The important stuff first:  Best wishes to Jack Roush (one of my personal heroes) for a speedy recovery from his accident, to Marcus Ambrose for finding a ride for next year, and condolences to the fans in St. Louis who won’t have the opportunity to see Nationwide or Truck racing in 2011.

Jenna Freyer of the AP reported that some NASCAR drivers have been fined recently for negative comments about the sport.  She wrote:

“The Associated Press has learned that NASCAR warned teams during the offseason that public criticism of the sport would no longer be tolerated, and at least two star drivers have been fined — one as much as $50,000 — for comments that were deemed destructive to the industry.”

When I first started in academia, I firmly denied the idea that we live in an ivory tower. Getting out of academia and working with companies and sanctioning bodies has been a real eye-opener for me. As a scientist, I have the right to make any assertion I want — as long as I can back it up with data. The whole point of scholarship is pursuit of the Truth (which we share with the field of capital-J Journalism). One of the most disappointing things I’ve learned as a result of my time with the ‘real world’ is that there are entirely to many people who believe they can dictate what people think by telling them what to say and do. In science, the determining factor is not who you are, but the veracity of what you say. I have the right – in fact, the responsibility – to correct something that is incorrect. It doesn’t matter if the speaker is a graduate student or a Nobel Prize winner.

Of course, when you start getting into the world of opinion (and yes, there is plenty of opinion in science because there are many things we still don’t know), the rules become fuzzier. We all know scientists who are so in love with their own theories that they are not as objective about their work as they should be. We have, unfortunately, had a number of recent cases of scientific misconduct, in which data were fabricated or even cherry-picked to make them look more convincing than they really were. When those cases are uncovered, the punishment is very clear – you lose the right to be a scientist at a reputable institution.  The funding agencies can go through due process and deny you the ability to compete for grants to support your research.  Papers in which incorrect data are  published must be retracted.  But unless I have evidence that someone has knowingly done something malicious, my accusing them of misconduct is libel, not opinion.

Imagine you are one of the people in the NASCAR hierarchy who makes decisions about debris cautions or determines whether a car meets NASCAR’s somewhat fuzzy technical specifications.  How would you feel if one of the drivers got up and told the world that he lost the race because the officials called a fake debris caution to make the race more exciting?  That’s not “destructive to the industry”, that’s making a value judgment of the integrity of the official and the officiating body.  I agree with NASCAR that they should have every right to discipline people they license to participate in the sport if those people make unfounded statements that question the integrity of the sport.

Ramsey Poston refused to get into specifics, saying only:

“It is the sanctioning body’s obligation on behalf of the industry and our fans to protect the sport’s brand.  Any action taken by NASCAR has nothing to do with the drivers expressing an opinion — it’s focused on actions or comments that materially damage the sport.”

That’s come across in very different ways in different stories, which range from “NASCAR fines drivers for making disparaging comments about the sport” to tweets that “NASCAR muzzles drivers”.  Drivers (crew chiefs, owners, mechanics and anyone else) should have the right to state substantiated opinions.  Denny Hamlin ought to be mad about losing a race due to a late-race debris caution, and he ought to be able to state facts. If no one on his team saw any debris, that’s a perfectly fair thing to say.  He can do that without suggesting that there is a conspiracy.  NASCAR, for their part, ought to be able to point out the debris when they call a caution and everyone involved in racing ought to understand that sometimes you can’t tell whether the unidentified debris is metal or rubber, and that it is better to call a caution than to find out what the thing in the middle of the best driving line is made of by having someone run over it at 200 mph.  The NASCAR media got on the TV broadcasters last year about not showing caution-causing debris.  The broadcasters responded by trying to make sure they showed the debris and, in at least one case, wondering out loud where the debris was because they couldn’t find it.

Tony Stewart lit into Goodyear for a bad tire choice at the first Atlanta race in 2008.  He wasn’t the only driver upset about tire problems – Jeff Gordon and Ryan Newman (among others) said similar things, although in more reasonable and measured ways.  Goodyear invited Stewart to visit their tire operation and explained the process of specifying and making tires to him and he appeared chastened.  He still felt it was a bad tire, but he was a little more constructive with his criticism.  The simple act of Goodyear taking the time to explain how they work and how they are really doing the best they can raised my opinion of them.  Stewart’s admission that he overreacted raised my opinion of him, as well.  Sometimes, you’re just wrong and the best way to deal with it is to admit that you were wrong.

@jim_utter asked whether anyone could show him one instance in which fans didn’t go to the track because of something someone said. (Bonus points to @spencerlueders, who replied “The weatherman”  Spencer is, if I remember right, a science-loving motorsports lawyer who sent me a neat email when I did Charlotte Talks.)

I think most fans have the same reaction I do when I hear a whiny driver making no sense:  “What a schmuck.”  It has absolutely no impact on my attending or watching race.  Far more important are ticket prices, where and when races are located, whether I have a job, and how my favorite drivers are doing.   NASCAR’s taken the other road and refuses to talk about it, which has only stretched out the discussion because people wonder who was fined and what exactly they said.  If NASCAR is (as I suspect) in the right (in this case) and it’s analogous to fining a pitcher for making remarks about the integrity of the umpire, they would have done themselves so much more credit by being open about it.  If they want to “protect the brand” by trying to make sure no one says anything negative about it — even when true and justified — then that’s a strong reason for me to stop watching.

