Put a fork in Level 5

Sorry, just because it's (arguably) legal doesn't make it right and absolve him of any scrutiny. He's a crook, not a capitalist.

 

So just because it's legal, but you consider it " unsavory" it's ok for the government to harras folks? Who else? Gun dealers, porn stars, political opponents?
Are they all crooks?

 

well in this case Ferrari-Racing Loan Mogul Said to Face Racketeering Case - Bloomberg, it's about deceptive marketing practices and falsifying the true interest rate of the payday loans. and they're trying to use RICO statutes against him. as mentioned above, these things don't happen for no reason.

 

I don't blame those who think Scott is a crook. You can't possibly know both sides. I just happened to be close enough to the situation that I have heard both sides and made my own judgments. I am not blinded by friendship or loyalty. Frankly no one would believe the lengths I have seen our justice department will go to when it is cornered and losing. I don't want to continue here with this but I agree with Rob that we need to remember that "innocent until proven guilty" remains one of our most important yet fragile rights. Forgetting it leads to public riots as we have recently seen. Forgetting it at the government level puts each and every one of us at risk of becoming a criminal one day simply for doing the same things we have done for years. Perception is NOT reality and if we begin to allow change, forget or create laws in the interest of "getting" someone or something simply because the government thinks the end results are worth the cost, we begin to lose who we are. I fear that it may be too late for Scott and they are going to do whatever is needed to get their trophy.

 

Where did I say that? Choosing not to support a convicted felon who now engages in loan sharking has nothing to do with the government, but if they do get him I won't feel bad for him.

Please give us the other side. Is he not using Native American sovereign protection to bypass federal and state usury laws? Legal or not, it's a despicable practice. Was he or was he not convicted of felony mail fraud and check fraud? Let's hear the other side.

You might be able to explain away one or the other, but taken together a pattern of preying on others that are trusting and/or unfortunate to make a buck emerges.

 

like another high profile scam artist on Fchat (Scott S down in Miami), everyone who knew him was mesmerized by him, and the rest of us just didn't know the whole story...but nobody could ever provide the whole story. sad to see good people get sucked into the trap of supporting a scumbag, even after he's been exposed.

 

I think this opinion is spot on. ST is indeed a convicted felon for fraud. Some may say that his initial conviction and jail time was incorrect and unjust and taken in isolation that may very well be arguable. That said it is hard to think that when you consider that he is currently involved in a scheme that pushes the boundaries of the law in the realm of predatory lending practices. Even if by the marginal letter of the law what he is doing is allowable, legalized loan sharking is pretty lousy and smells extra bad when a previously convicted felon is doing it.

Imagine a previously convicted drug dealer finding a clever loophole in the law to sell cocaine publicly. I admire racing engineers who push the boundaries and interpretation of the rules in order to gain a competitive advantage but I do not think much of those who find ways exploiting the weaknesses of others for their gain especially when they were caught doing it previously.

The prosecutors involved with ST may have to get equally creative to nail him and provided they use the same laws everyone else does it will be all fair in my books. We'll see how this one pans out but I would not bet against the government when they get an idea in their heads. Sorry Tucker but bullying goes both ways.

 

Some of the nicest people I've met are also scoundrels. Interestingly, they are often some of the most vehemently-defended people, when accusations are leveled.

Remember the case of the Fchat-known lawyer who represented Scott Rothstein's wife? Lots of people stood up for his character. IIRC, he had previously lost his license elsewhere. And, he did some VERY illegal things in representing her. Yet, people were saying we didn't know his side of the story. That he's aces in their books, and we should all STFU and stop speculating.

I don't know ST. I don't know the truth of the allegations. However, often, where there's smoke, there's fire. That's not dispositive, and he's certainly innocent until proven guilty (in a criminal venue, that's beyond reasonable doubt). He could even plead the case out, accept a lesser sentence and move on. Whatever. Regardless, racing has not only ALWAYS attracted the wealthy, but it has compelled lots of folks to do sordid things in order to participate in racing (the Whittingtons, Randy Lanier and Greg Loles, for example).

