Do you consider it "racing"?

alfadriver wrote: Seems like the whole argument is people pretending to be better than other people. JUST like the coal roller thoughts. In other word, why cares? Some old dufus wants to spend time complaining- go for it, dude, you are the person who openly decided to be angry. For such a trivial reason. Such a luxury in life that your biggest complaint is about what is racing or not. Although, I'm sure there are tons of things that you want kids off your lawn for. Such a fun and happy existance.

as far as the grumpy old fart is concerned … if he dislikes a-x so much ..why the berkeley is there in the first place ?

Just noticed this thread. What a lot of fuss about semantics.

People that race (as in on a track with other cars at the same time) generally hold that sort of event as the only competition that warrants the term.

But that doesn't belittle anything other than that and I think that's the thing a lot here are failing to get. No need to get your collective autocrossing noses out of joint or underwear in a knot.

Any exercise of car control is a worthy pastime, and competing against the clock is a respectable and far from easy thing to do. It also develops skills that will stand you in good stead should you ever have the desire and money to go on to wheel to wheel competition.

I came up through autocross for a couple of years and never felt that it was wasted time in any way; quite the contrary! I learned a lot that was useful when I switched to road racing - you need the car control skills as a basis, to which you need to add a sense of car to car interaction, and tactics if you are ever going to do well on a track.

6 pages in, I figured this might touch a cord with the GRM crowd. For the record, the original grumpy old fart was working a corner with me, which meant he was RACING (again, I said it), in a stock class of some sort, SA PA or MA. Never did ask him what he was driving, I tried to interact more with the enthusiastic younger guy of late20's and share his happiness. (The 4th gentleman was about my 40ish age and still happy to be there.)

Jerry wrote: 6 pages in, I figured this might touch a cord with the GRM crowd. For the record, the original grumpy old fart was working a corner with me, which meant he was RACING (again, I said it), in a stock class of some sort, SA PA or MA. Never did ask him what he was driving, I tried to interact more with the enthusiastic younger guy of late20's and share his happiness. (The 4th gentleman was about my 40ish age and still happy to be there.)

racing in stock class is enough to make anyone grumpy

I do not consider autocross racing, stay with me on this, because it is a pretty unique motorsports discipline. The car set up and the approach are very different from road racing. Now I say this because in my mind it's like riding trials bikes; it takes a every bit as much skill as road racing, but you walk the course prior to actually competing. You don't know if your approach will work until you try it and you only get one shot at it...........also keep in mind I bought a Formula 500 just for autocross. It is certainly semantics but if I'm road racing I tell people I am going racing, everything else I describe the event; Autocross, Rallycross, a Stage Rally, Hill Climb etc. Also note that I describe my dirt riding the same be it Vintage Motocross or an Off Road GP..........it's total semantics but I will never saying I am racing at an autocross.......I will say I competed in an event.......keeps me in the right state of mind. One event that is definitely NOT racing are track days..........yes I go to those too but they are not racing period........they are quite fun but anyone who thinks they are racing is kidding themselves.

    Tom

I'm burning gas, wearing down tires and having fun doing whatever it is. That's all I need to know.

In reply to Tom1200:

By those rules, downhill skiing, bobsledding, speed skating (realistically), etc- are all not racing.

Not that it matters....

As a NASA event organizer I say call it whatever you want. Although internally we only refer to wheel-to-wheel racing as racing... because otherwise it gets confusing when the phone rings...

"Hi, I'd like to race with you guys."

"Sure! please send me your experience and credentials."

"I have no track experience and only a stock street car."

"No problem! Please sign up for HPDE1, beginner group with limited passing and an instructor."

"Yes, that's what I want to do, the HPDE1 racing."

Re: auto-x

just call it solo racing. done

Are race car drivers athletes ?

ProDarwin wrote: It absolutely is racing. Its a competition of speed. Same with RX.

