Rules - why have them???

[EatMyShortsRacing]

Well I have stuck my nose in a couple of issues recently and made some lighthearted and some not so lightheearted comments.... Probably time to take this issue a little further...

This is an Internatinal forum covering many different associations but the one thing that seems to be lacking is coherent rules.

Recently there has been some debates within associations about rules for certain classes. Whilst I appreciate everyone is entitled to their opinions and also members of their respective associations ultimately are responsible for their own rules and regulations, it seems that some of the debates have consequences outside their own patch which are not being considered.

In reality there is no real 'World' governing body for boating. This means rules can change from country to country and in the case of the US more than one governing body.

Now how have these rules evolved??? Well generally it seems 2 styles of racing exist. I will generalise here and call them European and American.

European being based on NAVIGA (now my understanding of NAVIGA and its history is sketchy so please feel free to correct me - not shoot me down) which was largely based on 'multi-boat' style racing. Submerged drive boats required to race an M or W shaped course. As well other events like steering, NAVIGA triangle and speed events have been included in these rules.

American racing did not follow this style of competition and became largely an oval racing competition. Each one of these styles of racing developed rules and regulations along the way. I am unsure of the NAMBA IMPBA history so I will leave that alone for the time being.

Australia started out based on NAVIGA and multi-boat racing was THE main form of RC boat racing in Australia up until around 1980. Around the late 70s the more exotic US style boats began to appear and soon Oval Racing US style took over. As we had not grown up with oval racing we needed to base our rules off an established competition. I believe our rules were largely based on NAMBA rules (again correct me if I am wrong). Being that most of our boats were then sourced from the US this made sense.

With a lot of countries basing their rules and regulations on the US rules there is pretty much some sort of standardisation over the workd in most classes. This means that boaters all over the world can be reasonably confident that if they take their boats to another country or another association that a) their boat will be legal to race and B) everyone has the same performance limitations both in engine and boat configuration so it will be a level playing field.

Now comes the issues..... As in any racing innovation and interpretation of rules to gain advantage is natural, so the rules must therefore become tighter so the spirit of the class is not compromised. Such limitations in a class are designed to bring the racing closer together and the limitations may be on engine capacity or boat configuration. The rules in general are not cosmetic (with the exception of scale and sport classes) so they are there to provide performance limitations to promote closer racing within classes. When one association changes their rules without these considerations they remove the universality of that class. The level playing field no longer applies to the boater outside their association and also when they go to race outside their own association their boats become potentially illegal.

The 2 issues coming to mind are the push to allow twin 1.0 boats to run and more recently strut placement on sport boats....

Both these changes are basically increasing the potential performance within those classes. Why???? Especially in the sport classes where the idea is to provide performance limitations to promote closer racing!!!

So the same reasoning for having struts on the transom for sport boats should naturally flow through to scale boats??? Lets see how many people scream if you suddenly allow struts on the transom for all scale boats!!!! Some might say this is a ridiculous parallel to draw but if the argument stands up for sport boats that "its like the real boats" surely the same can be said for 1/8 scale???

What is really needed is 1 world body to define all the rules and associations regulate further to cater for local conditions (noise limits etc).... Now this wont happen in the near future if at all, but in the meantime associations should only consider rule changes that work to making boating across associations easier, not harder. Associations do need to consider the rest of the world in their decision making process.

Hey can you imagine if Australia decided to adopt a 'control fuel' for oval racing?? Now lets assume that we were all for it and all our national competitions were limited to 10% nitro. How many Americans would come race???? Now what sort of disadvantage would US boaters be at??? Given that we all learned over time to optimise our engines for 10% and there is no way US guys could prepare to be competitive.... is that reasonable for us to do? Is it still attractive for US boaters to come to Australia to race?

Now imagine there are two Australian associations and one only runs 10% nitro and the other unlimited nitro... Which one are the US racers going to go to?

Answer? The one they are more likely to be competitive in.... the one where the regulations are the same as they race.... the one where their boats will be on a level playing field....

