FIRST PERSON/OPINION

By John Ulrich

It is no secret that I am a motorcycle road racer, the father of a motorcycle road racer, and the owner of a professional motorcycle road racing team which has successfully competed for 26 consecutive seasons.

I write this as an individual, representing only myself. This is not the official position of any other person or organization. This is my personal opinion.

It’s been about four years since I became so frustrated with the way AMA Pro Racing was being run–and the way that everything I did to offer constructive input was ignored–that I decided to run for the AMA Board of Directors. I won by a landslide, out-polling my opponent by something like 8:1.

The problem I still faced was, that while the AMA Board oversaw the entire AMA, a separate Board of Directors had direct oversight of Pro Racing–and at the beginning was not inclined to pay much intention to anything I suggested. I wrote a 50-page report detailing problems in AMA Pro Racing operations and rules and suggesting fixes, sent a copy to every member of both Boards, and it was ignored (and some of the same problems remain unsolved today). For that matter, in the beginning the Pro Board regularly ignored resolutions passed by the main Board instructing Pro Racing to do things like improve communication with riders and teams, make rider safety the number one consideration, etc.

Eventually, the AMA Board voted to put me on the Pro Board. Once there, I found that even when the Pro Board made quite reasonable decisions, those decisions were often not acted upon by operational staffers, for whatever reason. In essence, it often didn’t matter what the Pro Board wanted to do, because it just didn’t happen. Some long-time staffers did whatever they wanted to do, whenever and however they wanted to do it. Stuff happened that the Pro Board didn’t even know about.

(Let me pause here to say that this is not a blanket indictment of former AMA Pro Racing CEO Scott Hollingsworth. Although our relationship started out being somewhat strained, over the years I gained great respect for Mr. Hollingsworth’s ability to keep AMA Pro Racing running in the black despite constant obstacles thrown in his way, including various pieces of litigation that weren’t his creation. He was often faced with impossible situations, without adequate resources and staffing, and my perception is that the problems he had to deal with on a daily basis–involving every type of AMA professional racing–were so large and so great in number that they would overwhelm anybody. Despite that, he did a lot of good, and received little recognition and no thanks for that–and the case can be made that Scott Hollingsworth would have been an effective President of the overall association.)

Worst of all, back-room secret deals and rulings that had nothing to do with what the rulebook said were commonly made by certain mid-level staffers–although in fairness the rulebook is such a mess it’s often difficult to figure out exactly what it says, and it needs a complete re-write.

What bothered me the most about the situation was that certain AMA Pro Racing staffers would make decisions and take actions without any input from the people those moves greatly affected, and without any apparent thought into how those decisions would impact the paddock.

This isn’t a case of somebody not getting their way. Everybody understands not getting their way. What people don’t understand is, not even getting a chance to offer their viewpoint before a decision is made in secret.

Things are different now. The Pro Board is gone. There has been a staff shake-up, and some very good staffers have been given more responsibility. AMA Racing is now being overseen by a standing committee of the main AMA Board of Directors, known as the Racing Committee and chaired by board member Carl Reynolds; Board members Art More and I are also on the committee. Non-Board-members Jeff Nash and Don Emde both accepted invitations to join the Racing Committee; Emde recently quit, then issued a press release decrying the pace of change despite the fact that he was a driving force behind several changes, including the decision to reverse the points penalty assessed Ricky Carmichael for violating an impractical unleaded fuel standard in Supercross, and the decision to not enforce that rule until it is replaced by a reasonable, real-world-applicable standard.

Nothing can happen instantly, but in the less than four months since the reorganization of AMA Pro Racing started, there has been progress. And there will be more progress.

Above all, there’s a new commitment to an open dialog with teams and riders, and a roadmap for a new system of rulesmaking that’s completely out in the open. Technical road racing rules will be formulated (and the rulebook rewritten) and approved by a representative rules committee that is being formed now, with members from both manufacturers and the paddock at large. Most of the manufacturers have already named their representatives, Suzuki being a notable exception that has failed to respond.

In the meantime, I find myself in the unusual position of being blamed by certain elements of the motorcycling press of trying to do things I am not trying to do, and of advocating things I don’t believe in.