Rallycross is not a competition of speed. It's a competition of precision driving. It's scored by how quickly you can navigate a course, with stiff penalties for imprecise driving.

I don't consider it racing, any more than I consider autocross, time trials, or stage rally to be racing. It's motorsports but, to me, "racing" is multiple cars and a finish line that you gotta beat the other people to.

Alfadriver, I'd argue speed skating is racing as anytime you have multiple competitors on the same course you start having to adjust and make changes to strategy on the fly. My thought on solo competitions is being they are pure speed, you are free from having to make compromises..........no saving the tires etc. You can be a successful road racer without being the outright fastest driver.........that doesn't work so well at an autocross.

A couple years back I had one of the most fun races ever with an Alfa (much like yours), his car had an issue with 3rd gear synchro, I get him under braking for 3rd gear corners and then get away in the tight bits, he'd zap me back down the straights. We see sawed back in forth adjusting lines to take advantage of each others weakness............if this were at an autocross the guy would not have to change anything as he was faster overall.

This highlights the difference; I can get a good opening few laps and maybe cause the other driver to burn up the tires or let you go because in the closing laps it will come back to me........whereas autocross you need to go and GO NOW from the instant the tires roll that 1st half an inch. You need to be uber aggressive with the car while being millimeter perfect (very ying/yang) so as not to hit a cone and get a time penalty. Autocross looks easy but you quickly find out there is way more than going out there and flailing about.

If we say definitively that "it is most certainly not racing" does it somehow make it less worthy.

Back to our grouchy old guy; he is the same one who poo poos young whippersnappers playing the silly video games only to learn that those silly games have a real world benefit.

    Tom

In reply to Tom1200:

While there are two skaters on a speed skating course, they are not racing each other. They race the clock. (other than short track skating)

Still, why make the distinction?

So when cars/bikes start at different intervals, that's not racing? Isle of Mann, Targa Florio, Mille Migla, etc? Seems very much like it.

Of course it's racing. The idea is to get form point a to point b faster than your competitors. That by definition is racing. It's not wheel to wheel racing, but it is racing.

Anybody who disagrees is just a big poo head

Alfadriver I was thinking of short course skating forgot about the big tracks with cross over. Now as for IOM (engage thin grab at strand logic) leaders do encounter back markers and you are released in pairs so it's racing. Back to Autocross if people want to call it racing it's fine by me, I just think it's a separate discipline albeit one with a big crossover in skill sets.....semantics for sure. Hey what do I know, last nights "dining" saw me order the curried goat.....mmmm tasty.

   Tom

Well you can tell who the autocrossers are. Autocross=race. If you race wheel to wheel, you think: Autocross isn't racing. I'm not sure why anybody cares but it sure is funny to see people get so worked up about what their hobby called.

I do both … and I think that autocross IS racing …different from w2w … but still racing … those that think I'm wrong … I don't care

Tom1200 wrote: Alfadriver I was thinking of short course skating forgot about the big tracks with cross over. Now as for IOM (engage thin grab at strand logic) leaders do encounter back markers and you are released in pairs so it's racing. Back to Autocross if people want to call it racing it's fine by me, I just think it's a separate discipline albeit one with a big crossover in skill sets.....semantics for sure. Hey what do I know, last nights "dining" saw me order the curried goat.....mmmm tasty. Tom

Autocrosses are released to have multiple cars on the a course, which is exactly like Isle of Mann, but because of the lenght, cars can pass and therefore it's racing? BTW, the Isle of Mann calls itself a Time Trial, not a race- but you see that as racing.

Odd.

And based on that, why isn't Rallying racing? They catch each other, too- and sometimes pass.

I've been at time trials where cars had to pass, too- is that racing or not?

See- what seems to be an easy distinction becomes complicated.

How about track and field? The 100M race is arguably head to head, but since the runners are in a single lane and can't cross- they don't actually pass each other. They go by each other, but not as if you have to go around the other guy. Same with the 400. Kinda race, kinda not.

