Define one change for one run

Generated from content/lms/coaching-science/03-build-deliberate-practice-loops/01-define-one-change-for-one-run.md; edit the source file, not this page.

Source path: content/lms/coaching-science/03-build-deliberate-practice-loops/01-define-one-change-for-one-run.md

Course: Coach drivers with evidence, not instinct

Module: Build deliberate practice loops

Estimated duration: 55 minutes

Purpose of the lesson

At the intermediate level, you are usually past the stage where the instructor has to remind you which way the corner goes or where the basic line lives. You can circulate at useful speed. You can feel obvious understeer, oversteer, missed braking points, and late throttle. The problem is that useful speed can make practice messy. You come in from a session knowing the car felt better in one place, worse in another, and faster somewhere else, but you cannot say which driver action caused which result.

This lesson teaches a smaller and more powerful skill: before a run, define one change you will make, where you will make it, and what evidence will tell you whether it helped. Then you drive the run with that single experiment held steady. Afterward, you review the result before you chase the next idea.

That may sound slow. It is actually how you make improvement accumulate. Bentley describes driving as something you cannot do purely by reading, because the learning has to happen through hands-on experience. But he also says that understanding the theory before you drive makes you more sensitive to what the car tells you once you are behind the wheel. A one-change run is the bridge between those two facts. You turn an idea into a controlled experience, and you leave the run with a cleaner signal than you would get from a general attempt to drive better.

The core principle

The rule is simple: change one controllable driver action for one run, and hold the rest of the lap as close to normal as you safely can.

The point is not that only one thing matters. Racing and HPDE driving are not sequential. Line, braking, throttle, steering, track surface, camber, elevation, tire behavior, car balance, traffic, and your own mental state all overlap. Bentley makes that point directly when he explains that driving, racing, mental skills, physical skills, techniques, and learning do not happen neatly one after another. Because everything interacts, you need practice loops that protect you from false conclusions.

If you change your brake release, turn-in timing, apex target, throttle pickup, and exit track-out all in the same run, you may go faster, but you do not know why. You may also go slower and blame the wrong piece. The car may have accepted the new turn-in timing, but the extra brake pressure hid it. The earlier throttle may have helped exit speed, but the missed apex made it feel wrong. A one-change run does not make the driving simple. It makes the learning legible.

The question behind the rule comes straight from the instructor mindset in the bonded material: when a corner is not working, ask whether there is something different you need to do with the car, or something different about your approach to the corner. That question is useful only if you answer it with enough precision to test it. Be more aggressive is not a test. Brake later is usually too crude. Try releasing the brake two beats earlier from the same initial brake point in Turn 5 is a test. Turn in one car length earlier while keeping the steering rate slower and more progressive is a test. Let the car use the final two feet of track-out on exit while keeping the same apex is a test.

One run means one protected experiment. It may be one HPDE session, one race practice stint, one out-lap plus three clean laps, or one timed run format. The duration matters less than the discipline. During that run, your job is to give the change a fair trial, not to keep negotiating with yourself every corner.

Why one change works

A race car gives feedback through motion, sound, pressure, speed, and time, but the feedback is easy to contaminate. Your hands may feel less steering load because the car was better balanced. They may also feel less load because you entered slower. Your exit may feel calmer because your line improved. It may also feel calmer because you gave away entry speed and reduced the tire's job. The same felt result can come from different causes.

Data can help, but only when you have a clean question. The Going Faster material points to real-time data acquisition as a way to show how the fastest drivers reduce lap times. It also describes an example where the difference between two drivers on the same section came from one driver slowing too much in the first half of the corner. That is exactly the kind of insight a one-change run is built to expose. If your test is to carry a little more speed into the first half of the corner while keeping the same exit discipline, the speed trace can confirm whether you actually did that. If your test is just to be faster through the corner, the trace may show five differences and no obvious cause.

The same logic applies without electronics. Bentley warns that learning your lap time compared to others too early can hurt the accuracy of your awareness and feedback. That does not mean lap time is useless. It means lap time is a late-stage verdict, not the first witness. Before the stopwatch gets the final say, you need to know what the car did, what you did, and whether the targeted change happened at all. The act of writing the result down is part of the feedback loop, because it forces you to separate memory from interpretation.

This is also why the rule belongs in a coaching-science module rather than a pure driving-line module. The skill is not only the selected driving technique. The skill is designing a rep that teaches you something.

What counts as one change

A good one-change target has four parts: one location, one action, one constraint, and one expected signal.

