NASCAR 2008 (merged)

Quote

Originally posted by AyePirate


no bucks, no buck rogers

LMAOnade. Good one.

We're not talking about a sleeper team here though. We're talking about the NASCAR equivalent of I guess a Minardi or Force India.

To put it into perspective, say if Kimi were today offered 50% ownership of STR just cos he's Kimi and he accepted. Yeah, they are sharing tech with Ferrari and/or Red Bull. So next year, it's Kimi and Rubens in STRs and beaucoup bucks. A podium next season for Kimi would be a huge accomplishment. A win from either within 2-3 years would be equally huge.

It's still a herculean, (perhaps even sisyphean?) task ahead.

Quote

Originally posted by OfficeLinebacker


LMAOnade. Good one.

Yes, it is, but it only demonstrates that I have good taste in movies.

It's from The Right Stuff. It was referring to another race, The Space Race to the Moon.

quote

A Liason man explains to irritated Astronauts why having sponsors (in this case US Congressmen) and keeping them happy is important.

"Funding. That's what makes the ships go up. I'll tell you something, and you guys, too. No bucks, no Buck Rogers. Whoever gets the funding, gets the technology. Whoever gets the technology stays on top."

Pretty much applies to motor sports unless you are Toyota F1.

Quote

Originally posted by Denier
Would you be happy if he was fighting for wins in NASCAR? He should be in the next year or two.

Not really, but there is always Alonso.

Quote

Originally posted by OfficeLinebacker


To put it into perspective, say if Kimi were today offered 50% ownership of STR just cos he's Kimi and he accepted. Yeah, they are sharing tech with Ferrari and/or Red Bull. So next year, it's Kimi and Rubens in STRs and beaucoup bucks. A podium next season for Kimi would be a huge accomplishment. A win from either within 2-3 years would be equally huge.

It's still a herculean, (perhaps even sisyphean?) task ahead.

The difference is that Kimi would need to raise $300M a year to have the hope of being an upper echelon team and Smoke needs to find $35M. Which for an Icon like Stewart is very doable.

Quote

Obama Campaign to sponsor BAM at Pocono? SI.com has learned that for the first time in history, a major presidential candidate may sponsor a race car in NASCAR's premier series. According to sources, Barack Obama's campaign is in talks to become the primary sponsor of BAM Racing's #49 Sprint Cup car for the Pocono race on August 3. Details of the agreement are expected to be worked out over the coming days. A BAM spokesperson has revealed the team will hold a press conference July 23 in Miami to reveal the partnership, currently a proposed one-race deal with an option to continue

Have they forgot about Vote for Bush sponsor that was on Kirk Shelmerdine car 4 years ago?

Quote

Originally posted by Pikachu Racing
Have they forgot about Vote for Bush sponsor that was on Kirk Shelmerdine car 4 years ago?

well for one kirk just stuck a bumper sticker on his car, he didn't get any money for it as a legit sponsorship; and two - i think everyone on the planet is doing their level best to try and forget that bush was elected.

Quote

Originally posted by WildmouseX

i think everyone on the planet is doing their level best to try and forget that bush was elected.

Not me, the dude just sent me 1200 bucks free and clear last week

Yeah, you should forget the status of the economy, debt, our standing in the world and everything else he's ruined in the US and done around the world with that $1200. That was his/their intention, though.

That's really sad, dude.

Nice win by Kyle tonight. It'll be interesting to see if the Cup race runs as clear and green as the Nationwide did.

Quote

Originally posted by CWeil
Yeah, you should forget the status of the economy, debt, our standing in the world and everything else he's ruined in the US and done around the world with that $1200. That was his/their intention, though.
That's really sad, dude.

Thanks!

economy?
which was worse?
the dot com bubble or the real estate bubble?
debt?
your credit card, mine, or a billion others that are overused?
our standing in the world?
yeah, the us has terrible emigration problems, or is that immigration?

whatever

I've been fat and happy for 54 years now and no president has ever had a ****ing thing to do with it.
People bagged on Nixon,Reagan,Carter,BushI,Clinton and now BushII, all for different reasons, but none of those guys have had **** all to do with my day to day life of putting food on my table or a roof over my head
Frankly if Bush, and congress mind you, want to pay for half of my vacation to Jamaica, I'm down with it


Oh, and Kyle is unstoppable,eh?
Just damn, what a roll he's on

Quote

Originally posted by whitewaterMkII

Thanks!

economy?
which was worse?
the dot com bubble or the real estate bubble?
debt?
your credit card, mine, or a billion others that are overused?
our standing in the world?
yeah, the us has terrible emigration problems, or is that immigration?

whatever

I've been fat and happy for 54 years now and no president has ever had a ****ing thing to do with it.
People bagged on Nixon,Reagan,Carter,BushI,Clinton and now BushII, all for different reasons, but none of those guys have had **** all to do with my day to day life of putting food on my table or a roof over my head
Frankly if Bush, and congress mind you, want to pay for half of my vacation to Jamaica, I'm down with it


Oh, and Kyle is unstoppable,eh?
Just damn, what a roll he's on

The real estate bubble is still going on, and it's already clearly worse than the .com bubble.