I hope people consider this when wanting to change rules in classes.. try to think outside your own back yard and consider the bigger picture....

 

[Don Ferrette]

I hope people consider this when wanting to change rules in classes.. try to think outside your own back yard and consider the bigger picture....

114765[/snapback]

​

Unfortunately there are some who can't see past their own best interests............ <_<

 

[Joe_Knesek]

Well I have stuck my nose in a couple of issues recently and made some lighthearted and some not so lightheearted comments....  Probably time to take this issue a little further...
This is an Internatinal forum covering many different associations but the one thing that seems to be lacking is coherent rules.

Recently there has been some debates within associations about rules for certain classes.  Whilst I appreciate everyone is entitled to their opinions and also members of their respective associations ultimately are responsible for their own rules and regulations, it seems that some of the debates have consequences outside their own patch which are not being considered.

In reality there is no real 'World' governing body for boating.  This means rules can change from country to country and in the case of the US more than one governing body.

Now how have these rules evolved??? Well generally it seems 2 styles of racing exist.  I will generalise here and call them European and American. 

European being based on NAVIGA (now my understanding of NAVIGA and its history is sketchy so please feel free to correct me - not shoot me down) which was largely based on 'multi-boat' style racing.  Submerged drive boats required to race an M or W shaped course.  As well other events like steering, NAVIGA triangle and speed events have been included in these rules.

American racing did not follow this style of competition and became largely an oval racing competition.  Each one of these styles of racing developed rules and regulations along the way.  I am unsure of the NAMBA IMPBA history so I will leave that alone for the time being.

Australia started out based on NAVIGA and multi-boat racing was THE main form of RC boat racing in Australia up until around 1980.  Around the late 70s the more exotic US style boats began to appear and soon Oval Racing US style took over.  As we had not grown up with oval racing we needed to base our rules off an established competition.  I believe our rules were largely based on NAMBA rules (again correct me if I am wrong).  Being that most of our boats were then sourced from the US this made sense.

With a lot of countries basing their rules and regulations on the US rules there is pretty much some sort of standardisation over the workd in most classes.  This means that boaters all over the world can be reasonably confident that if they take their boats to another country or another association that a) their boat will be legal to race and B) everyone has the same performance limitations both in engine and boat configuration so it will be a level playing field.

Now comes the issues.....  As in any racing innovation and interpretation of rules to gain advantage is natural, so the rules must therefore become tighter so the spirit of the class is not compromised.  Such limitations in a class are designed to bring the racing closer together and the limitations may be on engine capacity or boat configuration.  The rules in general are not cosmetic (with the exception of scale and sport classes) so they are there to provide performance limitations to promote closer racing within classes.  When one association changes their rules without these considerations they remove the universality of that class.  The level playing field no longer applies to the boater outside their association and also when they go to race outside their own association their boats become potentially illegal.

The 2 issues coming to mind are the push to allow twin 1.0 boats to run and more recently strut placement on sport boats....

Both these changes are basically increasing the potential performance within those classes.  Why????  Especially in the sport classes where the idea is to provide performance limitations to promote closer racing!!! 

So the same reasoning for having struts on the transom for sport boats should naturally flow through to scale boats???  Lets see how many people scream if you suddenly allow struts on the transom for all scale boats!!!!  Some might say this is a ridiculous parallel to draw but if the argument stands up for sport boats that "its like the real boats" surely the same can be said for 1/8 scale???

What is really needed is 1 world body to define all the rules and associations regulate further to cater for local conditions (noise limits etc)....  Now this wont happen in the near future if at all, but in the meantime associations should only consider rule changes that work to making boating across associations easier, not harder.  Associations do need to consider the rest of the world in their decision making process.

