Jump to content


Photo

Indycar - Richmond


  • Please log in to reply
89 replies to this topic

#51 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 55,890 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 29 June 2008 - 15:31

Indeed, I'm more excited about 10 engine builders/manufacturers taking a look at the sport than 100,000 more fans. The former is what will drive it forward. The latter will force you to make NASCAR style decisions.



One of the Haymarket girls (on the business side unconnected to the racing mags) is on a company trip to NYC and after getting back from watching the Sex and the City film turned on the TV in her hotel room and watched Richmond.

I had a wonderful chat with her today trying to explain that it's an oval, not a 'strange banked track' and 'yes, they're going much faster than F1, and yes they're passing' and my favorite 'No, zig-zagging behind the pace car doesn't do anything, but don't tell anyone I told you'.

So we've got at least one new fan. I think she's watching Watkins Glen next week and is trying to figure out if she can scam a visit to the track given that we ultimately own Racer.

So that's +1 on TV and potentially trackside. I should send TG an invoice for 5%.

Advertisement

#52 red stick

red stick
  • Member

  • 2,274 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 29 June 2008 - 15:55

Originally posted by Flat Black
PPPS--Danica is a finisher. She is never that fast and never seems a threat to win, but she almost never crashes out and always finishes somewhere between #4 and #7.


And yet.... I've defended her in the past but two things are starting to grate on me. The constant complaints about understeer on the ovals--you'd think that with that team and that crew they could find a way to dial it out, so I'm left wondering if that's just her excuse 1A. And at some point in her career you'd think she'd manage to not be an anchor on the restarts--I find it hard to take seriously her complaints (and Michael's) about people passing her on the left and right on restarts the past two weeks when, let's face it, she's not leaving people following her many options.

#53 red stick

red stick
  • Member

  • 2,274 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 29 June 2008 - 15:56

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
Indeed, I'm more excited about 10 engine builders/manufacturers taking a look at the sport than 100,000 more fans. The former is what will drive it forward. The latter will force you to make NASCAR style decisions.


:up:

#54 red stick

red stick
  • Member

  • 2,274 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 29 June 2008 - 16:00

Originally posted by Flat Black
PPS--Buddy Rice and AJ IV are a study in contrasts. Both screwed up. Rice admitted it like a man; Foyt wormed out like a weasel.


On the "being a man about it" spectrum, John Andretti too. According to Meira, he was suitably apologetic after crashing into Vitor's left rear.

Also Graham Rahal.

On Foyt, I think he's getting there. He half admitted being in the wrong, and you have to remember his accident took out his teammate (the series owner's kid), so being a little, uh, circumspect when the microphone is shoved in your face is, perhaps, a little understandable.

#55 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 17,699 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 29 June 2008 - 16:32

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld



One of the Haymarket girls (on the business side unconnected to the racing mags) is on a company trip to NYC and after getting back from watching the Sex and the City film turned on the TV in her hotel room and watched Richmond.

I had a wonderful chat with her today trying to explain that it's an oval, not a 'strange banked track' and 'yes, they're going much faster than F1, and yes they're passing' and my favorite 'No, zig-zagging behind the pace car doesn't do anything, but don't tell anyone I told you'.


Ross, without a doubt the most patronising styled post ever on these boards.

I'm amazed IRL won any fans after last night.

#56 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 55,890 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 29 June 2008 - 16:42

Yeah it had some dumb incidents, but it also had good racing and for someone like that who doesn't follow racing but is aware of F1 and MotoGP, she found it interesting.

That's what IndyCar can be, and was before; something different.

#57 whitewaterMkII

whitewaterMkII
  • Member

  • 4,990 posts
  • Joined: November 05

Posted 29 June 2008 - 16:42

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
Indeed, I'm more excited about 10 engine builders/manufacturers taking a look at the sport than 100,000 more fans.


Who are they?
There is not one mention of any of them anywhere on the net I can find other than Honda.

