Was anyone wondering how Helio was so much better than anyone else at Texas?.....

....answer is simple, he and Penske cheated.

INDYCAR: Texas Winners Team Penske Fined, Lose Points

The precedent is clear in IndyCar now. Run an illegal car and all that will happen is you receive a token fine. Race position and points will still be yours. Why should I care about integrity of the individual races and the of the championship when IndyCar clearly doesn't? I don't pay very close attention to IndyCar anymore and whatever pull I have left in me to pay any attention to their joke of a series may have just left the building.

From the article you linked comes this:

Quote:

---

“Obviously we are very disappointed that the No. 3 car did not pass post-race inspection after Saturday’s race at Texas," he said. "The rule in question (14.6.6.14) states that the diffuser exit must measure 7.600.” After the race, ours was 7.575” because we neglected to tighten the braces that position the rear of the diffuser following pre-race inspection. The way Helio’s car raced did not provide any advantage as a lower diffuser height actually adds drag and reduces downforce.

"To ensure this is the case, we ran this configuration in the wind tunnel on Monday morning and found that the No. 3 car actually raced with three pounds less downforce and one pound more drag than what it would have had if we tightened the underwing braces properly.”

---

Hardly sounds like the infraction gave them any sort of advantage. But then I guess that fact wouldn't play into your "joke of a series" comment then would it?

Gary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

From the article you linked comes this:



Hardly sounds like the infraction gave them any sort of advantage. But then I guess that fact wouldn't play into your "joke of a series" comment then would it?

Gary

---

Gee Gary, why are you trying to bring facts into the discussion? Silly boy.
:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

From the article you linked comes this:



Hardly sounds like the infraction gave them any sort of advantage. But then I guess that fact wouldn't play into your "joke of a series" comment then would it?

Gary

---

If I took the word of the head of team Penske as gospel, then maybe you have point. But as they have vested interest in softening allegations they are cheats, something they seem to spend a fair amount of time in NASCAR doing also, I don't believe them. And just because Tim Cindric says it's so hardly makes that a fact, as you claim. Add to the fact that Helio spent the last half of the race driving in a league of his own, able to drive a consistent high line when he needed to when no else seemed able to do that consistently through a run makes it difficult to believe that he was hindered by his car being out of spec of the rules.

If you are going to include quotes, why not pick some others in the article.

Quote:

---

The value of running with the tunnel exits higher than permitted is certainly an advantage, according to one veteran engineer I spoke with.

"If you alter that exit height--if you raise it--you can definitely pick up extra downforce," he said. "There's a reason they define its height very tightly. Move it up even a little bit, and there's definitely a performance gain to be had."

---

Quote:

---

A similar technical violation occurred at TMS in 2012 after the car of race winner Justin Wilson was found to have a pair of aero pieces that were leftover from Indy (but disallowed for Texas) installed for the entire event. Like Castroneves, Wilson kept the win but he lost five driver points and his Dale Coyne Racing team was penalized $7000 for the offense.

Why a similar specification transgression 12 months later carried no driver penalty, yet came with a team fine that's five times what DCR received is rather curious

---

Two years in a row at Texas, the "winner" was driving an illegal car. Just the week before at Detroit in the first race, Jakes car was out of compliance, but he kept his position and points and the team paid token fine. There have been other incidents along these lines and this seems to be the way IndyCar deals with their rule breakers, keep their position and points and pay a small fine. So why have the rules at all? If not meaningfully enforced, then why would a team not cheat to gain victory, or high finish, if all that's going to happen is they have to pay a few thousand dollars in fines, but get to keep the spoils of cheating?

Sure, deflect this into me having an agenda and just trying to slag the series. IndyCar has long had a credibility problem. If you think this sort of thing helps that, then your entitled to your opinion. Personally, when the same race has successive "winners" that were driving illegal cars and they are allowed to keep their victory's, then it seems to me that it's races are somewhat of a joke and not to be taken very seriously. But as I said in my original post, if IndyCar doesn't take the integrity of it's races and championship seriously, then why should I? I'll just vote with my personal time and my eyeballs and find something better to do than to bother to watch any of their races.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

Gee Gary, why are you trying to bring facts into the discussion? Silly boy.
:p

---

He didn't.

