The BOAT

[Don Ferrette]

Why didn't you or Don or one of your other cronies file a protest as per the rule book at that time? Why go online and name names where the person in question cannot respond? And how is it that IMPBA allowed a supposedly illegal boat to be a record holder?

If anyone is interested in photos, I will be glad to pass them onto you.

David Preusse

District 4 Scale Director.

I suggest before you post off you re-read what I posted & get your facts straight. I did not suggest or mention any names, only that there are multiple incorrect versions of this boat out there which there are. So don't try to imply otherwise, are you trying to start something with me? And I've seen pictures like you speak of that were taken during practice sessions not qualifying or racing. You do realize they let more than one boat out to practice right? Not to mention it's real easy to have any two bit photo shop edit the wings, or other things, off (which I have seen people do). There are far more knowledgeable people who were around, or part of, the single race in question that know better than suspect photos ( I have had phone conversations with one about this very race). <_<

 

[Cathy]

Why didn't you or Don or one of your other cronies file a protest as per the rule book at that time? Why go online and name names where the person in question cannot respond? And how is it that IMPBA allowed a supposedly illegal boat to be a record holder?

If anyone is interested in photos, I will be glad to pass them onto you.

David Preusse

District 4 Scale Director.

I suggest before you shoot your mouth off you get your facts straight. I did not suggest or mention ANYONE'S name, only that there are multiple incorrect versions of this boat out there which there are. Don't you dare imply otherwise trying to start some s#!t with me! And I've seen pictures like you speak of that were taken during practice sessions not qualifying or racing. You do realize they let more than one boat out to practice. Not to mention it's real easy to have any two bit photo shop edit the wings, or other things, off (which I have seen people do).

Don,

You are correct. YOU did not mention or suggest ANYONE'S name. Your post is proper and probably true.

What I take exception to is the comments that "CARL" made in response to your post. Which is why I included Carl's quote in my post and not yours. I was not responding to your post, I was responding to Carl's. Carl has accused GP (obviously Gary Preusse as mentioned earlier in this post) of cheating.

One more thing, Don, I would like to know your opinion of an online post that accuses someone of vauge cheating when that someone is not online to respond.

Cathy

 

[Don Ferrette]

Why didn't you or Don or one of your other cronies file a protest as per the rule book at that time? Why go online and name names where the person in question cannot respond? And how is it that IMPBA allowed a supposedly illegal boat to be a record holder?

If anyone is interested in photos, I will be glad to pass them onto you.

David Preusse

District 4 Scale Director.

I suggest before you shoot your mouth off you get your facts straight. I did not suggest or mention ANYONE'S name, only that there are multiple incorrect versions of this boat out there which there are. Don't you dare imply otherwise trying to start some s#!t with me! And I've seen pictures like you speak of that were taken during practice sessions not qualifying or racing. You do realize they let more than one boat out to practice. Not to mention it's real easy to have any two bit photo shop edit the wings, or other things, off (which I have seen people do).

Don,

You are correct. YOU did not mention or suggest ANYONE'S name. Your post is proper and probably true.

What I take exception to is the comments that "CARL" made in response to your post. Which is why I included Carl's quote in my post and not yours. I was not responding to your post, I was responding to Carl's. Carl has accused GP (obviously Gary Preusse as mentioned earlier in this post) of cheating.

One more thing, Don, I would like to know your opinion of an online post that accuses someone of vauge cheating when that someone is not online to respond.

Cathy

Well I guess this is a vague apology? But you did drag my name into it- "Why didn't you or Don or one of your other cronies...." with you reply to Carl's post. Who am I talking to here anyway? David or Cathy??? :blink:

I went back & turned down the flame a little in my post also FWIW.

As for on line posting? Well I guess it's no different than something getting printed in a newspaper that another didn't subscribe to. There is no real answer ............................ :blink:

 

[Scooter12195]

WHEW!

I thought that Cat was gonna go Ballistic and do the Postal Thing there for a minute.

