Speedway NZ CEO - Ask Me Anything! (Read 32,767 times)

[TimSOZ]

jamo asked:-
Why aren't race engine compression ratios being checked anymore at NZ titles with the "puffer" machine?

Haven't been checked for the last few seasons so will they be next season??

The rules have changed, and compression must now be officially checked using the Columbus Method. The top 5 cars at the NZ Champs have their engines sealed, and then have 30 days to confirm their compliance with the relevant rules (unless they've had it checked previously by a Tech Steward, and had the relevant red seals applied).
The Whistler can still be used, but is a guide only.

[TimSOZ]

tonyt:-
Tim, you state several times earlier in this thread that anyone can become a member of SNZ, and we encourage you to do so, or words to that effect. I also note that throughout the thread the over riding response you give to most of the "why not do this" type of questions is that changes can only come from voting on remits at conference. Therefore, I would ask how would fans, who become members of SNZ, be able to submit and vote on remits? My understanding (and I may well be wrong) is that at present, only member clubs can vote at conference through their two allocated representatives (drivers and promoters). Will the admission of non-drivers and non-promoters (and also likely non-club members) to SNZ membership require a change in the way conference voting is carried out? Could fans potentially force this change to occur via weight of numbers?

Becoming a member gives anyone the ability to submit a remit. Change to the current system still has to come via the current system, if that makes sense. That means that anyone submitting a remit has to “sell” their proposal to the delegates and ensure it gets the required votes. That’s what happens now, but the potential pool of people who can get involved in that process has moved from the 2600 competitors and 24 tracks to anyone in the sport who wants to join the organisation (potentially hundreds of thousands of people). Are the possibilities endless? Who knows?

[TimSOZ]

tank11 asked (twice):-
Tim, any data on injuries where neck restraints are used.

IE neck restraint/seat combo/injury incurred.

Just thinking after M. Auldings accident.

We are pretty transparent on injuries, and will presumably publish our annual stats at the end of the season. I have no idea what we will include in those stats at this point.

However, if you want to look at the potential impact of Head and Neck restraints, the best place to start is with Open Wheel classes, who are at the forefront of the safety revolution. Injuries in these classes have dropped away significantly over the last decade, particularly concussions and serious injuries (or worse).

[TimSOZ]

Hi Tim, We have talked a few times on the phone when I was trying to get the NZF2 class started in Wanganui. I was just wondering when is the opportune time to introduce a new class? There seems to be a decline over the past decade in streetstock numbers except for a few pockets where they are still strong and entertaining and the introduction of Six Shooters hasn't really built into much save for the south where theres good numbers at a couple of tracks. Is it time for a more home grown approach to another class I wonder. Self built basic chassis built off a plan and based on the super successful ministock theory. Nearly 60 thousand views on Macgors on the NZF2 thread shows theres a huge interest, although your thread will surpass that number very soon I think lol
Cheers, John Barker

So the question was when is an opportune time to introduce a new class? The Board can consider applications at any time. Will they be successful? Its up to the Board of the day.

However, one thing your question got me thinking about is – how are the Six Shooters doing? After 3 seasons there were 40 registered competitors, and this is up again halfway through the 2013/14 season to 42. Since Speedway NZ was instituted in 1984 there have been a number of new classes introduced – how did they look after three seasons?

Minisprints, introduced 1990/91. After 3 seasons = 43
Modified Sprints, introduced 1996/97. After 3 seasons = 24
Adult Ministocks, introduced 1996/97. After 3 seasons = 75
Kiwi Lites, introduced 1996/97. After 3 seasons = 9
Youth Ministocks, introduced 1998/99. After 3 seasons = 81

Also introduced were Junior Solos and Quarter Midgets, but unfortunately their numbers weren’t distinguished from each other for the first 5 seasons.

[TimSOZ]

zitadel:-
Mr CEO, ( lets keep it real impersonal)
you have stated that speedway is the largest motor sport in NZ.
However, the major "on line" gathering point is a web site created and run by a private individual with nothing to do with SNZ
There is one newspaper for our sport, also run by a private individual,
there is one speedway show on tv ( that only caters for a few classes) and is run by a private promoter...

Is it then fair to say that SNZ have in the past and are continuing presently to be particularly poor at bringing our product to the NZ market place and then isnt it also fair to say that SNZ does not attract the type of people who have the skill sets to lead speedway in to the light.
Speedway is a product that needs to be sold, SNZ have 24 branches nation wide...but no unified advertising strategy...basically when will SNZ start leading the sport instead of reacting to it?