The location keeps the run from becoming vague. Pick one corner, one phase of one corner, or one repeated feature. The bonded material divides cornering into phases and points out that entry is usually more difficult than exit because you must determine and set the car's speed before the turn. That makes entry a good place for a focused experiment, but it also makes entry a dangerous place for a vague one. If the change concerns entry, name the phase: approach, initial braking, brake release, turn-in, or the first half of the corner.

The action is what you will physically do. It must be something visible or feelable. Examples include starting the turn-in slightly earlier, making the steering input more progressive, easing the brake release over a longer distance, waiting to add throttle until the car is pointed, or allowing the car to run closer to the outside edge at track-out. Each of those actions maps to a known mechanism in the chunks: steering rate and amount, entry speed setting, track width use, high moment of inertia response, and the priority of exit, entry, and midcorner speed.

The constraint protects the rest of the lap. If you are testing an earlier and more progressive turn-in in a production car, the constraint might be that you keep the same brake marker and do not add earlier throttle. If you are testing fuller track-out, the constraint might be that you keep the same turn-in and apex and do not use extra throttle to force the car wide. If you are testing less steering angle, the constraint might be that you do not solve the problem by slowing the car below your normal entry speed. Bentley's cornering-technique section gives the key distinction: you can slow your steering inputs without slowing the corner speeds. That is a different experiment than simply driving slower.

The expected signal tells you what success should look like. The signal can be felt, seen, heard, or measured. A useful felt signal might be that the car takes a set without a second steering correction. A useful visual signal might be that the outside tires approach the exit curbing without you pinching the wheel. A useful data signal might be that the speed trace no longer has an unnecessary dip in the first half of the corner. A useful instructor signal might be that the comment changes from you are adding wheel twice to the car is taking the arc earlier and more calmly.

If your proposed change does not have those four parts, it is probably not one change yet. It is still a wish.

The priority problem: choosing the right change

Not every change deserves a run. The intermediate driver's trap is to pick the most interesting change instead of the most useful one. Bentley gives a driving priority sequence: first perfect the line, the acceleration phase, and corner-entry speed before chasing the more advanced prize of very high midcorner speed. That priority matters when you define your experiment.

If your exit is poor, do not begin by trying to carry heroic midcorner speed. Start with the action that lets the car be better positioned and better pointed for acceleration. If your line is inconsistent, do not define the run around a chassis adjustment or a subtle brake-release nuance. Define it around a line action you can repeat. If you are not using the full exit width, do not define the run around more throttle. Define the run around allowing the car to track out to the edge while keeping the same basic timing.

The bonded material is blunt about track width: leaving unused surface at exit gives away speed. But a one-change run keeps even that principle honest. The change is not fling the car wider. The change is use the available exit width by releasing steering and letting the car finish the arc. If the car reaches the edge because you added throttle too early and shoved it there, that is not the same learning result.

The car also influences the choice. Bentley's moment-of-inertia example explains that a car with more mass distributed away from the center, such as a production car, will take longer to respond to initial turn-in than a car with mass concentrated closer to the center, such as an open-wheel car. The practical driver response is to begin turn-in slightly earlier and make the steering more progressive. That is a clean one-change candidate because it connects car type, mechanism, action, and expected result. It is better than the vague conclusion that the car will not turn.

The anatomy of a one-change run

A complete loop has six steps.

First, establish the baseline. You need to know what normal looks like before you change it. This can be as simple as saying that in Turn 3, you normally brake at the 4 board, release abruptly near turn-in, add a second steering input at apex, and miss full track-out by about half a lane. If you have data, the baseline may include minimum speed, brake trace shape, steering trace, throttle pickup, or speed at a fixed exit point. If you have only your senses, the baseline is still valuable. The key is to describe behavior rather than judge it.

Second, ask the corner question. Is the problem caused by what you are asking the car to do, or by how you are approaching the corner? That question keeps you from blaming the vehicle before you inspect the driver action. It also keeps you from forcing driver technique to solve a setup or vehicle-character problem. Bentley says understanding chassis and suspension adjustments is a critical part of the driver's job, and he advises asking someone to explain what you do not understand. In one-change practice, that means you do not blindly turn knobs, but you also do not pretend the car's behavior is irrelevant.

Third, define the hypothesis. A hypothesis is a plain cause-and-effect statement. If I turn in slightly earlier and steer more progressively, then this high-moment production car should arrive nearer the apex without an abrupt late correction. If I stop leaving unused track at exit, then I should be able to reduce steering sooner without adding risk. If I carry two miles per hour more through the first half of the corner without moving throttle earlier, then the data should show less overslowing before the apex and no worse exit.

