Read your inputs as evidence of your eyes
Generated from
content/lms/mental-game-ii-perceptual-science/02-train-racing-speed-gaze/05-diagnose-late-eyes-from-car-symptoms.md; edit the source file, not this page.
Source path: content/lms/mental-game-ii-perceptual-science/02-train-racing-speed-gaze/05-diagnose-late-eyes-from-car-symptoms.md
Course: See sooner and decide faster at speed
Module: Put your eyes where the future arrives
Estimated duration: 60 minutes
Principle: your hands and feet are downstream of your information.
At the intermediate level, late eyes usually do not announce themselves as a vision problem. They show up as a car-control problem. You notice that you added steering in the middle of the corner. You turned in with a quick jab instead of a settled rate. You hesitated before throttle because the exit appeared late. You unwound the wheel late because your eyes were still attached to the apex. You corrected a slide after the rear had already taken a set. Those are not just hand problems or pedal problems. They are evidence.
The rule for this lesson is simple: when the car asks for a rough, late, or surprised input, read that input as a clue about what your eyes were doing two seconds earlier. Your body may have executed the input, but your eyes wrote the instruction. Better visual and sensory information gives your brain better material to work with, and better output follows from better input. That is the core diagnostic idea.
This lesson is not a replacement for the module lessons on the present point, eye jumps, search patterns, or widening awareness. Those lessons teach the forward-facing method. This lesson teaches the backward-facing diagnosis. After a lap, a corner, a slide, or a data-video review, you work backward from the symptom in the car to the likely visual cause. If your steering was late, ask what you were looking at when the steering plan should already have been formed. If your throttle was hesitant, ask whether the exit was actually in your visual plan or whether it arrived as a surprise. If your correction was panicked, ask whether your eyes went to the correction path or to the thing you did not want to hit.
Why this works: vision is part of speed sensing and traction sensing.
You sense speed partly through visual flow. Objects on and off the track enter and leave your field of vision, and that flow tells your brain how quickly the car is moving. More experience helps, but the quality of the visual information matters. If your eyes are narrow, late, or trapped on a nearby point, the brain gets a compressed version of the track. It receives the next problem too late, and your hands or feet have to catch up. If your eyes are farther forward and the information is cleaner, the brain gets time to organize the next action before the car demands it.
The same point applies beyond vision. The useful driver is not only seeing. You are also feeling g-forces, steering response, pitch and roll, vibration through the wheel, vibration through the brake pedal, bumps in the track, and the way your visual point of view changes as the car rotates or slides. The goal is not to stare far away and abandon the car underneath you. The goal is to let the body continue sensing where the car is while the eyes guide where the car is going.
That is the intermediate shift. A novice often looks at the immediate task because the immediate task feels urgent. An intermediate driver has to learn that the immediate task can often be handled by body awareness while the eyes are already collecting the next piece of information. By the time you are at the apex, your visual attention should already be working toward the exit. When the track goes blind over a crest, your mental picture should already include the direction or clues beyond the crest. When the car slides, your eyes should go to the safe path and correction path rather than to the barrier or edge you fear.
The car-control reason is equally practical. Rough steering costs speed. Bentley presents cornering in a way that rewards slowing the steering input without slowing the car through entry, middle, or exit. He also makes the blunt point that less unnecessary steering is faster. If you are sawing, adding, stabbing, or holding too much steering, one useful question is not whether your hands are talented enough. The better first question is whether your eyes gave your hands enough time and enough track to make one clean plan.
The steering evidence.
Steering is the cleanest evidence because it is visible, felt, and usually easy to remember. Good visual timing tends to produce an earlier plan and a calmer steering rate. You know where the car needs to go before the front tires are asked to take a set. The turn-in is not lazy, but it is deliberate. The wheel moves at a rate that matches the corner instead of a rate forced by surprise. Near the apex, you are not still hunting for the apex with your hands. You are preparing to release steering because your eyes have already moved toward the exit.
Late-eye steering has a different signature. One form is the turn-in jab. You arrive at the turn-in area with your eyes still too close, then you suddenly discover that the car must rotate now. The steering input becomes a command issued under time pressure. It feels decisive in the moment, but it often asks the front tires for more than a clean earlier input would have required.
