not PITing himself?[/quote]
Or using common racing sense…:)[/quote]
Unfortunately that is not always the case and we can’t rely on that alone.
Where in the rules does it actually prevent someone from intentionally swerving into a passing car on a straight when the trailing car has overlap but has not yet established position by making it to the drivers door? What rule(s) actually prevents someone from turning racing that requires skill to pass into a game of chicken for someone with a checkbook and will to wreck cars in order to prevent passes?
Does ‘The main purpose of the “¾ car width” rule is not to allow one driver to “squeeze” the other driver’ adequately cover the above? If so then is intentionally moving over, and purposely leaving only 3/4 car width in an area where 2 wheels off has an extremely high percentage of a very bad incident that could result in serious injury and certain car damage not considered squeezing?
Where does it say “in all cases, racing room is considered 3/4” car width" like everyone keeps mentioning? I see where it says “in some cases…” Other than a wall directly next to the inside of the track as depicted in figure 5 on pg87, are there any other cases where 3/4 of a car width would not be considered racing room? Would it be OK to force someone outside and only give them 3/4 car width room at T9 at WGI? Please show me where it shows an example of a wall on the outside of a turn in the CCR? I don’t think it shows that as an example or mentions anything about that, therefore leaving only 3/4 width must be legal there. Should it be? Where in the rules provides for it not to be?
Why are the rules of an amateur club race series still allowed to dictate that it is OK to be able to intentionally put someone in serious harms way in order to prevent a pass instead of force someone to use skill to maintain the lead?