For example, prior to the dissolution of the Pro Board, there were discussions in Pro Board meetings regarding spec tires. Various staff members who no longer work for the company were in favor of spec tires. Every time any spec tire proposal came up, I spoke against it. I believe that spec tires are a bad idea for AMA racing, and that the economic ramifications would empty the paddock. My idea of a good time is, four or five different tire manufacturers participating in AMA Pro road racing, each spending money by sponsoring teams and promoting their racing success. It is important to have more than one viable brand in racing, because if one brand achieves absolute dominance, at some point or another an accountant at the company will look around, note that the company has no real competition, and start asking why the company needs to offer any support or sponsorship of any type to anybody. As long as there is any type of competitive threat, companies interested in racing are likely to continue to spend money supporting teams and riders.

My position has been quite clear. Anybody who wanted to know what my position regarding spec tires is, would only have to ask me or somebody else who was at an AMA Pro Board meeting when the subject came up. For example, Mike Buckley, the Dunlop Vice President who was also a member of the Pro Board before it was dissolved.

Since the AMA Pro Board has been replaced by the Racing Committee, there has been no serious discussion of spec tires. It is a dead issue.

Yet in two consecutive issues of one publication, an esteemed veteran journalist who is well known for his technical expertise regarding tire performance and his inside line on the latest Dunlop technology has flatly stated that AMA Pro Racing is considering spec tires, and has insinuated that I am behind a plot to make Pirelli (the tire brand my race team currently uses, after multiple stints on Dunlops and Michelins over the years) the spec tire of AMA Pro road racing. It is hard to believe that the publication in question printed this fiction without even making a fact-checking phone call to, oh, Mike Buckley of Dunlop.

I called Buckley myself, and asked him where this idea that AMA Pro Racing was considering spec tires came from. He told me that various Dunlop employees noticed the presence of Pirelli worldwide racing boss Giorgio Barbier at the recent AMA National at Infineon Raceway, and the presence of more Pirelli technicians in the paddock at AMA Nationals this season.

Pirelli is making a serious effort this season to beat Dunlop–that’s why there are more Pirelli technicians at the races, although their number is dwarfed by the resident Dunlop army. Barbier was at the racetrack to see an AMA race, to see how Pirelli is doing in the AMA Series, and to discuss the 2007 and 2008 seasons with various Pirelli employees, vendors and teams.

The Dunlop employees made a leap of faith: I own a team that uses Pirelli, Pirelli has spec tire deals in World Superbike and in Canadian Superbike, I am on the AMA Racing Committee, and I was seen talking to Barbier at Infineon. Therefore, AMA Pro Racing must be planning on making Pirelli the spec tire of AMA road racing. That was communicated to the esteemed veteran journalist who is well known for his technical expertise regarding tire performance and his inside line on the latest Dunlop technology, who let fly with rumor, speculation and sheer imagination. Again, with no effort to do any basic fact checking at all. This is a conspiracy theory of the first order.

Which leads me to conclude that I need to go ahead and post here what I believe, including what changes I think should be made to make AMA Pro Racing better.

Do I expect that everything I’d like to see happen, will happen? No. But at least now, I (and every other AMA credential holder) can participate in a discussion before anything happens. Which is a new thing, and a great thing.

1. Democracy is good, but it takes time to organize and can be messy in the interim. Nothing can happen overnight. People should have more patience. In the meantime, AMA is working on a racing strategic plan, and has already resolved that any action taken should meet certain overall goals, including: –Emphasize Safety –Maximize Fair Competition And Competitive Balance –Control And Reduce Costs To Maximize Participation By Qualified Riders, Teams and Sponsors –Promote AMA Membership –Enhance Marketability And Professionalism –Maximize Customer Service –Operate In The Black

2. AMA Pro Racing needs to establish a formal procedure of handling safety issues, including a committee of riders who inspect racetracks and make recommendations. As it is now, riders have taken matters into their own hands because a vacuum exists–there hasn’t been consistent, scheduled, formal attention given to addressing track safety issues by AMA staffers. So now tracks have to deal with multiple contact points, differing opinions on changes and priorities, and there is no system in place to ensure promised changes are made on an agreed schedule. AMA Pro Racing has to get ahead of this, organize it, and improve it. Agreed-upon changes should be prioritized, given dates of completion, and written into sanction agreements. Riders who are not on the committee should direct their comments to riders who are on the committee. While working on improving racetracks, AMA Pro Racing should deploy as many soft barriers as possible.