From ESPN:
"In a math- and memory-challenged moment, Barnhart said representatives from "six to nine" major manufacturers attended, as well as interested parties from dedicated racing engine builders Cosworth and Ilmor."
From MVN:
"the IRL is reporting that a whopping 14 were represented at the round-table discussion (four were unable to attend due to scheduled conflicts)."

Google it up and you will find not one quote from any of the attendees other than Honda. It is also telling that there is no firm idea on who or how many were actually there. Anywhere from 6 to 14 has been bandied about.

Vaporware.

#58 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 55,890 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 29 June 2008 - 16:55

None of us were at the meeting but RM seems to think Audi, BMW, Chevrolet, Fiat, Mazda, Volkswagen; Cosworth, Ilmor, Judd, and AER.

I don't know why you have to be so unpleasantly pessimistic about this. It's not fixed and there's still a ****ing long way to go; but this is the first period in a very long time there's any sort of interest and a positive one. Trust me dude, when I was selling sidepods for Paul Newman, no one even wanted to hear about it. CART or IRL, no one gave a shit. At least now they're looking even if it's just tire kicking. I wasn't sure anyone would give it a second look even with a single series.

#59 Flat Black

Flat Black
  • Member

  • 480 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 29 June 2008 - 17:00

red stick,

Agree completely on Danica. The understeer complaints are constant with her. You'd think they'd get that problem solved at some point and give her the perfect car like TK had last night. In point of fact, I just don't think she's a terribly fast driver, nor is she particularly aggressive. (Marco, OTOH, might be a bit too aggressive.) What it all that adds up to, given the superiority of her equipment (nothing veiled about that ;) ), and the excellent race strategy from which she always benefits, is solid finishes but one win every 60 races or so.

PS--I also agree on John Andretti. He's probably my favorite Andretti since Mario. A stand-up guy and a very underrated driver, despite last night's spill.

Advertisement

#60 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 17,699 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 29 June 2008 - 17:18

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
Yeah it had some dumb incidents, but it also had good racing and for someone like that who doesn't follow racing but is aware of F1 and MotoGP, she found it interesting.

That's what IndyCar can be, and was before; something different.


Started watching CART circa 1997 and from then to 2003, I found it to be the best racing on the planet.

#61 ColdHeart

ColdHeart
  • Member

  • 1,255 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 29 June 2008 - 17:41

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
None of us were at the meeting but RM seems to think Audi, BMW, Chevrolet, Fiat, Mazda, Volkswagen; Cosworth, Ilmor, Judd, and AER.


Ford may have had a rep there as well but there has been a shakeup at management. And Ford's troubles, like GMs, are well known.

#62 random

random
  • Member

  • 4,890 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 29 June 2008 - 18:31

Originally posted by Flat Black
Pretty hideous race. The worst of the year. Not sure how suited Richmond is for Indycars. Would much prefer that Michigan be on the schedule than Richmond.


This was the 8th year the IndyCars have run at Richmond, and the first time it has been a crash fest. It wasn't the track, it was the drivers and a new, harder tire compound. I think Meira said that the low grip narrowed the window for mistakes, in that he is certainly right.

Just Two drivers caused HALF of the wrecks. Marty Roth's pathetically slow speeds on restarts caused restart pile-ups twice. John Andretti directly caused Two accidents in the 2nd turn. He got away with the first one, the second took him out as well. Roth was eventually parked.

If you pull those two guys out of the event, it turns from 9 cautions to a far more typical 5 cautions. And the "caution" around lap 60 was one of the Earl's manufactured cautions. Invisible "debris" just at the time the leaders needed to pit and were about to lap Danica.

Michigan? Michigan was vacant the last few times they hosted an open wheel race. Some good racing, but a near complete absence of fans made it unsustainable.

I think most of the fans at the track would disagree with you regarding it being a "hideous race". They saw a lot of action, a lot of wrecks, and some good racing. I don't know whether the good racing was shown on TV, but it was there. I think "interesting race" would be a better moniker. Although the last quarter of the event were pretty boring. Largely because only 12 cars were left.