Hey can you imagine if Australia decided to adopt a 'control fuel' for oval racing??  Now lets assume that we were all for it and all our national competitions were limited to 10% nitro.  How many Americans would come race????  Now what sort of disadvantage would US boaters be at??? Given that we all learned over time to optimise our engines for 10% and there is no way US guys could prepare to be competitive....  is that reasonable for us to do?  Is it still attractive for US boaters to come to Australia to race?

Now imagine there are two Australian associations and one only runs 10% nitro and the other unlimited nitro... Which one are the US racers going to go to? 

Answer?  The one they are more likely to be competitive in.... the one where the regulations are the same as they race.... the one where their boats will be on a level playing field....

I hope people consider this when wanting to change rules in classes.. try to think outside your own back yard and consider the bigger picture....

114765[/snapback]

​

The Sport 20 class is one of the newer classes for IMPBA and as with all new classes the rules may need tweaking. It's no differant than the Db rule change.

I do not think the strut placement rule is focused just on performance. It's more about making the design and build easier.

 

[Piston1]

You are absolutely right Don, unfortunately there are some who can't see past their own best interests............

 

[Ron Olson]

Great article Craig!

Let's start with the Sport 20, 40 and 1/8th scale hydro issues. The idea is to get the best performance out of what the parameters that have been established. If the strut has to be under the hull and not behind it, get your best out of that, like it or not. If you don't like the rules, don't build a boat for that class.

The noise issue. With us trying for the 92 dB or whatever level, that may be OK for us but if you held a race in a neighborhood, the homeowners might think that is isn't quiet enough for them and the next thing that you know, the police could be called in and shut the race down. They could care less what our standards are.

The founding fathers of the organizations limited the maximum engine size at that time to 1.8 cu. in., so if people want to run twin 1.0's or larger then they need to have the rules changed. If a manufacturer comes out with for instance a 1.3 engine, do we have to cater to them then change the limit to 2.6 cu. inches?

Some people in the IMPBA would like to see a class for the ProBoat 1/8 scale Miss Bud's. Why? Just because they decided to build a boat that they knew wasn't legal?

A world-wide sanctioning body? No thanks. We have enough trouble trying to get the smaller sanctioning bodies trying to keep just their membership happy, imagine how things would be when all of them were joined. Yes, there would be many pro's but I would feel that they would outweigh the con's then we would be back at where we are now.

The nitro limit seems to me to be more of a cost issue. Nitro is cheaper here in the US that it is in Europe. If there was a limit here to say 30%, you know that there would be people trying to run 50%. Trying to keep that in check would be a nightmare.

What if someone came up with a new NASCAR? No restrictor plate racing, wider tires, larger engines and more body mods? I think that you'd see a lot of teams making the move. If an organization wants more members then they have to listen to the membership.

 

[Preston_Hall]

I would think that rules are generated largely by the environment around them. As Ron points out, the cost of nitro as an example. Also, some have to race in much less than ideal conditions so their rules will reflect that. Can you see a B Tunnel, or anything other than a large cat or mono, racing in salt water with 4" chop? That's basically my thinking.

Strut placement on scales/sports? That is one of the most "penny pinching" issues. I know why it is there but big deal. If "we" want to keep somewhat of a comformity then the first thing to be looked at is why "other" hydros have to race with riggers. Generally speaking, the riggers blow away anything else on the pond. In other areas of the world a rigger may not stand a chance due to water conditions and the reverse may be true. Anyway, that is the biggest problem with classes. When I started boating cats were the most popular hull due to speed, handling, and ease of setup. Once the riggers were refined the cats were blown away and eventually went away. So before we try to organize the world we need to organize our own backyards.

 

[Marc Pagé]

Hi there, It's a interesting subject, international standards and organization standards are a good way to make life easier and more interoperable...that's mean less $$$ invest and more people understanding each other! The planet earth is becoming a big village, if your preocupation is only about your family....you'll soon be alone...You got to be aware of your members (truth!) but you got to be aware of the others that aren't in your circle and would like to join....and it's a good opportunity to remind you some Nascar facts....

