Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim
Folks,
We can gripe and complain about this forever. How about some solutions? Are there things that can be done from a program perspective to deter the desire for doping? Assuming the tire is doped to soften it, can the feature length be increased to the point that a doped tire wouldn't last? The one tire for qualification, heat and feature could also help this, which some organizations have adopted. The durometer rule can be effective assuming whatever durometer is in calibration (meaning it is tested against a test block prior to each use) but it would mean that any durometers used by teams at the shop to confirm the tires' hardness is also in calibration. Seems like some ambiguity here, as well. I believe we're all in agreement, though, that the current testing protocol is suspect to some degree so, is there a way to eliminate the testing necessity altogether?
Tim Simmons
|
I wonder if the three teams/owners that publicly stated on social media that they were done with USAC will show up at the owners meeting Monday and have a proposal for a more reliable, more repeatable, tire testing solution than current or if anyone will. I've seen lots of accusations, theories and hypotheses on here, but this solution (proposed by a couple of people/posters) is the only one I've seen. While good, it will require a great deal of management to insure that the testing device is correctly and accurately calibrated.
Did USAC mishandle the communications on this issue?? IMO, ABSOLUTELY!! BUT, penalizing teams without 100% confidence in the test results would be a miscarriage of justice, again, IMO. And it would have likely resulted in a similar amount of bad feelings and conspiracy theories.
I am not a car owner, driver or official, and never have been. I am a lifelong FAN of sprint car racing, and I enjoy watching the best drivers compete in the best cars on a variety of surfaces on an equal footing. To me that is what racing is about.