Then there is the issue of the new tires brought to this event for the first time. Seems a lot of drivers were complaining that the new harder compound didn't give enough grip. There were a handful of drivers that were able to make passes both high and low, most of the others didn't seem able. They probably need to go back to a softer compound to ensure two lines are there for all the cars.

Originally posted by Flat Black
PS--Looked like a very good crowd to me. Reid said well in excess of 60,000. I'm sure IRL and the Richmond promoters are pleased.


A few press outlets are reporting the 60,000 figure. If true, that nearly Doubles any previous attendance records I've seen for this race. In the previous 7 runnings of this race, the highest admission figures I can recall were 35,000. How many of the non-Indy races regularly pull in 60K? One, two?

60K in this economy means the race is here to stay. If they fix the tire issues and get rid of the moving chicanes, it should again be a quality race.

#63 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 55,890 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 29 June 2008 - 20:21

Originally posted by whitewaterMkII

I had no idea you could buy a Fiat in America any longer.
Why in the world would they be here? And please, don't even metion Ferrari.



Aren't Alfa on course to return to NA with a limited run of models? Though lets not repeat the Alfa IndyCar experiment...

Why would Mazda be there when TG just got done kicking them to the side of the road by trying to kill off Atlantics and the dumping the Laguna Seca race?[/B]



I don't think Mazda's advertising or motorsport programmes are that heavily tied to what is a rich kids Formula and a single race track. One could go at the expense of the other, they could compliment each other, they can exist seperately, the possibilities are endless.


Audi? Totally dominate in worldwide sportscars, and have never shown any interest in Formula racing. [/B]


It may just be tire kicking, but if Dr. Ullrich thought it was important enough to look into, that says a lot. It's even more interesting to me that both VW and Audi apparently went instead of just one general VAG representative to see what they had to say.


BMW on the cusp on being a major player in F1, like they need the distraction. [/B]



The thing we have to remember is the size and power of the US divisons of car companies. Honda has an F1 team, why do IRL? Toyota has an F1 team, why do NASCAR? BMW USA probably gets very little out of the F1 programme. They're hardly going to run an ad congratulating Robert Kubica in US papers. But an Indy500 win? And they do touring cars in Europe in the same markets their F1 programme penetrates. Just like Audi and Mercedes in DTM. No single series fits all requirements so thats why you see car companies doing multiple disciplines. I have no idea why VW do F3 in Europe, but I like it.

No mention of Toyota, which is no wonder since they gave up on USOW and put their chips in the NASCAR game. [/B]



I do agree there. For the only manufacturer in F1 and NASCAR, they don't need to do anything else. Unless Indycar or Sportscars come up with some really interesting fuel or engine formula, it doesn't give them anything they don't already have.

And for a lot of these people, there can be inhouse R&D opportunities as well as halo branding. Something you get very little of in NASCAR.

I'm not even at the pessimistic point, I'm in complete doubt that if anyone was there it was for a sign in. In Barnhardt's release it seems he made more of a sales pitch on why they should be there, than any interest in what they had to say. The admitted irl line that there will only be one designated chassis this early in the game will surely dissuade some from coming back again. If they were there in the amount alleged, someone would have had some corporate spokeshole write a blurb for Barnhardt to release. The only corporate entity that has acknowledged they were there is Honda, and that was the same press release they have had for 3 years, that they would welcome anyone else to come in.
I particularly like the inference by Coldheart that Ford racing is in some sort of upheaval, while he never mentions that same exact thing is happening at Honda right now, with Clarke stepping down. As if Clarke and davis were never going to retire,duh. Pretty cute trick, but meaningless. [/B]

I'm more concerned about Ford than Honda. Honda have always had a very healthy attitude towards motorsport so you don't need to worry about the new chief. But a place like Ford, which could be very half-assed at times (and that's with a guy like Dan Davis in charge) having a new guy in charge could dramatically change their motorsports involvement. Does having a guy from an important division but with racing experience mean he'll think "yeah lets ramp up the programmes" or having had experience in racing will self-critically think it's not worth doing.

