Adapt the rule to the event in front of you
Generated from
content/lms/mental-game-ii-perceptual-science/04-build-if-then-driving-decisions/02-build-current-event-profiles.md; edit the source file, not this page.
Source path: content/lms/mental-game-ii-perceptual-science/04-build-if-then-driving-decisions/02-build-current-event-profiles.md
Course: See sooner and decide faster at speed
Module: Preload decisions for fast-changing laps
Estimated duration: 55 minutes
Your prewritten rule is not a prison. It is a prepared starting point for judgment.
In the previous lessons in this module, you learned to write rules before the lap asks for them, keep the menu small, and make the decision at the next-action scale. This lesson teaches the part that keeps those rules from becoming brittle. You will learn to build a current-event profile - a quick, practical read of what is actually happening now - and use that profile to adapt the rule without drifting into guesswork.
The core principle is simple: start the lap with a rule, then let the current event decide the exact version of that rule. The rule gives you direction. The event gives you calibration.
This matters because race driving is not a purely book-driven activity. Bentley makes the point that you can understand theory and picture it clearly before you drive, but you still have to connect that theory to hands-on experience. Lopez and the Skip Barber material point in the same direction through the way they organize the craft: the racing line, braking, corner-exit speed, car control, turn-in, throttle-brake transition, rotation, multiple-event corners, speed changes, the whole racetrack, and data review are not separate trivia. They are the pieces you use to decide what the car and corner are asking for right now.
A current-event profile is your answer to five questions before you commit the next action. First, what phase of the corner am I in or about to enter: approach, brake, turn-in, middle, or exit? Second, what is the speed demand: am I carrying too much, too little, or the right amount for the phase? Third, what is the car balance: stable, under-rotating, over-rotating, or simply not yet loaded enough to respond? Fourth, what is the track consequence: is this a corner where exit speed matters most, where entry placement matters most, or where the whole section changes if I solve the first half badly? Fifth, what can I do with the next input: brake, release, turn, wait, unwind, or accelerate?
That profile is not a long analysis session. It is a disciplined glance at the problem. You are not trying to diagnose the whole lap. You are trying to make the next correct move.
The mistake intermediate drivers make is treating a rule as if it must be executed exactly the same way every lap. They write a useful rule such as brake at the marker, turn in at the cone, or get to throttle as soon as the car points. Then one thing changes. Traffic changes the entry. The tires are not giving the same answer. The car arrives five miles per hour slower because the previous corner was poor. The driver is late off the brake. The car takes a set differently. The rule still has value, but the lap is no longer the clean example the rule was written for.
This is where you need the habit Bryan Herta points toward in the Going Faster car-control material: when the corner does not give you the result you expected, you ask whether you need to do something different with the car or with your approach to the corner. That distinction is the heart of this lesson. Sometimes the rule is right and your execution is wrong. Sometimes the execution is reasonable but the event has changed enough that the exact rule must be adapted.
Do not turn this into improvisation. A current-event profile does not mean you invent a new plan every corner. It means you carry a prepared rule into the corner and then choose the version that matches the present state.
Here is the working model.
Before the braking zone, your rule is a hypothesis. It might say that for this corner you brake in a straight line, release as you approach turn-in, and wait for the car to accept steering before you add throttle. As you arrive, the current-event profile checks that hypothesis against reality. If the car is arriving faster than usual, the version of the rule is more brake and a cleaner release, not a panic turn. If the car is arriving slower because you gave away speed in the first half of the previous corner, the version of the rule may be less brake and a more patient turn-in. If the car is pointed too early, the version of the rule is not more throttle just because the plan said exit; it may be to hold the car in a safer, slower version of the line and repair the rule on the next lap.
The profile protects you from two bad extremes. One extreme is rigid obedience: you do exactly what you planned even when the event has changed. The other extreme is reactive driving: you throw away the plan and chase sensations. Good driving sits between them. You preserve the intention of the rule and alter the input that the current event actually allows.
Section 1 - The rule is the intention, not the input
When you write an if-then rule, separate its intention from its visible input.
A visible input might be brake at the 4 board. The intention might be to arrive at turn-in with enough speed removed that you can release brake pressure and ask the front tires to steer. A visible input might be turn at the access road. The intention might be to place the car so the exit opens without forcing a late, large steering correction. A visible input might be throttle at the apex. The intention might be to begin transferring the car toward exit acceleration once the car is aimed and balanced enough to accept it.
