Chequebook Racers, your thoughts?

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by TheKing

RCARR,

After reading your posts in this thread and numerous others you have made elsewhere...you sound like a broken record! "I do it on X amount of money whilst these are doing it on Y amounts of money. Not Fair..."

Your obviously not a paid driver...the only solution is for you to get a job that pays good money, so you can afford to compete. Dont take away from people that have worked hard to earn the money that they earn. Thats part of the game...

Mr TheKing could I remind you (and anyone else for that matter) of the forum rules particularly this one, do not attack the poster.
Could we now resume normal business please.

[graeme]

If I had the cash, I'd be racing a McLaren F1 in NW sports & saloons - as is, I'm trying not to be last in a road-going 100bhp Caterham...

[Notso Swift]

Chequebook racers... yep, with much thought I have decided I envy them.

Entering and being satisfied with mediocrity. It is a trait I wish I had some times, it would make racing a lot less stressful! But the fact is I am super competitive by nature and I never like losing, and very rarely do in equivilent equipment. Win or Bust!
Yes, they can ruin your race when they are slow through the corners but faster in the straights, so you can never quite pass them. However, as long as they are safe - good on them, when you do beat them it is more satisfying. Passing a GT3 Cup around the outside of a sweeper in a 100hp Suzuki is a memory I will cherish.

[TheKing]

Apologies for attacking RCARR. I shouldnt have aimed my post so directly..although my original viewpoint remains the same

[GORDON STREETER]

Or overtaking Adrian Newey round paddock in the wet in his Ferrari.!
I must admit he soon got better .

[greenamex2]

I like cheque book racers.

If you beat them you can say "money can't buy driving ability".

If they beat you then you can say "well if I had that much money I would win every race".

You can't lose really!

The only thing that does bug me is in supposedly 'cost controlled' racing where they can buy an advantage. In these categories things like tyre numbers, crash repairs and testing should also be strictly controlled or the organisers shouldn't keep going on about "level playing field" and "a season only costs tuppence ha'penny", this sort of thing really is false advertising.

[greenamex2]

Out of interest, how do you differentiate between "cheque book racer" and "credit card/second mortgage racer"?

[terence]

Cheque books afford it now,creditcards afford it in a years time

[COLIN STUBBS]

easy. cheque book racers dont have oily hands,dirty nails,furrowed brows,unbuffed tyres,faded nomex overalls and a head full of torque figures.also do not persist in asking questions about suspension and dry sumps!!!!!

[TheKing]

Originally Posted by COLIN STUBBS

easy. cheque book racers dont have oily hands,dirty nails,furrowed brows,unbuffed tyres,faded nomex overalls and a head full of torque figures.also do not persist in asking questions about suspension and dry sumps!!!!!

...or people chasing after them for repayment!

[tony griffiths]

hummm ...... how did Mr Lauda start to name but one ! And without naming teams ??????

[midgetman]

There's no such thing as a chequebook racer. There's racers and there's the rest of the world. Whether you've spent a fortune or a pittance on your car, you're still a racer as soon as the lights go green and it's not up to anyone here to criticise anyone who's a) doing their best and b) enjoying themselves.

There's too much attention paid to the spectator sometimes. SO WHAT if a GT2 car isn't driven to the ultimate potential? The day a spectator pays me to drive my car is the day I'll worry about what the spectator thinks about it. The approach should be - it's my money, I'm enjoying myself, if you don't like watching it you know where the off button is!

Or am I being too harsh?

[terence]

Then to add to the thread there are racers and then there are drivers.

[Al Weyman]

I think a much moneyed person very often is on a hiding for nothing, if he wins he has bought success and has no talent, if he looses he is a t****r. Its the same as a big guy fighting a small guy if he beats him he is a bully and bound to win if he gets beaten he to is a t*****r. Bring em on the more the merrier.

[Asp]

Whilst I agree with the general sentiment that there's nothing wrong in so called "chequebook racers", I want to draw on one point made in the original thread

Originally Posted by rcarr

Novice crosses on the back of Porsches, Ferraris etc.