I reckon Ford will want to do it if there's proper interest. A big part of Chevy's World Touring Car campaign is the Euro office wanting to show they are a competitive car. The image of it racing and beating BMWs and Seats and Alfas is important. Ford, VW, etc doing an Indycar programme says "our ideas can do more than get you to the supermarket.

#64 Flat Black

Flat Black
  • Member

  • 480 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 29 June 2008 - 20:38

random,

I hope the attendees at Richmond had a great time. Happy fans create good word of mouth which begets more fans. But from my ESPN vantage point, it was just not much of a race. The constant crashes disrupted any flow or momentum for the first 3/4 and then once the crashes ceased, TK just ran away with it. Not much drama but a whole lot of frustration. And this from a guy who pretty much loves any IRL race I can get a gander at.

PS--Why the hell is it necessary to even put out a yellow, let alone keep it there for seven laps, when a car merely spins as Hunter-Reay's did as the green dropped? Is this Barnhart being the ultimate nanny or what?

#65 ColdHeart

ColdHeart
  • Member

  • 1,255 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 29 June 2008 - 20:54

Originally posted by random
A few press outlets are reporting the 60,000 figure. If true, that nearly Doubles any previous attendance records I've seen for this race. In the previous 7 runnings of this race, the highest admission figures I can recall were 35,000. How many of the non-Indy races regularly pull in 60K? One, two?

60K in this economy means the race is here to stay. If they fix the tire issues and get rid of the moving chicanes, it should again be a quality race.


I believe Richmond has pulled 50K+ for several years. I was there in '05 and last night's crowd looked to be a bit stronger ......... but certainly not double.

As for other races over 60K, certainly Texas has always been over that number and I believe Kansas and Chicago draw in that range.

#66 random

random
  • Member

  • 4,890 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 29 June 2008 - 22:52

Originally posted by ColdHeart
I believe Richmond has pulled 50K+ for several years. I was there in '05 and last night's crowd looked to be a bit stronger ......... but certainly not double.

50K? I don't recall any year where the claimed attendance was over 35,000. Although I didn't go the first year.

I was there in '05 as well. The new, 5,000 seat "Tower Grandstand" wasn't there until last year. Not only did last night's race require the organizers to open more lower grandstands than I've ever seen used before, the the new tower grandstand was also full.

Originally posted by ColdHeart
As for other races over 60K, certainly Texas has always been over that number and I believe Kansas and Chicago draw in that range.

Fair enough, Richmond is among the best attended 3 or 4 (non-Indy) races. As I said, I don't see the race going away any time soon.

#67 random

random
  • Member

  • 4,890 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 29 June 2008 - 23:04

Originally posted by Flat Black
PS--Why the hell is it necessary to even put out a yellow, let alone keep it there for seven laps, when a car merely spins as Hunter-Reay's did as the green dropped? Is this Barnhart being the ultimate nanny or what?


So many laps of caution are rarely necessary for non-incidents like that. Although for the actual wrecks, it simply takes a bit of time to sweep up the carbon bits and mop fluids off the track. One thing the race certainly didn't need was the manufactured "debris caution" on lap 60 something.

I think Barnhart needs to retire to the front office and let Tony Cotman do the stewarding. Cotman is probably the most rational and even handed steward I've seen in any racing series. It's a shame that he's working for the earl but doesn't have the Chief Steward job.

The bottom line from Richmond was that hard tires and inexperienced drivers on a short track are not a good mix. Had the race started without perennial moving chicanes like Marty Roth, there would have been significantly fewer cautions. He caused some of the biggest messes that took the longest to clean up. One wonders if Milka Duno was kept from running at Richmond for just that reason.

#68 McGuire

McGuire
  • Member

  • 9,218 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 30 June 2008 - 00:03

Originally posted by random




A few press outlets are reporting the 60,000 figure. If true, that nearly Doubles any previous attendance records I've seen for this race. In the previous 7 runnings of this race, the highest admission figures I can recall were 35,000. How many of the non-Indy races regularly pull in 60K? One, two?