My apologies up front to any public servants that work in the USPS Dept of our Government.

Scott

 

[Cathy]

Why didn't you or Don or one of your other cronies file a protest as per the rule book at that time? Why go online and name names where the person in question cannot respond? And how is it that IMPBA allowed a supposedly illegal boat to be a record holder?

If anyone is interested in photos, I will be glad to pass them onto you.

David Preusse

District 4 Scale Director.

I suggest before you shoot your mouth off you get your facts straight. I did not suggest or mention ANYONE'S name, only that there are multiple incorrect versions of this boat out there which there are. Don't you dare imply otherwise trying to start some s#!t with me! And I've seen pictures like you speak of that were taken during practice sessions not qualifying or racing. You do realize they let more than one boat out to practice. Not to mention it's real easy to have any two bit photo shop edit the wings, or other things, off (which I have seen people do).

Don,

You are correct. YOU did not mention or suggest ANYONE'S name. Your post is proper and probably true.

What I take exception to is the comments that "CARL" made in response to your post. Which is why I included Carl's quote in my post and not yours. I was not responding to your post, I was responding to Carl's. Carl has accused GP (obviously Gary Preusse as mentioned earlier in this post) of cheating.

One more thing, Don, I would like to know your opinion of an online post that accuses someone of vauge cheating when that someone is not online to respond.

Cathy

Well I guess this is a vague apology? But you did drag my name into it- "Why didn't you or Don or one of your other cronies...." with you reply to Carl's post. Who am I talking to here anyway? David or Cathy??? :blink:

I went back & turned down the flame a little in my post also FWIW.

As for on line posting? Well I guess it's no different than something getting printed in a newspaper that another didn't subscribe to. There is no real answer ............................ :blink:

Don,

David and I post together. Two computers and several phone calls do the trick. We have been married for so long that doing things together as one is normal to us. So I guess you are talking to both of us. Sorry for that confusion.

The validity of the photos and where/when they were taken may be a good point for someone questioning the legality of the boat in a proper manner. I mentioned your name in the protest question because (1)

I think you are knowledgeable enough in scale matters to be in a position to formally protest a record breaking or winning boat if you felt it warranted at that time and (2) because Carl (whom I don't think I know) was responding to your post where he specifically mentioned initials of a well known long time boater.

Cathy & David

 

[Don Ferrette]

Don,

David and I post together. Two computers and several phone calls do the trick. We have been married for so long that doing things together as one is normal to us. So I guess you are talking to both of us. Sorry for that confusion.

The validity of the photos and where/when they were taken may be a good point for someone questioning the legality of the boat in a proper manner. I mentioned your name in the protest question because (1)

I think you are knowledgeable enough in scale matters to be in a position to formally protest a record breaking or winning boat if you felt it warranted at that time and (2) because Carl (whom I don't think I know) was responding to your post where he specifically mentioned initials of a well known long time boater.

Cathy & David

Well I guess you just don't realize how "you or Don or one of your other cronies..." sounds. :blink:

ANY member of the IMPBA in good standing has the right to file a protest of any sorts as long as they follow proper procedure as outlined in the rule book. B)

And it's quite possible that Carl saw the pictures that were circulating the 'net after the first record run with the "questionable" & "lack of certain parts" on the Boat. I saw the pics as well & have them saved somewhere. They were sent to me by a couple different individuals who had formed very strong opinions. I felt obligated at the time to forward those pics & info to Steve Ball our National Scale Director as that was his call to make..................

 

[P THOMAS]

HA What a bunch the only fuzzy picture I refered to is the one I have.

 

[Mike McKnight]

Man this is such a pain in the fanny of an issue but I had to deal with when I took over as Scale Chairman in NAMBA District 9. I have seen a couple of photos of it running with other boats as well. Here's the thing though. I did a lot of research and burned up a ton of phone time on this and the thing that keeps coming up is that the boat did practice without wings. That was I believe when they arrived late to the race on Friday. The boat did not become officially registered with APBA to race until Saturday and they used the first heat to qualify and at that time it did have the duct tape numbers and it DID have tailfeathers in the actual race.

