Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 7 votes

IndyCar for 2013, it's official.


  • Please log in to reply
1561 replies to this topic

#1201 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 1,671 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 14 May 2013 - 17:52

I don't like spec cars, but I also know that the casual fan doesn't care that much.

Really?

Then how come the Indianapolis 500 is a shadow of what it once was?

Gearheads did not make it great, Joe Sixpack did.

Although the average Joe Sixpack forty years ago had forgotten more about automobiles that the average yout knows nowadays.
Still that has little to do with the past twenty year fall.

Advertisement

#1202 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,268 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 14 May 2013 - 18:05

Apparently everyone has forgotten about The Split.

#1203 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 14 May 2013 - 18:14

Apparently everyone has forgotten about The Split.


Posted Image

#1204 ApexMouse

ApexMouse
  • Member

  • 909 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 14 May 2013 - 19:27

Really?

Then how come the Indianapolis 500 is a shadow of what it once was?

Gearheads did not make it great, Joe Sixpack did.

Although the average Joe Sixpack forty years ago had forgotten more about automobiles that the average yout knows nowadays.
Still that has little to do with the past twenty year fall.


You'd just love the nostalgia forum. They're just so superior in there.

#1205 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 549 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 14 May 2013 - 20:32

Really?

Then how come the Indianapolis 500 is a shadow of what it once was?

Gearheads did not make it great, Joe Sixpack did.

Although the average Joe Sixpack forty years ago had forgotten more about automobiles that the average yout knows nowadays.
Still that has little to do with the past twenty year fall.

Well Bob, as Ross mentioned the split quite effectively destroyed the series, and removed the interest of the fans. The stars weren't there anymore, and the casual fans came for them.

The evidence is in the ratings. Also, the rules during the CART era did not encourage innovation. More to the point, most of the 80s were spec- Ford-Cosworth. Yet the fans came in much bigger numbers. I know your opinion. I have read it for years on 10-Tenths. I fundamentally disagree, and feel that the modern world renders such a perspective obsolete.

But there is an easier way to prove it. What would get more media coverage and ticket sales? Indy announcing an open rules set; or announcing Tony Stewart and Sebastien Vettel would run the 2014 Indy 500?

#1206 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 3,983 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 14 May 2013 - 21:07

Well Bob, as Ross mentioned the split quite effectively destroyed the series, and removed the interest of the fans. The stars weren't there anymore, and the casual fans came for them.

The evidence is in the ratings. Also, the rules during the CART era did not encourage innovation. More to the point, most of the 80s were spec- Ford-Cosworth. Yet the fans came in much bigger numbers. I know your opinion. I have read it for years on 10-Tenths. I fundamentally disagree, and feel that the modern world renders such a perspective obsolete.

But there is an easier way to prove it. What would get more media coverage and ticket sales? Indy announcing an open rules set; or announcing Tony Stewart and Sebastien Vettel would run the 2014 Indy 500?


Jesus, why is it one or the other?!?



#1207 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,268 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 14 May 2013 - 21:09

Because people are trying to argue that opening up the tech regs is going to make a noticeable impact on the customer base. When history shows CART both peaked and went into a tailspin with an open rulebook.

#1208 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 3,983 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 14 May 2013 - 21:36

But not because of an open rulebook.

More of the same is not going to do anything to increase the fan base.

#1209 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,268 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 14 May 2013 - 21:53

So let's run the tracks in reverse too.

#1210 Andrew Hope

Andrew Hope
  • Writer of 2013's Best Opening Post

  • 7,046 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 14 May 2013 - 22:22

I propose 1 of the 200 laps be a joker lap around the infield course and to make it extra fun, run against the flow of traffic. Now we'll see what blocking really is.

#1211 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 14 May 2013 - 22:30

But not because of an open rulebook.

More of the same is not going to do anything to increase the fan base.


But an open rulesbook led to rising costs, which in turn scared away many drivers (i.e. many American drivers), which in turn led to Tony George snorting a pile of Columbia's Finest and starting the Indy Racing League, which really started to constrict the rules and continued to where we are now with a spec car and the potential to have a still spec chassis with a few differing aero bits (which I believe won't be very much different from a looks standpoint).