60K in this economy means the race is here to stay. If they fix the tire issues and get rid of the moving chicanes, it should again be a quality race.


60,000 (if that is what it was) is a fine crowd for an auto race in North America. If/when the IndyCar Series can draw 60k per race all season it has a very solid schedule.

People have short memories. That used to be a good NASCAR crowd too, at tracks like Rockingham and Darlington, until NASCAR chose to abandon those venues for the big cookie-cutter ovals. There is not a damn thing wrong with 60K. Everyone can make money with a gate like that.

#69 Flat Black

Flat Black
  • Member

  • 480 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 30 June 2008 - 14:36

Actually, Marty Roth did a fair imitation of Duno at her worst in Richmond.

If you're gonna throw a seven-lap yellow for the merest spin, you'd damn well better throw the black at Roth for driving 20 mph slower than the rest of the field.

#70 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 12,208 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 30 June 2008 - 14:59

Originally posted by Flat Black

PS--Why the hell is it necessary to even put out a yellow, let alone keep it there for seven laps, when a car merely spins as Hunter-Reay's did as the green dropped? Is this Barnhart being the ultimate nanny or what?


Didn't the commentators say something about the unusual duration of the Yellow being due to confusion over whether the start had been aborted or not? Certainly there were a number of cars double-file during the caution period, and of course it's a very short lap at Richmond. And again, with a fifteen-second lap, any car that is stationary even momentarily is a fairly significant threat to the rest of the field. Perhaps not at a restart, but the whole 7-lap caution period at the start was a fairly small error of judgement, IMO.

In any case, we're pretty much in the roadie half of the year now, so I guess everyone'll have to dust off some different bugbears.

#71 Flat Black

Flat Black
  • Member

  • 480 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 30 June 2008 - 16:34

IIRC, Hunter-Reay was never stationary. At worst he merely slowed down to Marty Roth's top speed.

:lol:

#72 random

random
  • Member

  • 4,890 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 30 June 2008 - 18:17

Originally posted by Flat Black
Actually, Marty Roth did a fair imitation of Duno at her worst in Richmond.

If you're gonna throw a seven-lap yellow for the merest spin, you'd damn well better throw the black at Roth for driving 20 mph slower than the rest of the field.


That was exactly my point. I was wondering if Duno had been parked this weekend because her slow speeds would have been SUCH a hazard at a place like Richmond. And if her, why not Roth as well?

Roth was eventually parked (by the officials?), but not before his slow speeds had caused two big crashes on restarts. Fully half the wrecks that evening were caused either by Roth or John Andretti.

Perhaps the series should come up with a minimum race speed for each of the ovals? 3 laps slower than the minimum and you're automatically parked. Drivers like Duno and Roth would know in advance what lap times they had to sustain.

#73 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 12,208 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 30 June 2008 - 18:33

Originally posted by Flat Black
IIRC, Hunter-Reay was never stationary. At worst he merely slowed down to Marty Roth's top speed.


:lol: Although the time needed to ascertain whether a spin can be recovered from is long, in comparison with the lap time, and the impending arrival of 25 other Indycars. Sometimes throwing a caution is an almost reflex action, although it was certainly overzealously applied in this case.

The lack of grip at the raceway was a major problem, as you said, although thankfully one that can be easily rectified. Which is a good sign, IMO, compared to the esoteric solutions provided in many other series to improve the quality of the racing on show. :up:

#74 ColdHeart

ColdHeart
  • Member

  • 1,255 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 30 June 2008 - 19:00

Originally posted by random


That was exactly my point. I was wondering if Duno had been parked this weekend because her slow speeds would have been SUCH a hazard at a place like Richmond.


Milka Duno did not enter at Richmond; she splits time in the car with Buddy Rice - who spun on his own after 80 laps and was credited with a 22nd place finish.