CW

 

If 1/10 of the allegations against him are true, it is enough to make someone vomit. The descriptions of the business are disgusting and indefensible and no way legal. I feel pretty certain that enough government resources will be spent to find out. Yes he's employed people I know and a sport I dearly love. But what is described if true (and I've not yet heard a defense on the merits-only legal immunity defenses) is not tolerable even if he funds things we enjoy.

 

Not sure if it's relevant to this discussion or not but Motorsport.com is running an
article about Level 5's victory at this year's 24 Hours of Daytona by Anthem Communications
(whomever they are).

Prominently mentioned is Tucker's "101st victory". I'm assuming these 101 victories
encompass all of his race wins through the amateur ranks on up through ALMS, etc.

BHW

 

no clue who anthem is, but yes 101 victories from SCCA, Ferrari Challenge on up. all part of building the legend of Scott Tucker.

I bet he once wrestled a bear over a picnic basket too.

 

Criminal allegations aside, I do understand the guy can drive.

And, that's admirable that he was interested and committed enough to develop his talent to the point that he can participate in a relatively credible way. I don't know that any pro teams would pick ST up as a paid driver, but if I had unlimited resources, I'd be doing the same/similar. I know I'd like to have his paddock set-up!

As for the best equipment or bringing a gun to a knife fight, it's probably true that his equipment is the best on the grid in the lower ranks. To some extent that may over-estimate and, thereby, undermine his talent, but if he passes tech, he can race in my book. Other teams/drivers are just going to have to figure out how to get faster to beat him. Did Penske's spending on preparation, organization and testing de-value the team's accomplishments? If anything, it blazed a trail, gave other teams an example to follow and basically professionalized the sport.

At the pro levels, he's not able to keep up with the werkes teams, as they can outspend and out-develop even him.

CW

 

you can get some pretty good comparisons of ST vs. his teammates and other drivers in class through this website:

Driver / Car lap breakdowns

just pick a race ST was in and sort by car number or whatnot.

yes, he is a talented gentleman driver.

 

I agree. The man passes he can race and if his prep is 110% and he has an advantage everyone else is going to have to step up to compete. In some ways you could say guys like him bring SCCA runoffs to the next level and increase its prestige when people are willing to bring a "tech legal" gun to a knife fight.

I raced my first Runoffs this october just because it was in California. Wow! what a show. I race for fun not glory. I spent more that week than nearly a year of regional racing. It wasn't enough! Unfortunately, I knew money counted in racing but this is the first time I experienced it. Wow the well-funded "teams" were amazing while I arrived with just a racecar and a checkbook. In general those who invested more won more. I guess that's fair.

 

top 10 in T2 at the runoffs ain't too shabby

what's the difference between T1 and T2? lots of similar cars in both classes. haven't kept up with how those classes have changed in a while.

 

Who can keep up with SCCA? There are 27 classes!

CW

 

truth!

(actually I think there's 30-ish classes, only 27 are Runoffs eligible )

 

bingo.

 

I had an excellent experience. SCCA runs killer events. Rules changed big at the end of 2012 season for the corvette mafia. corvette in T1 is now like the old STO, so wings and things + engine mods and got faster. Corvettes in T2 have become more of a detuned 2012 T1, so took away headers,smaller tires, kept good brakes, added weight, added a restrictor and got slower. I want to be lazy and arrive and drive so T2 was the way to go. My friends in T1 are ripping off splitters with track excursions and blowing motors. It is exactly how I thought it would be. I think the NASA nats in ST2 were non-existent because of the motor carnage of the 2014 season since many of the ST2 players ran SCCA too. My T2 vette is a lawnmower just add gas. The whole week at the Runoffs I added no oil and just changed tires. Well...maybe part of the reason I was 9th? Perhaps if I played with the set-up there is more time in there.

 

I don't know what the answer is but if you look at SCCA's primary competition, NASA you will find that the simplest class for the largest number of cars to fit into are the ST classes. Those 3 classes amazingly have sparse competition. This years West NASA nats the ST2 class was non-existent. It was so bad that my friend (we raced former T1 together) in his ST2 vette decided to start at the back of the ST1 grid and took second in his underoptimized ST2 car! Even the pro series have participation problems from F1 all the way down to SCCA.

 

Don't hold back John, let us know how you really feel!
Seriously, I know we differ on this topic, but I am very glad we can still be friends.