Current-event profiling adapts the visible input while protecting the intention.
This distinction comes straight from the way the bonded material treats driving technique. Lopez breaks the craft into the three basics, the real-world line, braking and entering, throttle-brake transition, and car control. Those are not decorations around a fixed geometric path. They are the components that let you achieve the purpose of the corner. Bentley also frames development as learning theory, picturing it clearly, and then becoming more sensitive to the experience once you are behind the wheel. The rule gives you the picture. The event tells you whether the picture still matches the corner.
For an intermediate driver, the most useful version of this is a two-layer rule:
Layer one is the stable rule: what you intend to accomplish in the corner.
Layer two is the adaptation rule: what you will change if the event profile disagrees with the clean plan.
For example, the stable rule might be: enter this corner with the car settled enough to turn once, not twice. The adaptation rule might be: if I arrive too fast, I lengthen the brake release and delay the steering commitment; if I arrive too slow, I avoid adding unnecessary brake and focus on clean placement.
Notice what this does. You do not need ten choices. You need one rule with two or three permitted versions. That keeps the decision small enough to execute under load.
Section 2 - The six-part current-event profile
Use the same six-part profile every time until it becomes automatic.
One: phase. Ask where the car is in the job. Approach, brake, turn-in, middle, and exit are different events. A correction that makes sense in one phase can be wrong in another. More steering may be a reasonable turn-in correction when the car is slow enough and loaded correctly. More steering at the wrong moment near exit can trap the car on a tight line and delay acceleration. A brake release that is useful while entering can be meaningless once you are already coasting in the middle.
Two: speed. Speed changes what the line and inputs mean. The Going Faster contents explicitly place speed changes, beyond geometry, and the whole racetrack in the real-world line discussion. That structure matters. A line that looks correct at one speed can be wrong at another because the car uses more distance, needs more time to rotate, and gives the driver fewer recovery options. Do not ask whether the car is on the drawn line first. Ask whether the speed you carried makes the next part of the line possible.
Three: balance. The car-control material points to oversteer, understeer, neutral, using the controls to alter handling balance, rotation, over-rotation, under-rotation, and big rotation. Your rule has to respect which balance state exists now. If the car is under-rotating, adding throttle because the rule says throttle now may make the exit worse. If the car is rotating more than expected, a sudden release or abrupt steering change can create a bigger problem. If the car is neutral and accepting the input, the rule may need no adaptation at all.
Four: placement. Turn-in and early turn-in are not abstract ideas. Lopez includes a proper turn-in and early turn-in comparison in the Three Basics material. That tells you placement is not just where the car happens to be. It is an input outcome. If your profile says you are turning in early, the right adaptation may be patience rather than more steering. If your profile says you delayed too long, the right adaptation may be a controlled slower version of the corner rather than a sudden attempt to recover the perfect line.
Five: consequence. The whole racetrack matters. Some corners punish a missed entry because the exit is important. Some sections punish a slow first half because it compromises the rest of the section. One Going Faster back-cover data example describes two drivers in the same section where the difference comes from one driver slowing too much in the first half of the corner. That is a current-event lesson hiding inside a data example. The driver does not only ask whether the apex looked neat. The driver asks what the first-half decision did to the rest of the section.
Six: evidence. Use feel in the car, instructor language, and data after the session. The corpus repeatedly emphasizes learning through experience, continued analysis, charts, diagrams, and real-time data acquisition. During the lap, evidence is the car accepting or rejecting the next input. After the lap, evidence is whether the speed trace, braking trace, and lap section show the outcome you believed you felt. The event profile gets sharper when the felt profile and the data profile begin to agree.
The six parts sound like a lot on paper. In the car they compress into one question: what is the car asking for now?
Section 3 - The decision ladder
Use a four-rung ladder so the adaptation happens at the right time.
Rung one: before the zone, name the clean rule. This prevents reactive driving. If you cannot name the rule before the event, you will not adapt it cleanly during the event. A good clean rule is short: brake straight, release to turn, wait for rotation, then throttle when the car opens. Or: protect the exit, do not chase entry speed. Or: use one steering commitment and let the release finish the entry.
Rung two: at the first cue, check the profile. The first cue may be your brake marker, the point where the car takes a set, the first steering input, or the moment you expect to release the brake. Do not wait until the corner has already gone wrong. Check speed, balance, and placement early enough that your next action can still matter.
