This is a no-win situation for the AMA. They look like buffoons eother way. Remember, this rule has been enforced against Kawasaki and Yamaha already.
The purpose of the rule was to combat additives that would allow high compression 2 strokes, especially 125's, to be competitive against four strokes. They should have junked the rule, as no one is running 125's anymore.
But to penalize a competitor for an offense that is completely beyond his or his team's control is not our purpose - this is proof that the rules need to be changed. If you ordered a 55 gal drum of race fuel as your race frequently does, would you check the fuel before you used it? - No. You just order what the rules tell you to.
Fact- the AMA made this rule because of FIM standards. Those standards DO NOT take into account all the differing situations (dust in air or human contact and such) that race fuels go through during race weeks. Are those standards too high? According to VP fuels and many factory teams- yes. Does the AMA need to address this- yes. Will they make the Carmichael situation stand. They should because you can't change the past (remember Yamaha and Kawasaki got nabbed, too). In short, I am a Ricky fan but the rule should stand this season and be changed by next or at-least by outdoor season.
This reminds me a lot the doping issues in many sports. It's really hard for us readers to know what is actually going on since so little information is released.
There are going to be cases that are beyond doubt, like if the limit is 0.005 and they find a bike with fuel with a level of 0.05. But then there could be a bike with a level of 0.006 that is a result of poor quality control from the fuel company. Maybe this is what happened here and is prompting the AMA investigation.
If they'd actually caught Carmichaels crew doctoring the fuel then it'd be different, just like failing a blood test is different then being caught with a car load of steroids.
In the end just like anything else the team is responsible for it's fuel, maybe they should be testing the fuel, at least when it's the high $$ factory supported teams on works bikes.
They are emulated because they are successful, financially speaking. Unfortunately, that "success" confers respectability on an inferior product, but that doesn't seem to bother the average fan who just doesn't "get" that roadracing stuff.
I can't stand NASCAR--never have been able to since I was a little kid in the 60's and 70's. The racing is kept artificially close through the use of ridiculous numbers of caution flags. The rules change on a weekly basis. It is the professional wrestling of motorsports.
As bad as the AMA is, it's still better than NASCAR. Racing in general has too many rules. It's too officious. Too often, outcomes are decided away from the racetrack. That doesn't make it more dramatic or interesting to me. It causes me to lose interest in the sport and to lose respect for the sanctioning body. If Supercross or Superbike ever get as bad as NASCAR in this respect I'll move on to something else.
Every racing orginization changes rules to include many brands and keep the racing close, or at least they should. NASCAR does it better than anyone else in the world. I understand you don't like it. Lots of people don't like lots of things. I think NASCAR racing is certainly more interesting than watching the same guy win the same way on the same bike week after week, and year after year, as has happened in AMA Superbike which you seem to like alot. I think it's boring. At least the AMA bent the rules to get the Buell in the Daytona 200. Last year we saw a 3 man Pro Honda Parade with 45 privateers used as backmarkers. Maybe the AMA could use a little WWF itself.
No thanks. Let the best man win, even if it's the same guy every week. Changing the rules all the time to make it more "fair" makes a worse product for everyone. It smacks of the kind of socialistic thinking that pervades our culture. Exalting mediocrity and penalizing excellence isn't what motorsports should be about.
Except that a racing league is not administering the SAT, it's meant to be selling a good race to existing, and especially potential, fans. Bureaucratic rigidity in the face of crap races, and a small and dwindling fan base, would be the socialistic sin in this case.
Thanks for that link. I seem to recall that lead levels in ordinary leaded gasoling were on the order of 2g/L to 3g/L, which is many times higher than the limit used by AMA. What level did they measure and what was the error limit of their test?? That would tell me a lot about how good their test was. Oxygen limits would limit the use of oxygenated octane boosters like MTBE, ethanol, methanol and my favorite, pentacarbonyl. Toluene and naphthalene also work. But, I doubt anyone would bother with any of these, since race gas comes as high as 110 octane anyway. If the lead level was instituted to protect catalytic converters, what does that have to do with offroad racing? Nothing about this rule makes any sense.
I agree. I'm not advocating bureaucratic rigidity. In fact, I'm against it and that's why I think Carmichael's penalty should be overturned.
Of course rules have to be adjusted periodically, but making races artificially close by penalizing fast riders (drivers) by changing the rules weekly, a la NASCAR, and bringing out caution flags all the time, a la NASCAR, do not make for good racing. They make for dumbed down least common denominator racing. If that's the recipe for "success" then, again, no thanks.
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.