Yes, sitting on you hands isn't going to grow the series, but will having a different end plate, or a differing hump on the sidepod going to propel the sport? Like I said earlier about NASCAR, you can dress up a car which isn't that great looking all you want, but the fans don't care. And getting new fans, or having a great/good idea (like the automaker specific aero bits), or great racing isn't helping at all. There is another underlying problem that IndyCar suffers from which is keeping it suppressed in the doldrums of the general public.

What helped grow NASCAR vastly in the past decade? Television! Those billion dollar deals they signed with FOX and NBC in 2000 blew the sport into the atmosphere. It was a full blown, in your face assault on the general public by those broadcasters those first couple of years. The forced storylines, and good boy image being spread out of the South just took hold. IndyCar just doesn't have that. NBC should be taking full advantage of having both F1 and IndyCar under their wing and shove so much content in our faces for both series (which they seemed to get at bargain prices compared to NASCAR), that it should cost little to none to force feed us pointless puff pieces and history stories that if the general public doesn't turn it off, they become hooked.

#1212 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 549 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 14 May 2013 - 23:55

But not because of an open rulebook.

More of the same is not going to do anything to increase the fan base.

Well, actually, it might. It remains to be seen what year-on-year growth is like. Nothing will change overnight, but increasing interest and awareness, with the public starting to develop relationships with the drivers will be the key. If Ryan Hunter-Reay becomes as household as Mario Andretti then Indy will return to prominence.

#1213 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 549 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 15 May 2013 - 00:01

But an open rulesbook led to rising costs, which in turn scared away many drivers (i.e. many American drivers), which in turn led to Tony George snorting a pile of Columbia's Finest and starting the Indy Racing League, which really started to constrict the rules and continued to where we are now with a spec car and the potential to have a still spec chassis with a few differing aero bits (which I believe won't be very much different from a looks standpoint).

Yes, sitting on you hands isn't going to grow the series, but will having a different end plate, or a differing hump on the sidepod going to propel the sport? Like I said earlier about NASCAR, you can dress up a car which isn't that great looking all you want, but the fans don't care. And getting new fans, or having a great/good idea (like the automaker specific aero bits), or great racing isn't helping at all. There is another underlying problem that IndyCar suffers from which is keeping it suppressed in the doldrums of the general public.

What helped grow NASCAR vastly in the past decade? Television! Those billion dollar deals they signed with FOX and NBC in 2000 blew the sport into the atmosphere. It was a full blown, in your face assault on the general public by those broadcasters those first couple of years. The forced storylines, and good boy image being spread out of the South just took hold. IndyCar just doesn't have that. NBC should be taking full advantage of having both F1 and IndyCar under their wing and shove so much content in our faces for both series (which they seemed to get at bargain prices compared to NASCAR), that it should cost little to none to force feed us pointless puff pieces and history stories that if the general public doesn't turn it off, they become hooked.

When it comes to TV that may be a losing game. Especially in the US and Canada as more people ditch cable for Netflix. IndyCar puts every race on Youtube though (not available in Canada due to rights issues >.< )

#1214 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 3,983 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 15 May 2013 - 02:26

But an open rulesbook led to rising costs, which in turn scared away many drivers (i.e. many American drivers), which in turn led to Tony George snorting a pile of Columbia's Finest and starting the Indy Racing League, which really started to constrict the rules and continued to where we are now with a spec car and the potential to have a still spec chassis with a few differing aero bits (which I believe won't be very much different from a looks standpoint).

Yes, sitting on you hands isn't going to grow the series, but will having a different end plate, or a differing hump on the sidepod going to propel the sport? Like I said earlier about NASCAR, you can dress up a car which isn't that great looking all you want, but the fans don't care. And getting new fans, or having a great/good idea (like the automaker specific aero bits), or great racing isn't helping at all. There is another underlying problem that IndyCar suffers from which is keeping it suppressed in the doldrums of the general public.

What helped grow NASCAR vastly in the past decade? Television! Those billion dollar deals they signed with FOX and NBC in 2000 blew the sport into the atmosphere. It was a full blown, in your face assault on the general public by those broadcasters those first couple of years. The forced storylines, and good boy image being spread out of the South just took hold. IndyCar just doesn't have that. NBC should be taking full advantage of having both F1 and IndyCar under their wing and shove so much content in our faces for both series (which they seemed to get at bargain prices compared to NASCAR), that it should cost little to none to force feed us pointless puff pieces and history stories that if the general public doesn't turn it off, they become hooked.


