Comments on: Penske’s Unfair Advantage

By: Andy Bernstein

Andy Bernstein — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 01:24:14 +0000

If there is anything closer to public disclosure than the link below, I failed my homework. This guy seems to have done his:
http://www.racer.com/team-penske-rejects-talk-of-trick-suspension/article/168627/

By: BentWickerbill

BentWickerbill — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 01:01:53 +0000

I guess there are two points in this discussion that I am somewhat confused about….
1.) At what point between 2008 and now did ‘other teams’, whether it was Roger Penske or otherwise, begin using the rubber bumper (the third damping device) on the anti sway bar?
2.) How long was Mike Hull going to wait until TCGR began testing a similar device for their cars. He or himself and the team may have initially either misinterpreted the rules or inadvertantly been given incorrect information. Or perhaps their original intention was to use an active damping device of some kind, as opposed to a non-active device, who knows.

If you are racing against the likes of Roger Penske, you had better obtain any advantage or means of leveling the playing field that you can. I’m not sure that whining that you were misled/lied to, two years later after dozens more races have gone by the boards is the way to leverage that….

By: Penske fan

Penske fan — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 19:48:29 +0000

The legend’s name is Mark Donohue.His book is “The Unfair Advantage.”

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 14:54:23 +0000

Coincidentally, I just finished reading Mark Donahue’s book, “an unfair advantage”. It gives a very detailed history of the beginnings of the Penske dynasty and how they got there. Mark writes about how they worked around the rule book at times in various racing series, as well as the attention to detail and the experimentation that was required to find the right combinations for handling setup. Although I too would like to see other teams win in IndyCar, I have to acknowledge that Team Penske works very hard for their success.

I would highly recommend the book to anyone who wants to know more about how the Penske success in racing was built.

By: Scott

Scott — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 13:55:35 +0000

What? My vote was in agreement with the majority? What is going on?

By: Andy Bernstein

Andy Bernstein — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 21:09:33 +0000

People who do their homework win.
That was a winning article.

By: Tim Nothhelfer

Tim Nothhelfer — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:34:19 +0000

Rulebooks are often littered with gray areas, where the intent of the rule may or may not be crystal clear. Exploiting those gray area is one thing, but this appears not to be the case this time. Seems that there were two sets of rules and one was secret. This might resonate with critics of Penske.
My observation would be that this device would be critical for qualifications on a road or street course where there are extremely limited passing opportunities for a faster driver/car. After the race start the premium is put on track position and making fuel.
Clarity in rules….approved parts is great.

By: Simon

Simon — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 16:03:13 +0000

Penske didn’t start out rich. If anybody wants to know how to be successful in racing, just emulate Roger Penske. He is always prepared for any situation, and has proved to be one of the keenest decision-makers. There’s a reason the Penske Automotive Group is a Fortune 500 company.

By: Donald McElvain

Donald McElvain — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 14:08:38 +0000

“Thou shalt have no other God’s before me”. If I was to break that commandment, Roger Penske would be that god. I’ve been a fan of his since the Mark Donohue days. (I’m now 61)

As an aside, in all the top level racing series, I’m a fan of the owners first and the drivers 2nd or 3rd. Go figure.

By: Paul

Paul — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 13:54:27 +0000

This isn’t about Penske doing anything wrong. It is about the series having a gray area in the rule book and not being consistent with the teams when they asked for clarification.