Weight as far rearward as possible, get wheels that have a flash edge on the inside that is slightly larger diameter than rest of wheel.   Mount those 'cheap' wheels on axle slightly angled so that only the edge of the wheel touches, and also install clockwise so that only 2 wheels are in contact with the track at any one time.  Have car turn very slightly so it continually skims/bumps the lane and it goes back on the other 2 wheels and then the car is a winner.   Removing 2 wheels from continual contact (instead of perfect alignment) is a huge boost, as is running on a very thin edge of a wheel.

They might have changed the rules to disallow this, but it would also ban kids who didn't have dial gages to get them exactly wrong to have the weaving motorcycle effect, but the weaving is only 1/8" or so, not bouncing hard into the side rails.  That's where the home tracks come in.  Tune for best run between "skim' off side rail and down toward the other side and by the 3 time it bumps it is over the line.  The cars dragging all 4 ties on the ground hoping the graphite on the nails lets the wheels spin freeley enough don' have a chance.

Make car design so if it is a near tie with another car, it's forward protrusion will trip the detector first, just like drag cars, but it still has to fit in the official size limit box, they're are some out there who spend a whole year perfecting their cars and so when it gets to the big races, they're all using the same hacks and all nearly tying on each race.

Honest son built with dad's influence don' stand a chance if done traditionally.  Them pushing the "Run Program" on shop bot and letting it cut out the design and spots for weights and perfect axle slots and special axles and wheels will always win.   Needs to go back to whittling and require all 4 wheels have full contact for entire length of car.

There's always the simulation theory.  If it is possible to simulate life, there's a near certain chance that we live in a simulation and are not the base reality.   In such a case, anything is possible.  Simulation theory also makes a lot of quantum mech concepts make sense (only things being looked at need perfect rendering).

Same with the Moon, simulation theory would explain it, but according to nearly everybody that has calculated the actual measurements, physics and math, there's more proof that the moon is not a natural satellite of Earth than some comet ejection/capture theories.  

Strange Universe when you start to look at it.

Basically, yes.   Except we could be in the 2,584th iterative recursion of that from the base reality.  Some reality is high tech and dimensionless and  starts a world to emulate a billion years with some nudges and that reality grows on to create simulations of a world in their world and on and on.   We can't break out of the box so everything is an illusion, essentially.

Life being an illusion, or partially so, as well as being a simulation is thought to be 80% or higher by various scientists.



Even black science man



And several others.    Same for there being more proof for the moon not existing than there is proof for the moon to exist being the right size, orbit, and made of the minerals we found.

just because it's a possibility doesn't make everything else less real.   Maybe we're the only simulation where a Creator and soul took off to steer humanity toward coming together in a crisis instead of every man for himself, despite other disagreements.   That got us over the first technological hump and is pushing us over the second, despite hard attempts at ripping that trait out of our world.

Musk has also mentioned a second show/illusion world that is overlaid with our reality, and it is the intersection of these that cause UFO sightings or something like that.  Just because it's possible doesn't mean other theories at the same time are not.   Simulation just covers time/rules of universe/big bang, nothing changes.

"There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy" -- Hamlet