Have we spoken about cheating as a protest?

The theory being, "berkeley you, if you have to give the BMWs another 700 rpm to keep up, that's their problem, not mine. Go ahead and take my !$35,000! for third place in the 24 and shove it up your ass. The rev limiter chip is in the bottom of the pit cart if you want it."

Or sumthin like that...

Following a post-race inspection of the No. 60 Michael Shank Racing Ford-Riley, GRAND-AM determined that the team was in violation of Section 4-1.1 (“GRAND-AM will specify components and performance levels in the Specific Car Regulations that must be adhered to”) of the GRAND-AM Rule Book, the team was notified on Thursday that it would be penalized the driver, team, and manufacturer points earned from the result.

The infraction was based on how the motor was set up for the testing process. The team has decided not to appeal the decision and will focus on the upcoming event at the Circuit of the Americas March 1-2.

“As much as we are frustrated with the penalty, we believe that pursuing an appeal would not change the outcome, and that we should just move forward from here,” said team owner Mike Shank. “Fighting this will only take time and resources away from improving this process in the future.”

Shank also took to Twitter following the penalty to express both his disappointment with the penalty, and also his support of the Rolex Sports Car Series.

GRAND-AM enjoys the participation of three different engine manufacturers in the DP category, and continually makes adjustments to each of them in the pursuit of competitive parity. Shank is hoping that this process can become more open and clear in the future.

“I want to be able to show up at Daytona International Speedway each spring and be able to run flat out from practice to the race without fearing that we will get engine penalties,” said Shank.

“Winning the Rolex 24 should come down to the engineering, driving talent, and strategy--not who can win the race on the dyno in Concord (NASCAR’S R&D facility). Obviously this entire process has been very frustrating, but just like we did in the 24, we will have to put it behind us, embrace all of our partners, and get to work on clawing our points back starting at COTA.”

TL:DR

It's getting to where I would rather watch a Lemons race than any professional series.

I didn't watch the race anyways, so whatever.

As much as I want to side with Shank, I can't.

They are all playing the same "Balance of Performance" game, Ganassi just plays with better equipment and more dollars.

Honestly, the BMWs couldn't have been THAT much better if three cars were on the lead lap at the finish.

Maroon92 wrote: As much as I want to side with Shank, I can't. They are all playing the same "Balance of Performance" game, Ganassi just plays with better equipment and more dollars. Honestly, the BMWs couldn't have been THAT much better if three cars were on the lead lap at the finish.

I believe the three cars being on the lead lap is due to the new rule that is similar to NASCARS of whomever is the first person a lap down gets to lap back around to the lead lap or next lap up during a caution. And I can't be the only one who saw the Ganassi BMWs just pulling away from everyone else is every part of the track. No one could keep up with them.

The top three in qualifying were all BMW's. One of those was a brand new team.

seemed like the BMW's could re-take the lead (after FCC's ), which seemed to be the only time they got behind, anytime they wanted ... then pull away to whatever was a comfortable lead and then just ride 'til the next caution ... then repeat

I'm not debating that the BMWs weren't faster, they clearly were.

What I am saying is, racing is a game, and Ganassi played the game better. The game is more than who's car is fastest, these days. It's about politics, it's about ratings, it's about keeping manufacturers happy.

Last year was Ganassi's turn to get screwed, and Ford, Shank and Starworks took full advantage of it. This year, Ganassi was given a more favorable rule package, and they won.

point well taken .. it'll be interesting if the dominance manages to last the entire season

In reply to Maroon92:

Which is why racing today sucks. Back in the day you ran what you built, and if you weren't fast enough you did something about it. That's the major issue with nearly all forms of professional racing today, and why old powerhouse races that were watched by a large portion of America are now buried in the Sports section after curling, if mentioned at all. Nobody gives a flying berk that a manufacturer has more pull and got a better rule (except for maybe in F1, and even that's growing stale).

They really got screwed last year (Ganassi). Ya know, winning the championship and all.

In reply to Javelin:

plus, curling is berkeleying awesome!

wvumtnbkr wrote: They really got screwed last year (Ganassi). Ya know, winning the championship and all.

At Daytona, they really got the shaft. The rev limiter was changed at the 11th hour, and they ended up swapping gear stacks DURING THE RACE to compensate for it.

In reply to Javelin:

Thats also where most of these rules and calls for similarity came from as well.......

One of the problems with international motor racing is the lack of stand alone resource support. Everything comes with a price. At ANY moment, GM, Ford and BMW could all decide to pull their dollars out of the sport, and Grand Am would be a GT series with very little support and a passable TV schedule.

To avoid this complete failure, Grand Am and the Daytona Motorsports Group has to kowtow to manufacturer pressure to provide them with marketing exposure and a return on investment. The biggest race of the year, Daytona, happens to be one that the manufacturers care about. Last year was Ford's year, this year BMW's, and I wouldn't be surprised if Chevrolet are given some extra balls next year to help them take the win.

Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I've been watching sports for too long to not believe it.

I'm hoping that IMSA brings a little bit of their flavor into the merger next year, but I'm not holding my breath.

...and this is different from the sainted F1 in what way?

Duke wrote: ...and this is different from the sainted F1 in what way?

F1 doesn't "need" manufacturers to be successful. Historically, some of the best teams of all time have been privateers. McLaren, Williams, etc. F1 gets MILLIONS of viewers, and the manufacturers (some of them, at least) are loving their exposure.