I don't know what sort of significance the infraction had one way or the other,but IndyCar officials lack of meaningful enforcement of it's own rules is credibility issue that is bigger than actual offence of one team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DBell

If you are going to include quotes, why not pick some others in the article.

Quote:

---

"If you alter that exit height--if you raise it--you can definitely pick up extra downforce," he said. "There's a reason they define its height very tightly. Move it up even a little bit, and there's definitely a performance gain to be had."

---

---

How is that even pertinent to this discussion since Penske is being accused of, and admitting to, doing just the opposite.

Quote:

---

Running with the tunnels exits lower than allowed would reduce downforce--something that was already in short supply--and would have made the car more unstable. According to Penske Racing president Tim Cindric, that's exactly what happened.

---

I believe that is why Indycar ruled in the way they did. Had the team raised the exit height, giving Helio an advantage, I think the officials would have penalized him as well. But since the mistake actually gave him a disadvantage, they cut him some slack and fined the team for a rules violation.

I think, in this case that was the correct decision.

Gary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

Gee Gary, why are you trying to bring facts into the discussion? Silly boy.
:p

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DBell

He didn't.

---

Really, I didn't? I quoted a report from Tim Cindric that was printed on Indycar's own site and not disputed by Indycar. Do you really think Indycar would have posted, without comment, that note with the exact measurement's intact, if they, Indycar, disputed them. What more would you want for this to be considered "facts"?

Gary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DBell

Two years in a row at Texas, the "winner" was driving an illegal car. Just the week before at Detroit in the first race, Jakes car was out of compliance, but he kept his position and points and the team paid token fine. There have been other incidents along these lines and this seems to be the way IndyCar deals with their rule breakers, keep their position and points and pay a small fine. So why have the rules at all? If not meaningfully enforced, then why would a team not cheat to gain victory, or high finish, if all that's going to happen is they have to pay a few thousand dollars in fines, but get to keep the spoils of cheating?

---

So much hyperbole. Breaking the rules and cheating are two different things. Penske was caught breaking a rule, they were not caught cheating. Cheating carries with it the intent to gain advantage. Since even the other "veteran engineer" quoted in the article said that what the team did was a disadvantage, it could hardly be termed cheating.

With this, I am most assuredly NOT commenting on the other transgressions that have occurred because I don't have the facts in front of me. I agree there needs to be consistency in applying the rules. But I think there needs to be different penalties for cheating versus rules violations.


Gary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

How is that even pertinent to this discussion since Penske is being accused of, and admitting to, doing just the opposite.



I believe that is why Indycar ruled in the way they did. Had the team raised the exit height, giving Helio an advantage, I think the officials would have penalized him as well. But since the mistake actually gave him a disadvantage, they cut him some slack and fined the team for a rules violation.

I think, in this case that was the correct decision.

Gary

---

That quote is pertinent because all IndyCar has said is that it is out of compliance with :

Quote:

---

Rule 14.6.6.14, which states "The exit of the underwing height is 7.600 inches with a tolerance of plus 0.050 inches and minus 0.000 inches" was violated by an unspecified amount.