Quote

Originally posted by CWeil
Yeah, you should forget the status of the economy, debt, our standing in the world and everything else he's ruined in the US and done around the world with that $1200. That was his/their intention, though.

That's really sad, dude.

Nice win by Kyle tonight. It'll be interesting to see if the Cup race runs as clear and green as the Nationwide did.

This is why Obama sucks for running ads on a racecar. Racing is something I watch to take a break from all of 24 hour news cycle bullshit and now we are talking about politics in a racing thread. I hope that car goes into the wall on the parade lap. Same goes for any political ads on cars.

We already had Prez Bush II waving the green at Daytona in 2000(I think) when he was a candidate so Obama sponsoring a race car, while it will look awfully strange and I won't enjoy it, isn't new.

this freaking economy.. I just heard rumors my company is about to downsize again for the 3rd time in the last 2 years.. my 401k isn't going anywhere ... I liked the $ 1200 check though, that was sweet.. I told you guys, you put Scott Speed on one of the Gibbs Nationwide rides and he'll sure finish in the top 5 , perhaps win.
Just wondering why the hell is Bowyer leading the Nationwide series when he hardly ever wins a race, it must be consistency alone... I have to check the standings and see why Gibbs is not up there..

Quote

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
We already had Prez Bush II waving the green at Daytona in 2000(I think) when he was a candidate so Obama sponsoring a race car, while it will look awfully strange and I won't enjoy it, isn't new.

Like I said I want them all to stay out. I guess if someone is the President they can show up in that capacity but I'd prefer politicians- elected, unelected, and othewise just stay out of sports. It's everyone's reprieve.

Obama does the right thing for whatever reason
http://sportsillustr...n.ap/index.html

Kyle Busch is on a tear. Whoever the Chase manufactures as champion, KB is the driver of the year.

Quote

Originally posted by AyePirate

Like I said I want them all to stay out. I guess if someone is the President they can show up in that capacity but I'd prefer politicians- elected, unelected, and othewise just stay out of sports. It's everyone's reprieve.

Concur
Wholeheartedly

I made the mistake one time of entering the paddock club, where the political grandstanding occurs on this board.
never again.

I wonder why Kyle is so dominant this year. In Nationwide I can see it, the JGR cars are just so much better, Joey Lagano won in that car with not much experience. I hear that in Sprint cup Toyota's have 20hp on the field, but if that was the whole story you'd see a lot of Toyota 1-2-3's. Is Schrub just on another level this year?

I think it's a combo of Toyota engines built by JGR which narrows it to their cars having a decent advantage, and specifically Kyle being comfortable with the COT and it's setups so early in it's career. Remember Stewart and other vets complaining about tires at Atlanta? Who won?

Yes, I've heard Kyle say this is the worst car I have ever driven while leading the race.
I think he meant the COT in general not specifically he car he was driving at the time though.

Quote

Originally posted by BMW_F1

Just wondering why the hell is Bowyer leading the Nationwide series when he hardly ever wins a race, it must be consistency alone... I have to check the standings and see why Gibbs is not up there..

Bowyer is leading the drivers standings because he's driven in more races then any of the JGR drivers, and finish's in the top 10 every week..... however Gibbs is leading the owners standings with a 203 point lead for the 20, because that car has won a ton of races this year...tony's finishing the year off in the 20 and hopes to get Joe his first owners championship in nationwide.

http://www.nascar.co...ings_owner.html

Quote

Originally posted by AyePirate
I wonder why Kyle is so dominant this year. In Nationwide I can see it, the JGR cars are just so much better, Joey Lagano won in that car with not much experience. I hear that in Sprint cup Toyota's have 20hp on the field, but if that was the whole story you'd see a lot of Toyota 1-2-3's. Is Schrub just on another level this year?

drivers get on a roll from time to time - kyle is threatening to break some records, but those are records that others have set - for example jeff gordon is tied with the king for "most cup wins in a year" at 13 (plus jeff hit 10 a year for the two years before that one)... last year jimmy won 10. - kyle is currently at 6.