Lots of semantics makes the whole thing odd.

What about drag racing? I haven't read too many opinions on that. What about indoor bike racing where they race against the clock, but they are riding in a staggered start?

In reply to Mr_Clutch42:

Yes and yes.

It's pretty cut and dry for me. If the goal is to be the fastest/quickest over a set distance or go the farthest over a set time, vs. a competitor...IT'S RACING

Alfadriver the first clue to "my" thinking is the mention of curried goat, I also love anchovie pizza and while I can't stand chocolate I drink yahoo drinks like they are free crack.........I do not like sweat stuff but love grape soda........ OK back on topic at IOM you have riders released at the same time and they frequently are dicing, hence it is a race. While I have not competed in a Stage Rally I organized one for several years and we structured things to eliminate cars catching each other, if any passing occurred it was because one car was limping along not dicing...... Not real racing. Back to Autocross; I am an autocrosser, as well as a racer and have a separate car for each. I started autocrossing first, granted I was road racing bikes at the time and then moved to SCCA club racing. When my son started autocrossing a Kart I stopped competing in autocross because I wanted to focus on him. I wasn't jazzed about getting back into it because it didn't have enough speed for me, then I drove an F500........I have since bought one and am looking forward to autocross again.........with all that said I just don't consider it racing........it probably is but I do not see it as such.........remember this is from the mind that pairs grape soda and anchovie pizza.

 Tom

In reply to Tom1200:

Ok- since the Dakar rally very often have passes, is that racing? But it's a very very long stage rally.

Is Drag Racing racing? They don't dice, but are released at the same time. If they even come close to crossing paths, they are eliminated from consideration.

A time trial isn't racing, unless there's a pass? Even though there shouldn't be one?

Isle of Mann is solo racing where you may encounter another vehicle, but rallying that is solo racing where you may not encounter another vehicle is not. Both are racing against the clock.

Since the fuel economy challege races are run with the vehicles on the track at the same time, and pass each other- is that racing? Even though the goal isn't to finish first, but to go the farthest on a given amount of fuel.

Funny that you claim that it doesn't matter, but still hold fast to your theory. You try some kind of levity, but still come back to some ambiguous definition that can be poked at- so you do take it seriously. Funny how that is.

wbjones wrote:

irish44j wrote:

wbjones wrote:

Lof8 wrote:

Bobzilla wrote:

D_Eclipse9916 wrote: Just to throw in a mix as someone else did. A Race car's definition. In my opinion, it is something caged, and built to a specific rule set, but I see HPDE/TT/Autox cars marked as "race cars" all the time. This bothers the E36 M3 outta me for NO reason.

My auto-x car is built to a specific rule set. Wouldn't that make it a racecar by your standards?

you missed "caged". Unless your autox car is caged - unnecessarily?

as pointed out earlier … F1, Indy Car ..etc.. no cage roll bar, yes … but so does my a-x/TT car

no cage:

yep … hadn't even thought about them ...

Wow, you quoted a "race bike" as proof that my statement about cages in race Cars doesn't work.. LOL, shows where the mindset is on this forum.

PS- F1/Indy are roll cages. Sedan roll cages no, but roll cage safety cells yes.

I stand by my statement. For the .01% of autox, the AMOD type cars, I could understand an exception, but we are looking at a .01% exception. This is like saying Chinese people are rich, and looking at the .01% driving around in stretched A8L when ignoring the majority of the population.

Shame you missed the point about me saying HPDE/TT/Autox cars marked as "race cars" was really in reference to the 99% where their mustang with an intake and wider tires are marked on craigslist as "race car".

Nick_Comstock wrote: It's pretty cut and dry for me. If the goal is to be the fastest/quickest over a set distance or go the farthest over a set time, vs. a competitor...IT'S RACING

Agreed.

Haven't read the whole thread, but I'll someone far better with words than I am answer

"“There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games.”

Basically if there is a chance of death = racing

Autocross (and I love autocross)= game