|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
25 Nov 2006, 09:13 (Ref:1774616) | #26 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 402
|
Quote:
Good regulations try to create some stability, so we get good close racing and lots of variety. It's obviously not an easy thing to achieve and there will always be someone who is unhappy about something, but it's got to be better than the boom-and-bust cycle. I think most people want to see close racing and variety of machinery - it's what makes le mans so special. We don't want to see one big-spending manufacturer disappearing into the distance or a field of identical cars, even if they are porsche 956/962s. |
|||
|
25 Nov 2006, 12:25 (Ref:1774696) | #27 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,418
|
Quote:
the 60s to 90s were the pinicle of cheating. or 'enhansment' Gentleman NEVER cheat. Those darn chief engineers, yah just cant trust them. |
|||
__________________
"When the fear of death out weighs the thrill of speed, brake." LG |
25 Nov 2006, 15:01 (Ref:1774767) | #28 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,555
|
Quote:
I want close and exciting racing as much as anyone but I don't believe throwing money and manufacturers at it with a free rule book is the answer. They'll simply outspend and out muscle each other until it implodes. The Maserati MC12 could very well have been a modern example of this - how much better than any other car would that be without it's harsh restrictions? Particularly considering there are only two of them in this year's championship. Also, remember what happened last time round? The FIA GT championship was nearly dead, only 18-20 months on from when it started. Why would it be remotely different this time, in a world where money is at even more of a premuim? |
|||
|
25 Nov 2006, 15:56 (Ref:1774780) | #29 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 18,856
|
Quote:
|
||
|
25 Nov 2006, 19:47 (Ref:1774861) | #30 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,351
|
Quote:
Your viewing what I wrote with blinders on. As for the mantra, "CLOSE RACING", if it comes from teams being well prepared, it is fine, if it exists because of contrived equalization rules, it is a farce. I go for the cars, and when I had favorite makes, blow outs suited me just fine, wspecially if the right car won, but a close race was just a little extra frosting, especially if the right car won. Last edited by Bob Riebe; 25 Nov 2006 at 19:55. |
|||
|
25 Nov 2006, 20:07 (Ref:1774869) | #31 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
First off; what do Level Playing Field and people cheating have in common? A level playing field implies that the rules are the same for everyone. Cheating is cheating. The trick is to be able to catch the cheaters and maintain the level playing field.
The rules should be set and maintained at a certain level of continuity,as to not disqualify a project that was legitimately started and conforming to the previous rule. Sometimes this is impossible,due to limitations in the base structure of the car etc... That is where variances come into play( with the variance being satisfied as soon as possible),to keep the large investment it takes to field an entry from becoming a waste. Large changes should be announced well in advance(3 yrs. ?) as to make compliance possible. As with everything you can not please all the people all the time. As to the myths of who needs who, its a symbiotic relationship. One does not function without the other. They both need each other to put the product in front of the fan,PERIOD. Sanctioning bodies(unless parallel) do not wish to have similar rules,as to attract entries in their races and not someone else's. Once again the mighty dollar(euro....) at work. And as with almost anything in life,the mighty $ is the key to winning. Yes you can be the best and win.But if you are then somebody is willing to fork over big $$$,to get or supress you so they can win. So yes it is the best car, best team, best man at that moment that wins. But the object is to give lots of men the chance to be in that moment!!! Thus we have rules and sanctioning bodies. And some of those are very interested in the preservation of Sports Car racing and some just want the $$. IMO the ACO is the top of the heap. And at this time they are LeMans and LeMans is the Pinnacle of Sports Car racing. They are also trying to introduce(inject) future technologies into Sports Car racing to insure the future of the sport. It is not an easy balancing act but they have and are trying to maintain,grow and insure the future of the sport at the same time. Could it have been better? Yes. Can it be better? Yes. But that being said LeMans is still being run so their efforts have proven to be effective so far. L.P. |
||
|
25 Nov 2006, 22:00 (Ref:1774939) | #32 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 402
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Playing with the weight | Pingguest | Formula One | 23 | 27 Aug 2005 16:16 |
So what is Trulli playing at? | Knowlesy | Formula One | 23 | 14 Sep 2004 18:57 |
Cosworth - what are they playing at?! | Logrence | Formula One | 14 | 24 Aug 2003 22:54 |
What games are you playing right now. | Sharky | Virtual Racers | 30 | 20 Jul 2002 14:53 |