Another form is the midcorner add. You turn in, wait, realize the car is not aimed where you need it, and add wheel near the middle of the corner. This is often treated as a line mistake, and sometimes it is. But the diagnostic question is sharper: when should you have known that you needed more arc? If the answer is before turn-in or early in the corner, the late add is evidence that your eyes did not build the corner early enough.
A third form is the delayed unwind. You reach the apex with the car turned, but the exit is not yet truly in your plan. Because your eyes are still processing the near point, your hands hold steering longer than the car needs. The car feels bound up. You wait, then unwind after the exit finally becomes obvious. That costs exit speed and confidence. On video or data, it may show as a car that reaches the apex but does not accelerate cleanly away from it.
A fourth form is busy correction. The wheel never settles because the driver keeps discovering small problems late. Each correction may be small, but the pattern tells the story. The issue is not one dramatic mistake. The issue is that the car is being driven as a series of late discoveries. Your hands are doing constant small repairs because your eyes are not giving the brain a smooth enough preview.
When you notice any of those steering symptoms, do not immediately try to force smoother hands. Forced smoothness without better information can become slow, vague driving. Instead, rebuild the visual job that should have fed the hands. Ask where your eyes were at approach, turn-in, apex, exit, and track-out. Ask whether you saw the next useful point early enough to make the steering input feel inevitable rather than urgent.
The throttle evidence.
Throttle is the next major clue because throttle confidence depends on believing the exit. In a rear-wheel-drive car, especially one with meaningful power, the far look matters because the rear can step out if you ask for throttle too early or too abruptly. When you are looking far enough ahead, the exit point and available track are part of your plan. That tends to make your throttle handoff more deliberate. When your eyes are late, throttle becomes a guess, a wait, or a surprise.
The first throttle symptom is the parked apex. You arrive at the apex, the car is pointed well enough, but you wait because the exit appears too late. The hands may be acceptable, yet the car does not accelerate when it should. The underlying evidence is that your eyes did not confirm the exit soon enough. The cure is not simply to promise yourself to get to power earlier. The cure is to make the exit visible in the plan before the apex arrives.
The second symptom is the throttle stab. You see the exit late, realize there is track available, and apply throttle as a catch-up move. In a low-power car, that may only cost smoothness. In a higher-powered rear-wheel-drive car, it can provoke an oversteer moment. The bonded material is clear that a far look helps you avoid being caught off guard when the rear moves, and it also helps you modulate throttle because you have already identified the exit.
The third symptom is exit blindness in connected corners. Intermediate drivers are asked to link corners in their mind. That means you may need to exit one corner on a line that sets up the next one, not simply maximize the first exit in isolation. If you exit a corner and immediately realize you are in the wrong place for the following right-hander or left-hander, the input evidence is not only throttle or steering. It is also that your eyes and mental picture stopped too soon. You drove the corner you were in, but not the sequence you were in.
The braking evidence, with a limit.
The current corpus is stronger on vision, steering, throttle, recovery, sensory input, and speed sensing than it is on detailed brake-release technique. So treat braking symptoms as supporting evidence rather than a complete diagnosis by themselves. If you are constantly surprised by brake timing, holding pressure because the corner picture is unresolved, or releasing in a way that feels reactive rather than planned, your eyes may be part of the problem. But do not use this lesson to turn every brake issue into an eye issue. Braking also depends on reference points, grip, balance, traffic, and the car itself.
What you can read honestly is the timing of certainty. Did you know where the car needed to go before the brake release began, or were you still searching? Did the visual flow make the corner feel impossibly fast even at a reasonable pace? Did you feel the brake pedal and the car, or were your eyes locked so tightly on the near point that the rest of the sensory picture went quiet? Those questions stay inside the evidence supported by the corpus: better sensory input improves the quality of the output.
The recovery evidence.
Recovery moments reveal eye behavior quickly because the car gives you less time to hide. If the rear steps out, the useful visual job is not to stare at the barrier, grass, dirt, or edge of the track. The useful job is to look where the car needs to go for recovery. The corpus describes intermediate drivers forcing themselves to look at the safe runoff or track path rather than at the barrier, and explains that the hands follow and correct sooner when the eyes go to the correction path.
This is not mystical. It is a chain. The eyes point the brain toward a path. The brain organizes the hands. The hands send the correction. If the eyes are captured by the threat, the correction is late or misdirected. If the eyes go to the usable path, the body has a better chance to correct earlier and with less panic.
