OPINION: ARCA, Racing-Reference need better clarity, more consistency on DNF/DNS rulings

by Ben Schneider / LASTCAR.info Staff Writer

The tail end of the field during the pace laps at Mid-Ohio. (PHOTO: Clubb Racing, @ClubbRacingInc)

Racing-Reference has a problem.

On paper, it should be - and in many ways still is - one of my favorite websites on the internet. I love numbers, statistics, and analytics, and looking for patterns in all three. There is no better place for combing through historical data, not just for NASCAR, but for plenty of other motorsports series around the world.

However, in recent years, Racing-Reference has also become one of my most frustrating websites to visit. The site removed users’ ability to leave comments on their pages a couple of years ago, which makes it harder for readers and fans to inform the site of potential typos and mistakes, or even to reveal new information.

If Racing-Reference still featured a comments section, I would no doubt have been using it to ask some questions throughout the current 2024 ARCA Menards Series season when writing my articles for this site.

First, there was the debate regarding what happened to Tony Huffman at Kern. As I noted in that week’s article, Huffman was one of three entries considered a “did not start” (DNS). Based on how we’ve chosen to rule the last-place finisher (LPF) at the ARCA level since the start of 2023, this meant that Henry Barton would be considered the LPF.

There was a problem, though: Huffman’s No. 0 car was clearly visible on the broadcast as the field came to take the green flag.

As the cameras obviously focused on the leaders as the field entered Turn 1, I can only guess that Huffman pulled off into the infield coming off of Turn 4, therefore falling out of the race before even crossing the start-finish line to take the green flag. This presents another problem, however: that’s exactly what happened to Rob Pellosie and Chris Golden two weekends ago at Mid-Ohio, and both their “reasons out” were listed as “mechanical” rather than a DNS.

If “start” is defined by taking the green flag, then both drivers should have been considered DNS entries at Mid-Ohio. If it’s defined by pulling out of the pits to participate in the pace laps, then Huffman should have been credited with an official start at Kern and a standard start-and-park “reason out” such as “mechanical,” “vibration,” “ignition,” etc. Either way, these rulings are inconsistent with one another.

After Kern, Huffman and Dave Smith were correctly ruled as DNS entries at Portland, leaving Todd Souza as the first retirement and therefore the LPF. I know this because I was at the track and can confirm neither car left the garage area. I can also confirm Souza’s car suffered from a recurring mechanical and/or engine issue throughout practice, which appeared to come back to haunt him during the race as his car stopped on track in the opening laps. Curiously, however, Racing-Reference listed Souza’s reason out as a crash despite no evidence that accident damage was the culprit. It is hard to believe that “crash” is correct in this instance.

To their credit, Racing-Reference was indeed spot-on the following weekend at Sonoma. My editor-in-chief, Brock Beard, interviewed Huffman and got a quote from the driver, who explained that the car “[had] no brakes.” Huffman was correctly credited with a 31st-place finish with 0 laps completed and “brakes” as the reason out.

A few minutes later, I went down to the pits to speak with Ryan Philpott’s No. 52 team after noticing they had dropped down the leaderboard. The team told me that they broke an axle, and I tweeted as such. Philpott’s official reason out was indeed “axle.”

Yet here we are, just a couple of weeks later, wondering a) if the Mid-Ohio results sheet is even accurate to begin with and b) how to reconcile that results sheet’s inconsistency with prior situations that were similar in nature, yet resulted in completely different rulings.

I must also acknowledge that one can argue I am being hypocritical and inconsistent myself with my own rulings. The bottom of this site’s homepage, where the definition of LPF is outlined, includes the following text: “the LPF can be any one driver classified as such for any reason, including but not limited to (1) a ‘did not start,’ that is, an entrant who qualifies for a starting spot in the race, but for any reason is subsequently unable to start the event.” For Brock, in all the years he has been running this site for the three national touring series of NASCAR, this has not been an issue. DNS entries are incredibly rare at the top three levels of NASCAR, and when they do happen, they are for legitimate reasons that distinguish themselves from withdrawals (WD) that should not be included in the final results.

ARCA, however, is a different story. Consider current series points leader Andres Perez, whose 2023 result at Daytona was the instigator for my change in defining LPFs in the first place. As Perez was only just a few weeks under the age of 18, he was not permitted to compete at the 2.5-mile superspeedway. He was, however, allowed to practice a No. 01 Fast Track Racing car, then “withdraw” from the race he was forbidden from starting to ensure he recorded an “attempt” and remained eligible for ARCA’s full-time points bonuses. If I were the deciding official in this instance, I would consider this a clear WD rather than a DNS. ARCA and Racing-Reference, however, disagreed, and credited Perez with a 40th-place finish with “DNS” as the “reason out.”

To put Perez down as the LPF for a race in which he wasn’t even eligible to compete just didn’t feel right. I ultimately ruled Hunter Deshautelle as the LPF instead, and this was ultimately the catalyst for my decision to begin defining ARCA’s LPFs as the first car to pull behind the wall after taking the green flag. After all, we’re talking about a last-place “finish,” and one cannot “finish” what they “did not start.” 

This was not, however, the original catalyst for my frustration. Recall Irwindale in 2022, when Sarah Burgess was entered as a replacement driver for Tim Spurgeon’s No. 04 entry before the car withdrew at the last minute. Burgess participated in qualifying and, according to the season’s final point standings, appears to have received 16th-place points from that Irwindale race.

However, Burgess is listed on the results sheet as a WD, absent from the listed 15-car field entirely. If that’s the case, she should have only received three points for making a qualifying attempt. ARCA PR director Charlie Krall was told this would happen, and even responded to my tweet as I sought out more clarity. But Burgess is listed as finishing 47th in the final standings and scoring 55 points across the 2022 season, more than the 27 she received for a 17th-place run at the Las Vegas Bullring. The 28 additional points indicate she was indeed given 16th-place points at Irwindale after all, and therefore, her entry should have been ruled as a DNS.

Clarifying “did not start” rulings is not all that needs to be more consistent. For the second-straight week, every DNF’s reason out was listed simply as “mechanical.” My fellow staff writer, William Soquet, has also dealt with this frustration in covering IndyCar for this site. William has decided to seek out team press releases and notes from race broadcasts in an effort to list a more specific reason out for his articles and last-place statistics, which I respect and even find admirable.

But IndyCar is the top level of American open-wheel racing and the host of what is arguably the most prestigious race in the world. ARCA simply does not get that level of coverage, particularly at the back of the field. I am only comfortable relying on the information I am given from official sources, and there are rarely (if ever) any such sources beyond Racing-Reference and ARCA themselves.

You might be thinking to yourself, “it cannot possibly be this deep.” I can’t blame you, considering I’m roughly 1300 words into this column. But the reason I feel so passionate - so compelled to speak up about this issue - is that I value consistency above all else. I also value telling these drivers’ and teams’ stories every week, and without proper context, or with new rulings that seem inconsistent with previous ones, it is much harder to feel confident in doing so.

To our readers: stay tuned for the Berlin article, along with features on the two upcoming ARCA West races at Irwindale, over the next few days.

And to ARCA and Racing-Reference: I simply ask for more consistency, clarity, and specifics whenever possible. Those of us who “turn the field on its head” count on it to be as accurate and confident as possible when telling these stories, because every driver and team in the field has a story to be told.