Rung three: choose the smallest adaptation that protects the intention. If you are too fast, do not add three corrections. Add the one correction that gives the car back enough margin: more brake pressure if still straight, a longer release if entering, less steering aggression if the front is overloaded, or a later throttle if the car is not ready. If you are too slow, do not punish the car with unnecessary brake just because the clean rule included a brake point. Protect placement and exit.
Rung four: debrief the rule, not just the lap time. After the session, ask whether the rule was wrong, the event profile was wrong, or the execution was wrong. This connects directly to the sibling lesson on debriefing the rule. If the data says you were slower because you slowed too much in the first half of the corner, the fix is not vague courage. It is a better rule for the first-half speed and release. If the car repeatedly under-rotates at turn-in, the fix may be your brake release, your speed, or your turn-in timing. If the car accepts the input but the exit is still poor, the rule may be solving the wrong phase.
Do not skip the debrief. Bentley frames driver development as continuing to analyze how to go faster, and the data-oriented chunks point to acquisition and analysis as a way to show where time is gained or lost. Current-event profiling is not complete until you compare the in-car judgment with the evidence.
Section 4 - Separating car problem from approach problem
This is the most important sub-skill in the lesson.
A car problem is when the current input is not producing the balance you need. The car is under-rotating, over-rotating, not accepting brake release, not accepting throttle, or not responding to steering the way the clean rule assumed. In that case, the adaptation is usually an input adaptation. You change pressure, timing, rate, or patience.
An approach problem is when you asked the car to solve the wrong job. You arrived at the wrong speed, from the wrong placement, with the wrong intention for the corner. In that case, the adaptation may only limit the damage on this lap. The real fix is a new rule for the next lap.
Intermediate drivers often confuse these. They feel understeer and treat it as a car problem: add steering, wait, maybe complain about front grip. But if the profile shows early turn-in, too much entry speed, or a line that pinches the exit, the understeer may be the result of approach. The car is not refusing a good request. It is refusing a request the approach made impossible.
The reverse also happens. A driver blames the approach because the lap felt messy, when the real problem was a rushed input. The plan was sound, the speed was acceptable, and the placement was good, but the driver snapped off the brake or turned faster than the front tires could accept. That is an execution problem inside a valid rule.
Use this test: if the same rule fails in the same way over repeated laps, look upstream. If the rule works when executed calmly but fails when you rush it, look at the input. If the result changes with small changes in speed or release timing, the profile is telling you which lever matters.
Section 5 - Worked example: Formula Dodge 110-to-35 mph corner
One bonded chunk from Going Faster describes a racecar approaching a 35 mph corner at 110 mph in a Formula Dodge context. That is a perfect current-event profile because the speed change is large enough that a rigid rule can get you into trouble.
Suppose your clean rule is: brake straight, finish most of the speed reduction before turn-in, release enough pedal effort for the car to enter, then let the car rotate before returning to throttle.
On the first lap, the current event matches the clean rule. The car arrives at the marker with normal speed. You apply the brake, the car remains stable, and as you approach the turn-in you can relax pedal effort enough to let the front accept steering. The profile says: phase is braking-to-entry, speed is appropriate, balance is stable, placement is on plan, consequence is exit protection. You run the clean rule.
On the next lap, you arrive faster. The rigid-driver mistake is to still turn at the same point because the turn-in marker is part of the rule. The current-event driver sees that speed has changed the event. The correct adaptation is not heroic steering. While the car is still straight, you use the braking zone to recover the speed target. If you are already entering, you release with more care and delay the full steering commitment until the car can accept it. The intention remains the same: arrive at turn-in with the car able to turn. The visible input changes.
On another lap, you arrive slower because the previous corner was poor. The rigid-driver mistake is to brake the same way anyway, turning a small loss into a bigger one. The current-event profile says the speed demand is different. You may need less brake, an earlier transition off the brake, or more attention to placement than to speed removal. The intention remains the same: place the car so the exit can be built. Again, the visible input changes.
On a fourth lap, the car enters with under-rotation. Now the question is whether the car problem came from the car or from the approach. If you entered too fast, the adaptation is to release and steer more patiently while accepting that this lap will be slower. If you turned in early, the adaptation is to stop making the corner smaller. If the approach was good but the release was abrupt, the adaptation is smoother release timing. The profile keeps you from naming every understeer event the same way.
This is why current-event profiling belongs in an intermediate mental-game course. The skill is not bravery. It is disciplined classification under pressure.