#75 Locai

Locai
  • Member

  • 1,952 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 30 June 2008 - 19:12

Extended caution periods for minor incidences are a hallmark of NASCAR. Whenever they throw the yellow for even just a solo spin, they always extend it for enough laps to bunch up the field and allow enough time for everybody to pit. It's not done like F1 where they can dive into the pits immediately and a Safety Car period may only last for a lap or two. Unfortunately, it seems as though F1 is leaning more towards the NASCAR method more and more.

#76 ColdHeart

ColdHeart
  • Member

  • 1,255 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 30 June 2008 - 19:18

I don't like this trend - it sucks. The whole idea of bunching the field and opening the pits is just plain stupid.

"But if we don't do this, somebody may get screwed and lose a race because of bad luck...."

Tough. These interminable yellows are killing racing. NASCAR, F-1, Indy Cars, they all do it and it is getting worse. Any wonder why the TV numbers don't look as good as 10 years ago?

#77 red stick

red stick
  • Member

  • 2,274 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 30 June 2008 - 19:19

Originally posted by ColdHeart
Milka Duno did not enter at Richmond; she splits time in the car with Buddy Rice - who spun on his own after 80 laps and was credited with a 22nd place finish.


Actually Rice, a former Indy 500 winner, is full-time. Duno splits time with Townsend Bell.


Please let it be Bell's turn again at Watkins Glen.

#78 Ian Stewart

Ian Stewart
  • Member

  • 252 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 30 June 2008 - 20:36

Well, despite being a "True Brit" I've enjoyed U.S. open wheel racing since Indycar days (before the split), and I thoroughly enjoyed Richmond. Wrong tires plus slow runners on such a short track didn't help, but the unified series looks well on the road to success.

The great thing is that it lacks the gut-wrenching tension and bias of F1, and I find it real good fun to watch. Does anyone know if it's going to change its name back to "Indycar", instead of the uninspiring and rather meaningless IRL?

#79 red stick

red stick
  • Member

  • 2,274 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 30 June 2008 - 20:50

Originally posted by Ian Stewart
Does anyone know if it's going to change its name back to "Indycar", instead of the uninspiring and rather meaningless IRL?


It has. It is the IndyCar Series. The Indy Racing League is the sanctioning body.

http://www.indycar.com/

Advertisement

#80 random

random
  • Member

  • 4,890 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 30 June 2008 - 21:29

Originally posted by red stick
It has.


No, it hasn't.

People don't call Formula One "The FIA", people don't call Le Mans, "The ACO". People, and more importantly, the Press, do call IndyCar, "The IRL".

There is only one reason for this, the management of the series hasn't gotten entirely rid of the IRL Moniker. They still use "IRL" in their own broadcasts. Why should the press stop using it if the IRL still calls themselves "The IRL".

I've been saying for YEARS that the IRL moniker NEEDS TO GO. They need to rename everything to IndyCar. Some respond with "The IndyCar series run by the IndyCar sanctioning body???" YES, both the series and the sanctioning body should be named IndyCar.

Once they rename the sanctioning body, the series needs to hire a PR firm to make sure the re-branding sticks. A PR firm will actively (and gently) correct the press as to the new name of the series.

"The Earl" is a confusing and exceedingly poor moniker, especially when compared with the universally recognized and highly esteemed IndyCar brand name. Tony George just needs to get off his butt and make the executive decision to relegate "The Earl" to history.

#81 Ian Stewart

Ian Stewart
  • Member

  • 252 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 30 June 2008 - 21:35

Thanks Mark.

autosport.com still list it as IRL, and Sky TV vary between Indy Car Series and Indy Racing series.
Mustn't be pedantic though !

#82 OfficeLinebacker

OfficeLinebacker
  • Member

  • 14,009 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 30 June 2008 - 22:45

Originally posted by random

Perhaps the series should come up with a minimum race speed for each of the ovals? 3 laps slower than the minimum and you're automatically parked. Drivers like Duno and Roth would know in advance what lap times they had to sustain.


Such a rule should be necessary. For cars damaged or otherwise performance-degraded, yet still capable of sustaining for many more miles.