Do you know that they had opened the door to Jap's car...yes they did...and for about 10 years they refused it, years after years...also, each year they have to reevaluate a lot's of rules like the restrictor plate...and so...things are changing...

'If the strut has to be under the hull and not behind it, get your best out of that, like it or not. If you don't like the rules, don't build a boat for that class'

Humm... with that we still sure be on a flat earth trying to burn alive the witches and devils that doesn't think that way....

Yes you must have RULES but be open to the others around your circle who makes differents moves to help or try to make things easier or simply different...

As a example why the position strut subject is so scared from american boat associations...are they scared that the old and there biggest float of rcboats will be beaten by some new, different, and the minority ??? Why these peoples votes against rule like that if it's not fear instinct? Don't forget that this is not a so serious think, it's only a game and the most important thing it's not to win but to be with the most racers you can be. Does the changing of this rule will make you lost runner??? If yes, what kind of gamers are these if they left the playground? Were they really playing or there to win plastic award?

Some say the rules are voted by the members....how can we become a member if our 50 Quebec, Canadian rcboats aren't accepted? However almost all of our boats became from a reputated engineer who makes real hydroplane...

 

[lohring]

The NAMBA system is to allow the individual districts and clubs to race using local rules. We hope they will use the national rules as a guide. When a district has a rule change, a class, or a new style of racing that they feel other areas would support, they can submit it to everyone for a vote. If the proposal passes, it becomes part of the national rules. The national rules are only manditory for the NAMBA Nationals.

I have raced California style (with local flavor supplied by Kevin Taylor) in Las Vegas and IMPBA style in Florida. Both were NAMBA sanctioned races with long but different traditions, and both were equally fun. The NAMBA Nationals has their own traditions that are not really written down in the rule book and are equally fun. I wouldn't miss a team marathon (really interesting since the Seducer team has been challenging the Californians) for the world.

Lohring Miller

 

[EatMyShortsRacing]

The Sport 20 class is one of the newer classes for IMPBA and as with all new classes the rules may need tweaking. It's no differant than the Db rule change.

No different to the Db rule???? The Db rule is largely influenced by external factors, like authorities etc... and yet again another example of people only thinking about their small patch of the world... The reality with noise is we all have to tow the line...

I do not think the strut placement rule is focused just on performance. It's more about making the design and build easier.

Thats the argument that comes from the performance people!!! Let that rule in and watch the ways people exploit it even further....

 

[Joe_Knesek]

The Sport 20 class is one of the newer classes for IMPBA and as with all new classes the rules may need tweaking. It's no differant than the Db rule change.

No different to the Db rule???? The Db rule is largely influenced by external factors, like authorities etc... and yet again another example of people only thinking about their small patch of the world... The reality with noise is we all have to tow the line...

I do not think the strut placement rule is focused just on performance. It's more about making the design and build easier.

Thats the argument that comes from the performance people!!! Let that rule in and watch the ways people exploit it even further....

The reality is that the "performance people" will figure out how to make the boat faster than the under achievers regardless of the strut placement. Racing in all forms is defined by ones creativity. Ever hear the maxim "Only those who can see the invisible can predict future success."

 

[EatMyShortsRacing]

The reality is that the "performance people" will figure out how to make the boat faster than the under achievers regardless of the strut placement. Racing in all forms is defined by ones creativity. Ever hear the maxim "Only those who can see the invisible can predict future success."

So? Boundaries were set.... now you want to run outside of those boundaries?

Hey I got an idea!!!! We will call the NFL and suggest that a player be allowed to carry the ball over the side line for 10 yards!!! Yeah I know there is this boundary line all the way along the field but our guys can get around defenders better if we can carry the ball out of bounds for a few yards... its for the advancement of football!!! Its creative!!!

Or lets just go back to the motto "if it aint broke, dont fix it..."

Yes I am getting more cynical as I go along with this subject.... but NOBODY HAS COME UP WITH A GOOD ENOUGH REASON!!!! One that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks...