Is there any reason why NASCAR can’t collect the debris that causes cautions and put it on display, like they do the shock absorbers they select for dismantling?  Yes, this could result in embarrassment because sometimes a caution is called and it turns out to be a hamburger wrapper or a piece of foam – but honestly, if you can’t appreciate the importance of being very careful when you’re talking about people’s lives, you really shouldn’t call yourself a racing fan anyway.

My friend The Rocket Scientist likes to engage me in the occasional debate of whether NASCAR is a sport.  (It’s a boring debate that doesn’t really interest me, but I sometimes play along just because it gets fun.  Like the time someone suggested that a sport was anything people paid to watch.  TRS noted that this would technically make stripping a sport.)  It’s become a running game with a group of friends:  what makes a sport a “real” sport?  During the World Cup, another friend, Owl, suggested that a true sport doesn’t allot points for style.

I’ve got a new one to run by them: A true sport doesn’t have secret rules.

OK, this is a minor one to start with, but one that I think could be pretty easily addressed.

The Issue

I’ve written two posts explaining how the drivers determine Pit Road speed (1 and 2), so I won’t repeat here why the cars have tachometers instead of speedometers, and how the gearing choices determine the engine rpm that corresponds too the appropriate pit road speed.

But once you understand how that works, you realize how easy it is for someone to change out the rear-end gear, but forget to put the change into the Excel file they use for figuring out pit road speed and you get Juan Pablo Montoya losing a race he really should have had a shot at winning.

Kudos

I’m trying to remind myself to give NASCAR credit for the things they have done right. It’s so much easier to criticize the wrong.

The pit road speed limit was instituted for the safety of the pit crews. Being within five feet of a car going 100 mph+ while changing tires is a recipe for disaster. The motivating incident for the pit road speed limit was the death of Mike Ritch in 1990 at Atlanta Motor Speedway. EPSN Classic has been running some old races and it makes me wince to see the pit crew running out there without firesuits or helmets as cars zip by.

NASCAR gives teams a 5 mph window on pit road speed, so if pit road speed is 55 mph, you can go up to 60 mph without getting a penalty. If you go 60.1 mph, you are sent to the tail end of the longest line. So of course, the pit road speed is really 5 mph higher than what is stated because all the teams are trying to go as fast as possible without getting penalized.

Ideas

Tachometer

I would never suggest doing away with the pit road speed limit; however, there seem to be way too many inadvertant violations of that rule that have radicaly changed the makeup of the front runners. Many drivers use a tachometer with color-coded lights set to come on at predefined rpm values (see an example patent, or the picture below). But if someone on the crew sets the tach to light up at the wrong rpm, the team is pretty much out of luck — even if the driver was going below the rpm limit he was told to stay below.

Idea 1: Pit Road Rev Limiters.

Rev limiters kick in if the engine is rotating at a higher rate than a certain predetermined rotational speed – they electronically prevent the spark plugs from firing if the rpm limit is exceeded. Let NASCAR issue the chips the same way they issue the wings and transponders. Coming down pit road, the driver switches to the pit-road chip. The transponders already being used to track speed can be used to double check.

Now, there’s a catch here, which is that the rpm limit is associated with being in a particular gear, which is why you hear the crew chief tell the driver something like ’3400, 2nd gear’. At some tracks, drivers may want to come down pit road in second or in first, depending on whether they are coming down under green or yellow. Since you have two ignition boxes, you can only have one pit road speed chip. And, of course, that eliminates the ability of the engine tuner to use two rev limiting chips to protect the engine. They sometimes will use one for most of the race, with a second slightly higher-rpm chip in place for use over limited durations or at the very end of the race.

Idea 2 – Cockpit Information Center

NASCAR has the speeds from the transponder data. Is there any reason they can’t put a piece of electronics in the car that signals when the driver is approaching the pit road speed limit? Yellow-to-red LEDs? Or (heaven forbid) a digital display that only reads at and below the pit road speed limit?

The race-safe system allows a series director to throw one switch in the control center when the decision is made to wave the yellow flag. That switch activates a yellow light in every driver’s cockpit. Instead of being dependent on the spotter seeing the yellow flag and telling the driver, the racing series can tell the driver directly. There is no reason cars should be hitting those cars caught up in an accident ten seconds after the first accident happens.

The technology you’d need for an automated system that would turn on a light or display the speed when the driver is at pit road speed is not that much more complicated than the race-safe system. Get rid of the 5 mph allowance, which is an artifice anyway. Give the drivers a yellow light when they are within three mph and a red when they are within 1 mph of the pit road speed. The team will still provide an rpm reading to the driver. The first time the driver is coming down pit road and the lights come on at a rpm reading he’s not expecting, he’s going to say something to the team and hopefuly someone is going to realize that there may have been a screw up.

At the very least, have NASCAR report measured speeds for each car to the teams during the parade laps when they are ostensibly at pit road speed so teams can compare their calculations with reality. If there is something systematically wrong on either side (as there seemed to be in at least one Nationwide race in 2009), before the race is the time to find that out.

I understand pit road is supposed to be part of the strategy and the speed & dexterity of the pit crews is part of the race. Maintaining safety on pit road is the most important thing, but the spirit of the law is significantly more important than the letter of the law in this case. Being a fraction of a mph over the pit road speed limit ought not to take a driver out of contention for a win.