Well, it takes a lot more skill to race close and NOT bump someone than
it does to race close AND bump someone. I'd rather race with someone
who has the brains to race close without bumping than with someone who
has to hit me to to get by me. If you race in open wheels and can't keep
on bumping people, you either learn real fast not to or you better stop
racing,
whereas stock cars are more forgiving (but the other drivers will get mad
at
you if you bump them).
>Simply not racing is a good approach, or perhaps signalling to the
>third place guy to follow you off-line and drop the guy out of the
>draft. That means your "blocker" is going to have to get off that line
>to stay in the dratf. Alternatively duck low going into one of the
>turns and put yourself BIG in his mirrors.
As for ducking low, you'll have to get on the flats to do that. If you
happen to be known as a clean driver that doesn't normally punt people
into the wall in T3 then your at a psychological disadvantage there too.
I agree. Other tactics would always be the preferred choice. In fact,
the only simulated track I have trouble with regarding blocking is
Talladega on Hawaii. The design makes it too easy to block there.
There's a 1001 ways to end up in front of somebody and many of those
ways have little to do with whether or not your faster. You have the
right to defend your position but once you cross certain lines your
inviting greater aggression from your competitors. I'm not going to
intentionally bump somebody but if I'm following somebody blocking like
that at Dega then I might try to thread the needle a little tighter than
I normally would. I think there would be more "give-n-take" if the
threat of serious consequences were greater.
Member - Hawaii Ace League http://www.dithots.org/hal
> >John, why is someone who has to block to stay in front a good driver,
> >while someone who has to barge in order to pass a good one? Some how, the
> >logic of that escapes me. I know you can't be applying the rules of F1 to
> >this line of logic. If a back marker is slowing down the leader, then the
> >officials start waving that blue flag at them, and the commentators start
> >riding their butts hard. But if the 1st place driver is slowing up the 2nd
> >place driver, this is called " good racing ", and all is well. The logic
> >of this escapes me.
> Quite simple Robert. Psychology is a part of racing, thumping someone
> off the racing line isn't - it's cheating.
> If two cars are running together then the car in front is _always_
> seen to be holding up the second car. The guy behind has the draft and
> can close up, and on the contrary the leader always has to be aware of
> the following car who doesn't have this distraction - of course the
> second place guy thinks he is faster.
> Only _thinks_ he is faster - the leader got himself into that position
> and he is 100% entitled to it. You may be faster than him, but that
> gives you no right at all to first position. At that time you have to
> start using your brain to drive rather than all your practice time.
> Using different lines, feinting, perhaps even fumbling your way past
> using a backmarker. Hitting the guy is simply lazy thinking, and is
> the act of someone who only thinks he should be leading rather than
> the act of a guy who knows how to race - that guy is already in front.
> This isn't directed at you, I just think there's an awful lot of
> immature thinking - people saying "I'm faster so I should be in
> front". That's only driving, it's not racing.
> Cheers!
> John
>Oh, was Mark Martin just trying to break the draught at Talledega when >he was racing Steve Parks over the last couple of laps ?
>Roy