These people buy vastly expensive racing cars or create them from mediocre road cars and race them in club races and can't drive them properly, ie brake at 200 yards before a corner, when experienced drivers brake at 75 yards or they hammer everyone in the field but as soon as an experienced racing driver gives them a challenge, they bin their beautifully prepared car into the gravel.
...
He was asked, being a novice could he handle the power of this out and out race car, he answered, I own quicker road cars than this 1 so I am fine with the power! That race he came stone last agains Escorts, Sierras, Caterhams etc.

This side of things is a legitimate point. You can't go and do your ARDS and then race in the F1 World championship straight away. So, why should you be able to drive a similar spec car?
I do not doubt for a moment that people go out, buy a nice looking car with lots of power, then decide to go and race it without learning race craft properly. And thus, they legitimately take things slowly and brake earlier.
Would it be legitimate therefore to impose restrictions on a NatB licence beyond the type of series you can race in, but also the type of car you can race? Give them time to learn race craft in a more suitable car to do so, and once they've gained that they can race their "proper" car?

[Tim Wilkinson]

No, not legitimate.

1. Too difficult to enforce, too many variables.

2. I've seen some very good drivers with novice crosses on, and some bloody awful ones without (and some of those in relatively low-powered cars).

I think it's grossly unfair to restrict the equpiment someone can use. If it's a big problem to another driver then maybe some advice should be offered to the novice (or not, as the case may be), but all any restriction would serve to do is discourage money'd racers from taking part - if I can afford an RS500 (for example) and feel I can handle it, as long as I'm not causing a danger to myself or others then why shouldn't I be allowed to use it?

Chequebook racers? Good for them. They're committing a lot of funds into something they're obviously interested in - an unlevel playing field is inherent in motorsport, even to a certain extent in one-make racing, and some will always have more budget than others. It's a shame that better-off people who are passionate enough to race are castigated just for having more money than others.

[dtype38]

Originally Posted by Denis Bassom

I like cheque book racers.
If you beat them you can say "money can't buy driving ability".
If they beat you then you can say "well if I had that much money I would win every race".
You can't lose really!

Couldn't agree more. There's nothing more satisfying than beating someone in a gizzilion pound car, cos they can't drive or have no idea how to set it up. It's also really easy to put down a loss to the size of the wallet of your opposition.

Something else that's not been mentioned though. I like the idea of chequebook racers giving so much financial support to the whole area of club racing... suppliers in particular. When they have rich customers paying megabucks, they seem more inclinde to look sympathetically on the odd shoestring racer

[zefarelly]

with all the chat about quality and safety of driving standards, surely its down to the CoC to monitor ? ? ? I don't care if your an F1 Director or a shelf stacker, if you can drive/race safely somewhere in the same time zone as the race pace then fine . . . .if not, then you should consider an alternative hobby

why do you think so many older/wealthier/less abled people get their cars driven by other people ? they still enjoy their motorsport( and let us see some fantastic cars in action) but with less risk, and at least thay have have been man enough to admit to a shortcoming . . .no ones perfect !

[rcarr]

I am back! Sorry been travelling north, back homein Scotland now. Been working on my Sunbeam Californian till could not longer feel my fingers or legs or anything really!

I used to get paid as a driver, be it wedding cars and racing cars alike, it used to pay for my tuition fees during my undergraduate degree.

I am not against chequebook drivers as a whole, just ones that are arrogant enough to claim that they drive similarly spec'd cars on the road and show they can't race to save themself. As it has been reiterated on this thread "money can't buy you talent." However, if any 1 wants to give me a GT drive etc they are most welcomed! I have come up through different levels of (saloon/gt) motorsport, my main problem is notbeing able to physically fit into single seaters

There are several chequebook racers that I respect and envy. The McCaig clan, ie Ecurie Ecosse, Alastair is the same age as me but before racing "Reggie" he cut his teeth racing xr2s, FF and he also drove the Mallock p20 now and again. He could have raced Reggie as a novice but saw sense and started in a lower formulae.

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by rcarr

The same guy, 2 seasons later is still only dicing with Caterhams in the mid-field.

Your thoughts on these chequebook races, please...

As long as there behind you and dont crash anyone who cares?