Didn't Richard Petty win like 27 races in one year?

Quote

Originally posted by Slyder
Didn't Richard Petty win like 27 races in one year?

i was speaking of modern era records, which start in '72... his 27 wins was back when there wasn't an offical nascar circut and you could run 2-3 points races a week at any nascar sanctioned track. - i'd say that since they only pay points once a week now, 27 a year isn't possible anymore.

http://www.jayski.co...alltimewins.htm

Yes but that was back in the '60s when NASCAR still ran on dirt tracks and a driver could run 2 or 3 races in a weekend that all counted for points. It wasn't until the '70s when Winston came in and the season was shortened.

Quote

i was speaking of modern era records, which start in '72... his 27 wins was back when there wasn't an offical nascar circut and you could run 2-3 points races a week at any nascar sanctioned track. - i'd say that since they only pay points once a week now, 27 a year isn't possible anymore.

http://www.jayski.co...alltimewins.htm

Sigh, ignorance of the past strikes again.....

The NASCAR Strictly Stock Division was formed in 1949 and re-named as the Grand National Division in 1950. It operated under that name until the 1971 season when there was an interesting situation wherein certain races in the GN series, those events 250 miles or longer, were proclaimed to part of the "Winston Cup Championship," even though points earned in ALL events on the GN calendar counted towards winning the Winston Cup. In 1972, the GN Division became the Winston Cup Grand National Series and later the GN part of the name was dropped.

The whole concept of the "Modern Era" and rewriting the record book was one of those ideas at Daytona Beach taken with an eye aimed squarely at "Keeping the Customer Satisfied" as Simon & Garfunkle once sang. Not one of their brighter ideas, but then again, history is useful only as a commodity within the racing community -- and not just NASCAR, so outside a very few who might actually care, the general attitude then as now was, so what?

The grind of the GN series was scarcely the cakewalk some seem to think it was for the Pettys and the other strong teams. Petty, Pearson, Allison, and several others were fully capable of winning each time out; plus, there were others who had their day as well as the local hotshoes who could cause heartburn for the stars.

During the 1964 GN season, there were a staggering 62 events, which came only a few days short of being an entire year in length.

I am always bemused at how so many off-handedly belittle Richard Petty and his accomplishments, always chalking it up to having everything at his beck and call, having it all handed to him, which was not the case.

The fact, the only relevant one in this discussion, remains. There were a lot more races back then, so those 27 wins are not on the same level as Jeff Gordon's 13 wins.

Quote

Originally posted by HDonaldCapps



I am always bemused at how so many off-handedly belittle Richard Petty and his accomplishments, always chalking it up to having everything at his beck and call, having it all handed to him, which was not the case.

acknowledging that the law of averages played an important roll in petty being able to win so much in a year, isn't a belittlement of his abilities - it's just an acceptence of reality. that reality is simple, without running 62 races a year he wouldn't have had so many wins, by the simple fact he wouldn't have had so many chances to do so....it takes the same level of skill to win 13 out of 32, as it does to win 27 out of 62 - both of which, petty did.



- statisticly speaking, it's the same win percentage.

Quote

Originally posted by BMW_F1
this freaking economy.. I just heard rumors my company is about to downsize again for the 3rd time in the last 2 years.. my 401k isn't going anywhere ... I liked the $ 1200 check though, that was sweet.. I told you guys, you put Scott Speed on one of the Gibbs Nationwide rides and he'll sure finish in the top 5 , perhaps win.
Just wondering why the hell is Bowyer leading the Nationwide series when he hardly ever wins a race, it must be consistency alone... I have to check the standings and see why Gibbs is not up there..

Gibbs because they use many different drivers--haven't at least three won in the #20, with something like 7 or 9 wins on the season?

I just read a bit more and looks like the owners standings put paid to that.

Bowyer is the driver of consistency; #20 is the equipment of dominance.

Quote

Originally posted by Dmitriy_Guller
The fact, the only relevant one in this discussion, remains. There were a lot more races back then, so those 27 wins are not on the same level as Jeff Gordon's 13 wins.

That is also an opinion which completely misses the point that both were very great accomplishments.

While there were many more races "back then," the 62 events during 1964 season (10 November 1963 to 8 November 1964) being the longest ever, very few ran the entire season, even the Pettys skipping races or not starting to mechanical problems and so on. It was harder than it looked. It is also worth keeping in mind that the Petty family derived its income from one source: racing. They were very motivated to run as many events as possible and run as well as possible.