It is just a guess on my part but the cost was not nearly as high on TG's list as control of the series.

I just think some differentiation in the cars would be useful in getting people excited, an additional way to contrast IndyCar with NASCAR.

#1215 Lemnpiper

Lemnpiper
  • Member

  • 776 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 15 May 2013 - 06:03

Apparently everyone has forgotten about The Split.



The Split played a part , but when you have such long term stars such as 1992 indy 500 starters Foyt Al Unser Sr G Bettenhausen Rick Mears Tom Sneva not start the race post 1994 and have the Indy 500 careers of Al Unser Jr Michael Andretti Gordon Johncock interupted to the point they missed years of races during the rest of their careers that too had to play a part.

In fact of the 1992 starters only Sneva & Mears Indy 500 careers had started in the 1970's. So to me the fact so few stars started in the 1970's seems to indicate driver influx into the series was stagnant long before the split, and it affected the series more than most seem to realize once the long term stars did retire.

Especially when you realize how many were USA born drivers ( except Mario) and maybe the foreign driver influx just never was accepted by the fans .And while Rahal Cheever & Sullivan became stars they never became superstars they tried to replace.

Also the loss of Jeff Gordon , Tony Stewart and others to Nascar may have given the image Indy car was no longer the best american series in the USA.


Paul

#1216 anbeck

anbeck
  • Member

  • 2,023 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 15 May 2013 - 06:43

But an open rulesbook led to rising costs, which in turn scared away many drivers (i.e. many American drivers),


Would you mind expanding that argument? I would imagine that drivers don't really mind rising costs (at least not in F1 since... like, well: ever - maybe until 2007/8, when they'd rather drive for 5 million than not at all). Imagine Schumacher's income: only due to the rising costs through the 1990s did his tens of millions look tiny in comparison to the rest of the money spent by the team. The higher the costs to run in a series are, the more a driver can ask for pay without it seeming suspicious in the team's budget diagrams. Well, unless the sponsors run away. But that's different than scaring drivers, isn't it? Usually, if costs skyrocket, there's always some breadcrumbs falling off for those who pilot the cars as well. I'd rather drive in the unsustainable mid-1990s than now in any series!

What helped grow NASCAR vastly in the past decade? Television! Those billion dollar deals they signed with FOX and NBC in 2000 blew the sport into the atmosphere.


Aren't you confounding cause and effect? Yes, TV billions boost any sport that gets such a deal. But why did FOX and NBC pour money into NASCAR in the first place? And here is the point where I stop finding motorsport-immanent explanations unsatisfactory: those TV giants probably give a sh** about winglets or silhouettes or engines or spec rear wings and gearboxes and all that. And probably they don't care whether the fans care. You cannot explain that development just by looking at NASCAR (or comparing it to Indy), but you have to see it just like any other investment by (media) giants. And probably it was a time in the US, where money was cheaply available and just had to be invested somewhere. And we know that productive industry wasn't the game to play during that time, and hollow real estate stuff not yet. So money had to be pumped into some kind of service, and then NASCAR is as good as anything that promises a good return on your investment. And then the split as such completely suffices to so why the money didn't went to IndyCar.


#1217 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,795 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 24 May 2013 - 11:27

Might be more related to Indy itself, but it concerns the future direction of Indycar so I thought it'd be best here: http://www.autosport...t.php/id/107619

"We always have to be mindful of costs, but that doesn't mean we can't manage improvements to create more exciting racing and at the same time do it safely."


Finally they got someone with some common sense to help shape the future of the series.

#1218 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,268 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 24 May 2013 - 11:28

If they just ran the boost at Indy that they run on road courses, they'd get a big gain without a lot of effort.

#1219 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,795 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 24 May 2013 - 11:35

If they just ran the boost at Indy that they run on road courses, they'd get a big gain without a lot of effort.


Question is, with many probably still with their eyes firmly on the series in terms of safety (and still not in a good way), what would be their plan to bring the speeds at Indy towards 240 while still keeping a good degree of safety?

Advertisement

#1220 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,268 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 24 May 2013 - 11:38

I assume crank up the straight speeds but keep the corner speeds where they are. So short of tire incidents you won't be crashing at any higher speed than you are now.