Firstly, until June 2012 Speedway was particularly poor at bringing our product to the NZ market place because it had no mandate to do that. That was never part of Speedway NZ’s brief since its inception in 1984 – that role fell to individual tracks and the Speedway Promoters Association of New Zealand (SPANZ). So it’s completely understandable as to why Speedway NZ looked “poor” at it.
That’s now changed, with SPANZ currently on hold, replaced by a Promotional Team within Speedway NZ. The resource devoted to promotions has increased from approx $10,000 a year (SPANZ’s budget) to $50,000 a year (the Promotional team budget), and that’s occurred without major fee increases.

Nationwide TV advertising is running now on TV1, and has done for the last two years, so it’s not entirely true to say there is no unified advertising strategy.
www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=2893557619005

There’s also SNZ’s “Get ready for an explosive summer” branding which has been used widely around the country this season. Anything over and above what is currently happening requires more funding, and I’m sure the Promotional Team are exploring more options.

Leading speedway into the light requires far more than a skill set.

[TimSOZ]

custaxie50-
Whats up with this wheelie bar that was fitted to one of the sidecars at palmy last night,is that in the rule book that you can fit one.

Forgive me for not being up with the play with Sidecar slang…but a wheelie bar is? And the bike was???

[TimSOZ]

kevtherev asked:-
Hi Tim.Heres a couple of questions.As a spectator i find it frustrating and uninteresting often
watching the fastest cars starting off the front.Surely everybody would rather see the
better drivers passing as many cars as possible.Is this ever likely to change?A fair way
would be marble draw then reverse finishing order from previous races after that.

Unless its an allocated title, Speedway NZ has no interest or influence over the grids used at a race meeting. I know that what you are suggesting was particularly popular as a championship format up until the mid 1980’s, when it fell out of favour because if a protest was lodged you couldn’t set the grid for the next heat in a title…or put the race out on the track. This is why the protest rules now allow for a protest to be heard at the end of a race meeting.

Also some of us are a bit wary about pre booking tickets for major events in case of "god forbid"
rainouts.Is there any way to get a refund?Especially for travellers who have ferries or
planes to catch.Thanks.

Until speedway is an indoor sport everyone involved has to accept that there is an element of risk due to the weather. When it rains the promotion takes a bath financially, competitors incur additional expenses returning for the rerun, and spectators are in the same boat. So don’t expect change any time soon……it’s just the way it is when you race outside in a temperate climate zone.

[TimSOZ]

Right, well that should be everyone's questions answered to date. Feel free to keep them coming if you wish, and I'll respond when I can.

Cheers, Tim

[custaxie50]

Number 97 sidecar had bar work fitted out passed the back wheel,whats that all about Tim i do know what the rules say.

[Jake36p]

Hi Tim,

My question relates to the Podjursky / Rees engine protest. In the latest SNZ newsletter, it has now been published the protest was considered null and void as a result of the race car not being impounded correctly. I respectfully have four questions:

1. Why, if the vehicle was not impounded correctly did SNZ attempt to carry out the protest and even take it the degree of having the engine examined regardless. If the impoundment was not conducted in the prescribed manner does everything after this point become "fruit from the poisonous tree"?

2. Can you outline the prescribed process for a technical protest?, perhaps a flow chart would be an accurate method of outlining it.

3. What has SNZ learnt from this situation?

4. What would SNZ do differently next time?

Thanks for establishing a transparent post such as this.

[sonic33]

Feb 1, 2014 14:04:18 GMT 12 TimSOZ said:

Sonic33’s questions:-
Do you think the track criteria, for hosting a NZ title, has had the desired effect? Was it not to ensure those allocated the titles were up to the job. Does the criteria need tweaking?

The criteria were originally instituted by SPANZ (separate organisation), so don’t quote me on what the “desired effect” was, but I believe it was to institute minimum standards. All 23 Division 1 tracks meet those standards and are eligible to apply for a title, other than the minimum numbers of meetings and cars for each class. The criteria is always up for review, but that is a role for the 24 tracks who vote on the criteria.

At the end of a championship you suggest there is a de-brief. What happens with the outcomes? I carry out these at work (after gas emergencies)and out of them came action points. What is the end result of SNZ de-briefs?

