washburn wrote:
>
> There's a great idea, let's take it out on the dues paying membership!
> I sense that you were just putting this out as a fun "what if", but the
> underlying message is that the "SCCA" will class cars in Solo for
> political reasons. Even though you were kidding (?), I think it is
> important for folks to know that this is not how things work. I sure
> hope that my belief in our fellow competitors who make up the SEB, SCAC,
> ..., who really do the classing, is not misguided.
> --
> Patrick Washburn <washburn@dwave.net>
> Wausau, WI Land of Cheese
> 95 DS Neon
> Moooooooooo.
Patrick is correct. I was KIDDING ( note to self: create smiley face
macro and use it frequently ).
Seriously, I enjoy this sport tremendously. Without the SEB, SCAC etc.
the competition would be much less fair. I applaud the work the paid
SCCA folks are doing in Colorado. I doubt any of them consider it "just
a job" and put in lots of extra effort because of love of the sport. I
was shocked to hear the negative comments about Howard Duncan a few
weeks ago on this list. After seeing him in action I have nothing but
respect.
Patrick, I do think its a little naive to believe that there will be NO
political motives in classing. We are all human; it happens. I also
think that classing cars must be the most thankless, difficult job there
can be. First of all, even with the data from many events, the choices
can be in error using hindsight. Second, new cars are unknowns; classing
them based on manufacturers' HP, torque and weight specs is a big
unavoidable dice roll because THE MANUFACTURERS LIE. Third, no matter
what you do, some auto-xer will find it "unfair" (unfair is generally
agreed to mean that it puts me at a competitive disadvantage).
So while I really agree with you please let me joke about the SCCA
"getting even" with Daimler-Chrysler. OK? :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
Regards,
Alan "my car should move to I stock" Pozner
|