#1221 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 3,983 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 31 May 2013 - 01:04

http://www.indystar....rand-needs-ride

Hildebrand out, Briscoe in.

#1222 packapoo

packapoo
  • Member

  • 731 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 31 May 2013 - 04:34

Hooray!
Can we have more of that please, getting rid of crashes-r-us drivers.

#1223 SonJR

SonJR
  • Member

  • 144 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 31 May 2013 - 09:24

Good to see Briscoe back a little longer. Curious to see if he'll stay on after Detroit/which events he'll participate in. He's got quite some sportscars stuff lined up already.

Edited by SonJR, 31 May 2013 - 09:25.


#1224 Fulcrum

Fulcrum
  • Member

  • 201 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 01 June 2013 - 17:56

IndyCar gives green light for aero kits

Posted Image

#1225 Deluxx

Deluxx
  • Member

  • 2,174 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 01 June 2013 - 19:19

Wow that's a huge news story actually

#1226 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,899 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 02 June 2013 - 17:02

I could swear Indycar is setting itself up as the anti-F1 again. Tyre limited racing that doesn't suck, V6 turbos, and now eight years' worth of technical plans. I'm frightened. When "possible aerodynamic upgrade" happens I'll be 31. As per this article on Autosport:

2014 has engine upgrades (I guess the main thing will be Honda switching to twin turbos), regular opportunities for power increases are pencilled in, and no change of engine formula till 2019 at the earliest. For all people talk about TV ratings, I think some sort of long-term technical strategy will help keep suppliers involved and draw in more competition. Confidence, investment, amortization etc.

It appears Indycar is also working with Dallara to reduce the floor size as a matter of some urgency. Which is good. I haven't seen anything as weird as that dry-leaf-in-the-breeze crash between Andretti and Rahal last year at Long Beach, but there's no reason why it couldn't happen again.

Edited by Risil, 02 June 2013 - 17:05.


#1227 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,268 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 02 June 2013 - 17:05

The cynic in me wonders how many of these plans will come to fruition. That's not a slight against Indycar but a reflection of how the racing world works. Remember the proposed F1 design where they were going to have split rear wings?

I like that they went to break the Indy record in 2016, the 100th running. I think they need to go for de Ferran's CART record though. Having the fastest racing driver in the world, rather than just the track record holder, is free PR.

#1228 Victor_RO

Victor_RO
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,795 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 02 June 2013 - 17:14

The cynic in me wonders how many of these plans will come to fruition. That's not a slight against Indycar but a reflection of how the racing world works. Remember the proposed F1 design where they were going to have split rear wings?

I like that they went to break the Indy record in 2016, the 100th running. I think they need to go for de Ferran's CART record though. Having the fastest racing driver in the world, rather than just the track record holder, is free PR.


Luyendyk's fastest lap ever was 239.260, if they break it and keep developing the cars then they'll definitely break de Ferran's 241.4 the following year... if not even breaking them both in the same year.

#1229 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,307 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 02 June 2013 - 17:17

Hooray!
Can we have more of that please, getting rid of crashes-r-us drivers.

Just wonder where Hildebrand would be had he been a few mph slower coming into Turn 800...

#1230 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,899 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 02 June 2013 - 17:18

Luyendyk's fastest lap ever was 239.260, if they break it and keep developing the cars then they'll definitely break de Ferran's 241.4 the following year... if not even breaking them both in the same year.


If Indycar develops a rule package to allow 239.26mph, you can guarantee the drivers and engineers will find away of doing 245s. ;)

#1231 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,268 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 02 June 2013 - 17:28

Luyendyk's fastest lap ever was 239.260, if they break it and keep developing the cars then they'll definitely break de Ferran's 241.4 the following year... if not even breaking them both in the same year.


Official track record is 236.9 and that's what they're targeting.

#1232 anbeck

anbeck
  • Member

  • 2,023 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 02 June 2013 - 17:55

I could swear Indycar is setting itself up as the anti-F1 again.


Yesterday I thought the same thing! That's the first year since Ganassi and Penske left Champ Car in 2002 that I look forward to the Indy races more than to the F1 races. I hope they can keep that going!

