Since the beginning of motorsports, rulesmakers have fought a constant battle with those who design and build the cars running under those regulations.
As one key management insider once told this columnist, “About all we can do is slow progress, not stop it.” Perhaps, but look to Formula One to see what happens when regulators let their zeal for manipulation go too far.
So many new restrictive rules have been introduced in the past few years in F-1 that even the participants need a lawyer at their sides to help figure out what can and cannot be done.
Racing used to be simple: The person getting to the finish line first, or covering the most distance in an event, was the winner. Even the dumbest among us could figure that out. But today the desire to create a “satisfactory” environment where not only does the outcome meet the expectations of the rulesmakers, but also the way that outcome is achieved must meet desired criteria.
In road racing, Grand Am’s Rolex Sports Car Series has been tightly controlled from a technical and racing viewpoint to maintain competitive equality and an on-track decorum that would appeal to the late “Dear Abby.”
In many ways Grand Am accomplished what it set out to do. However, there are a number of folks who suggest that its inability to appeal to the public in the numbers it would like has its root cause in those very same restrictive rules.
Now, the American Le Mans Series is facing another regulatory challenge: how to bring back equality between the LMP1 Audi turbo diesel R10s and the supposedly lesser performing LMP2 Porsche RS Spyders, which under the guidance of Roger Penske have won every ALMS round outright since the Audis last occupied that position at St. Petersburg in March.
By the time you read this, the ALMS should have already acted — most likely increasing the fuel capacity of the R10s by four to five liters, right around half the amount that was deducted from their tanks at the beginning of 2007.
What was, perhaps, the final consideration in taking this action was the defeat the Audi camp suffered a week and a half ago at Road America. The Penske Porsche of Romain Dumas and Timo Bernhard beat them to the line at a track the R10s were expected to dominate.
The thing is that they weren’t beaten to the line by that much, in this case the margin being well under two seconds.
On several other occasions, their failure to come out ahead has been due less to an inferior performance factor than it has the well thought-out strategy of the Penske camp. Moreover, the ALMS’s original thinking in placing fuel restrictions on the Audi diesels was to prevent a repeat of the 2006 campaign, in which the R10s simply ran away from the rest of the field.
Indeed, Tim Mayer, the president of the International Motor Sports Ass’n, which is responsible for the rules, has indicated to NSSN and others that he would like to see an equalized battle for overall victory between the LMP1 and LMP2 contenders, in effect creating a single prototype contest.
So what happens in 2008 if the Audi engineers revamp their cars to make them more suitable for the race tracks and condition of North America?
Do we return to the “bad old days” of 2006 or do IMSA and the ALMS play a dance with the regulatory throttle in an attempt to key everything in line?
Most pilots will tell you that keeping ahead of the power curve is far more preferable than trying to catch up. The problem is finding the right power setting and maintaining it throughout the flight.
And in racing terms, where ever-advancing technology can change the equation almost instantaneously, it can be the hardest thing to achieve.