---

An unspecified amount, it does not say whether that amount was plus or minus. Tim Cindric says it's minus, but that's his statement on behalf of the team. If IndyCar were to confirm that, then I would take it as fact. Whether what Cindric says is correct or not isn't the issue. The issue is that IndyCar has let a car that was out of spec in a crucial aerodynamic area, in a oval race where aero and downforce is everything, be declared the winner. Whether Penske meant to be outside the spec or whether it was an accident is unimportant, the fact is they were. In many other forms of motor sport, they would have been given, at minimum, a time penalty added. Maybe I'm in a minority on this, but to me, this taints the race, and the championship itself, with these types of rulings. I tend to believe if they did put some real bite in enforcing their rules with some meaningful penalties that hurt , then the teams would be much more careful about putting a car in the race that isn't legal. A little bit of money doesn't hurt Penske much, not when they get to keep the win and driver points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

Really, I didn't? I quoted a report from Tim Cindric that was printed on Indycar's own site and not disputed by Indycar. Do you really think Indycar would have posted, without comment, that note with the exact measurement's intact, if they, Indycar, disputed them. What more would you want for this to be considered "facts"?

Gary

---

An unspecified amount, it does not say whether that amount was plus or minus. Tim Cindric says it's minus, but that's his statement on behalf of the team. If IndyCar were to confirm that, then I would take it as fact.

A statement from Cindric and an assumption by you on behalf of IndyCar doesn't make what Cindric said fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DBell

An unspecified amount, it does not say whether that amount was plus or minus. Tim Cindric says it's minus, but that's his statement on behalf of the team. If IndyCar were to confirm that, then I would take it as fact.

A statement from Cindric and an assumption by you on behalf of IndyCar doesn't make what Cindric said fact.

---

Never mind the fact that all of this was posted on Indycar's own website without them disputing what Tim said, right? I guess you want notarized copies of the inspection report. Whatever.

Gary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

So much hyperbole. Breaking the rules and cheating are two different things. Penske was caught breaking a rule, they were not caught cheating. Cheating carries with it the intent to gain advantage. Since even the other "veteran engineer" quoted in the article said that what the team did was a disadvantage, it could hardly be termed cheating.

With this, I am most assuredly NOT commenting on the other transgressions that have occurred because I don't have the facts in front of me. I agree there needs to be consistency in applying the rules. But I think there needs to be different penalties for cheating versus rules violations.


Gary

---

Did you read the article? The "veteran engineer" was quoted on what happens if the car is on the plus side of being out of compliance, which is clearly an advantage. "VE" says nothing about the minus side of being out of compliance.

Last years penalty with Wilson's car is in the article and part of what I quoted in post #4. for the Jakes/Detroit incident:

Quote:

---

INDYCAR announced penalties following the June 1-2 races at The Raceway at Belle Isle Park.

The No. 16 Rahal Letterman Lanigan Racing entry driven by James Jakes was fined a total of $10,000 for violating Rule 14.6.4.6 and 14.6.4.9. Both violations were found during post-qualifying inspection for Race 1. The team was fined $5,000 for each violation.
14.6.4.6 (Rear Wing): The rear wing mainplane must be set at 0.0 degrees plus or minus 0.50 degrees.
14.6.4.9 (Rear Wing): The mainplane trailing edge height, as measured from the chassis reference plane, is 28.060 inches plus or minus 0.050 inches.

---

link:INDYCAR levies Belle Isle post-race penalties

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

Never mind the fact that all of this was posted on Indycar's own website without them disputing what Tim said, right? I guess you want notarized copies of the inspection report. Whatever.

Gary

---

A simple confirmation from IndyCar on how specifically the car was out of compliance would suffice. Funny, you're the one who made a point of something being a fact and when called about it, you state your assumption, put it into the equation, and call it a fact. Whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DBell

A statement from Cindric and an assumption by you on behalf of IndyCar doesn't make what Cindric said fact.

---

Logic and fairness dictate we apply the same reasoning to your position :-

"A statement from an unreferenced anonymous source and an assumption by you doesn't make what Veteran Engineer said fact".

Both positions must be treated equally. If you dismiss Cindric's position using the quoted argument, you must allow the same argument to be applied to your position. Refusing to do so exposes bias.

C hip, A ndretti, R oger, T eams are basically running the show and they can do whatever they want. Fans? They just argue about it -- probably best to just let it go.

I see this thread has "The Usual Suspects." :p :