Problem: Stakeholders have different reasons for their interest in the regulation of motor racing. These reasons include the provision of, for example, safety for drivers, excitement for spectators, financial success for racing teams, and a positive environment for sponsors' products and services. The acceptability/unacceptability of current risk levels in motor racing depends on these stakeholders' perceptions of risk, within the sport. Method: This study assessed the risk perceptions and preferences of stakeholders through the use of structured interviews. Comparative data on fatal accident rates (FARs) in sport were obtained from published data. The number and type of vehicle incidents during competition were obtained from the circuit marshals' incident reports and post-race vehicle damage was assessed by visual inspection. Discussion: Two hundred and three stakeholders, defined as spectators (49), race officials (69), race teams (63), and safety managers (22) were interviewed during open-wheel and closed-wheel motor racing competitions. Significant differences ( P<.05) were observed between stakeholders for the relative risk perception scores across five sports; however, their rank ordering of the relative risk perception scores were similar and consistent with FARs for these sports. Spectators demonstrated a reverse affiliation bias effect by overstating the relative risks of motor racing, compared to other stakeholders. All stakeholders perceived the relative risks associated with open-wheel racing to be significantly greater than closed-wheel racing and the relative risks associated with standing race starts to be significantly greater than rolling race starts. However, all stakeholders demonstrated a domain effect, and spectators and race officials also demonstrated cognitive dissonance, in their expressed preferences for the type of motor race starts. Nineteen of the 21 race team managers nominated just three motor racing circuits and 17 team managers nominated “run-off” or “drop-off” track features as presenting the greatest risk to drivers. Impact on industry: The results obtained confirm the complexities faced by governing bodies when setting acceptable levels of risk within professional sports regulations.