I understand your position of recovery Dave! However, as a factory
rider, I too was at the mercy of whatever they put me on when they put me on
it! There was never a time that the 305cc engine was used illegally! I DID
ride it once in a 500cc race ( Which I won!) thinking that I had won it on a
250cc only to find out later that they had actually used the 305cc for that
race! Odd as it may seem, I was not protested at that event but it would
have been futile anyway as the 305cc was well under the 500cc limit.
I think the repercussions of providing a professional with illegal
equipment would NOT be good press in any field! It would pretty much self
regulate itself in a similar manner to the way golfers call penalties on
themselves! ( Regardless of the do gooders that call in after watching
something they think is an infraction on TV!) (;-)
Ed J.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Tutelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Face Milling
> Great story, Ed.
> And good discussion fodder -- see my comments below.
>
> At 09:07 AM 1/29/03 -0500, Ed Johnson wrote:
> >Dave and All: See comments below }--------->
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Dave Tutelman"
<<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > If people start modifying the COR of the clubheads with milling
> > machines or
> > > grinders, then the whole notion of type testing goes out the window.
Clubs
> > > will have to be measured at every significant tournament. And, as
Charlie
> > > notes, it is expensive to measure face thickness. Moreover, there
isn't a
> > > simple mathematical relationship between face thickness and COR. So
the
> > > USGA and the PGA tour may have to carry around an air cannon to their
> > > events and measure COR directly every time.
> >}---------> Not everytime! See Below }--------->
>
> I still think every time. Just not every club in the tournament.
> See below.
>
> > This is not an idea I'm inventing on the fly. When I raced
sailboats,
> > I was
> > > also a fleet measurer in the Albacore class (15-foot planing sloop),
> > was on
> > > the specifications committee, and was on the national championship
> > > measuring staff a few times. At the national championships, all boats
were
> > > measured before the regatta, in any dimension that was:
> > > (Well, the technical term is DSQ, but SOL is so much more colorful.)
> >}---------> Total Agreement with SOL! (;-)
> >}---------> I also come from a racing background as one of first factory
> >riders for Honda Motocycles! I rode a 250cc Honda in professional racing
> >for several years. I won't bore you with details but at that time (1963)
> >was third in the US AMA standings. The relative issue here is that Honda
> >also had a 305cc engine that required disassembly to tell the difference
> >between the two. Of course the 305cc was illegal for professional racing
> >in the 250cc class! In those days a formal PROTEST cost $10! This
required
> >my mechanics to disassemble the engine for measurement! Approximately 80%
> >of the races I won ( I won a lot as I still hold every track record in
the
> >Pacific Northwest except one!) were followed by a formal protest! The
> >engine was legal in all instances yet I continued to be protested after
> >almost every win.
> > My point being; If the USGA used their heads ( Yeah, like that is
> > likely to happen! (;-) Only the winner of the tournament would have to
> > have his club tested. If it included disassembly to accomplish the test,
> > so be it!
>
> But the equipment to test it has to be there!
> The workload is smaller, because only the winner (I'd recommend all the
> trophy winners) need to be tested. But the air cannon and the independent
> officials to do the test have to be there at every important event.
>
> >No consideration was given to us for the labor involved in disassembling
a
> >very hot motorcycle engine at the completion of the race. The motorcycle
> >was not even allowed to leave the race track! It was impounded at the
> >finish line for disassembly so that there was no chance for anything to
be
> >switched or altered back to stock.
>
> Very good idea!
>
> >Had it ever been illegal, I would have been awarded the SOL trophy that
> >Dave previously mentioned. Enforcement is indeed possible and very viable
> >in the future.
>
> The biggest difference between pre- and post-measurement (apart from the
> obvious reduced workload of post-measurement -- only measuring the
winners)
> is that you have a chance to recover from pre-measurement. In a
> professional event where the competitors are all sponsored by
manufacturers
> (like professional motorcycle racing or professional golf at the highest
> level), I have no sympathy for the SOL with no chance to recover. The
> manufacturer was in control to the last minute, and the competitor was
> sponsored by the manufacturer -- so the manufacturer is not just a
supplier
> but a partner. In that event, any out-of-spec equipment can reasonably be
> assumed to be cheating. It isn't necessary to decide whether the
> manufacturer or the competitor was the actual dishonest party; they're in
> it together.
>
> Now, how about competitions where the player is not sponsored, but rather
> buys the equipment almost anonymously from a well-known manufacturer. If
> the equipment is out of spec but NOT on some non-conforming list, the
> player is SOL for the cheating (or error) of the manufacturer. After a
> while, the manufacturer would get to be known as one to avoid, but in the
> meantime...
>
> BTW, sail racing had both cases. It was one of the few sports where the
> local hotshots (probably my level; the best I ever did at nationals was
> tenth) could race against the tops in the world. A couple of incidents
from
> measuring day at the 1973 nationals:
>
> * First, to set the stage... Tom Allen was an Olympic gold medalist
> (sailing's equivalent to a "major winner"). He turned his fame from the
> Olympics into money by becoming a boat builder and sailmaker. His boats
and
> sails were known to be among the most competitive in the Albacore class.
>
> * One of the things we were measuring that year was the position of the
> centerboard pivot. Most of the Allen boats were illegal. The competitors
> had bought the boats in good faith, but had never had them officially
> measured. (They should have. The capability was there.) They were up late
> that night with resin and fiberglass, filling the old bolt hole and
> drilling a new, legal hole.
>
> * On the morning of the first race, a set of brand new sails was
> presented to the host club's chief measurer, who was measuring jibs. He
> found every measurement too big (sorta' like the 305cc engine when a 250cc
> was specified). He turned the sail over and looked for the sailmaker's
> logo. It was an Allen. Gene (the measurer) angrily muttered, "Somebody
> ought to sit Tommy Allen down and explain to him the need for rules." The
> owner of the sails walked away really red-faced, while I struggled to keep
> a straight face. (I was measuring mainsails, and watched the whole thing).
> When the guy was out of earshot, I told Gene that the guy with the sails
> was Tommy Allen himself. No sympathy there!
>
> Cheers!
> DaveT
>
>
>
