Funny, I could not find my post of the last couple years on this
subject. Anyway, to quote Richard Petty: "Cheat Neat!"
And my comment: more rules make more cheaters!
IMHO: As for Donohue and Penske, and the whole Trans-AM series, cheating
was institutionalized! Factory $$ and pressure to win made cheating
necessary and acceptable. The SCCA (Tracy Bird?) kept everything sorta
under control, but looked the other way to make competition closer.
Vintage racing is about fun, not $$. If someone wants to go faster, so
be it - I'll bet if all the drivers voted on which of their competitors
were cheating, the percentage would be 90%+!
And, of course they would be in the "honest" 10%!
If the game plan is to have fun and put on a show for everybody, who the
@#$%^&*()_+ cares?
Winter sucks - too much time for contemplation and too little
competition!
Back to hibernation!
Ciao,
Jim
John.Desantis@inficon.com wrote:
>
> Tom wrote
>
> "Ought to remove the incentive for cheating, wouldn't you think? It isn't
> racing if it isn't legal."
>
> If you really believe this, read Mark Donohue's book "The Unfair
> Advantage". Here is a man who rose to the top of our sport with the
> philosophy of making himself and his cars "BETTER" than the next guy. He
> mentions going toe to toe with SCCA on rules several times as well, so he
> must not have been "within the rules" at all times. Or may be he just bent
> the rules.
>
> Is bending the rules the same as cheating?
--
Jim Hayes Fotec/Cable U
hayes@mediaone.net http://www.CableU.net
jeh@fotec.com http://www.fotec.com/
All generalizations, with the possible exception of this one, are false!
|