Fourth, define the protected action. This is what you will actually do in the run. Keep it small enough that you can remember it under speed. If it takes a paragraph to say while you are belted in, it is too big. A good action sounds like: same brake marker, slower release, earlier eyes to track-out. Or: same entry speed, one car length earlier turn-in, smoother steering rate. Or: same apex, unwind earlier, use the last two feet of exit.

Fifth, drive the run. During the run, do not grade every corner emotionally. Your job is to execute the test and observe. Bentley's mental-performance chapters matter here. Your results depend heavily on mental performance, and a distracted mind creates noisy reps. The run is not a debate. It is an experiment.

Sixth, review before you compare. Write down what happened before you look at comparisons that can distort your awareness. Did you actually make the change? Did the car respond in the predicted direction? Did the change create a new problem somewhere else? Did lap time, sector time, or data support the felt result? What is the next single change: keep, revert, or refine?

Sub-skill: make the change driver-controlled

The best first experiment is usually a driver action, not a car adjustment. That is not because setup is unimportant. The chunks say the opposite: chassis and suspension understanding is part of the driver's job. But if you are still changing your inputs every lap, a setup change is hard to interpret. You may soften a bar, alter tire pressure, or change damping, then drive the next run differently and learn nothing clean.

A driver-controlled change uses your hands, feet, eyes, timing, or path. Steering amount and steering rate are especially useful because Bentley directly connects less steering input with speed. But the phrase less steering is easy to misunderstand. You are not trying to understeer off the road with a lazy hand. You are trying to choose a path and timing that require less wheel for the same or better speed. That may mean turning in earlier in a high-moment car. It may mean slowing the steering input without slowing the car. It may mean using more track so the radius is larger.

Pedal changes can also be clean, but they need clear boundaries. Brake later is often too broad because it changes speed, weight transfer, line, and courage all at once. A better driver-controlled change is to keep the same initial brake point and alter the last part of brake release. Or keep the same minimum speed and change the point where you begin throttle application. Or keep the same throttle point and change whether you are still holding steering angle when you add it.

The point is not to avoid complexity forever. The point is to earn complexity with clean reps.

Sub-skill: keep the corner phase separate

A corner is not one event. The bonded material separates approach, braking, downshifting, turn-in, entry, midcorner, and exit, and it treats entry as particularly challenging. When you define one change, do not collapse all of those phases into a single blob.

If the problem is entry, say entry. If the problem is first-half overslowing, say first half. If the problem is exit width, say track-out. This matters because the fix for one phase can damage another. More entry speed may help the first half of the corner but delay acceleration if the car is not placed or rotated. Earlier throttle may improve the feeling of urgency but push you away from the intended exit. Less steering may improve tire capacity, but only if your line gives the car room.

For an intermediate driver, the safest structure is usually to protect exit while testing entry. That means you can experiment with how you set speed and turn in, but you do not declare success unless the car can still reach the exit phase cleanly. Bentley's priority sequence supports that discipline: do not chase great-driver midcorner speed before the line, acceleration phase, and entry speed are working.

Sub-skill: define evidence before the run

The worst time to decide what counts as success is after the run, when adrenaline and lap time are already arguing with you. Define the evidence before you leave pit lane.

Evidence can be qualitative. The car takes one steering input instead of two. The brake release feels like a ramp rather than a drop. The outside tires approach the curbing at exit without a panic correction. The instructor says your hands got quieter. You can repeat the same reference point three laps in a row.

Evidence can be quantitative. Minimum speed is no lower than baseline. Speed at a fixed exit point improves. The speed trace loses the midcorner dip. The steering trace has less late correction. The throttle trace begins at the same point but rises more cleanly. The key is that the number must match the experiment. A faster lap with worse execution is not proof that the change worked. A slower lap with clearly improved execution may be a useful learning result, especially if traffic, tires, or a cautious first attempt affected the time.

This is where review tools help without drowning you. Use data to answer the question you asked. If the question was first-half corner overslowing, compare speed at the relevant part of the corner. If the question was track-out width, video may be more useful than a full data overlay. If the question was steering smoothness, watch your hands or inspect steering trace if available. Do not let the tool choose the lesson for you.

Sub-skill: write the review in driver language

A review is not a diary entry about whether you felt good. It is a record of cause and effect.

Use three lines. Planned change. Observed result. Next decision.

Planned change: same brake point in Turn 6, slower brake release from turn-in to apex, no earlier throttle.

Observed result: car accepted the entry better on laps three and four, still added a small second steering input at apex, exit width unchanged.

Next decision: keep the brake-release shape for one more run, then test earlier eye pickup to track-out if the second input remains.

That is enough. It respects Bentley's point that awareness and feedback suffer when you jump straight to comparison, and it uses the act of writing to sharpen what you noticed. You are not trying to produce a novel in the paddock. You are preserving the signal while it is fresh.

Calibration cues

You are improving at one-change practice when your pre-run notes become more concrete and your post-run notes become less emotional.

Early notes sound like: try to be smoother. Better notes sound like: in Turn 2, keep the same brake marker, release the brake over one additional beat, and look for one steering input to apex. Early notes sound like: use more track. Better notes sound like: same apex, unwind earlier, let the car finish with outside tires near the exit curbing without adding throttle earlier.

In the car, improvement feels like less surprise. The change may still be difficult, but you know what you are listening for. You notice whether the car responds late because of its inertia. You notice whether you are overslowing the first half of the corner. You notice whether the steering wheel is being used to fix a path problem that should have been solved earlier.

On video, improvement often looks calmer than it feels. Hands make fewer emergency corrections. The car reaches the edge of the track as a result of arc and release, not as a result of being thrown there. The same reference points appear lap after lap.

In data, improvement looks like the metric tied to the experiment moving in the expected direction without a hidden cost. A first-half-corner speed experiment should not destroy exit speed. A smoother steering experiment should not simply be a slower entry. A track-out experiment should not create an earlier throttle spike that masks a worse line. The data does not need to be fancy. It needs to answer the question.

With an instructor or coach, improvement sounds like the conversation getting narrower. Instead of receiving a flood of comments, you and the coach can talk about whether the run tested the intended action. This matters because auto racing is both individual and team-based in the way Bentley describes. Once you are in the car, you execute alone, but the communication around the run can decide how useful the next session becomes.

Common failure modes

The first failure mode is stacking changes. You decide to brake later, turn earlier, use less steering, add throttle sooner, and use more exit curb in the same run. That may feel productive because you are working hard, but the review becomes useless. You changed the whole corner. If the car is better, you do not know which part helped. If the car is worse, you do not know which part to undo.

The second failure mode is choosing an outcome instead of an action. Faster entry is an outcome. More progressive brake release is an action. Better line is an outcome. Turn in one car length earlier while keeping the same apex is an action. Outcomes are useful for choosing the target, but actions are what you can practice.

The third failure mode is using lap time as the first judge. Lap time matters, especially in racing, but it is too blunt for early feedback. Traffic, tires, fuel, weather, confidence, and unrelated corners can all move the number. Bentley's warning about comparing too early applies here. First ask whether the change happened. Then ask whether the local evidence improved. Then let lap time join the discussion.

The fourth failure mode is making the change too global. If your instruction is to be smoother everywhere, you have no clear rep. Pick one corner or one repeated phase. A global theme can guide a day, but a one-change run needs a local test.

The fifth failure mode is ignoring the car type. A production car with higher moment of inertia may not respond like an open-wheel car. If you wait for it to react instantly and then add a rushed steering correction, the problem is not only line knowledge. It is a mismatch between the car's response and your timing. The one-change version is to start the turn-in slightly earlier and make the steering rate more progressive, then review whether the car reached the apex with less drama.

The sixth failure mode is confusing less steering with less commitment. Bentley's less-steering principle is not an invitation to coast around timidly. The point is to reduce unnecessary steering input while preserving corner speed. If your calmer hands come only from slowing down, you have run a different experiment.

How this lesson connects to the sibling skills

Practice the cue, not the slogan, is the close cousin of this lesson. One change is how you convert a slogan into a cue. Be smooth becomes release the brake over one additional beat from turn-in to apex. Use all the track becomes unwind so the outside tires reach the exit edge without a late correction.

Time feedback around the rep explains when to deliver the cue and when to review it. This lesson explains what the cue should be testing. If feedback arrives too early or too late, the rep gets noisy. If the change is too broad, even perfectly timed feedback cannot save it.

Use review tools without drowning the driver fits the evidence step. Data acquisition can show where faster drivers reduce lap time and where one driver slows too much in the first half of the corner. But the tool is most valuable when the run has one question. Otherwise the driver drowns in overlays.

Progress from clean reps to variation comes after this lesson. First you prove that you can make the change in a controlled run. Then you test whether it survives traffic, changing grip, different tires, a different car, or a different corner shape. Variation is earned by clean reps, not substituted for them.

The takeaway

Define one change for one run because the car cannot teach you clearly if you keep changing the question. Pick one location, one driver action, one constraint, and one expected signal. Drive the run as an experiment. Review what happened before you chase the next idea. That discipline turns ordinary seat time into deliberate practice.

Worked example: production-car turn-in timing

Use this example when the car feels late to the apex and you are tempted to solve it with a bigger steering input. The bonded material gives the mechanism: a car with more mass distributed away from the center has a higher moment of inertia and takes longer to respond to initial turn-in. Bentley's practical adjustment is to begin turn-in slightly earlier and make the steering more progressive.

For one run, do not change everything about the corner. Keep the same initial brake marker. Keep the same approximate entry speed. Keep the same apex target. The single change is turn-in timing and steering rate: begin the turn about one car length earlier than your baseline and feed the wheel in more progressively.

Before the run, write the expected signal. The car should begin rotating earlier, arrive nearer the apex without a late extra hand input, and require less rescue steering at midcorner. The exit should not get worse. If the car reaches the apex but you are slower everywhere, you probably made the run about caution rather than progressive timing. If the car still misses the apex and you add a second steering input, the change may have been too small, too late, or hidden by brake release. If the car turns in better but runs out of exit room, you may have improved entry timing while exposing an exit problem.

The review decision is one of three choices. Keep it if the car reached the apex with less correction and no exit penalty. Refine it if the response improved but the timing was inconsistent. Revert it if the earlier turn-in only pinched the corner or forced you to wait longer for throttle.

Worked example: first-half-corner overslowing on a data trace

Use this example when a data overlay or instructor comment suggests that you are giving away speed early in the corner. The Going Faster back-cover material describes a data example where the difference between two drivers came from one driver slowing too much in the first half of the corner. That is a perfect one-change target because it names a location and a mechanism.

Do not define the run as carry more speed everywhere. Define it as first-half-corner speed with exit protected. Keep the same brake marker for the first attempt. Keep the same turn-in and apex reference. The single change is the final part of speed setting: release the brake slightly more gradually and avoid adding an extra comfort lift or extra brake pressure before apex.

The expected evidence depends on your tools. With data, the speed trace should show less unnecessary drop before the midpoint or apex, while speed at corner exit should remain at least as good as baseline. With video, the car should not look rushed or pinched. From the seat, the car should feel loaded but not surprised, and you should not need a late steering correction to rescue the line.

If entry speed improves but exit speed drops, the change is not complete. You may have raised the first-half speed beyond what your current line can support. If the speed trace looks better and exit is unchanged or better, keep the change for another run before adding a new variable. If nothing changes on the trace, you may not have executed the change even if it felt different.

Worked example: using the last feet of track at exit

Use this example when you consistently finish a corner with unused pavement at track-out. Bentley's track-width point is direct: unused track surface costs speed. The one-change version is not simply drive wider. It is to let the car finish the corner on a larger usable radius while protecting the apex and throttle timing.

For one run, choose a corner with a clear and safe exit edge. Keep the same turn-in and apex target. Keep throttle pickup at the same point for the first test. The single change is steering release after apex: begin unwinding the wheel earlier and allow the outside tires to approach the exit curbing or edge under control.

The expected signal is that the car uses more of the available surface without a late shove, abrupt throttle addition, or panic correction. If the car reaches the edge because you forced it there with throttle while still holding too much steering, that is not the same result. If you use more exit width and the steering wheel is straighter earlier, the line has become more efficient. If you still finish with unused track, you either did not unwind enough, turned in too late, apexed in a way that shortened the exit, or entered too slowly to need the width.

The next change should depend on the result. If the car now uses the exit cleanly, you can later test throttle timing. If the car cannot use the exit without missing the apex, return to line. If the car is calm but still slow, then the track-out change has cleaned the path and you can choose a new run to test speed.

Common mistakes and what good looks like

Mistake one is the everything run. You change braking, line, steering, throttle, and track usage all at once. It feels ambitious, but it destroys the feedback. Good looks like one named action in one named place, with the rest of the lap held close to baseline.

Mistake two is the slogan run. You tell yourself to be smoother, braver, cleaner, or faster. Those words may describe the goal, but they do not define a rep. Good looks like a physical cue: slower brake release from turn-in to apex, one car length earlier turn-in, or earlier steering unwind after apex.

