Rule Interpretation

[Hatter]

Hello,

Our council’s rules state:

The car may not be designed so that the wheels ride upon the center guide strip of the track.

Does that mean that rail riding is not allowed? I’m assuming the front wheel has to be flat on the track?

Thanks for the help!
Hatter

[philm63]

I see some ambiguity in this rule with the use of the word "upon". Some may think I'm splitting hairs or say "That's not the intent..." but I use and interpret standards for a living and sit on standards development committees so identifying ambiguities is one of the many things I do.

Assuming the author intended for the wheels to not intentionally contact the center rail (or ride the rail) then you're assessment would be correct - no rail riding. But better wording could certainly make this more clear, in my humble opinion.

[Hatter]

Yes, it could be interpreted that the wheels can’t ride on top of the center guide strip. This would be fine for rail riding configuration.

[philm63]

Yes, but considering that riding on top of the center guide strip would not be seen as a normal condition during a run and the folks writing the rules would likely know this, let me stress that I see the "intent" or "spirit" of the rule to mean they don't want cars designed specifically for rail riding. If you know who wrote the rules, you could always inquire about an official interpretation citing this ambiguity - always best to check first to avoid being disqualified come race day.

[Loud2ns]

This rule means no riding on top of the rail. Rail riding is against the rail. All cars hit the rail at some point, RR just does it in a controlled fashion.
My guess is someone made some crazy experiment that rode on the rail, and they didn't care for that! Lol

But, when in doubt........ask!

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[FatSebastian]

This rule means no riding on top of the rail. Rail riding is against the rail.

I agree with Loud2ns - it implies a wheel rolling on top of the center guide strip. I think the intent would have been a little clearer had they separated "up" and "on", i.e.,:

The car may not be designed so that the wheels ride up on the center guide strip of the track.

[philm63]

In any case, if you do a rail rider and they say "not in my derby!" you can cite the way the rules are written - FS and Loud make a good point - "upon" actually does mean to get up on top of something. Honoring the "spirit" of a requirement infers one has a good understanding of how and why the rules were written the way they were - we probably don't have that here.

[Vitamin K]

With the randomness of wheels inserted into axle slots, a kid could get lucky and end up building a rail-guided car.

Any rule that bans a car that could be accidentally built is a bad rule, IMO.

[exoray]

This rule means no riding on top of the rail. Rail riding is against the rail. All cars hit the rail at some point, RR just does it in a controlled fashion.
My guess is someone made some crazy experiment that rode on the rail, and they didn't care for that! Lol

As said I would certainly ask for clarification, but I'm betting that rule came up because someone narrowed the wheelbase forcing a wheel or two to ride on the center rail if there was any possibility of it fitting on the track in the first place, or they designed a radical car where they relocated a single wheel so far inward that it rode on the center rail in some 3 wheel rider design... I could see this happening, as I know way back when had a CO2 car race in school, I personally went radical and built a three-wheeler Blue Flame themed car even though the kit was made to be a 4 wheel car...

[gpraceman]

I would be curious to know why that rule came about. Just someone trying to squelch people from trying rail riding because they think it is unfair for those that don't know about the technique or maybe someone ran a car with only one front wheel and it would crash at the finish?

[whodathunkit]

I'm with FS, Load2n, and Randy !

The car may not be designed so that wheel's ride upon the center guide strip of the track. . The big word is upon as FS points out.

You would think that the rule on wheel spacing across the body would also rule out.. insetting the wheels to ride up on the guide strip of the track.
All car's will at some point make contact upon the rail as load2n also points out.. whether it be in a controlled manner or an uncontrolled manner.
Due to the track as it may have some twisting to the left or right on the curve section or even some tilting in the flat sections.

( Wheel's to ride upon the center guide strip ) the word upon is just another word that has two principles its based on.. for on indicating a position reached by going up.
like climb upon.. make's me think of rail road tracks and how the wheel's are designed run.. and ride upon the rails of its track.



However could the rule interpretation.. also imply that they don't want cars.. with a lifted wheel in its design.. that could ride upon and over the guide strip.
Causing the rest of the (wheel's) on the car.. to do the same while leaving the track. ( as Randy point's out also!)

Id would say you need to ask your counsel for clarification on the wording of upon to there ruling.
because synonyms of the word upon are
on
against
next
alongside
upside
next to

And then even ask the question.. of what the center guide strip on the track are for.
guiding the wheels on the car and so that the car can travel, roll / ride upon the track surface that should even include center guide strip.. as the intended purpose of having them on a track.
Just some of my thoughts..
However you will need to ask for clarification.. as I have never ran across wording to a rule like this one.

[Darin McGrew]

Any rule that bans a car that could be accidentally built is a bad rule, IMO.

AMEN!


For the record, we had a kid try to build a three-wheel car where the odd wheel rode on top of the rail. I pointed out that the wheel would drop into the slot at the top of the rail (the one the starting pin swings down into) and the car would stop dead in its tracks. And thus, the car would fail our basic "must fit the track" rule. So he built his car differently.

[gpraceman]

Any rule that bans a car that could be accidentally built is a bad rule, IMO.

I'll second that.

Still would like to know the background as to why someone felt that that rule was necessary.

[whodathunkit]

For the record, we had a kid try to build a three-wheel car where the odd wheel rode on top of the rail. I pointed out that the wheel would drop into the slot at the top of the rail (the one the starting pin swings down into) and the car would stop dead in its tracks. And thus, the car would fail our basic "must fit the track" rule. So he built his car differently.

And we've even had it happen by kcarchiect with his 2018 spitfire mark III build for the record here on DT.
However it's ( odd wide rear wheel ) rode down in between and along side the sides of the center guide rails of a Best track .. and not upon a lane strip type guide.
https://www.derbytalk.com/viewtopic.php?t=8419
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P11Bdkxhlg0
His car running the track:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olmBB9osybE

The words ( Wheel's ride upon the center guide strip ) means 2 or more for the word wheel's.. and not just 1 wheel ( for the word wheel.)
And the center guide strip makes me think of track types that use wooden strips for the guides.
un-like how Best track clearly names there guides as ( rails ) to there track type.

I'm with you Randy I like to know how this rule came about as It sure puts a limit on creativity.