The outcomes are many. Sometimes we have to work with tracks and officials to avoid issues from reoccurring. On other occasions there are suggested rule changes that come out of a debrief. Often, we send emails of congratulations to the tracks and officials on a job well done. Let’s be honest though, most titles run just fine. We’ve had 23 to date this season (27 after tonight) and those with major issues to date can be counted on one hand.

Do you think the scheduling of the NZ stockcars, NZ stockcar teams and NZ superstock champs were ideal?

Weather is always going to impact on speedway from time to time, and there will always be issues when the weather doesn’t play ball. The scheduling of the events was in accordance with Speedway NZ’s rules.

Lastly, if everyone wanted a change from the seemingly archaic constitution (or whatever it is called) under which SNZ is run, how would this be achieved. Total dispantion or something not so extreme?

Changes to the Speedway NZ constitution require a 2/3rds majority vote (basically 16 tracks to agree). Clearly therefore, the simple answer if you want change is to get as many people on board as possible who support your position. It’s why the threshold for change is so high – essentially it keeps the sport stable and ticking over until there is a great deal of support for a new initiative. Some view that as a negative, but over time I’ve realised this is one of Speedway NZ’s strengths. It stops divisions within the sport from forming.

It seems the voting system at conference is far from transparent, or fair for that matter. Under the the current rules that govern the sport is there anyway to change this? There are some major players (promoters) etc that seem to be able to block some initiatives for the betterment of themselves. Surely each individual licence holder having a vote on each remit would be favourable?

The voting system is exceptionally transparent, to those who take the time to attend the AGM (as it’s done by show of hands). Last year we gave the opportunity to anyone to attend the AGM, provided they came to the awards. A few people took up that option and came along – and well done to them. No-one else has the right to say they didn’t get the opportunity, so it’s not accurate to say the voting system is not transparent.

Thanx Tim,

In relation to the voting system, transparancy was probably the wrong word. I meant more along the lines of ensuring what the club member voted, was how the representatives voted at the meeting.

Anywho, thanx for your time, and being so open.

Cheers.

[TimSOZ]

Feb 2, 2014 17:42:24 GMT 12 custaxie50 said:

Number 97 sidecar had bar work fitted out passed the back wheel,whats that all about Tim i do know what the rules say.

Have checked with the relevant officials and the bike was not fitted with a wheelie bar.

[TimSOZ]

Feb 3, 2014 17:24:04 GMT 12 Jake36p said:

Hi Tim,

My question relates to the Podjursky / Rees engine protest. In the latest SNZ newsletter, it has now been published the protest was considered null and void as a result of the race car not being impounded correctly. I respectfully have four questions:

1. Why, if the vehicle was not impounded correctly did SNZ attempt to carry out the protest and even take it the degree of having the engine examined regardless. If the impoundment was not conducted in the prescribed manner does everything after this point become "fruit from the poisonous tree"?

2. Can you outline the prescribed process for a technical protest?, perhaps a flow chart would be an accurate method of outlining it.

3. What has SNZ learnt from this situation?

4. What would SNZ do differently next time?

Thanks for establishing a transparent post such as this.

The Technical protest rules were established at the 1996 AGM, and are another classic example of rules being made up on the fly at a conference, as they were amended on the day and there is no rationale for the rules in the 1996 AGM booklet to assist with an original intent. You'd have to ask someone there what the prescribed process was/is, because there isn't one in the rulebook (like there is for say a standard racing rule protest).

I'm not going to comment any further on the specific case, you've read what the Board's view on the topic is via the latest SNZ Update.

[custaxie50]

Ok Tim forget the wheelie bar thing,whats all the bar work that is passed the back wheel for can these officials tell you.

[sonic33]

I certaily think Tim has put forward some good points, and I am now more informed, but I think some of the answers were a little PC. Hence he needed to get sign off from the board to do it. Nt bad tho and definately better than we have had.

[percy]

Jan 13, 2014 22:24:22 GMT 12 TimSOZ said:

Fearless wrote:-
However after attending NZ Supers at Meeanee there need should be some guide lines. Maybe a team of SNZ to review a plan before the championship is run advise on concerns. If the ground can hold 7000 people thats fine but the spectors must be safe and comfortable and amemidies available.