I even called people I knew back in the 80's when I raced full size outboard hydros that were APBA officials and most everyone connected with inboards and the bigger hydros including the Unlimiteds said the same thing. That it was not a registered boat until Saturday. The way the NAMBA rules read is: "The full sized boat must have been registered with the APBA" and "The REGISTERED boat must have made at least one verifiable test run in the water".

I'm not sure how IMPBAs rules read but based on our rules and the information I collected I chose not to allow the boat to run in this district without wings. Even though the boat had been run previous to my term as Scale Chairman and it had also been allowed to run at the NAMBA Nationals without wings. The boat in question also had other issues like pipe concealment issues that caused me not to allow it run but that driver was informed he would not be allowed to run without wings and taped numbers.

 

[Don Ferrette]

Man this is such a pain in the fanny of an issue but I had to deal with when I took over as Scale Chairman in NAMBA District 9. I have seen a couple of photos of it running with other boats as well. Here's the thing though. I did a lot of research and burned up a ton of phone time on this and the thing that keeps coming up is that the boat did practice without wings. That was I believe when they arrived late to the race on Friday. The boat did not become officially registered with APBA to race until Saturday and they used the first heat to qualify and at that time it did have the duct tape numbers and it DID have tailfeathers in the actual race.

I even called people I knew back in the 80's when I raced full size outboard hydros that were APBA officials and most everyone connected with inboards and the bigger hydros including the Unlimiteds said the same thing. That it was not a registered boat until Saturday. The way the NAMBA rules read is: "The full sized boat must have been registered with the APBA" and "The REGISTERED boat must have made at least one verifiable test run in the water".

I'm not sure how IMPBAs rules read but based on our rules and the information I collected I chose not to allow the boat to run in this district without wings. Even though the boat had been run previous to my term as Scale Chairman and it had also been allowed to run at the NAMBA Nationals without wings. The boat in question also had other issues like pipe concealment issues that caused me not to allow it run but that driver was informed he would not be allowed to run without wings and taped numbers.

Mike you & I have the same info except I thought it was shelf paper not duct tape for numbers. The IMPBA scale rules, like alot of our rules, are too vague in some areas like this one. One part of the rules does cover the lettering part as the rule states you must complete all major lettering & paint schemes. I consider the name major as did the APBA at that race. As for the wings...well... all scale boats are required to be registered & approved by the district scale director. I know how "the Boat" qualified & raced so if someone either tried to register or come to a district 12 race with this boat without tail feathers I would require the rear wings be added before it was registered or raced. I would love to clear up some of these "grey areas" in the IMPBA scale rules & have previously offered to do so but it fell on deaf ears.....

 

[Cathy]

Mike:

Your post is the most interesting and informative on this thread. Thanks for sharing all those facts with us. This information is exactly what the forum should be about. The IMPBA Scale Engine and Boat Specification is 9 short rules that take about two minutes to read. To summarize: The boat may be modeled after Unlimited hydroplanes past or present. Boats must look as scale as possible. Thank you for verifying that The Boat was run in practice without tail feathers. Even running an Unlimited in practice makes it a legal model boat in the IMPBA. There are no rules about qualifying and racing an Unlimited to make a legal model in the IMPBA. So while The Boat is legal in IMPBA, it would not race in NAMBA.

All facts aside. I really am disappointed to see that this forum condones someone who comes online and make vague accusations of cheating by using this person initials after his name is mentioned in an earlier post. Especially when the person mentioned is one of the best sportsperson in this hobby. He has probably helped out more people in this hobby over the past several decades than there are current members of the IMPBA.