The issue at hand is one of speed discrepancies. I doubt you'd ever want more than a 10% discrepancy at most but you'd have to go on the distribution of values in the qualifying speeds table.

If nothing else, simply make it a rule that the minimum speed is 80% of the pole speed. You get shown the black flag if you are under speed, so you basically have three laps to get the car up to speed, or you're done.

#83 Option1

Option1
  • Member

  • 12,261 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 30 June 2008 - 23:31

Or you could stop running 200mph open wheel cars at 400m tracks. NASCAR can bang wheels at those tracks - open wheelers can't.

It's ludicrous running at those tiny tracks. It's like trying to race Ferraris around my living room. What's next? An indoor velodrome?

Neil

#84 jdanton

jdanton
  • Member

  • 734 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 30 June 2008 - 23:52

The track is like 1.1 km, but agreed its a bit ludicrous to have 26 open wheel cars racing on it...

#85 random

random
  • Member

  • 4,890 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 01 July 2008 - 00:05

Originally posted by Option1
Or you could stop running 200mph open wheel cars at 400m tracks. NASCAR can bang wheels at those tracks - open wheelers can't.

It's ludicrous running at those tiny tracks. It's like trying to race Ferraris around my living room. What's next? An indoor velodrome?

Neil


I think that's a bit of an over reaction.

IndyCar has run at Richmond for 8 consecutive years, only one of those years has been a crash fest. As for 26 cars, Nascar runs 43 cars there many times each year. Two Cup Races, Two Nationwide races, and the truck races. Those cars are quite a bit larger than the IndyCars.

As was pointed out above, the track is a little over a KM and the IndyCars qualify at about 160 MPH. Sure the Nascar guys run slower, but they also take up a whole lot more room.

It's hard to blame this on the track when fully Half off all the accidents that evening were caused by two drivers, Roth and J Andretti. Further, nearly all of the drivers were critical of the new low-grip hard compound tire. A lack of grip can amplify even the smallest error. I expect a number of the other incidents would have been avoided with a more appropriate tire, especially the single-car incidents. It was the first time that compound had been used at the track, I can't imagine it would be used there again.

#86 MichaelJP

MichaelJP
  • Member

  • 849 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 01 July 2008 - 08:47

Originally posted by ColdHeart
I don't like this trend - it sucks. The whole idea of bunching the field and opening the pits is just plain stupid.

"But if we don't do this, somebody may get screwed and lose a race because of bad luck...."

Tough. These interminable yellows are killing racing. NASCAR, F-1, Indy Cars, they all do it and it is getting worse. Any wonder why the TV numbers don't look as good as 10 years ago?


Absolutely, its endemic now throughout racing. A disastrous trend if ever there was one. There is now less and less point in any driver pushing and trying to build a lead. All racing is becoming 90% pacing then a sprint to the end. What next, yellows for MotoGP??

#87 Dudley

Dudley
  • Member

  • 9,245 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 01 July 2008 - 10:00

Originally posted by Flat Black
Actually, Marty Roth did a fair imitation of Duno at her worst in Richmond.

If you're gonna throw a seven-lap yellow for the merest spin, you'd damn well better throw the black at Roth for driving 20 mph slower than the rest of the field.


The worst part was them saying if Roth Racing couldn't get a sponsor they'd park the #24...but it's ok because Marty would be in the #25 all season...

Christ.

#88 Option1

Option1
  • Member

  • 12,261 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 01 July 2008 - 12:04

Howard in at Roth Racing for Watkins Glen, but not for Roth.

Neil

#89 Dolph

Dolph
  • Member

  • 4,201 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 03 July 2008 - 03:21

When Kanaan didn't want to climb out of his car I thought he had peed his pants or smth. :p Some drivers used to have some mishaps (Piquet, Herbert). Now with the cameras on them, it's hard to get away with it :p

#90 Rob G

Rob G
  • Member

  • 10,839 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 04 July 2008 - 02:53

Robin Miller has written an eye-opening post-mortem on the Richmond race revealing the immense amount of monetary damage that went along with the physical destruction.

click here

Bring on the road courses.