3. Racebikes are fast and getting faster. Along with a formal procedure to handle safety issues at tracks, the speed of the bikes has to be considered. One quick way to slow bikes down–or to at least slow down the rate at which speeds increase year by year–is to regulate what fuel is used. One way to do this would be to mandate a spec fuel to replace the expensive ($17 to $30 a gallon), highly carcinogenic rocket fuel now used, which adds about 4 horsepower to a 600cc machine and about 8 horsepower to a 1000cc machine. Such a spec fuel should meet these requirements: –Non-oxygenated –Easily field-tested (full lab not required) –Relatively stable –Not require the fuel system to be drained nightly –Less carcinogenic –Detonation resistant –Suitable for use in existing engines in all classes –Commercially available around the country, so teams can easily obtain it for at-shop dyno work and testing –Vendor to sell fuel at all race venues and to all licensed riders and teams for $6.50 a gallon –Vendor to provide on-site testing and quality control at all races

4. Access to hot pit lane should be more restricted. Pit bikes, ATVs, Mules and other motorized vehicles should not be allowed on hot pit lane while racebikes are on track. Such vehicles should be allowed during set-up and tear-down times at the beginning and end of each day at the track.

5. The minimum requirements for riders obtaining AMA Pro Racing licenses must be tougher, including two full years of non-AMA road racing with a minimum number of events completed and a minimum number of points earned.

6. The points system should be changed to match the system used in MotoGP and World Superbike. The current system favors finishing over finishing position, and makes it almost impossible for a rider with a bad race finish to race his way back into Championship contention.

7. It is important to consider the privateers. If you take care of the privateers with pick-up trucks and box vans, the guys with semi-trucks (me included) will be fine. The reverse is not always true.

8. Homologation requirements for Superstock (if it continues as a class; see below) and Supersport should be tightened. Homologation requirements for Superbike and Formula Xtreme should be loosened. The “Formula” part of Formula Xtreme should be emphasized, with AMA Pro Racing allowing in all manner of diverse machines. If one type of machine becomes an overdog, it should immediately be required to carry more weight. Additional machines that should be allowed in the class include Triumph 675cc Triples, 850cc liquid-cooled 4-valve Desmo Ducati 748s, 1100cc air/oil-cooled two-valve Desmo Ducatis, 1200cc air/oil-cooled pushrod 4-valve BMWS with shaft drive, etc. This class should be used to address the common fan complaint that, all the bikes in all the classes look and sound alike.

9. Superstock should be merged into Superbike, with much more restrictive engine and chassis rules. No special part should be allowed unless it is readily available to all competitors. (The ideal would be to adopt World Superbike rules, but only if, as we heard was possible at one point, World Superbike rules move toward World Endurance rules, with what are basically Superstock engines. Recently, FGSport has said it is satisfied with existing World Superbike rules, and the MSMA has proposed adopting intake restrictors to limit power after extensive modifications are made. Both those ideas could make AMA Superbikes faster, and they’re already fast enough for American tracks.)

10. Qualifying tires are the work of the devil, created for the sole purpose of burning money for the teams and riders that can get them, and for the purpose of screwing over the teams and riders that can’t buy them at any price, as unilaterally determined by tire vendors. Qualifying should be restructured from a single flying lap to heat races for Superstock and Supersport and to an average of 4 flying laps (between an in-lap and an out-lap) for Superbike and Formula Xtreme.(Note to conspiracy theorists: My race team has access to qualifying tires.)

11. Traction control should be allowed in Superbike and Formula Xtreme and should be stomped into the ground in Superstock and Supersport. The idea that traction control is “affordable” or would save privateers money in any way is pure bullsh-t. I’ve been offered a traction control system (for one bike) for $20,000; reports from Europe price traction control at between $15,000 and $50,000 per motorcycle. I call BS on the myth of affordable traction control and challenge anybody who claims it exists to produce such a system for testing by Roadracing World. When it becomes standard on sportbikes in about five years, it’ll be different, but in meantime, forget about it in Superstock and Supersport. (For reference, look at the history of slipper clutches, once an aftermarket part, and now standard equipment.)

12. Testing should be controlled. The existing testing cartel conducts about 12 private tests a year, with some teams reporting that they use more tires testing than they do racing. Teams and riders who are not members of the testing cartel cannot attend these tests at any price. Worse, the tests are conducted on tracks that are not set up to full safety spec, and some riders have been injured hitting walls that would be covered with soft barriers during a race weekend.