Cathy

 

[SayMikey]

Mike:

Your post is the most interesting and informative on this thread. Thanks for sharing all those facts with us. This information is exactly what the forum should be about. The IMPBA Scale Engine and Boat Specification is 9 short rules that take about two minutes to read. To summarize: The boat may be modeled after Unlimited hydroplanes past or present. Boats must look as scale as possible. Thank you for verifying that The Boat was run in practice without tail feathers. Even running an Unlimited in practice makes it a legal model boat in the IMPBA. There are no rules about qualifying and racing an Unlimited to make a legal model in the IMPBA. So while The Boat is legal in IMPBA, it would not race in NAMBA.

All facts aside. I really am disappointed to see that this forum condones someone who comes online and make vague accusations of cheating by using this person initials after his name is mentioned in an earlier post. Especially when the person mentioned is one of the best sportsperson in this hobby. He has probably helped out more people in this hobby over the past several decades than there are current members of the IMPBA.

Cathy

There is NO DOUBT Gary Preusse is one of the finest racers you will meet,I find it dishearting to see him build "THE BOAT" after seeing the other beautiful scale boats he has built. The Bud he had was tops,its a shame to see all this muck when with just a little more paint a lot less attention would have come his way. Ive known Gary for years an he does not deserve all the bad press.The Preusee family has got to have hundreds of trophys to show there performance and tons of friends that mean much more that any trophy could ever.....Mike Schindler IMPBA 9112

 

[Don Ferrette]

All facts aside. I really am disappointed to see that this forum condones someone who comes online and make vague accusations of cheating by using this person initials after his name is mentioned in an earlier post. Especially when the person mentioned is one of the best sportsperson in this hobby. He has probably helped out more people in this hobby over the past several decades than there are current members of the IMPBA.

Cathy

It's not a matter of "condoning", it's called free speech to which I will say that Tom has been more than fair about, there are no 'net Nazi's on this board. As for Gary I don't disagree that he has helped many, many boaters. Gary was a good source of info recently when I was trying to find the 8-32 fittings for my needle bases. As for "The Boat" well I'll say just this- When numerous people sent the pics to me of Gary's boat at the first record trials there were things beyond the lack of wings that were not right. For openers, the big stacks of lead weights on the sponson tips & the big blunt plastic capping affixed to the deck leading edges were not "scale as possible", they weren't even on the real one (could you imagine scaling up stick on lead wheel weights to the real boat :lol: ). Also the words "The Boat" did not appear on the deck as required by the rules (must complete all major lettering & paint schemes). This caused a ruckus back then, so Gary did the smart thing, he withdrew his record, removed those "questionable" pieces & reset the record. If you really get down to it the "fault" at that first record trials lies not with Gary but, in my opinion, whoever allowed the boat to run like that in the first place. If it would have been addressed at that point I bet Gary would have removed those pieces, re-tuned the boat's trim, & the "questioned record" would have been a moot point.

I will say I plan to submit a proposal to re-word the scale rules to add qualified or raced. As it stands now the rule is wide open to allow boats that were "one off" & never even made it to the racing circuit which is not the intent of the class. If I wanted to exploit the rules in the current format I could build some rather bizarre "one off" boats that would have people scratching there heads... but they did exist.

 

[Mike McKnight]

I mean don't get me wrong I'm not trying to discourage someone from building any boat. It's just that it needs to be accurate and folow the rules. Like you Don I have my issues with rules but until something can be done with clarification or maybe defining them a little better I have to enforce the rules that exist. I wasn't trying to slam the guy that had this boat, I was just trying to tighten things up a bit in our district where things had become a little lax and I felt the integrity of the class was slipping a bit. I wish every person that runs a scale was as meticulous about detail as I try to be. But I'm a realist and I know that's not the case and the minimum standard set forth in the rules must be followed even if you think they may be flawed.

It's unfortunate that this particular boat has become such a hot button but it seems to be the one that quite a few people have used to get into the class with as little effort as possible. Yeah ok it was a really simple paint job with duct tape or shelf paper and wings whatever.....the scale needs to be that too.

