vintage-race
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Rules and 'Cheating'

To: Rogsie@telesistech.com, S800Racer@aol.com, vintage-race@autox.team.net,
Subject: Re: Rules and 'Cheating'
From: WSpohn4@aol.com
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 10:34:55 EST
In a message dated 1/18/01 5:14:18 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
Rogsie@telesistech.com writes:


> There are RC's at all levels of racing. 

Yes, I know - I'm one of them, when placed in a much faster grid.

> 
> Since the runoffs have been at Mid-Ohio, I've been every year. I hate it 
> when
> some SCCA racer claims that vintage racing is not real racing, partly 
> because
> there is no contact. 

I agree - if you are doing it right, there should be very little contact. 
Body contact happens when someone fails to 'do it right'.  I frankly think 
that 'real man' thought and talk has little to do with racing, and that 
bluster is often, but not always, exhibited in inverse proportion to driving 
skill.

> 
> Oh, and yes, I did race SCCA for a couple years, but the vintage cars and
> non-contact racing is more to my liking. And yes, I watch my mirrors cause 
> I'm
> not the fastest guy out there

Good for you - so do I.



> Also, Bill, if your not devoting 100% of your thought process to what's going
> on on the track, then I think you should sit that one out. I've never seen
> anyone talking on a cell phone while on the track, but we all know what
> happens when people don't pay attention when driving, even on the street.
> 

Where did that come from? Please reread my post. I never said anything about 
not paying attention. But if you think the level of attention, of awareness 
of what is going on around you, is as high in a vintage grid as an SCCA 
national, I would disagree with you.


> Back when I used to race bicycles, I came up with this little thought: No
> matter how fast or slow you think you are, there will always be someone who
> will be faster or slower than you, if not today, then tomorrow.
> 
> 

And I don't think I said anything that varies from that. Why is it that when 
I characterise slower, and sometimes less attentive drivers as roving 
chicanes, that some people feel bound to come to their rescue, when from 
where I sit, no slur was articulated against them in the first place?

Help me out here - my thought is that all, or most of the guys that took 
exception to that innocent (in the sense of being neutral, or without any 
element of condemnation) characterisation are American. Not wanting to start 
an international incident here, but I have noted reactions like that from 
friends who are American liberals (we usually agree not to discuss certain 
topics so as to remain friends).

There is an odd (to much of the rest of the world, anyway) strain of 
egalitarianism that says that all people are created equal, not in the 
laudable sense that all should be afforded equal opportunity, but in the more 
literal sense that they really ARE somehow equal. When you see some 
disadvantaged guy (maybe he isn't as gifted as the average guy in terms of 
intelligence, monetary means, physiognomy, or whatever), the sort of person I 
am talking about rushes to state that said disadvantaged person is just as 
good as anyone else etc., often in the absence of anyone saying anything to 
the contrary.

So let me clarify - there are some people that do NOT have the skill, talent, 
whatever, to race a car in a safe AND competitively fast manner. No amount of 
egalitarianism will change that. But they are not lesser beings because of 
that, any more than the good regional level SCCA driver is a lesser person 
just because he will never have the wherewithal to run at the Formula 1 
level. 

In discussing vintage racing, one inevitably touches on speed differentials 
resulting from equipment or driver differences. Can we agree that every time 
a mention of slower drivers comes up, or drivers with less innate skill, we 
are not uttering slurs against their character that can be remedied only at 
dawn, with oil guns at 20 paces? And that there is no need to leap to their 
theoretical defence? We can save a lot of bandwidth (what's left after my too 
lengthy response, anyway) that way.

To further outrage the people that took exception to me saying that there is 
a difference between vintage 'racing' and amateur (SCCA/CASC) racing, let me 
add that I received mail from people that participate in current racing, 
saying 'Right on - the other guys will never understand" and mail from 
vintage racers saying "What do you mean we don't do REAL racing?" So there 
are apparently two schools of thought on this, it isn't just my overwrought 
imagination.

Bill Spohn
(who runs an MGA, for heaven's sake - bottom 25% group, if he is lucky)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>