You can diagnose this after the fact. In a slide or near-slide, what do you remember seeing? If the memory is only barrier, grass, dirt, cone, or the nose of the car, your eyes probably narrowed under stress. If the memory includes the path back to pavement, the exit space, or the track beyond the moment, you were closer to the right recovery habit. This is a skill, not a personality trait. The corpus specifically treats this as an adaptation you can hone, including through karting or sim work.
Sub-skill 1: replay the input before judging it.
Most drivers judge a mistake too quickly. They say they turned in too late, missed the apex, got greedy on throttle, or had a messy correction. That may be true, but it is not the complete diagnosis. The first sub-skill is replaying the input as evidence. What exactly did your hand or foot do? Was the steering early and smooth, late and fast, doubled, held, or corrected? Was throttle a smooth pickup, a wait, a stab, or an early surprise? Did the car feel busy because the track was busy, or because your vision was late?
Do this replay while the memory is fresh. You do not need perfect data. You need honest sensory recall: wheel rate, steering amount, pedal confidence, whether your visual point of view changed smoothly as the car rotated, whether you noticed bumps and surface features, and whether your world felt wide or narrow. Bentley emphasizes exercises that make you more sensitive to what the car is doing and improve the quality of input to the brain. This replay is one way to build that sensitivity.
Sub-skill 2: identify the missing visual question.
The sibling lessons teach eye jumps that answer a question. This diagnostic lesson asks the reverse question: what did the input prove you had not answered yet? A midcorner steering add may prove you had not answered how much arc the corner required. A delayed unwind may prove you had not answered where the exit opened. A throttle hesitation may prove you had not answered how much track you would have on exit. A poor linked-corner exit may prove you had not answered where the next corner wanted the car.
This keeps the work specific. Do not tell yourself to look farther in a vague way. Instead, name the missing answer. I did not know the exit soon enough. I did not know the correction path. I did not know where the next right-hander needed me. I did not see the early clues after the blind crest. Once the missing question is named, the next session has a job.
Sub-skill 3: keep the car under you while the eyes go ahead.
A common intermediate fear is that looking farther ahead means losing the car underneath you. The corpus gives the right answer: the body can still know where the car is while the eyes are ahead guiding it. That is the adaptation. You are not ignoring the present. You are moving some of the present-car monitoring into kinesthetic and auditory channels while vision starts solving the next task.
In practice, this feels like a wider bandwidth. You still feel steering response, brake vibration, g-force, pitch, roll, and bumps. You still hear and feel the car. But your focal attention is not trapped on the hood, apex cone, or immediate pavement. You are letting more sensors contribute. This is why a pure visual command is too small. The skill is sensory organization, with vision leading the plan.
Sub-skill 4: use visual flow as a speed-sensing tool.
If the track feels faster than it should, inspect your visual flow. With higher-quality visual information, speed sensing becomes more accurate. When your eyes are late and narrow, objects enter and leave the field of vision abruptly, and the car feels rushed. When your eyes are ahead and your awareness is wider, the same speed can feel more organized because the brain sees the flow earlier.
This does not mean you should drive faster just because things feel calm. It means calm visual flow is one calibration cue that the information is improving. You should still obey event rules, traffic, flags, and your actual skill level. But if a corner suddenly feels less frantic at the same pace, that is useful evidence that your gaze timing has improved.
Sub-skill 5: use outside evidence without outsourcing judgment.
Intermediate drivers can use tire marks, cones, video, and data to see whether a line or exit speed improved. Use those tools as checks on your diagnosis. If you think your eyes reached the exit earlier, video may show a cleaner release of steering or a more repeatable track-out. Data may show cleaner throttle timing or better exit speed. Cones and tire marks may show whether your car is actually arriving where you think it is arriving.
Do not let tools replace the in-car question. The goal is not to collect evidence for its own sake. The goal is to connect the evidence chain: eyes, brain, hands and feet, car path, exit result. When those line up, the diagnosis is useful.
Calibration cues: what improvement feels like.
The first improvement is time. The corner does not necessarily become slower, but it feels less urgent. You are no longer waiting for the track to reveal itself at the last possible moment. The apex arrives as part of a known sequence, and the exit is already in mind before you need to release the wheel.
