majority of the spectators enjoyed it.

I kep sneaking up to the stands to see the Pro Mods and Pro Stocks, just in case someone ran in the 5's or 6.20's. So I could say I saw it.

__________________
www.zizzoracing.com

Dang sure didn't see a 5 in that final round huh T??

In any other sport, if you throw a game, it's called cheating.

As to risking an oildown, that's part of racing. If he wasn't racing a teammate, he would have had to risk the oildown and earn the victory.

Bottom line: they fixed the race and Stott did not earn the victory.

Jim

Jim - up until this point I thought we were having a conversation. To accuse someone of cheating by working together - well, I just think you're a bit goofy now.

They did it right up front and told everyone about it. Not sure what axe you have to grind. But I know the best way that you can grind it. Get a Pro Mod car and go beat 'um.

I think Larry made great points. So many things happen over the course of the year. Sometimes a team feels like they couldn't buy a win. No matter what they do nothing falls their way. If this happened to fall Quain's way - then so be it.

Let me ask you this. Would it have been cheating if Quain had to face someone else. And that someone else needed an engine cause he blew his stuff up. And maybe Rector or Kerunski or Janis supplies this other person with an engine to beat Quain - is that cheating too? Maybe teams should just quit sharing parts - cause some bench racer on a forum would think it was cheating.

Maybe McMillen shouldn't have helped Atchison put a motor in his car in San Antonio last year, so Atchison could beat him in the finals - Maybe Creasy shouldn't have lent Wyatt a motor so Wyatt could continue his run at Creasy for the championship - Maybe Quain shouldn't lend out pistons and valves and tools so other teams could compete in a rough spot.

Is that all cheating? Hell no - it's racing. And you take your breaks where you can get them. Quain and Tommy and the team worked their a$$es off to get two cars in the finals of the fastest Pro Mod field in IHRA history. AND two cars into the top 5 of the closest points chace in IHRA Pro Mod History.

They tested those two cars until they blew up their back up motor a week ago. I say, if they want to roll down the 1320 on a parade lap - my hats off to them.

The rest of you can debate it in a forum

__________________
Jim Walczak
jim@squeakywheelonline.com
http://squeakywheelonline.com

If it is acceptable for teammates to intentionally throw races, what is to stop a racer who needs points from literally "buying a win?"

Let's say there's a situation in which at the last race of the year, a racer needs a win to take the points lead. His opponent in the final round of the final race is a driver who is out of the points race but just happened to have a good day. Is it okay for the driver who needs the points to pay off his opponent to get the opponent to throw the race?

After all, wouldn't that just be a business decision? What's the difference between having a teammate throw the race and paying a non-teammate to throw the race?

Sharing parts, or helping another racer compete fairly on the track, is in no way comparable to throwing a race.

Fixing a race is cheating.

Jim

As you all know, I dont have a problem with team orders in the right situation. Mainly, at Pomona 1 you should be racing heads up, at Pomona 2 if one of you can gain major $$$ or pts or whatever, then you have to do what you have to do. Plain and simple. You people complain b/c they did it the way they did, if they went out there and he cut off at half track yall all would be *****ing how it was team orders anyways. Big deal. You should have seen the Jay Payne/Shelly Payne semi match at Ennis last weekend. They should have just left Shelly in the pits and let Jay take a bye.

Have you ever met Quain? I don't think this would ever have occured, had there been more than six people in the stands on a Monday holdover.

Maybe you should call Connie Kalitta and scold him for splitting the purse up in Norwalk under the same circumstances.

The number of people in the stands is totally irrelevant.

What about the drivers that Stott jumped over to take the points lead? Is it fair to them that he got by them by fixing the final round? They were eliminated through fair competition, something Stott did not have to face in the final round.

Jim

It wasn't really "team orders," it was D'Aprile's idea, not Stott's, so it was not imposed on him. If D'Aprile had kept his mouth shut and redlighted, or lifted with tire shake, would you still be unhappy. You don't like it, I thought it was done properly.

Was it just a bad tuneup or team orders when Hillary smoked the tires against Doug Sunday? We'll never know, but given the current points situation, it would have been the smart thing to do.

Stott and D'Aprile wasn't the only example of "team orders" Monday - Bob and Craig Marshall were supposed to race each other in the quarterfinals. Bob's car never came to the staging lanes. Does that annoy you too? Same thing, different category. In that case, Dad let his son go on to the semifinals.

Sportsman racers routinely split big purses. Is that "cheating?"

Hey, all those other 14 guys had to do to prevent it would be to beat one of the two teammates before the final round. They didn't do it and Stott beat the current points leader early in eliminations, giving him the chance to take the points lead in the final round.

It may be a lot of things, but "cheating" isn't one of them. It's a business, that's why they are called "professional racers." At this point in the season, it would have been foolish to do otherwise.

OK, let's put on our "Thinking Cap" for a minute. You're in the final:

• With a cracked rear main cap (~$25K bottom end)
• No spares
• On a Monday holdover
• Virtually no fans/sponsors present
• One race from season's end
• Against a teammate
• Tightest points chase in years
• ...with an opportunity to take the points lead.

Scattering an engine in the finals, forcing yet another cleanup, coming out 35 points down, losing the points lead [and very possibly the championship]...to "make it look good for the camera"...Are you serious?!?!

If you do the math, that decision could have cost around $150,000, when all is said and done after Rockingham. Do you have that much lying around?

So, if you are facing a non-teammate in a race you really need, why not make the "business decision" to toss him a few thousand bucks to throw the race?

Jim

So all that justifies throwing a race? Isn't that all part of being a competitor in the sport?

BTW, it has nothing to do with looking good for the camera. It has to do with fair, honest competiton.

Name me another sport that allows competitors to throw events?

What happens to a jockey who throws a horse race? They get suspended or banned for life.

What happens to a boxer who takes a dive? He loses his license.

What happens to baseball players who throw games? Look at the 1918 Chicago White Sox.

Other sports protect the competition from fixing to protect the integrity of their sport. If you are a fan, what's the point of watching and following the sport if you think the outcomes will be fixed?

This is all an outgrowth of allowing multi-car teams in the sport and the situation is just going to get worse. Racing is the only sport I can think of in which participants can be both drivers and competitors. It's the only sport I can think of in which one competitor can benefit his teammate by intentionally throwing a race.

When it gets to the point where one team has all four cars in the semi-finals of eliminations, how can any fan believe that the last two rounds of eliminations are true competition? They won't be able to believe the competition is real. So, then what's the point of watching when at least half the elimination rounds might be fixed?

When you allow drivers to intentionally throw races, for any reason, you destroy the integrity of competition. And when you lose the integrity, you have entertainment, not a sport.

Jim

On the other hand, during the last few seasons, I've seen Jason Line take out Greg Anderson in eliminations when a win for Greg would have clinched the championship or given him the record for most wins in a season. Was that the smart thing to do?

Jim