That the accomplishments of those in the past being dismissed or rationalized into irrelevance is not unexpected or a surprise.

Quote

Originally posted by HDonaldCapps
That the accomplishments of those in the past being dismissed or rationalized into irrelevance is not unexpected or a surprise.

Nor is you being pedantic...

And I don't recall anyone here slagging Petty's accomplishments, just merely putting them into perspective.

Quote

Originally posted by whitewaterMkII
Nor is you being pedantic...

You could try writing, "Nor ARE you being pedantic...." However, that only resolves the problem with the verb, not the meaning of whatever it is that you meant to write. Sorry, but your communication skills seem to be a sad foretaste of life to come due to the internet.

anyone else watching the Kyle show ?...
I switched over after the rainout in Richmond.

Jp

Think you might mean Nashville, JP

Neil

My dad's team, though primarily Chicago and Midwest area short track stock car racers in the 50s and 60s used to race, Wednesday night, Friday night, Saturday afternoon, Saturday night, Sunday afternoon, and Sunday night at times all on different tracks, both pavement and dirt. They made a lot more money doing that than going South for Nascar but the number of races there was similar. In other words all the time. These were Depression era, World war II era people and they were not afraid of work and constant motion. And in those days there wasn't a lot of stuff to do.

My dad's main regret was he turned down Dick Rathmann's offer twice to become a Ford factory team in Nascar. The deal eventually went to another Chicagoan Fred Lorenzen, who we beat regularly at the time. Nobody had any idea how big Nascar would become. Don't anybody think early Nascar or stock cars were small time. You can't compare eras. They were very dedicated and hard working people.

Great pic Buford
yeah...uhh Nashville.
Jp

Oh he put on a show all right, more like a clinic!

A few guys looks like got past him for a lap here and there...cousin Carl before he lost a lap, JJ on that last caution there.

But he led the lap that counts!

Never been a big fan of his personality or anything, but GAWD that boy can drive. And now that he is backing up his arrogance, I can not fault him one bit. He's just picking them off, one by one. What a show, what a driver.

Mine too. Can't stand him but he's impressing me and that doesn't happen often anymore.

Quote

Originally posted by Spunout


I watched the whole race, and replays they showed. But in case you missed it, the camera wasn´t on JPM & Kyle 100% of the time. So I am wondering if something happened earlier. I saw Kyle doing similar stuff Montoya has done several times in NASCAR. And yet I cannot see you, BMW_F1 or OLB cheering whenever somebody "teaches Montoya some respect".

Now, how can that be?;)

Well there is something called RaceView which effectively allows one to zoom in on any driver one likes. I am just now taking the time to watch the replay from a straight-down shot, and from lap 278, when they went back green....

Juan passes Needsacheck (sorry that nickname is too funny) right away on the restart to take 21st, right behind Busch. Busch is battling Kenseth in front, Juan on his bumper, and Gilliland a lap down is in the mix. At one point Gilliland causes Busch to swerve up (Juan pretty much taking the outside to Busch's inside, with Gilly on the apron) into Juan's path, which was the first no-no, though somewhat understandable.

At the next corner Juan gets right up to Kyle's RR corner in the center, possibly nudging him, and Kyle drives him up into the wall on corner exit.

At that point there is a spin, and in the in-between part between the spin & the caution, Kyle runs him up again.

The caution comes out, and they pass the spun 07 who is up against the outside wall, Kyle basically leaving Juan exactly the width of the car to fit between himself and the stationary 07.

They are coming up on the 40, 3 laps down. Kyle makes some vague threatening swerves at Juan, nothing major (IMHO). As they come up on the 40, the 40 just happens to be in front of Kyle, and Kyle waits till the last second and swerves into the side of Juan. This is the part where Busch claims he was just trying to get past the 40 and maintain position. The situation is analogous to the famous incident where Schumacher pretended not to see Montoya and ran him off the track. It's obviously intentional.

Then Juan spins him at the end of the straight.

I am now re-watching their earlier battle around lap 254, and will report back.

Quote

Originally posted by Buford
My dad's team, though primarily Chicago and Midwest area short track stock car racers in the 50s and 60s used to race, Wednesday night, Friday night, Saturday afternoon, Saturday night, Sunday afternoon, and Sunday night at times all on different tracks, both pavement and dirt. They made a lot more money doing that than going South for Nascar but the number of races there was similar. In other words all the time. These were Depression era, World war II era people and they were not afraid of work and constant motion. And in those days there wasn't a lot of stuff to do.