C'mon... 2 issues... the twin 1.0 issue and the changing of strut placement on sport boats.... lets see someone really think about these and satisfy 2 criteria....

1/ A good enough reason to make a change

2/ What the drawbacks are and why they are negligible in comparison to the benefits????

Without satisfying both those issues you dont have a case!!!!

 

[Joe_Knesek]

The reality is that the "performance people" will figure out how to make the boat faster than the under achievers regardless of the strut placement. Racing in all forms is defined by ones creativity. Ever hear the maxim "Only those who can see the invisible can predict future success."

So? Boundaries were set.... now you want to run outside of those boundaries?

Hey I got an idea!!!! We will call the NFL and suggest that a player be allowed to carry the ball over the side line for 10 yards!!! Yeah I know there is this boundary line all the way along the field but our guys can get around defenders better if we can carry the ball out of bounds for a few yards... its for the advancement of football!!! Its creative!!!

Or lets just go back to the motto "if it aint broke, dont fix it..."

Yes I am getting more cynical as I go along with this subject.... but NOBODY HAS COME UP WITH A GOOD ENOUGH REASON!!!! One that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks...

C'mon... 2 issues... the twin 1.0 issue and the changing of strut placement on sport boats.... lets see someone really think about these and satisfy 2 criteria....

1/ A good enough reason to make a change

2/ What the drawbacks are and why they are negligible in comparison to the benefits????

Without satisfying both those issues you dont have a case!!!!

I'll take a shot at it. For a new boater, it's easier to align the strut when it's bolted on the back making it track correctly. If they misalign the strut, the boat will not run correctly and the new boater may quit before they get it right. Because the issue is already up for vote and all IMPBA members have the right to make the change for whatever reason they have.

 

[Propjockey]

I neither race nor own a sport 20, so the outcome really doesn't affect me either way. So consider this a 'view from the outside' if you will.

First, I'm wondering. Is there a big difference in performance with respect to strut placement? Will "hanging it off the transom" make the boat faster to the point where the "underhung" boat is no longer competitive?

Second, it seems to me there is a gob more choices of hardware that bolts to the transom.

Third, if the intent of the class is to emulate full scale boats, and there are full scale boats with transom mounted hardware.....?

 

[dwb2620]

When I first entered this hobby back 1985, I wondered why do they place the Strut under the hull on the sport 40 boats? My thinking was that is so "OLD FASHIONED!" I still think that today and nobody has given a good reason as to why we shouldn't be able to mount them on the transom. The usual reply is that "they will be riggers". Well I don't see how that is because we are talking about a whole different designed boat.

What about monos? They have the strut mounted on the transom? You don't hear people say "they will be monos!" <_<

This subject just makes me shake my head in disbelief that people can be so polarized on this issue. I say mount the strut whereever you want. The boat will still be a Sport 40 "design".

One more thing. I race Sport 40, and I HATE having the strut under the boat.

My 2 cents worth!

David

 

[EatMyShortsRacing]

The limitation on scale and sport boats for the strut placement is to limit the pace of the boat. These boats have dimensional restrictions to even up the competition. By allowing the strut to be moved back you increase the footprint of the boat and therefore the stability. Those with existing boats are immediately disadvantaged. No one has really addressed this issue!!!!! Just a 'there's no real difference...' so why make the rule in the first place??? BECAUSE THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.. If I was one of the people who had a sport boat and this rule was changed I would be asking WHY??? Why is it of little concern that my boat is now at a disadvantage in a so called controlled class??????

Also when you take your boats to other races outside your association they will be deemed illegal. The Race director would be well within his rights to not allow you to race it.

All this crap about available hardware is starting to be annoying too.... all you do is take a normal strut and install the strut mounts as if the Transom was inside the boat on the hull..... Alignment ??? again way too easy.... and it even allows you to put some correction for propwalk in....

So you want to copy real boats???? then how bout we meet in the middle and you make a 'true to scale' transom mount????