#1233 juicy sushi

juicy sushi
  • Member

  • 549 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 02 June 2013 - 17:55

If they can make the DW12 look good, be safer and keep the racing great or even improve it then F1 could be in trouble again.

I'll be optimistic and hope for a bright future.

#1234 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 02 June 2013 - 17:56

Just wonder where Hildebrand would be had he been a few mph slower coming into Turn 800...


I don't know, but the way IndyCar has worked as of late, he would have probably been still with Panther and might have gotten a smaller pass (a few more weeks or until the end of the season). He just simply wasn't getting the job done now. That Indy 500 might help the sponsors a bit, but if you're not bringing in results for the rest of the season, even a 500 win a couple of years ago isn't going to make the sponsors happy.

IndyCar gives green light for aero kits

Posted Image


Ah... keeping the fin for sponsorship sake. Just wish they'd get rid of the useless bumper. Has proven to not work in keeping cars from climbing over each other. Make the front wing even more fragile or make the bumper stronger.

Edited by HaydenFan, 02 June 2013 - 18:00.


#1235 stewie

stewie
  • Member

  • 457 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 02 June 2013 - 18:01

Yesterday I thought the same thing! That's the first year since Ganassi and Penske left Champ Car in 2002 that I look forward to the Indy races more than to the F1 races. I hope they can keep that going!

Personally, I am enjoying this season of Indycars more than F1, mostly because the drivers can really push without worrying about playing a tyre game and also because they Indys are generally very competitive and close in racing. Thought the 500 was fab!

#1236 anbeck

anbeck
  • Member

  • 2,023 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 02 June 2013 - 18:06

By the way: isn't it surprising that of all teams, which "resisted" the switch to the IRL from ChampCar, it is Dale Coyne who made the most out of it? We've lost Newman/Haas, Forsythe, Walker.... and Dayle Coyne just beat Penske, Ganassi, Andretti.... :rotfl:

I'd like Justin Wilson to win today, but I'm afraid they'll run out of luck today (though I don't want to jinx anything or anybody...)... :|

#1237 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 02 June 2013 - 18:14

Dale Coyne just seemed to be the less invested in the success of Champ Car. He never had a big sponsor to please by racing one series or the other.

#1238 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • Member

  • 7,465 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 02 June 2013 - 18:17

F1 could really take a few lessons from Indycar. Well that's always been the case to some extent, and vice versa, but at the moment the Indycars are pretty good racing cars and I would hope that F1 takes a few ideas from their configuration.

The series has to be ambitious right now. The product is good and they have a good chance to make Indycar as succesful as it was in its hayday. It can't and won't happen overnight, but it won't happen at all without a solid plan for the future.

#1239 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 1,671 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 03 June 2013 - 04:49

Because people are trying to argue that opening up the tech regs is going to make a noticeable impact on the customer base. When history shows CART both peaked and went into a tailspin with an open rulebook.

CART started slowly narrowing the rules in the rule book a few years after they took control of open wheel racing.

They kept it up till they put themselves out of business, whilst being to stupid to see that George was crapping on his own reasons he supposedly split from CART.

Indycar is continuing on the path to follow both CART and the IRL into the grave.


Advertisement

#1240 packapoo

packapoo
  • Member

  • 731 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 03 June 2013 - 05:16

Gotta chuckle at the 8 year plan.
The BUF's use by falls well short of that.

#1241 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,268 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 03 June 2013 - 10:30

CART started slowly narrowing the rules in the rule book a few years after they took control of open wheel racing.

They kept it up till they put themselves out of business, whilst being to stupid to see that George was crapping on his own reasons he supposedly split from CART.

Indycar is continuing on the path to follow both CART and the IRL into the grave.


Because of market forces, not the tech rules. Indycar is still way too expensive compared to its sponsorship value.

#1242 Prost1997T

Prost1997T
  • Member

  • 1,947 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 03 June 2013 - 12:27

Because of market forces, not the tech rules. Indycar is still way too expensive compared to its sponsorship value.


If Nascar is any indication, US fans watch mainly for the drivers (that and the constant promotion helps).

#1243 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,268 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 03 June 2013 - 12:33

I think it's a bit more complicated than that. NASCAR is really really really easy to watch. I don't have to explain much about it, but Indycar at minimum you need to explain fuel strategies and stuff. Even if it's just "This car pulling away has to make an extra stop but if he doesn't get far enough ahead this second car is the winner". It's not too hard to figure out, but it's just that little bit extra you have to explain.

