Chip,
You are very observant. Apparently the British version of "Vintage Racing"
is far different than the US version. Frankly the Brits are really racing,
and that's fine. That's just there belief system. Maybe they simply have
more cars to draw on. However, in the US we are trying to still emphasize
"vintage racing" not racing old cars. That's really the great debate,
isn't it? That is, do we (US vintage racers) want to "vintage race" or
simply "race" vintage cars? From what I can tell, we would prefer to
"vintage race." That's the challenge of our sport in the US --- to NOT let
it evolve into what the Brits are doing and be able to let drivers like
Sterling (to pick on him) KNOW that there is a difference here. He surely
has the skill to tell the difference and can act accordingly (And he has a
year to think about the difference, thanks to Steve Earle.) Nothing says
the ethic has to be the same on both sides of the pond.
-----Original Message-----
>I recall a discussion a few months back, on vintage racing, and whether
>or not one should really race the cars, as they're pieces of history,
>etc.
>
>The topic centered around a move that Stirling Moss did at the Monterey
>Historics, and whether he should have behaved that way w/ the historic
>machine he was driving.
>
>While watching Speedvision last night, I watched a show on Goodwood
>'99, and it featured a retro race. Everyone dressed up in vintage
>clothes, etc.
>
>Well, during one of the races, Alan DeCadenet punted someone off, for
>'taking his racing line'. He damaged both cars, and his excuse was
>that "some poor lapped chap came back onto his line, and he punted him
>off," implying that he deserved it for making the move.
>
>He also interviewed Moss, who was there, as the honored figure - his
>birthday is apparently on the same day.
>
>Comments? I thought it was rather interesting...
|