I'm not a fan of the boat but if it's accurate I can't tell a driver he can't race it. The fingerpointing and suggestions of cheating that have gone on in this thread are really kind of unnecessary and infantile. If you have a problem with someone's boat, you have the option of protesting it I would think don't you?. Our procedure consists of "put up or shut up" basically. If you want to protest a boat, put up some money and protest it to the appropriate chairperson. If your protest it upheld you get your cash back and the boat in question has to be fixed. If not, your money goes into the district and it's squashed. I've only seen it happen once and the protest was upheld.

 

[rctinman]

Just for everones info...

IMPBA Scale Unlimited rules, under "Registration Procedures", it lists the requirements to register a hull, which includes - giving the "Unlimited name, year RACED, and number". So, from this section of the Scale Unlimited rules we do get the fact that your chosen hull must have been RACED.

Hope this helps!

Steve Ball

 

[Don Ferrette]

Just for everones info...

IMPBA Scale Unlimited rules, under "Registration Procedures", it lists the requirements to register a hull, which includes - giving the "Unlimited name, year RACED, and number". So, from this section of the Scale Unlimited rules we do get the fact that your chosen hull must have been RACED.

Hope this helps!

Steve Ball

Hey Steve, how ya been buddy!! You are correct, it says just that on line c. & it should be interpreted that way which makes running "the Boat" without wings illegal. But we kind of leave it open to contradiction on the very next line with-

d. Length & beam of prototype boat and model

I have had people argue that prototype meant test versions. We both know what was meant by the rule but this is another example of how people will attempt to read it the way it suits them. That's why I would like to see a seperate line some thing like "The real unlimited being modeled MUST have qualified and/or raced in at least one sanctioned racing event. " B)

 

[rctinman]

Hey Steve, how ya been buddy!! You are correct, is say just that on line c. & it should be interpreted that way which makes running "the Boat" without wings illegal. But we kind of leave it open to contradiction on the very next line with-

d. Length & beam of prototype boat and model

I have had people argue that prototype meant test versions. We both know what was meant by the rule but this is another example of how people will attempt to read it the way it suits them. That's why I would like to see a seperate line some thing like "The real unlimited being modeled MUST have qualified and/or raced in at least one sanctioned racing event. " B)

Hi Don, I'm do'in great. Getting ready for my last race of the season, down in Huntsville.

As far as the word PROTOTYPE in the IMPBA Scale Unlimited rules, it has one meaning, and one meaning only, and that is the word given to the full size hull you are modeling, as it was RACED. If it didn't RACE in the configuration that you modeled, it is not legal.

Now, if we want to include "qualified hulls" we need a rules rewright

Thanks,

Steve Ball

 

[Don Ferrette]

Well there you have it, straight from the NATIONAL Scale Director of the IMPBA. For a scale rule there is no higher interpretation. If you want to build & race "The Boat" at an IMPBA race it better have wings on it and be correctly marked. Hmmm, wonder where you can find correctly scaled duct tape.

I guess Gary will be making some wings this winter. B)

 

[Mike McKnight]

Trust me guys I hate to see or hear of accusations of impropriety in scale whether they are true or not. Especially with this boat at the heart of it. By the way, I just received some pictures of someone that did this boat the right way. Funny, considering it came from someone I had a conversation with about this exact subject earlier this year. I'm sure he knew I find it amusing. I honestly laughed out loud when I saw the pics.

 

[Geraghty]

Just for everones info...

IMPBA Scale Unlimited rules, under "Registration Procedures", it lists the requirements to register a hull, which includes - giving the "Unlimited name, year RACED, and number". So, from this section of the Scale Unlimited rules we do get the fact that your chosen hull must have been RACED.

Hope this helps!

Steve Ball

Hey Stevie......I just love these pissen' matches.[i hope ya all make bail cause I just love it when ya run]

We know this is not the first time that this controversy about "The Boat" has reared its ugly head.