The second improvement is steering economy. The wheel moves less often. You add less midcorner. You unwind more naturally. You can slow the steering input without reducing the car's pace through the corner. This is the practical link to cornering speed: unnecessary steering tends to cost time, and better visual information reduces the need for unnecessary steering.
The third improvement is throttle confidence. You pick up throttle because you know where the car is going, not because you are hoping the exit will appear. In a rear-wheel-drive car, that matters even more because early or clumsy throttle can create a rear movement that demands quick correction. A far look does not remove the need for throttle discipline, but it gives the discipline a plan.
The fourth improvement is recovery calm. When the car rotates or slides, your memory contains the correction path rather than only the threat. You may still have an adrenaline spike. That is normal. But the hands react sooner because the eyes gave them a usable destination.
The fifth improvement is richer sensory detail. You begin to notice surface cracks, undulations, bumps, how quickly the steering responds, brake-pedal vibration, and the way your viewpoint changes as the car rotates. This is not trivia. The corpus treats better sensory input as a path to better skill output. When the sensory picture gets richer without overwhelming you, you are training the system this lesson depends on.
Failure modes: what wrong looks and feels like.
Apex attachment is the classic one. You find the apex, then stay with it too long. The car may hit the apex, but the exit becomes late. Your hands hold steering, throttle waits, and the car feels like it pauses before leaving the corner. The input evidence is delayed unwind and delayed throttle.
Threat fixation is the recovery version. The car slides or runs wide, and your eyes go to the barrier, grass, or edge. The hands either freeze or correct late. The input evidence is panic, not because you are weak, but because your visual system fed the brain the threat instead of the path.
Near-field driving is the general version. You drive from one near point to the next. Cone, apex, pavement, cone, exit, next cone. Each item arrives alone. The input evidence is a chain of small late corrections. The car is not necessarily out of control, but it never feels settled.
False smoothness is another trap. You hear that late eyes create rough hands, so you force the steering to be slow. But if the eyes are still late, slow steering simply makes you late more gently. The car misses shape with less drama. Good smoothness comes from earlier information, not from suppressing the hands after the brain has already been surprised.
Single-corner thinking is common in intermediate groups. You solve the corner in front of you and forget the next one. The input evidence appears after track-out, when you realize you are badly placed for the following bend. The fix is not only a different exit line. The fix is to extend the visual and mental picture so the first corner is driven as part of a sequence.
Over-blaming the eyes is the final failure mode. Not every problem is vision. The car may have a setup issue, the track may be changing, traffic may have altered your plan, or your braking and throttle technique may need specific work. Use the eye diagnosis as a first-pass investigation, not as an excuse to ignore the rest of the car. The strongest conclusion comes when the input symptom, the visual memory, and the external evidence all agree.
How to use this lesson in a session.
Pick one or two corners, not the whole track. Choose one corner where you often add steering or hesitate on exit, and one sequence where exit position affects the next corner. Before the session, name the visual question for each. For the first corner, it might be whether you know the exit before the apex. For the sequence, it might be whether you know where the next corner wants the car before you track out of the current one.
During the session, keep the driving task simple. Do not chase lap time while you are trying to diagnose perception. Run enough pace that the symptom normally appears, but not so much that survival takes over. After each target corner, make a brief mental tag: one steering motion or add, exit known or late, throttle confident or delayed, world wide or narrow. Those tags become your evidence.
After the session, write the pattern down while it is still fresh. If you had three clean exits and two late unwinds, ask what changed visually on the clean ones. If every messy lap involved staring at the apex, you have your next session goal. If the steering improved but throttle remained hesitant, the visual target may have moved from apex to exit, but the exit may still be too vague. Keep diagnosing, not guessing.
Cross-references.
Use this lesson with the present-point lessons by noticing when you failed to release the present point. Use it with the eye-jump lessons by identifying the question your eyes failed to answer. Use it with the three-part search pattern by checking whether your inputs prove one part of the pattern went missing. Use it with the wider-awareness lesson by monitoring whether you still felt the car while your eyes worked ahead.
The final standard is not that you can recite a vision rule. The standard is that the car's inputs become calmer, earlier, and more explainable. When your eyes are on time, the hands and feet look less heroic because they no longer have to rescue late information. That is the skill: read the evidence, find the missing visual job, and fix the information before trying to polish the output.