To replace unlimited testing by the testing cartel, AMA Pro Racing should establish 5-6 official tests, including full soft barrier placement, safety crews, timing and scoring equipment, etc. The first two days of each test would be restricted to existing members of the testing cartel using the same shared-cost system now used. The third day would be open to any licensed AMA racer at a fair price, around $300. Nobody would be allowed to do any private testing on any track that hosts an AMA National, outside the official tests. However, teams and riders would be allowed to test as much as they wanted at non-AMA tracks, and could also participate in any public event (such as a track day or a club race) at AMA tracks.

The official tests could be used as a pre-race promotional function by the tracks, with local media representatives invited to come and do interviews, film riders, etc. The tracks at which the tests were held could rotate year-to-year.

Current restrictions on Thursday practice should be eliminated.

(Note to conspiracy theorists: My team is part of the testing cartel and has been for almost 10 years.)

13. The appearance of the paddock–and thus the professionalism and marketability of the series–should be improved by eliminating the haphazard parking of cars around and between team trucks. Teams that are parked in the front rows of the paddock should have to park their rental cars and private cars outside the paddock, in a designated parking lot, as at Laguna Seca. My team’s mechanics and riders can manage the small sacrifice of walking into the paddock for the greater good, although judging by this last weekend’s race at Miller Motorsports Parks, apparently members of certain other teams (Jordan Suzuki and the always adjacent Joe Rocket display, factory Yamaha, factory Kawasaki) cannot. Teams that don’t want to do that should be banished to the privateer area of the paddock, where they can do anything they want.

14. Apply the Big Mac Theory Of Racing. No matter who you are, and no matter where you are, if you walk into a McDonald’s and order a Big Mac, you get the same Big Mac for the same price as anybody else who walks into the same McDonald’s, be it in Buffalo, New York or at Narita Airport in Japan. The same should be applied to AMA Pro Racing: Everybody should get treated fairly and the same way at every AMA event and by every AMA employee, whether they’re a famous basketball superstar or a first-year rookie.

15. There should be an easily accessible Rider Contact as the first place a rider or team goes when they need something addressed or answered.

16. Event schedules should always be the same, with every practice, qualifying session and race for a given class happening at the same predictable time at every track.

17. “Bankers Hours” for registration should be eliminated, with registration opening at 7:00 a.m. at every track, every day of a race weekend, including Thursday.

18. Team and rider access to pit garages should be negotiated and standardized, with, for example, teams able to get into their garages at 7:00 a.m. on Monday of Speed Week at Daytona instead of the current 1:00 p.m.

19. Portable toilets should be placed every 150 feet along hot pit lane at every track, with two portable toilets placed immediately adjacent to the pole side of the grid.

20. Every racetrack should provide a designated, suitable “spotter area” with adjacent parking for use by race team spotters, located in the last 20% of the racetrack length.

21. Riders should be required to participate in riders’ meetings at every track, with loss of qualifying position for failing to attend riders’ meetings–i.e., any rider who doesn’t attend the riders’ meeting would start his next race of the weekend at the back of the grid.

22. Riders who do not attend the annual AMA Pro Racing Awards Banquet should not be paid any Championship bonus money, because their absence disrespects the participants and fans who attend the banquet to honor the riders.

23. Riders who finish in the top three in points in Superbike and who do not attend the AMA Pro Racing Awards Banquet should also be fined $15,000 and their team fined $30,000. (Except in cases of verified family emergencies.)

More to follow…

(Note to conspiracy theorists: My racing team, Team Hammer, Inc., is a separate company from Roadracing World Publishing, Inc., and race team contracts include language that specifically states that involvement with the race team does not get a sponsor any special treatment in Roadracing World or on Roadracingworld.com. For an example of how that works, companies that are involved with the race team did not win the latest Roadracing World 600cc shootout nor the latest Roadracing World tire comparison test. In fact, Dunlop won the track day tire section of the tire test…and Yamaha won the 600cc shootout. Laying issues of the magazine down on a table and looking at what has been published over the last year, two years, five years, 16 years, you name it, demonstrates that Roadracing World publishes what is true, and that the winners of Roadracing World comparison tests are determined by performance, not brand or affiliation. Also reference Roadracing World articles on quality control problems with various motorcycle models.)