I firmly believe that without a protest system, we'd have many more
illegal cars. We don't have a legality-based tech inspection system.
Our only compliance checks are via the protest system. The protest
system benefits legal drivers, and for us soloists, that's the vast
majority of us. To object to the protest process is, to my way of
thinking, a vote for looking the other way at best, and at worst, a vote
for penalizing the legal guys.
It's noteworthy that in Solo 2 it seems lately that the majority of cars
protested are found legal. This is a very, very good thing! Unlike our
road racing brethren, who have in some years past had to get all the way
down to third or sometimes 4th place to find a legal finisher, Solo-ists
are *usually* found legal.
I served on a protest committee in 1993 when a Miata was protested for
having it's Koni shock perch in a different groove than all the others
in the class. That protest was filed by an impound official.
The year before that I was involved in protesting a 914 which had it's
Koni shocks in a lower groove than the rest of the 914 contingent
thought it should have been. The point is, this is a visible item, not
part of some ill-founded fishing exhibition. The groove you use for
your perch heights on Koni shocks is a fairly common protest, with
fairly predictable results. However, after serving on numerous PC's,
I'm amazed how the clearest, most cut and dried, black and white case
can suddenly go gray when protested. This was the case with Katie and
Kevin.
Kevin found that Katie's car was not using the same perch height that
his car, and others, had needed to be legal. My understanding is that
the issue had been discussed prior but was not resolved. And Katie had
good reason to believe that her car was in fact legal in that same
groove. There was a real disagreement as to how the PC would rule on
this. This is exactly the kind of stuff that meaningful protests are
made of.
The PC concurred with Katie, stating that the amount the shock lacked in
height was equal to or less than the amount of "squish" observed in the
lower bushing, and further, they found the "squish" in the lower bushing
legal.
Kevin should NOT be impugned for bringing the issue to the Protest
Committee. Remember, this wasn't a fishing exibition...this was a
visible item which the protestor thought would be illegal if it were on
his car the same way. And as a side note, the next time I'm protested,
I'd appreciate it very much if it would be handled as Kevin handled it.
Kevin was careful to file paperwork in such a way that Katie was not
aware until after her last run. This is a very fair-minded approach,
and one for which Kevin should be lauded.
My esteem for both Kevin McKormick and Katie Kelly has been buoyed by
their conduct during the whole episode. I feel that both handled the
stresses of protest extremely well, and continuously took the high road.
Had there been malice in Kevin's actions he would have presented the
protest at the start of the 2nd days runs, and further, he would have
appealed this decision. The fact that he did neither speaks volumes.
Likewise, Katie had plenty of opportunity to bad mouth Kevin during the
process, but despite the urging of others, she never did that. It's
rare to find a protested competitor with the strength of character and
conviction shown by Katie. And that Katie was found legal was just a
bonus!
In my view, both drivers are to be commended.
--Byron
|