Which is fine, Indycar takes a little bit more attention, but NASCAR is very accessible to new viewers.

#1244 Prost1997T

Prost1997T
  • Member

  • 1,947 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 03 June 2013 - 12:36

I think it's a bit more complicated than that. NASCAR is really really really easy to watch. I don't have to explain much about it, but Indycar at minimum you need to explain fuel strategies and stuff. Even if it's just "This car pulling away has to make an extra stop but if he doesn't get far enough ahead this second car is the winner". It's not too hard to figure out, but it's just that little bit extra you have to explain.

Which is fine, Indycar takes a little bit more attention, but NASCAR is very accessible to new viewers.


You can go 2 or 4 tyres in Nascar and make numerous handling adjustments during a pit stop (though you can make a few in Indycar). On an oval the ambient conditions (temperature, track rubbering in to create a wider groove) make a bigger difference. Fuel strategy is arguably just as important. The qualifying rules at Daytona also come to mind.

Speaking of ovals, Indycar could use more of them.

#1245 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,268 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 03 June 2013 - 12:55

The pitstop changes are easy. They make an adjustment and hopefully the car goes faster. But in NASCAR passes 'count'. It's not "oh this guy has to stop later" except in rare circumstances. Usually you get a guy out front trying to make it without stopping, not someone trying to run away from the field and say "Oh, ignore him".

And the Daytona qualifying rules are irrelevant. No one's getting into NASCAR on the back of that. Especially when they're on a weekday afternoon.

#1246 Prost1997T

Prost1997T
  • Member

  • 1,947 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 03 June 2013 - 13:43

The pitstop changes are easy. They make an adjustment and hopefully the car goes faster. But in NASCAR passes 'count'. It's not "oh this guy has to stop later" except in rare circumstances.


Quite a few people here seem to disagree. I suppose that's part of the appeal, in Nascar there is no certainty until the last green flag run.

Usually you get a guy out front trying to make it without stopping, not someone trying to run away from the field and say "Oh, ignore him".


Fair enough.

And the Daytona qualifying rules are irrelevant. No one's getting into NASCAR on the back of that. Especially when they're on a weekday afternoon.


What I was getting at is the qualifying for their biggest race isn't "simple".

#1247 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,268 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 03 June 2013 - 14:11

Neither is Indy 500 qualifying most of the time. But NASCAR is the easiest one for a rookie to get their head around. On the other end of the scale Formula 1 is just ridiculous. If you want to explain an exhaust blown diffuser do you start with aerodynamics 101, engine maps, or how a four cycle engine works?

#1248 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 3,983 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 09 June 2013 - 11:30

http://www.indystar....cing-Mark-Miles

Re Mark Miles and the task before him.

#1249 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,104 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 09 June 2013 - 13:46

Yup.

Best quote in what is filled with great quotes.

“I would work with the TV partners to get more races on network television,” team owner Dale Coyne said. “I would work to get the cream-of-the-crop announcers. NASCAR makes putting a window net up exciting.


This last race proves it. I like Scott Goodyear. Not bad, better than Marty Reid and Eddie Cheever, but he talks to us about racing like we've stumbled onto the race from watching cartoons all day. And the others are just the most boring people on earth. And these races are on network television. This last race at Texas was primetime on late spring Saturday. And IMO, it might have taken away whatever was gained from Indy. The bad tires, bad aero choices, an overly bad race, it cannot be allowed again. Not every race is going to be like Indy, but Texas is supposed to be another crown jewel weekend, and the lack of people in the stands, and a bad race is a big nail in the coffin. The next race is an historic venue and doesn't provide the best place to start over, but Iowa and Pocono are where if they don't regain traction lost this weekend, then whatever plans the series has are going to have to be shortened from 8 years to only a few months.

#1250 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,268 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 09 June 2013 - 13:53

But you cant just get races on network TV anymore than you can clap your hands and have 'innovation' in the cars. If it doesnt make money for the broadcaster they're not going to show it.

I dislike Goodyear, he adds absolutely nothing to the broadcast. I'd take Cheever because at least he's a more interesting guy.