On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 08:58:01 -0800 "Tibbals, Paul" <PHT1@pge.com> wrote:
>Someone else made the point that I was looking for, I suppose, so here's my
>restatement: "Reasonable" people (IMO) would look at a car whose driver beat
>them, and would choose not to protest the car based on a breakdown or wearing
>out of a component, where that breakdown did not give the driver an advantage.
Paul,
I think we should give you fair warning that people who invest an enormous
amount of time, money, and effort into getting their name in the rulebook as a
National Champion don't always stop to reason before plunking down hard cash to
protest someone who beat them. SCCA tries to discourage unfounded protests by
retaining protest fees but that seems to be far more common in road racing than
autocrossing, and is not used to punish protests of rules violations where no
competitive advantage has been gained.
The rule book says if a modification is not specifically approved, then it
isn't allowed, and if doubt to ask the SEB for clarification. Reasoning over
rules is assigned to them for better or worse.
For local events, disclosing nonconforming modifications to your competitors
and asking them if they mind is advisable in the interest of fair play.
Rich
Sign up for Internet Service under $10 dollars a month, at
http://isp.BlueLight.com
|