> Take the '89 Nationals as an example. Oh, never mind. That's already
> been talked to death...
<<<'89 Nationals - I don't think I've heard that story. (groan from the
audience, I'm sure)>>>
This event is the reason why redundant timing systems are now required.
Apparently, the battery in the motorhome on the south course ran down on
the second day which gave the timing system inadequate voltage. This
caused the times to be quite erratic and nonlinear. The best example was
Chuck Sample - then a member of the SEB. His 3 runs varied by 8 seconds
although he swore that they should have been within a second of each
other. He protested and lost. But he was right. But he was also wrong
because there was nothing that could really be done about it...
Paul Foster
|