Tweet
Listen,
I have been around racing my whole life and I have come across a few things that stick in my mind. One of them is engine height. Without any discrepancy, an inch and three eights, is an inch and three eights, is an inch and three eights. I don’t see any leeway for a discussion on the rule. Whether or not a speed advantage has or has not occurred in a special situation has no bearing on the rule, and hopefully never will. That is why the rule is so strict. If we decide to make special accommodations for special instances we will find ourselves in a racing community where the importance of a race for someone and last name means more than the rule itself. I wouldn’t be going out on a limb too far to say that if the rule was debatable we would have racers claiming that their engine was high after a heat because they got bumped or hit in the first turn. That sounds pretty harsh but I believe that we are on the cusp of this thinking already. When it comes to an inspector’s call to disqualify a driver, the decision MUST be on technical specifications ONLY. In a sense, the inspector should be inspecting the equipment like he or she had their back to the actual race the whole time. I think I relate to a lot of drivers in the sport when I state that I have been disqualified for a high engine due to loose things or stress on the engine while on the racecourse. When I was “pitched” the inspector couldn’t care less about how my engine became illegal, the only thing that mattered was that it was illegal. On the other end of the spectrum, an engine height that is too low due to shim stick or kick out bracket failure on the race course is not grounds for a re-run of the heat. Sounds pretty silly when the opposite of a too high engine is put into a scenario.
We do all that we can to go fast and stay within the rules but sometimes we are just lucky, and sometimes we are just unlucky. When we are unlucky the rules and system seems to be unfair. I guess that’s racing in the APBA.
I have been around racing my whole life and I have come across a few things that stick in my mind. One of them is engine height. Without any discrepancy, an inch and three eights, is an inch and three eights, is an inch and three eights. I don’t see any leeway for a discussion on the rule. Whether or not a speed advantage has or has not occurred in a special situation has no bearing on the rule, and hopefully never will. That is why the rule is so strict. If we decide to make special accommodations for special instances we will find ourselves in a racing community where the importance of a race for someone and last name means more than the rule itself. I wouldn’t be going out on a limb too far to say that if the rule was debatable we would have racers claiming that their engine was high after a heat because they got bumped or hit in the first turn. That sounds pretty harsh but I believe that we are on the cusp of this thinking already. When it comes to an inspector’s call to disqualify a driver, the decision MUST be on technical specifications ONLY. In a sense, the inspector should be inspecting the equipment like he or she had their back to the actual race the whole time. I think I relate to a lot of drivers in the sport when I state that I have been disqualified for a high engine due to loose things or stress on the engine while on the racecourse. When I was “pitched” the inspector couldn’t care less about how my engine became illegal, the only thing that mattered was that it was illegal. On the other end of the spectrum, an engine height that is too low due to shim stick or kick out bracket failure on the race course is not grounds for a re-run of the heat. Sounds pretty silly when the opposite of a too high engine is put into a scenario.
We do all that we can to go fast and stay within the rules but sometimes we are just lucky, and sometimes we are just unlucky. When we are unlucky the rules and system seems to be unfair. I guess that’s racing in the APBA.
Ed.
Comment