Preusse is just the last in a long line to take flak for showing up with"The Boat".

[Auguston will laugh his ass off when I tell him that "The Boat" is still raising the blood pressure of scale boaters 15 years after it hit the RC scale boat curcuit in Washington in RCU.]

The funny thing about this controversy is if Garys boat was a turd not a word would have been said.Its amazing, if you go fast you are are sure to be the target of a "discussion board" colonoscopy by someone who can't go fast or just likes to see themselves in print on one of these so-called "discussion" boards.

It is obvious that the problem with "The Boat" lays with the interpetation of the rules as written.If not,the subject would not rear its ugly head every few months with somebody verbally trying to cut off the man sack of anybody who dares to run "The Boat" without a wing.

I have always wondered why the word "raced" is always launched to the fore front.It always boils down to the word "raced".

If the word "raced" was the end all to this problem why do we re-visit the topic every few months???

I decided to go to Merriam Websters Collegiate Dictionary [tenth edition] just to see exactly what they have to say about the word "raced".

Well,per Webster,to race is......a contest of speed,to go or move at top speed,or to drive or ride at high speed or to transport or propel at maximum speed,to "compete" in a race.Ah! The word "compete".The plot thickens.

Per Webster,to compete is......seek together,to come together,to be in a state of rivalry.

As you can see the definition of the word "race" is to go fast and you can definitely race without competing.

If Webster is correct "The Boat" definitely was raced and the only thing in question is did it "compete" while it was being raced?[i guess this is like what your definition of the word "is"..."is"! Sound familiar?]

Moving forward,this controversy ain't never going to be settled on IW and a simple interpetation by the scale director isn't the answer or we wouldn't be revisiting this subject every few months for another round of keyboarding.Someday Steve you will move on,and the next 1/8th scale director could well make a call that is 180 degrees different from yours.[i am not saying your call is right or wrong.]

Now somebody is about to jump into this discussion screaming about the intent of the rules.I don't want to hear anything about the "intent" of the rules or what anybodys definition of "intent" is.By definition the word intent is subjective.Intent is irrelevant in this discussion.The rules stand as written and have to defend themselves as they are written."Intent" has nothin' to do with nothin'.

Well,maybe it is time for a comprehensive update of the 1/8th Scale rules.

Whadda ya think?????

Rod

Stevie,Some other thoughts......I guess we are all lucky that Auguston's health got him out of the sport.

Steve,you have personally seen Augustons 8#,C/F'd tub,RTR lobster boat sitting in my rec room.Here it is 12 years later and it is still a cutting edge 1/8th scale record boat waiting to be used.Hell,this boat was in the high 80's in 1994.

One of these days I am going to find someone who really knows the definition of going "fast with finesse".I can recognize it I just don't have the dedication to want to do it anymore.I will probably just give them the boat to do with as they wish.Are you interested????

A quick edit.....Throwing the word "qualfied" into the fray means nothing.I can remember races in the west in the 50's & 60's where boats that did not qualify were allowed to run.

 

[Don Ferrette]

Well,maybe it is time for a comprehensive update of the 1/8th Scale rules.

Whadda ya think?????

Rod

Rod you know I've been for cleaning up the "grey areas" for a long time, especially in scale. Another one of my "favorites" is the dummy engine rule that only says an effort must be made to conceal the glow engine. A number of years back at a race a few of the scale drivers were having a hissy fit over a round nose that had a dummy engine only covering about 20% of the motor's flywheel, the rest being exposed. They complained having the engine that far forward gave a distinct advantage. Did it? You bet, the boat was rather well balanced with the engine slammed that far foward. The owners response? Well that's my attempt to cover the engine. I have previously offered to draft up a clearer set of scale rules only to have other "board individuals" say the scale rules are fine. So...... I will offer again. Except this time I will, if he's interested, send them directly to Steve instead. B)

And you're right about "intent". Our rule book is full of "intent" which by what seems to go on means loophole! <_<