[steveng]

There seems to be a common thread among many contributors to these fora. Whether it be 'too expensive cars' or 'too large motorhomes'. Envy is not a very good attitude when dealing with fellow compititors.
We are all wealthy enough to race after all.
I don't think that I qualify a 'cheque book racer' but I remember standing behind the fencing as a spectator being very envious of those people with the money to own a racing car. I am now fortunate enough to own two. I drive them both fairly badly but I have a great time, have met some really nice people and even have the odd class lap record (nobody else turned up that day). I have enough money to indulge my childhood dreams.
If somebody has earned enough to make their little dream come true I think it is just fine. Some of us are not defined by our last lap time and as long as we are safe and can carry enough speed not to get in anyone's way. What's the problem?
If I could afford to buy a GT2 Porsche and a f***ing great motorhome I would!

[ADEE]

Really what we're talking about here is large bank accounts ( i can write big cheques but usually the end result is a big bounce!!).. i have no problem with that EXCEPT when it is mixed with arrogance.

It is my experience that in a miracle of the English language big bank balance plus arrogance typically spells danger!

The other issue not really touched upon is how the big spenders have over time generally raised the bar for us all. I was looking thru some old shots from F1 in the '80s last night - today's F3 and even FFord kids have smarter equipment, trucks etc. (and generally better dress sense!!). If one team gets a better truck or motorhome they all have to in order to attract the drivers but costs go up. Then drivers priced out of this level move down a rung only to increase the budgets in that series. Witness Formula Renault last year - the UK series is now so expensive the kids (or their parents) decided it is too much to spend in a learning year so they went to BARC, a club series, and spent £50k plus there instead... and so on.

So the real question is should we limit the budgets needed to run in a series or are we happy to let costs multiply ever more.

I'm sure 'inflation' in motor racing is well above the Bank of England's target rate!

[AU N EGL]

Originally Posted by ADEE

R

It is my experience that in a miracle of the English language big bank balance plus arrogance typically spells danger!

I disagree. The arrogance may come for those that are envoius of people who are successful in business and can afford finer things. Success does not make ppl arrogant.

So the real question is should we limit the budgets needed to run in a series or are we happy to let costs multiply ever more.

I'm sure 'inflation' in motor racing is well above the Bank of England's target rate!

Limiting budgets only cause race series to go away as no competitor will stay. or that race series will die a long slow death. and those that stay are too blind to see.

PPL choose are race seirese which they think they can stand on the podium, not finish in the pack. Winning may not be everything, but striving to win is.

The Biggest budget teams dont aways win, but it helps. Even a driver with the most skill can only do so much when his equipment is should have been junked 5 years ago.

Since we all know prize lists can afford our families with great life styles, we change our work, start a second or third business, make partnerships with local business to help sponsor us or what ever it takes to be more sucessful in business. And better lifestyles for our families and a little more for our racing.

We do what we can, by keeping equimpent fresh and safe, use the best tires we can, or the ones with the least number of heat cycles, and at every chance improve our driving skills. More times then not, that driver will do very well.

If all racing was socialistic, we would all have F1 teams.

[ADEE]

Originally Posted by AU N EGL

I disagree. The arrogance may come for those that are envoius of people who are successful in business and can afford finer things. Success does not make ppl arrogant.

I totally agree that not all successful people are arrogant - far from it. What I say is that IF you have the £££ AND are also arrogant, then this is a dangerous cocktail on the race track. Especially if ability is limited. And by their nature arrogant people seldom strive to listen to advice on how to improve. Put them in a powerful race car and sooner or later they will be involved in a situation they are not sufficiently skillful to handle. That's the point.

[rcarr]

If you are very grateful that you can afford to buy a large powerful car, thats fine.

Its the arrogance of the guy of whom I referred to earlier, the fact that he "drove faster cars on the road than his GT2" and then was made to eat his words when he came stone last in the race!

Another guy raced a Carrera Cup car in our race, he walked most of the races, unless there were guys who could take the fight to him, they would blow him off the track. Anyway, he entered his "home race" in the Carrera Cup and the really experienced Porsche Cup drivers blew him off the track and he came last (I think). Big Fish in Small ponds, I think!

The big powerful cars, in my experience, scare people off racing in the same race.

I remember when the Radicals were introduced into our race (sports n saloons) there was a public outcry that the proper steel bodied cars would be a danger to the radical drivers! There was a petition at the end of the 1st meeting and by the 2nd race of the season, the Radicals had their own race.

I can't wait to have a pop at the GT2 when I finish my Stiletto.