Mistake three is the stopwatch verdict. You finish the run and decide the change worked or failed only from lap time. Good looks like reviewing execution first, local evidence second, and lap time third. The stopwatch matters more after you know whether the experiment actually happened.

Mistake four is the setup escape. You assume the car needs an adjustment before you have stabilized your own inputs. Good looks like understanding chassis behavior and asking for help when needed, while still making the first practice loop driver-controlled unless the car is unsafe or clearly outside a workable window.

Mistake five is the false smoothness. You make the car feel calmer by slowing too much. Good looks like calmer inputs without giving away the target speed. Bentley's steering guidance is about reducing unnecessary input, not coasting through the corner.

Mistake six is the unrecorded lesson. You come in, talk for five minutes, remember only the emotion, and lose the useful detail by lunch. Good looks like three written lines: planned change, observed result, next decision.

Drill: the three-run one-change loop

Use this drill at your next HPDE, test day, or practice session. Pick one corner that is safe, repeatable, and not overloaded with traffic decisions. Do not choose the most frightening corner on the property. Choose the corner where a cleaner experiment will teach you something.

Run one is baseline. Drive the corner in your normal current style for three clean laps or three clean repetitions. Do not try to fix it yet. Immediately after the run, write the baseline in driver language: brake reference, turn-in reference, apex result, exit result, and the main unwanted behavior.

Run two is the single change. Choose one action from the baseline. Examples include a more progressive brake release, a slightly earlier turn-in for a slower-responding production car, or earlier steering unwind to use more exit width. Write the expected signal before you go out. Drive at least three clean repetitions with that single change protected. Success for run two is not lap time. Success is that you can say whether you executed the change and what the car did in response.

Run three is confirmation. Repeat the same change without adding a new one. The success criterion is two clean repetitions where the intended action happens and the local evidence moves in the expected direction without creating a worse exit or a control problem. If you have data, check only the channel or segment tied to the question. If you have video, watch only the selected corner first. If you have an instructor, ask for feedback only on the defined action before opening the conversation wider.

End the drill with a keep, revert, or refine decision. Keep means the change produced the expected result twice and did not create a hidden cost. Revert means it made the corner worse or solved the wrong problem. Refine means the direction is promising but the dose or timing needs another one-change run.

When the principle bends

The one-change rule is a learning tool, not a superstition. It bends when safety requires it. If the car is unstable, visibility changes, fluid appears on track, traffic becomes chaotic, or the instructor gives a safety correction, abandon the experiment and drive the car. A clean practice loop never outranks control.

It also bends after the skill is stable. Once you have proven a change in clean repetitions, later practice should add variation. Different grip levels, different traffic, different fuel loads, or a different corner shape can reveal whether the skill is robust. That belongs after the clean loop, not before it.

Finally, it bends when the car itself is the topic. Bentley makes clear that a driver needs to understand chassis and suspension adjustments. If the session goal is to evaluate a setup change, then the setup change may be the one change. The same discipline still applies: define the adjustment, protect the driver inputs, name the expected signal, and review the result before changing another thing.

Author Review

No quiz questions are attached to this lesson.

Sources

#	Document	Chunk	Pages	Score	Collection
1	Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez	f2410e4f-42d0-24db-af78-3d9940ff312d	75	1	uio_books_raw_v1
2	Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley	0237a5bd-e2d4-724e-bc2e-ba13db924f66	11	1	uio_books_raw_v1
3	Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley	1c0de301-8b35-9fab-3376-de66edf0d04d	535	1	uio_books_raw_v1
4	Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley	c179b4ca-b1cd-bbae-16ca-d15b1ecdfc12	11	1	uio_books_raw_v1
5	Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez	4285b990-c3e7-880e-5596-99af145b469c	300	1	uio_books_raw_v1
6	Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley	d64f3ac3-8ef8-0bfd-1ea5-ca5dc9d308c0	197	1	uio_books_raw_v1
7	Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley	ee4ddb39-cb81-0fa5-5322-b5aefed1e642	276	1	uio_books_raw_v1
8	Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley	536ffcb0-b4fd-90e0-b1a6-b29d29b9de0f	217	1	uio_books_raw_v1
9	Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley	47f6de8d-9d56-5b6d-547a-f1e7bb92faaf	152	1	uio_books_raw_v1
10	Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley	149c4d5c-d228-0358-acc0-8a92ac07ec7c	50	1	uio_books_raw_v1
11	Performance-Driving-Illustrated-Ross-Bentley	d03d8129-9884-8385-fe77-b2af5835c3e6	1	1	uio_books_raw_v1