Section 6 - Worked example: proper turn-in versus early turn-in
The Going Faster turn-in diagram gives another useful event. The page contrasts proper turn-in with early turn-in. At intermediate pace, early turn-in can feel productive because the car seems to be doing something sooner. The problem is that the earlier action may create a worse later event.
Your clean rule might say: wait for the proper turn-in, make one steering commitment, and let the car open toward exit.
Now imagine you turn early. The event profile is immediate. Phase: turn-in. Speed: maybe acceptable, but now aimed at the wrong path. Balance: possibly fine at first, which is why the mistake can fool you. Placement: early. Consequence: the exit is likely to become smaller. Evidence: you need more steering later or you cannot unwind when expected.
The rigid-driver response is to continue as though the rule is still alive. That usually means adding steering in the middle, delaying throttle, or using more track than planned. The current-event response is different. You accept that the perfect rule has already been missed. Your job is now to choose the safest and least costly version of the corner. You avoid adding a second big steering demand. You keep the car balanced. You wait to accelerate until the exit path actually exists. Then you repair the rule on the next lap by moving the decision upstream: the if is not if I miss the apex. The if is if I feel myself wanting to turn before the proper cue.
That last sentence is the transfer. Current-event profiling teaches you to catch the event earlier each lap. First you notice the consequence. Then you notice the middle. Then you notice the entry. Finally you notice the urge before the input. That is progress.
Section 7 - Worked example: the first-half slowdown shown by data
The Going Faster back-cover material describes a data example where two drivers differ in speed over the same section because one slows too much in the first half of the corner. Even though the chunk is brief, it gives you a strong rule-building lesson.
A novice debrief might say: driver B was slower in the corner. An intermediate debrief should be sharper: driver B lost the section by solving the first half with too much speed reduction. The problem was not simply total corner speed. It was where the speed was removed and what that did to the rest of the section.
Build the current-event profile around that.
The clean rule may be: do not over-slow the first half; carry enough speed to keep the section alive while still protecting exit. The current-event profile asks: at entry, am I removing speed because the car needs it, or because I am uncomfortable? At middle, am I waiting because the car needs rotation, or because I arrived too slow and now have no energy left? At exit, did the first-half choice give me the ability to accelerate, or did I simply make the corner look tidy while giving away speed?
Data is useful here because the in-car sensation can lie. A corner where you slow too much early may feel calm and controlled. The line may look neat. The car may never complain. But if the speed trace shows the loss happened in the first half and never returned, the current-event profile was too conservative. The adaptation for the next run is not to throw the car in harder. It is to test a small first-half speed increase while protecting the same exit intention.
That is the mature use of data. You are not looking for a heroic number. You are checking whether your event read matched the car and the stopwatch.
Section 8 - Calibration cues
You know the skill is improving when your adaptations get smaller and earlier.
The first felt cue is reduced surprise. You begin noticing that the corner is changing before it becomes a rescue. A slightly faster entry is recognized while the car is still straight. A likely early turn-in is recognized before your hands commit. A poor previous corner is recognized before you apply the normal brake pressure for the next one. The lesson from the corpus is that understanding theory and picturing it clearly can make you more sensitive to experience. This is what that sensitivity looks like in practice.
The second cue is cleaner phase language. Instead of saying the whole corner was bad, you can name the phase. I was late in brake release. I turned early. I over-slowed the first half. I asked for throttle before the car was ready. I used the same brake input even though entry speed was lower. This is not academic language. It is how you make the next rule precise.
The third cue is fewer stacked corrections. A weak event profile produces chains of corrections: extra brake, then extra steering, then delayed throttle, then a late unwind. A better profile produces one main adaptation. You recognize the speed problem early, so you do not need to fix a balance problem later. You recognize the early turn-in urge, so you do not need a mid-corner correction. You recognize the car is not ready for throttle, so you wait instead of adding throttle and then lifting.
The fourth cue is data agreement. If your post-session review shows the same thing you felt - too much speed removed in the first half, a late release, an early minimum speed, or a repeated loss in one section - your profile is becoming trustworthy. If the data contradicts your story, believe the evidence enough to refine the rule.
The fifth cue is instructor agreement. An instructor watching from the right seat or from trackside should hear a more specific debrief from you. Not just that the car pushed. You should be able to say what event profile you saw and what adaptation you attempted. That gives the instructor something to coach.
Section 9 - Common mistakes
Mistake one: obeying the marker after the event changed. Markers are useful, but the marker is not the purpose of the corner. If you arrive faster, slower, offline, or unsettled, the marker-based input may need adaptation. Good looks like protecting the intent of the marker - the car state you wanted at the next phase - instead of worshiping the marker itself.