SNZ’s rules around NZ title allocations are as follows:-
M4-2-5(b) Track Grading for New Zealand titles only
(i) All facilities must be able to accommodate the crowd, competitors & associated vehicles pertaining to their championship being held.
(ii) If night racing, good lighting for track, pits, toilets and carparks (lighting not necessarily permanent). In the event of inclement weather or other exceptional circumstances this may be waived or amended in part by the unanimous decision of the Promotion, Stipendiary Steward if in attendance, or Steward of the meeting, Clerk of the Course and a class representative of the class competing, bearing in mind the following 3 factors- Safety of the competitors, safety of spectators and the better promotion of the event
(iii) 2 toilet blocks / 25 toilets minimum, sufficient lighting and all in good working order (2 disabled person toilets).
(iv) Grader, welder, water truck and appropriate vehicles depending on the class racing.
(v) Running water in pits.
(vi) Electronic lap scoring, fully operational and with competent personnel operating the system (N/A for Sidecars or Solos).
(vii) Competent marshalls, track staff, announcers and PA system for crowd and pits
(viii) Health and safety in place and operating
(ix) Fire crew, crash crew, medics and appropriate vehicles in the infield. (Including specialised infield personal depending on the classes racing).
(x) Adequate ticket boxes, entrance way and signage.
(xi) Adequate results board – with plenty of room around it for checking of results.
(xii) Fully operational website / media releases process.
(xiii) Championship log book to be implemented and filled out.
(xiv) All amenities and grounds of the facility must be in presentable condition.

In all seriousuness, which of those would Meeanee have failed to achieve prior to the meeting? I'd suggest none of them. Any other issues are currently outside of SNZ’s scope, but that could change it the members want it to.

Try the first one. Meannee does not have the crowd space required to host the New Zealand Superstock Championship. According to New Zealand Dirt Track racing magazine the crowd was under 8,000 people. The track couldn't handle that let alone a crowd of 10-12,000 people that this event is capable of attracting.

Anyway I do have a question.

At the 2013 AGM a remit was passed opening up membership of Speedway New Zealand.

C5 MEMBERSHIP
e) General Members: Any individual or entity who by virtue of their interest and contribution to the general aims of the organisation may apply to be a member of SNZ. They do not have voting rights or speaking rights at any Annual or Special General Meeting.

This seems to have been the biggest kept secret of the year. I spend more time than most scanning this forum and Speedway New Zealand correspondence and I have heard very little promotion of this option.

To add to this the online option to join the organisation is clearly tailored towards a competitor, not the type of member envisaged by the remit.

So my question is given the membership provided a strong mandate to the board to go ahead with this option why has the board been so inactive in promoting this membership option?

[pfloyd]

"The Technical protest rules were established at the 1996 AGM, and are another classic example of rules being made up on the fly at a conference, as they were amended on the day and there is no rationale for the rules in the 1996 AGM booklet to assist with an original intent. You'd have to ask someone there what the prescribed process was/is, because there isn't one in the rulebook (like there is for say a standard racing rule protest).

I'm not going to comment any further on the specific case, you've read what the Board's view on the topic is via the latest SNZ Update."

I am confused. If there is no prescribed rule in the rulebook then how could it have been established that the vehicle was not properly impounded ? would it not have been logical to have gone thru that argument before pulling the engine apart ? once the engine was apart why not follow thru and sort out if the engine is actually legal or not. The statement in the latest update does nothing to clarify the actual issue and speculation persists

[jimmyj]

Tim just another couple of questions please

What is the point of becoming a member if you have no rights to vote or anything apart from giving them a donation

Like every club at the a g m as a member you should have the right to put forward a motion and if enough people agree have a vote

.
Why does Jonathon Allard get dispensation to use the number O a when he is racing in NZ the whole year practically And why does it have A not USA??

It clearly states in the rule book it is not to be used ..WHY

[Admin]

This is not a discussion thread chaps , you might want to start a new thread for the purpose as by the end of today I will be removing non complying posts from this Ask the CEO thread.

[craige]

ok my question tim is

on ya website it says the wrong process was done towards the impounding of the jag engine of mr hiebners.would you clarify that the said engine was tested at csl with and found to be legal .pete rees ..steven blackley .john viles (head tech man from rotorua )cant remember who other guy was..and was found to be totaly legal.....ie compression bore size and cu inch

also why wasnt it mentioned on the snz site that the engine was found to be legal ?