Bill, that looks pretty reasonable, but . . .

My first concern is there are a lot of words. Yes that is a pretty thin argument but typically the more words in a rule the more people tend to find "alternate" interpretations. That certainly isn't a good reason to toss it out but something to bear in mind.

Second, the phrase "then the overtaking car is entitled to racing room" could be taken that prior to that point the overtaking car is NOT entitled to racing room. Either that or you are restating what is already established under the existing rule which says that everyone is entitle to racing room. Also it can be implied that blocking is allowed prior to that point because the phrase about impeding the car does not take effect yet.

I do like the second rule concept protecting the position of the guy who avoids contact when he is not at fault. While I don't see anything inherently wrong in the wording I think coming up with evidence to support a protest is going to be difficult at best.


------------------
~Matt Rowe
ITA Shelby Charger
MARRS #96

[This message has been edited by Matt Rowe (edited May 17, 2005).]