Worked example: higher-powered RWD corner exit
You are driving a rear-wheel-drive car with enough power to make exit throttle matter. The corner itself is not mysterious. You know the apex, and you can usually get the car turned. The problem appears after the apex. Some laps you wait too long and lose exit speed. Other laps you get impatient, add throttle, and the rear starts to move before you are ready.
Read the inputs backward. The hesitant laps suggest that the exit was not confirmed early enough. You reached the apex, but your eyes had not already collected the track-out space, so your foot waited. The over-eager laps suggest a different version of the same visual weakness. You applied throttle before the exit plan was complete, so the rear movement surprised you. In both cases, the useful fix begins with the far look. Identify the exit earlier, keep enough awareness of the car underneath you, and let throttle pickup match the track you have already seen rather than the track you hope will appear.
The success cue is not simply earlier throttle. Earlier throttle without a better exit picture can make the car worse. The success cue is a cleaner chain: exit seen before apex, steering release beginning without delay, throttle pickup matched to the available track, and any rear movement corrected toward the path rather than toward the threat.
Worked example: blind crest into a left-hander
The corpus gives a useful intermediate situation: a blind crest followed by a left-hander. The weaker version of this corner is hood-and-crest driving. You climb the hill, your eyes stay on the immediate pavement, and only after the crest do you start solving the left-hander. The car then needs a late steering decision because the driver gave the brain late information.
The better version begins before the crest. You already know from track knowledge that a left-hander follows. Because you cannot yet see the full corner, you look for early clues: markers, tree lines, pavement direction, and any reference that helps rebuild the mental picture beyond the visible road. You are not inventing a line through blind faith. You are extending the picture so the crest does not reset your brain to zero.
The input evidence is easy to compare. In the late version, the car crests and then the hands wake up. Steering is sharper, and the entry feels rushed. In the better version, the steering plan begins earlier because the left-hander was already in the mind before it was fully visible. The felt difference is time. The crest stops being a surprise and becomes a known transition.
Worked example: linked corners where the first exit sets the next entry
Intermediate drivers have to link corners rather than treat every corner as an isolated puzzle. Use the corpus example of planning to stay left exiting one turn to set up the next right-hander. If you track all the way out from the first corner and then discover you are poorly placed for the next right, the mistake shows up as a line problem, but the input evidence points to a perception problem.
Ask what your eyes solved. If they solved only the first apex and first exit, your hands and throttle may have done a competent job on the wrong assignment. The next corner then arrives late, and you need an extra steering or placement correction. The fix is to make the exit of the first corner answer a second question: where does the next corner need me?
Video, cones, tire marks, and exit-speed information can help verify this. If changing the gaze task makes the car repeatably arrive in a better setup position without extra steering correction, the visual diagnosis was probably right. If the car still arrives wrong even when the next corner is in your plan, then the issue may be line choice, speed, or another technique problem.
Common mistakes
Mistake 1: trying to fix hands before fixing information. The driver notices abrupt steering and decides to be smoother. The wheel may move more slowly, but the car is still late because the eyes are still late. Good looks like earlier information producing naturally calmer steering.
Mistake 2: staring at the apex until the car reaches it. The driver hits the apex but cannot leave the corner well. The evidence is delayed unwind and hesitant throttle. Good looks like using the apex as a present reference, then releasing visual attention toward the exit before the car arrives there.
Mistake 3: treating every throttle problem as bravery. The driver thinks the cure is simply to commit to throttle. In a rear-wheel-drive car, that can turn a visual problem into an oversteer problem. Good looks like identifying the exit early enough that throttle is confident, modulated, and matched to available track.
Mistake 4: looking at the thing you fear during a slide. The driver sees the barrier or runoff and the hands follow the fear too late. Good looks like sending the eyes to the safe path or correction path immediately, so the hands receive a usable destination.
Mistake 5: collecting visual points without linking them. The driver can name apex and exit points but still drives the lap as disconnected pieces. Good looks like using the current exit to prepare the next corner, especially when one corner's exit position determines the next entry.
Mistake 6: ignoring the other senses. The driver hears look ahead and interprets it as visual tunnel vision far down the track. Good looks like eyes leading the plan while the body still feels steering response, brake vibration, bumps, pitch, roll, and the car's rotation.