My dad's main regret was he turned down Dick Rathmann's offer twice to become a Ford factory team in Nascar. The deal eventually went to another Chicagoan Fred Lorenzen, who we beat regularly at the time. Nobody had any idea how big Nascar would become. Don't anybody think early Nascar or stock cars were small time. You can't compare eras. They were very dedicated and hard working people.

You guys beat Fred Lorenzen? The guy who became a NASCAR champ as well?

Wow, that's amazing...!

Usually - he was good but my dad's team was the best at the time (for a long time). The only place we couldn't beat Lorenzen regularly was his home track at O'Hare (was near the airport) where his friends would block for him. Must add though Fred was young and up and coming at the time and we had the best driver and crew and experience. My dad didn't take the Nascar deal Lorenzen took because both he and his driver had young children who they didn't want to move to the hellhole that was the South in the early 1960s, and they were making more money than the Nascar deal racing close to home. Nobody knew Nascar would get as big as it did even in the late 60s, let alone now.

Who was your driver?

Well I have never said because that would identify me to certain Lemmings who have been trying to discredit me for years on racing forums, but if they really wanted to and knew anything they could figure it out from the sponsor name on the early 1950's pic above. So I will say now for the first time. There isn't a big internet paper trail on him but he was the best. But he never went national so only die hard racing people will remember him. He died young of cancer. His name was Bill Van Allen.

http://www.dirtfans....llVanAllen.html

----------------------------------------------------
http://www.nationals...-around-chicago

Quote

Years ago, Raceway Park, located near Blue Island, would host stock-car racing sometimes four nights a week, including Sundays. The likes of 11-time track champion Bud Koehler, Bob Pronger, Bill Van Allen Ray Young, Jerry Kemperman and others would battle on the shorter-than-a-quarter-mile paved oval. Some Sundays would even feature special events, including the track’s popular Monza Classics that would feature four 30-lap features in one night....

During his departures from Raceway Park, Van Allen, along with fellow multiple-time track champions Dick Nelson, Jim O’Connor, Tony Izzo and a host of others, would provide Sunday night thrills at “the Fe.” During most of its years of featuring weekly stock-car racing on clay, Santa Fe would present racing every Saturday and Sunday.

http://www.kalracing..._Years_1960.htm

Quote

Bill Van Allen of Justice set a single-season record for feature wins at Raceway Park near Blue Island, as he captured 29 late model stock car main events in his 1960 Studebaker Lark No. 6. The 33-year-old Van Allen finished in the runner-up spot in the final point standings behind Chicago’s Harry Simonsen, who won a total of 10 feature races in this ’57 Chevy No. TS-1. Simonsen competed in all 64 of Raceway’s stock car programs in 1960, while Van Allen only ran two nights a week during the hectic schedule at the “World’s Busiest Track.”

http://www.kalracing...years__1954.htm

Quote

A bunch of drivers won feature races at Santa Fe in 1954, including track champion Bill Van Allen, Bill Clemans, “Happy Dan” Walters, Bob Button, Gene Crowe,

Gene Crowe was our #2 driver.

Chicago still making news after race is over....

Quote

JOLIET, Ill. -- It's official: Ryan Newman is a candidate to drive the second car next season for Tony Stewart's new team.

"Driving for Tony's team is an option," Newman said Saturday at Chicagoland Speedway, prior to the running of the LifeLock.com 400 Sprint Cup event. "He has a seat. Even you guys [in the media] have marked me as the leading candidate to get in there. So it is an option."

Stewart, who is leaving longtime home Joe Gibbs Racing at the end of this season, announced Thursday that he had acquired a 50 percent ownership in Haas CNC Racing, a two-car operation which will turn into Stewart-Haas Racing at the start of next year. Stewart, a two-time champion on NASCAR's premier series, will pilot one of those entries himself. Newman would seem a leading choice for the other, given his history of on-track success, the fact that his contract at Penske Racing expires after this season and his close relationship with Stewart.

----------

Newman said he has two other options other than Stewart's team and staying with Penske, and in one of those instances an ownership share has been discussed. He added that nothing has been decided, and he has set no deadline by which he has to make a decision. His current team owner, 71-year-old Roger Penske, has skipped some recent races while receiving treatment for a reported kidney ailment, but Newman said the two have still spoken "a little bit" over the past few weeks. The odds of him staying with Penske? "Honestly," he said, "I don't know."

