Hi Andrew,
I guess we'll end up disagreeing on this one.
I really don't understand how publishing chronometric results involves intellectual property. If they win, their numbers will be published. The 2009 results were published, but only the category winners were identified, however if the various investigative reports are true both the positions of the competitors and their numbers are findable with some basic google-foo.
i'm not sure how the argument that they're producing repeatability that doesn't need specialist adjustment aligns with the idea that they didn't have enough prep time. Especially as they're talking of naming the regulators due to the importance of their role in the results.
nick