 

[Joe_Knesek]

Craig, just curious how many IMPBA races you attend each year? Did you ever consider that if the rule is passed, all you have to do is move the strut and cover up the hole in the bottom of the boat? Coupled with your comments about changing the rules to regulate fuel to 10% clearly points out that you just want to bring American racing down to your level even though few Americans will ever race in your country.

When in Rome, do as Romans do.

 

[Don Ferrette]

The whole point Craig is trying to make is to think outside your own little sandbox. Unfortunately the IMPBA seems to talk out both sides of it's mouth sometimes. In one instance there is much chatter about promoting unity among boaters with inter-organizational racing, scheduling big events so they don't interfere with each other and the like. Then we (IMPBA) start talking about rule changes that have a broad impact with really no other reason than because a couple people want it. Rest assured it's a safe bet that those few who are doing the most bitchin' for the changes have no intention of ever racing in NAMBA, APBA or any international events. And no performance advantage? That is the biggest bunch of bulls#!t I have ever heard. If there was no advantage then nobody would want it, period! <_<

 

[EatMyShortsRacing]

Craig, just curious how many IMPBA races you attend each year? Did you ever consider that if the rule is passed, all you have to do is move the strut and cover up the hole in the bottom of the boat? Coupled with your comments about changing the rules to regulate fuel to 10% clearly points out that you just want to bring American racing down to your level even though few Americans will ever race in your country.

When in Rome, do as Romans do.

I have only been to one race, Detroit 2003 Internats. Sorta hard to race there when flying to the US takes 13 hours.... plus connections...

10% Nitro was to illustrate a point....

And yes I would love to carve some extra holes in the back of a sport 40 if I had one... Ask anyone who has spent time on a quality paint job on their boat??????

Bring American racing down???? No I am stating how you guys are potentially isolating yourselves from the rest of the RC Boat racing world with that attitude.... Your loss more than ours... And yes only a few Americans will come to Australia.... Me? I have been over to the US to race 4 times. 3 NAMBA and 1 IMPBA Nats. I will make that trip again... but these sorts of decisions inside your association seriously would tip me over to running NAMBA if everything else (transport, location etc) was equal.

Oh and guess what??? My boats seem to be legal wherever they go....

Yours if you decide to change???? Buhbye now.... just put it back in the trailer...

 

[Grub]

Craig, just curious how many IMPBA races you attend each year?

16 of us Aussies went to the NAMBA Nats last year and 12 to the Internats. Not only did we race but we supported all the manufacturers and clubs as we bought a heap of stuff including hulls, motors and hardware plus lots of food from the canteens, drinks and alcohol. Don't forget we also paid our entry fees for the event plus membership fees to race.

Why should we go if we can't race with our boats? It's not only IMPBA that loses, its the manufacturers and the host club as well.

.................though few Americans will ever race in your country.

But there are some Americans that have been over here and will be coming back.

Team Ozzy may be there again next year.

Grub

 

[Joe_Knesek]

Craig, just curious how many IMPBA races you attend each year?

16 of us Aussies went to the NAMBA Nats last year and 12 to the Internats. Not only did we race but we supported all the manufacturers and clubs as we bought a heap of stuff including hulls, motors and hardware plus lots of food from the canteens, drinks and alcohol. Don't forget we also paid our entry fees for the event plus membership fees to race.

Why should we go if we can't race with our boats? It's not only IMPBA that loses, its the manufacturers and the host club as well.

.................though few Americans will ever race in your country.

But there are some Americans that have been over here and will be coming back.

Team Ozzy may be there again next year.

Grub

And when you come over, did you run 10% nitro? Remember the rule is not banning you from running a strut the way you have it. My point is that I see nothing wrong with changing the rules if the majority of the voting members are in favor of the change.

If I planned a trip to your country, I would expect to play by your rules unless they required me to drive in my underwear. That would be a bad scene! I realy do not care one way or another and plan to build a Sport 20 this winter I'm surely going to take the opertunity to vote on the matter.