Newman said the process of deciding where to race next year has brought "a sense of distortion" and is unlike anything he's been through before.

"It's not an easy decision," he said. "It's probably one of the hardest decisions I will make as a driver and maybe as a person, who knows. I'm sure Tony sat there and said the same thing, it's not an easy decision to make. It's not an easy answer that comes to you. I've had people tell me, sometimes it will be the simplest thing that makes sense, and that's it."

http://www.nascar.co...lans/index.html

BTW - what'd ya'll think about our sunsets round here?

Quote

Originally posted by HDonaldCapps


You could try writing, "Nor ARE you being pedantic...." However, that only resolves the problem with the verb, not the meaning of whatever it is that you meant to write. Sorry, but your communication skills seem to be a sad foretaste of life to come due to the internet.

Ironically, and somewhat sadly, he could try writing that, but it would entirely change the meaning. He said "Nor is you being pedantic" - the complete sentence being a continuation of what you said: "That the accomplishments...is not a surprise", to which he responds "Nor is you being pedantic [a surprise]". Yes, you could argue that he shouldn't said "Nor is it that you are being pedantic", but it's unnecessarily verbose.

Changing it to "Nor ARE you being pedantic" is an entirely different meaning, and would not be a grammatically viable response to what you said. It would an incorrect conjugation of "to be" in this instance, despite what you suggested, because there aren't more than one subject (the surprise).

So I think it's a bit unfair to critique his communication abilities. At his age, I also would think it unfair to blame the internet.

Oh, and I think that ol' Kyle Busch seemed to do "just okay" today. >_<

Quote

Originally posted by CWeil


Ironically, and somewhat sadly, he could try writing that, but it would entirely change the meaning. He said "Nor is you being pedantic" - the complete sentence being a continuation of what you said: "That the accomplishments...is not a surprise", to which he responds "Nor is you being pedantic [a surprise]". Yes, you could argue that he shouldn't said "Nor is it that you are being pedantic", but it's unnecessarily verbose.

Changing it to "Nor ARE you being pedantic" is an entirely different meaning, and would not be a grammatically viable response to what you said. It would an incorrect conjugation of "to be" in this instance, despite what you suggested, because there aren't more than one subject (the surprise).

So I think it's a bit unfair to critique his communication abilities. At his age, I also would think it unfair to blame the internet.

Oh, and I think that ol' Kyle Busch seemed to do "just okay" today. >_<

Glad you picked up on that.

Out of curiosity, would "Nor is your being pedantic" be correct?

Nor is your pedantic-ness?

Pedanticity?

But I digress!

The Ryan Newman article came out before the race. Dunno about the sunsets.

I am of the mind that the Yeley incident is more discussion-worthy. That's some old-school cheatin'.

Quote

Originally posted by CWeil

So I think it's a bit unfair to critique his communication abilities. At his age, I also would think it unfair to blame the internet.

Blame it on my Catholic schooling if you need to bame it on something, you know, Jesuits and all that. At any rate, most of my writing is contracts, not books or articles, and at 6 million or so a pop, everyone seems to understand those just fine.
Hung out with the bro in law for the race, man that guy is a fanatic for Dale Sr., his die cast collection is to die for, he must have fifty Dale cars in his floor to ceiling showcase. Anyway, I didn't see it mentioned here, but he said that NASCAR confiscated a crap load of Toyotas, engines and cars, over the last week. Anyone hear about that?

Quote

Originally posted by OfficeLinebacker


I am now re-watching their earlier battle around lap 254, and will report back.

Thanks for description, but I cannot simply take your version for it. Cheers for admitting you are biased for Montoya...very few do that. However, since this post was written with JPM glasses on...I´ll keep waiting for proper video.

Thanks again.

Quote

Originally posted by CWeil


Ironically, and somewhat sadly, he could try writing that, but it would entirely change the meaning. He said "Nor is you being pedantic" - the complete sentence being a continuation of what you said: "That the accomplishments...is not a surprise", to which he responds "Nor is you being pedantic [a surprise]". Yes, you could argue that he shouldn't said "Nor is it that you are being pedantic", but it's unnecessarily verbose.

Changing it to "Nor ARE you being pedantic" is an entirely different meaning, and would not be a grammatically viable response to what you said. It would an incorrect conjugation of "to be" in this instance, despite what you suggested, because there aren't more than one subject (the surprise).

Good eye. "Is" was the correct verb in that instance.

I also like OLB's suggestion, "your" rather than "you."