Drill: two-corner input evidence audit
Purpose: diagnose late eyes from steering, throttle, and recovery symptoms without trying to fix the whole track at once.
Setup: choose two target areas before your next session. Pick one corner where you often add steering, delay throttle, or feel rushed near the apex. Pick one sequence where the first corner's exit affects the next corner. Write one visual question for each. For example: did I know the exit before the apex, and did I know where the next corner wanted the car before I finished this one?
Session 1, observe for 10 to 15 minutes: drive at a controlled HPDE pace where you can still think clearly. Each lap, after the target corner, tag the evidence in three short categories: steering, throttle, and visual width. Steering is one motion, add, hold, or busy. Throttle is confident, delayed, or catch-up. Visual width is wide, narrow, or threat-focused. Success criterion: by the end of the session, you can name the most common input symptom and the likely missing visual question.
Session 2, change only the visual job: keep the same target corners. In the first corner, make the exit part of your plan before the apex. In the sequence, make the next corner part of your plan before track-out. Do not chase lap time as the goal. Success criterion: on at least four clean laps, the main steering symptom is reduced or the throttle hesitation becomes easier to explain.
Session 3, verify with outside evidence: use video, data if available, cones, tire marks, and your own notes. Look for a cleaner steering release, less midcorner add, more consistent exit placement, or a more confident throttle pickup. Success criterion: your in-car memory, the input symptom, and the outside evidence tell the same story. If they do not, keep the finding provisional and repeat the drill at another event.
Do not run this drill in traffic that forces constant compromise, and do not use it to justify driving beyond your current safety margin. The goal is cleaner information, not proof of courage.
When this principle breaks down
The eye diagnosis is powerful, but it is not universal. If the car is changing because of tires, setup, surface condition, traffic, or a mechanical issue, better eyes may not remove the symptom. If your braking technique or throttle application is technically wrong, gaze timing may expose the problem without solving it. If you are overdriving, the world may feel late because your pace has exceeded your current information-processing skill.
Use a three-part check. First, ask whether the input symptom matches a visual memory: apex stare, exit surprise, threat fixation, or no mental picture beyond the crest. Second, ask whether changing the visual job changes the input. Third, ask whether outside evidence supports the change. When all three agree, the diagnosis is strong. When they disagree, stay honest and look for another cause.
This is also why the skill belongs in the mental-game and perceptual-science course rather than only in a cornering-technique lesson. You are training a performance strategy: improve the information entering the brain so the output has a better chance of being accurate, calm, and repeatable.
Author Review
No quiz questions are attached to this lesson.
Sources
| # | Document | Chunk | Pages | Score | Collection |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Inner Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley | faf47214-2619-0395-43b8-f1f6523e5a80 | 32 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 2 | Inner Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley | 7f788f5a-9a30-fc71-3220-8bdc3e9c1171 | 75 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 3 | Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley | 13d5ad27-440c-a690-f470-907b60dcfb22 | 476 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 4 | Inner Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley | 5e0b1782-7a4b-985f-79c7-740f10fa0c30 | 144 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 5 | High-Performance Driver Education HPDE Techniques by Skill Level | b67b7b85-6af9-5950-f9f1-bb4db754dcc1 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 | |
| 6 | High-Performance Driver Education HPDE Techniques by Skill Level | f1af6542-238a-0a29-1c06-80e59620361a | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 | |
| 7 | High-Performance Driver Education HPDE Techniques by Skill Level | 722c5386-4351-168a-f0f8-1781c968824a | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 | |
| 8 | High-Performance Driver Education HPDE Techniques by Skill Level | 17ec1691-8df7-a447-9010-00ebb000d6c1 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 | |
| 9 | Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley | 47f6de8d-9d56-5b6d-547a-f1e7bb92faaf | 152 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 10 | Inner Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley | 1f89d950-4532-a2f9-3f06-33a6a39f92d6 | 24 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 11 | Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley | 0237a5bd-e2d4-724e-bc2e-ba13db924f66 | 11 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |
| 12 | Ultimate Speed Secrets - Ross Bentley | 4400491c-451f-86fc-590c-1fa83983aef9 | 12 | 1 | uio_books_raw_v1 |