Mistake two: treating every miss as a bravery problem. The data example about slowing too much in the first half can tempt a driver to think the only answer is more commitment. Sometimes the answer is indeed less unnecessary slowing. But the better lesson is to locate where the speed was lost and why. Good looks like testing a controlled, narrow change: a little less first-half speed reduction, a cleaner release, or a more accurate turn-in, then checking the result.
Mistake three: adding steering to fix an approach error. If the car is under-rotating because you turned in early or arrived too fast, more steering may only overload the front or make the exit smaller. Good looks like recognizing the approach error, choosing a conservative completion for this lap, and writing the next-lap rule upstream.
Mistake four: adapting too late. If you wait until the exit is gone, your choices are limited. Good looks like profiling at the first cue: entry speed before turn-in, brake release before steering, turn-in timing before the apex, and car attitude before throttle.
Mistake five: changing too many variables. A driver who misses a corner may move the brake point, turn-in, release, steering rate, and throttle all at once. That creates noise. Good looks like one controlled adaptation tied to one profile observation.
Mistake six: using data as a verdict instead of a question. Data can show that a driver slowed too much in the first half, but it does not automatically tell you the whole cause. Good looks like using the trace to ask better questions: was the speed reduction demanded by entry speed, by early turn-in, by brake release, or by confidence?
Section 10 - Drill: three-session current-event profile progression
Run this drill over three sessions at your next event. Pick one corner or one short section. Do not use the whole track. The point is to build the habit at a scale small enough to repeat.
Session one: profile only. For five laps, drive your normal safe pace. Each lap, say the clean rule before the chosen corner. After the corner, name only the event profile: speed, balance, placement, and consequence. Do not try to fix everything. Your success criterion is that after five laps you can describe the recurring event in one sentence, such as I am slowing too much in the first half, I am turning early, or I am releasing the brake too abruptly before turn-in.
Session two: one adaptation. Keep the same corner. Choose one adaptation based on session one. If the profile was over-slowing, test slightly less speed reduction while keeping the same safety margin and exit intention. If the profile was early turn-in, test a later steering commitment. If the profile was under-rotation from release timing, test a smoother brake release. Run five laps. Your success criterion is not immediate lap time. It is whether the adaptation changed the targeted event without creating a new larger problem.
Session three: evidence check. Use whatever evidence you have: instructor feedback, video, data, or your own notes immediately after the session. Compare what you thought happened with what the evidence suggests. If the data or instructor says the first half is still slow, the rule needs another version. If the car was better but the exit suffered, the adaptation solved one phase and hurt another. If the event improved and the rest of the section stayed stable, keep the rule.
Write the final rule in this form: If the event profile is normal, I use the clean rule. If I see this specific change, I make this specific adaptation. If I miss the profile and arrive too late to fix it, I choose the safe completion and repair the rule next lap.
That is a complete current-event rule. It has a clean plan, a permitted adaptation, and a bailout standard.
Section 11 - Cross-references inside this module
This lesson depends on the sibling lessons but does not duplicate them. Write rules before the lap asks for them gives you the prepared rule. Decide at the next-action scale keeps the adaptation small enough to execute. Limit the menu before pressure rises keeps the profile from becoming a list of options. Debrief the rule, not just the result turns the post-session evidence into a better rule for next time.
The new skill here is the middle step: reading the current event accurately enough to know which version of the rule belongs in the car right now.
Section 12 - The finished habit
When this lesson is working, your driving becomes calmer, not busier. You still prepare. You still use rules. You still respect the fundamentals of line, braking, corner exit, car control, and track strategy. The difference is that you no longer treat a clean rule as if the lap owes you a clean event.
The lap does not owe you that. Traffic, speed, balance, timing, and placement change the problem. Your job is to notice the change early, keep the intention of the rule, and adapt the next input with the smallest correction that makes the rest of the corner possible.
That is what it means to adapt the rule to what is happening now.
Worked example: Formula Dodge 110-to-35 mph corner
One bonded chunk from Going Faster describes a racecar approaching a 35 mph corner at 110 mph in a Formula Dodge context. Use it as a pressure test for the rule. The clean plan is to brake in a straight line, remove enough speed before turn-in, release enough pedal effort for the front tires to accept steering, and then wait for the car to rotate before returning to throttle. If the car arrives faster than normal, the current-event profile changes the input but not the intention: recover the speed while straight if you can, release more carefully if you are already entering, and delay the full steering commitment until the car can accept it. If the car arrives slower because the previous corner was poor, the profile points the other way: do not add unnecessary brake just because the normal rule included it. Protect placement and exit instead. The useful question is whether the event changed speed, balance, placement, or all three.
