Well I've had plenty of time to think about this (which means I should
know to keep quiet) but I thought I'd open discussion on the canceled
CART race.
Originally, I tended to agree that canceling was a good idea. How could
anyone argue that a driver should risk his life needlessly? But my gut
feeling was that the race should have gone on. I can now explain why.
Racing is about driving to the limits of the car and driver. At this
track, apparently the driver was the limit, not the car. This may have
been new to many drivers, but it is racing. By the drivers deciding
that they did not want to race because they might black out means that
they did not have the self control to drive slower than full throttle.
Think about that. If 8-10 laps at full speed is all that you can safely
drive, then that obviously becomes your driving limit. Adjust your race
strategy to handle it and go on. I don't know about 300-mile races, but
on the 500-mile races, the drivers drive hard (not 100%) for 100 miles;
then cruise for 300 miles; then race for the final 100 miles. They
rarely drive 100% except in qualifying anyway.
If they would have raced, I feel there would have been 3 types of
drivers out there. There will be the average CART driver (average on a
higher driving level than most and physically fit) who would adjust his
race strategy to allow for several 8-10 lap bursts when he felt they
were needed. There would have been a few drivers who would have been
minimally affected by the G forces and probably would have run away from
the field (But that's racing.). And lastly there would have been a few
drivers who would not have admitted that they were the "weakest link"
and they would have exceeded the limit and crashed. That's racing.
Lastly, If I got any of the "facts" incorrect, please let me know. The
information on just what the drivers' said/felt is second hand.
Charlie Mathews
///
/// autox-cm@autox.team.net mailing list
///
|