John Link part 2 August 28, 2025 03:10AM
I encourage everyone to find the No Practice Podcast from last night. About an 1 hr 12 min in they talk to John Link.

They showed videos of his DQ Friday and Saturday runs, and he did dump lots of water. He was unaware he had been dq'ed, and found out from texts from people in TX while the PS class was still ongoing. That should never happen.

They guys had a devastating clip where they teased Mr. Link about looking and learning to do it right, and showed the winning JD pass from Saturday (I think it was Saturday), where the Deere also dumped a lot of water.

2nd point - Mr. Link has decided to sell his tractor.

Chase, Tyler, and Adam had valid if sarcastic criticisms of NTPA rule-following consistency (or lack thereof) near the beginning of the show.
Link here- No Practice Podcast



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 08/28/2025 04:22AM by The Original Michael.
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 28, 2025 05:12AM
For those of us who don't tune in live, thanks for ruining the surprise. Its nice to not know what's coming sometimes..........
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 28, 2025 05:39AM
Quote
gee thanks
For those of us who don't tune in live, thanks for ruining the surprise. Its nice to not know what's coming sometimes..........

I'm so sorry I tied you down, forced your eyes open like they did in A Clockwork Orange, and made you continue reading against your will past the first paragraph where it mentioned the podcast.

Same for the other guy too. I didn't know you lost the free will to discontinue reading as soon as the words "No Practice Podcast" crossed your vision.

You must get the vapors when someone is on Joe Rogan and something said goes on the news networks before you've listened to it. I've never heard anyone grumble about CNN or Fox spilling the beans about something a politician or celebrity said on a podcast. It's pulling news, and this message board is as close as their is to an independent pulling news site.
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 28, 2025 05:51AM
Don’t pretend like you don’t know what was meant. Give people a day or two to view/listen for themselves. It hasn’t even been 24 hrs yet.
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 28, 2025 11:06AM
Quote
The Original Michael

For those of us who don't tune in live, thanks for ruining the surprise. Its nice to not know what's coming sometimes..........

I'm so sorry I tied you down, forced your eyes open like they did in A Clockwork Orange, and made you continue reading against your will past the first paragraph where it mentioned the podcast.
Don't be an ass. Just say sorry and move on. Wow, people are so sensitive these days.
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 28, 2025 12:58PM
Quote
Face in crowd
Don't be an ass. Just say sorry and move on. Wow, people are so sensitive these days.

Apologize for what? Sharing a few brief comments made during a few minutes of a 2 hour conversation (with multiple guests) between several people drinking beer in front of their webcams?

It's not like going to a movie you overpaid to see and telling somebody the ending during previews.

It's a podcast, not a movie. I have never seen anyone get upset if a 20 second clip on Rogan or another podcast goes viral or makes the news before they listened to the full 2 hours.
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 28, 2025 05:26AM
Maybe next time give folks the chance to watch or listen to the episode before spilling out all the details.

Nothing wrong with telling people it's just simply a must watch.
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 28, 2025 05:59AM
To The Original Michael, thanks for letting me know about it. I don't get time to listen to every podcast. I went and watched it. When they showed the video of the green tractor that didn't get DQed versus Link's pass that did. I think Jon got even more mad.
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 September 09, 2025 04:37PM
Calm down. It's a podcast, not a movie.
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 29, 2025 03:42AM
Thanks for the link...Those were some very interesting interviews..If I were the head track judge I would have had to DQ both tractors in the 10 Pro pulloff..Both dumped excessive fluids on the track..Before they left the track I would also have also told both pullers why I gave them the DQ..Back when I was pulling I got the DQ several times and the track judges always told me the reason why before I even left the track..Usually,I already knew why.

As for Ross I can see why he was mad..I would have been mad too..If BG sees the need to have pulloffs,then cool down time is needed..Todays dry block pullers cant immediately come back without eventually paying the price..In Ross's case it was the very next hook and it cost him lots of money to fix the damage as he lost his chargers, etc...
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 29, 2025 06:17AM
It's worth mentioning that the video of the JD leaking water shown on No Practice Podcast was not from Bowling Green, nor was that the John Deere that won in BG. (Same team different tractor)
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 29, 2025 01:10PM
I would hope people figured that out but I think the point was made.
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 29, 2025 02:29PM
Describe "excessive" in a rules way to be read so noone can raise doubt,you cant.these types of rules can always be questioned as being biased for a reason,there's no factual amount listed.this causes hard feelings for years to come.theres no way possible to put a volume amount on paper as enforceable.its either no amount is allowed to touch the track surface at anytime,or remove it from the rulebook.
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 30, 2025 09:23AM
2025 NTPA rule book: page 37, C, 1d Note: Excessive is defined as any steady or intermittent stream discharged onto the track, or a spot equivalent to more than 8" diameter. Granted, it only becomes a judgement call when the track official decides to enforce the rule, but there is a rule and a definition.
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 30, 2025 10:49AM
And if it's a 8 inch circle then there should be a lot more DQs if the rule was enforced uniformly. And its still a judgment call which is to subjective. And why not the DQ when the vehicle is still on the track, maybe they called NY for a review of the tape.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/2025 10:49AM by Dick Morgan.
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 30, 2025 12:30PM
An 8 inch circle would dq over half the mods
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 30, 2025 10:47PM
An area equal to a 8 inch circle would dq all mods
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 August 31, 2025 03:51AM
Geez Dick...didn't you read what I wrote? I wrote " Granted, it only becomes a judgement call when the track official decides to enforce the rule, but there is a rule and a definition". I answered the poster who asked for the rule and definition. LOL
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 September 01, 2025 11:50PM
Okay, so serious question then. So far, this post has just been about water. What about the guys that make a great pass and the motor lets go at the very end putting oil all over the track. Should that be a DQ? Yes, I understand that is just adding "insult to injury", but they are still putting a pile of fluid on the track. Years ago in Freeport, IL, Witworths LSS burst the oil pan and they put oil all over the track. It was a great run, I believe a tp 5 pass. Should they have been DQ?
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 September 02, 2025 12:14AM
Quote
avercusauto
Okay, so serious question then. So far, this post has just been about water. What about the guys that make a great pass and the motor lets go at the very end putting oil all over the track. Should that be a DQ? Yes, I understand that is just adding "insult to injury", but they are still putting a pile of fluid on the track. Years ago in Freeport, IL, Witworths LSS burst the oil pan and they put oil all over the track. It was a great run, I believe a tp 5 pass. Should they have been DQ?

Good question. Is the intent of the rule fluids per se, or fluids during a run which could "grease the skids", shall we say? If something lets go at the end, it isn't potentially adding distance. What is the rule's intent?
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 September 02, 2025 01:30AM
Pretty sure internal breakage is exempt form the rule........then define "internal breakage"! lol
Reply Quote

Re: John Link part 2 September 02, 2025 02:08AM
Intent,has no bearing on this,what's wrote of paper does.a fluid is liquid on the track,dont lots of mods breather blow on the track, I bet every one of them leaves multiple areas 8 inches or bigger of oily film,a liquid,on the track.thats a automatic dq as its stated above.right ?
.how many ss/ps leave a patch of oily film,a liquid,from blow by ?.as wrote automatic dq.if what's wrote on paper is followed,as stated its supposed to be we wouldn't be having multiple discussions about these issues
Reply Quote

Same thing happened at Sandwich September 08, 2025 02:05AM
Just an observation, but the Shramek tractor had his intercooler fail and he was not diqualified the first time, but did get dq'd the second time. Should not matter when the failure occurs. Not mad at Shramek at all, just dont understand the inconsistancy of the NTPA officials and their rulings.
Reply Quote

Re: Same thing happened at Sandwich September 08, 2025 02:13AM
Quote
Red Man
Just an observation, but the Shramek tractor had his intercooler fail and he was not diqualified the first time, but did get dq'd the second time. Should not matter when the failure occurs. Not mad at Shramek at all, just dont understand the inconsistancy of the NTPA officials and their rulings.

They should remove as much grey area as possible from the rulebook. Of course, if black-and-white rules are ignored, that's a separate and larger issue.
Reply Quote

Re: Same thing happened at Sandwich September 08, 2025 04:04PM
Quote
Red Man
Just an observation, but the Shramek tractor had his intercooler fail and he was not diqualified the first time, but did get dq'd the second time. Should not matter when the failure occurs. Not mad at Shramek at all, just dont understand the inconsistancy of the NTPA officials and their rulings.

The first pass, the failure was at the very end of the run.
The second pass, it was blowing ice and water in large amounts from the very beginning of the pull.
Reply Quote

Re: Same thing happened at Sandwich September 09, 2025 12:00PM
Get rid of the intercoolers and there is zero grey area with this rule
Reply Quote

Re: Same thing happened at Sandwich September 09, 2025 04:39PM
Exactly. I was told by one of the end NTPA officials that because it was at the very end of the run, and wasn't very significant, as well as didnt impact the length of the track, that they would not disqualify him. They said if it was at the beginning or even the middle, that it would have been a different result.
Reply Quote

Newer Topic Older Topic

Author:

Your Email:


Subject:
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically. If the code is hard to read, then just try to guess it right. If you enter the wrong code, a new image is created and you get another chance to enter it right.
Message:
Website Statistics
Global: Topics: 40,291, Posts: 239,931, Members: 3,675.
This forum: Topics: 38,584, Posts: 235,705.

Website Daily and Monthy Hits: http://pulloff.com/webalizer

Our newest member LewisM