Worked example: proper turn-in versus early turn-in
The Going Faster turn-in material contrasts proper turn-in and early turn-in. Treat early turn-in as a current-event profile, not just a line mistake. At first it can feel productive because the car responds sooner. The cost often arrives later, when the exit becomes smaller and you need extra steering or a delayed throttle. The clean rule is to wait for the proper cue, make one steering commitment, and let the car open toward exit. If you turn early, the adaptation is not to pretend the original rule still exists. Complete the corner in the safest and least costly way, avoid stacking a second large steering input, and repair the next-lap rule upstream by catching the urge to turn before your hands move.
Worked example: first-half slowdown shown by data
The Going Faster data example describes two drivers in the same section with a difference caused by one driver slowing too much in the first half of the corner. Use that as a debrief model. A vague debrief says the slower driver was simply slower in the corner. A useful debrief says the first-half speed reduction damaged the rest of the section. The current-event rule becomes more specific: if the profile shows that I am removing speed from discomfort rather than necessity, I test a small reduction in first-half slowing while protecting the exit. Then I check whether the evidence supports what I felt.
Common mistakes
The first common mistake is obeying the marker after the event has changed. Good driving protects the purpose of the marker, not the marker itself. The second is treating every miss as a bravery problem. Good driving locates where the time was lost and tests one narrow change. The third is adding steering to solve an approach problem. Good driving recognizes when early turn-in, excess speed, or poor placement made the later input impossible. The fourth is adapting too late. Good driving profiles the event at the first cue, not after the exit is already gone. The fifth is changing too many variables. Good driving adapts one input tied to one observation.
Drill: three-session current-event profile progression
Pick one corner or short section for three sessions. In session one, drive normal safe pace for five laps and name the clean rule before the corner. After the corner, name the event profile: speed, balance, placement, and consequence. In session two, choose one adaptation based on the repeated profile and run five laps with only that change. In session three, compare your felt profile with instructor feedback, video, or data. The success criterion is a written rule with three parts: the clean version, the specific adaptation for one repeated event change, and the safe completion if you miss the profile too late to fix the corner.
When this principle breaks down
The principle breaks down when the corpus would require invention beyond the current evidence. The bonded material supports adapting rules through car-control questions, turn-in timing, braking and entering, speed changes, whole-track consequence, and data review. It does not provide named track-corner case studies beyond general situations and the Formula Dodge speed-change example. For that reason, the lesson uses grounded situations rather than fabricated VIR, Lime Rock, or other named-corner examples.
Author Review
No quiz questions are attached to this lesson.
Sources
| # | Document | Chunk | Pages | Score | Collection |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley | 0237a5bd-e2d4-724e-bc2e-ba13db924f66 | 11 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 2 | Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez | 2cc8fb73-bf8b-6575-5167-9dbef050bdfe | 75 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 3 | Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez | f2410e4f-42d0-24db-af78-3d9940ff312d | 75 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 4 | Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez | d276269f-3631-7310-7146-524e58cef7fc | 5 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 5 | Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez | 591fe11f-29bf-4360-31eb-dce735a2b212 | 42 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 6 | Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez | b2c44205-8e7a-2622-d998-a8b843b3229a | 92 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 7 | Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez | 06a160fb-3b2a-e539-9ffc-8741bf0bd18d | 91 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 8 | Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez | f8e3be74-968a-a046-4ad6-3509a8108cfe | 91 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 9 | Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez | 4285b990-c3e7-880e-5596-99af145b469c | 300 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 10 | Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez | fa01ec16-aace-9079-2afa-de127b8272a9 | 300 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 11 | Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez | 132b7a24-40cb-abb1-5287-ba5b0971b786 | 120 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 12 | Speed Secrets Professional Race Driving Techniques Ross Bentley | 8b546b81-602a-e872-facb-d67640333134 | 6 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 13 | Going Faster Mastering the Art of Race Driving - Carl Lopez | f75104b8-d501-a888-1d42-4c3af3942f97 | 13 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 14 | Data-for-Drivers-PRINT | 9b632c37-672c-fca9-151f-48cfd93f4f35 | 1 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |