I was kinda half-reading the thread on wheel size changes in Stock, when I
stumbled across this little gem of a quote:
<<The guy I protested for the 6" rims, and who had argued strenuously that
they provided no competitive advantage, put legal (5") ones back on his
car after the protest and went from finishing 1st-3rd in a hotly
contested Regional class to finishing no better than 5th for the
remainder of the year. He sold the car after that season. 'Nuff said.>>
Now my opinion on "weenie" protests - protests for "letter of the law"
infractions that have no bearing on the car's performance - is well known. This,
however, is _not_ a "weenie" protest. The item protested was fairly signifigant
and appears to have had an effect on performance. (Of course, it may well have
been that the protestee was bummed over being protested, and just lost interest,
and so wasn't driving as hard or as well, but for the sake of argument let's
assume that driver motivation wasn't an issue here.)
The protestor here was entirely within his rights to protest here, and did
nothing wrong.
But look at the _effects_ of this protest:
1) The class situation pre-protest is described as "hotly contested" implying
that there were at least two cars in class that were capable of winning, and
that winning margins were small. It can be assumed, based on this description,
that the cheater was only as good as the other best cars in class, and wasn't
running away with everything.
2) By removing the cheat, the protested car was rendered no longer competitive;
so much so that the car was sold - perhaps the owner even left the sport.
3) This is not ProSolo, or Nationals - this is _Regional_ racing. As
self-important as us National types like to feel sometimes, these guys are the
bread and butter of the sport. It may be reasonable to expect a Pro to change
cars at the drop of a hat, but we certainly can't expect Regional-only
competitors to switch cars to say/become competitive (especially in Stock).
It looks to me like a competitor took steps to increase his car's performance to
where it was on par with the top dogs in his class, and then stopped there. He
was then pounced on by a rulebook lawyer, forced to play by the letter of the
rules, and the net result was a loss for nearly everybody. The class lost, as
competition was reduced, the competitor lost, as he was no longer competitive,
and the SCCA lost, as it (may have) lost a member, and another brick was added
to the "the SCCA is full of protesting lawyers" monument.
In fact, about the only person who did benefit was the protestor, as there was
one less person in contention for a class win in a given event. While the
protest was entirely legal, and entirely correct, and he cannot be faulted for
his actions, methinks I detect a whiff of Oscar Mayer in the air....
While I believe very strongly that competitors have the innate right to protect
themselves from cheaters seeking an unfair advantage, and I believe that the
SCCA should make and enforce rules that keep costs down (especially for Stock
(ie "entry level") classes) I also believe that the rules we have today do not
provide enough leeway for competitors with uncompetitive cars to make those cars
competitive.
"Got the wrong car for the class? Too bad." What kind of attitude is that? How
can that be justified in a downhome, grassroots sport like autox?
If this is starting to sound like the "Bohemian vs Prussian" argument, or that
it sounds like I'm starting to think about specific rules allowences for
specific cars, then you get a gold star.
Can anyone provide an argument against:
- Porche timing chain adjusters
- Neon motor mounts
- 17" wheels for C5 Corvettes
- F-body subframe connectors
- F-body aftermarket rear diffs (using stock gear ratios)
_besides_ the "slippery slope / Pandora's Box" argument?
The "It'd be too much work for the SEB" argument isn't valid. The SEB works for
Us, the Membership. If We decide that specific car allowences are what We want,
then the SEB had better put its heels together and do it. The SEB works for the
Members, not vice versa. (sorry SEB guys - sometimes "right" and "easy" are
mutually exclusive)
Food for thought.
[BTW, "protest guy" please don't get in a huff about being used as an example. I
left your name off the quote on purpose, as you didn't do anything wrong, and so
I didn't want this to turn into a personal attack on your decision. If anything
is at fault, it's the system, not you personally. Peace, brother.]
DG
|