Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

IndyCar 2014 Official Thread


  • Please log in to reply
278 replies to this topic

#251 Muppetmad

Muppetmad
  • Member

  • 2,401 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 08 May 2014 - 14:25

I would be more than up for it if I weren't up to my eyeballs in reading on the Counter-Reformation and in snotty Kleenex tissues. I'll happily make a thread or two during the Summer months, though.



Advertisement

#252 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,343 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 08 May 2014 - 14:48

I'll be up for making the thread when I get home from work in approx. 1 hour.

 

No worries, I'm off sick from work today and this can be my gift to the world that isn't germs.



#253 jonpollak

jonpollak
  • Member

  • 13,100 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 08 May 2014 - 14:54

Huertas has Juan Valdez sponsorship on his race suit :lol: :lol:

juanv.jpg

 

 

Jp


Edited by jonpollak, 08 May 2014 - 14:56.


#254 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,029 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 08 May 2014 - 18:04

http://motorsportsta...ry-in-indy-500/

 

Helio is my favorite for the 500 now. 



#255 red stick

red stick
  • Member

  • 2,288 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 08 May 2014 - 18:41

http://motorsportsta...ry-in-indy-500/

 

Helio is my favorite for the 500 now. 

+1.  Love that scheme.  Just coincidence it's announced on throwback Thursday?    ;) 



#256 Xpat

Xpat
  • Member

  • 3,657 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 May 2014 - 20:00

I haven't read this but it is supposed to be good.

 

http://www.amazon.co...e62cf-362689402

 

51lOjFCWt8L._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg



#257 red stick

red stick
  • Member

  • 2,288 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 08 May 2014 - 20:53

10300697_10152104279380794_5382032493263

 

1980 Chaparral 2K, 2014 entry, 1988 Penske PC-17.


Edited by red stick, 08 May 2014 - 20:56.


#258 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,029 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 08 May 2014 - 21:11

Damn the Dallara is a big car. But the best at the DW-12 has been.



#259 Andrew Hope

Andrew Hope
  • Writer of 2013's Best Opening Post

  • 6,873 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 08 May 2014 - 22:20

I'm not even kidding, I think the DW12 looks the nicest of the bunch.

 

(booty reasons).



Advertisement

#260 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,343 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 08 May 2014 - 22:24

Looks more in keeping with those 80s cars than I'd have expected. This is the last year for this body shape so it's good to make peace with it at last.



#261 jonpollak

jonpollak
  • Member

  • 13,100 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 08 May 2014 - 22:32

Great to see Johnny Rutherford back in the 500!!!

 

$%28KGrHqJ,!qYFIOF7+PLSBSECwmfDM!~~60_35

 

Those posters who showed concern about the competing drivers ages will be calling Mumsnet again.

 

Jp

 



#262 HaydenFan

HaydenFan
  • Member

  • 2,029 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 08 May 2014 - 23:24

I'm not even kidding, I think the DW12 looks the nicest of the bunch.

 

(booty reasons).

 

Might have to agree with that statement. 

 

(Bit more of a boob guy myself though)



#263 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • Member

  • 7,022 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 09 May 2014 - 07:14

It's interesting that the cars are mechanically very similar in size. The cockpit to gearbox volume is about the same. It's just that on those old cars the energy absorbing structures are either your legs or not present. Obviously the semi-enclosed rear wheels on the DW12 add to the bulkiness, but that's just bodywork.



#264 Rob G

Rob G
  • Member

  • 10,883 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 09 May 2014 - 17:23

Oddly enough, I always thought the Dallara was a bit stubby-looking, but I didn't realize it was so huge compared to the others. The Penske is my favorite of the three by far. I like the Chaparral more for what it was compared to its contemporaries, rather than what it is compared to the cars that followed.



#265 Jim Thurman

Jim Thurman
  • Member

  • 4,087 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 03 July 2014 - 18:35

Wow, nothing here since May 9?  So there's nothing general or non-specific about Indycar since then?  Hmmm.  Ok...

 

A message to all the F1 noobs and trolls.  Indycar is not imitating F1 with it's "double points." for their 500 mile races.  It's the other way around as the point system from the 20s on used to be based on race distance, with a points per mile format.  Thus, from the 50s through the 70s the winner of the Indianapolis 500 (or the 500-mile races at Ontario and Pocono) used to receive 5x the points of the winner of a 100-mile race.  So, it has a long history with Indy car type racing.  Actually, F1 is imitating U.S. short oval tracks, many of which used to have "double points" race(s) in season as far back as the 1960s.  Often these were extra distance or a major or historic event, so F1 didn't even get that right.

 

But, it's not Indycar imitating F1.  History.  Learn it. Know it. Live it.

 

Edited for clarification  :D


Edited by Jim Thurman, 03 July 2014 - 21:19.


#266 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,343 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 03 July 2014 - 18:44

I think since the Indy weekend there's never not been a race thread near the top of the index... Speaking of which, Pocono thread can be found right here. Hands up if anyone can say what a saturation point is.

 

You're absolutely right though, and not just factually. :up:


Edited by Risil, 03 July 2014 - 19:42.


#267 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 1,599 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 03 July 2014 - 20:48

Except the bit about a 500 mile race being 10x the distance (and therefore points) of a 100 mile race.

Multiplication. Learn it. Know it. Live it.

#268 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,343 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 03 July 2014 - 20:52

Don't tell me you've never heard of the Indy 1000



#269 paulb

paulb
  • Member

  • 2,472 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 03 July 2014 - 21:02

Don't tell me you've never heard of the Indy 1000

I've experienced the Indy 1000: its the Indy 500 after two-many libations!



#270 Jim Thurman

Jim Thurman
  • Member

  • 4,087 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 03 July 2014 - 21:15

Except the bit about a 500 mile race being 10x the distance (and therefore points) of a 100 mile race.

Multiplication. Learn it. Know it. Live it.

 

:lol: :blush:   Well, I forgot to mention the "points per mile" format.  Corrected.  The winner of a 500-mile race got 5x the points of the winner of a 100-mile race. So, a lot more than "double points"

 

When was this "gimmick" created? How about 1920...30 years before "F1" :D

 

While there were five different point systems used from 1916 to 1981, the 5x difference for race winners at those distances remained the same save for between 1930-35 when it was weighted even more heavily, with 600 for a 500-mile win to 120 for a 100-mile win.

 

The fifth of those five point systems was also the one used the longest, from 1946 (again, before "F1") through 1980.



#271 Jim Thurman

Jim Thurman
  • Member

  • 4,087 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 03 July 2014 - 21:17

See, if I was Andrew or several other posters here, I could claim I was :stoned: ...

 

but, no, it was simple :yawnface:

 

plus not being very good at math...



#272 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • Member

  • 3,199 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 03 July 2014 - 21:20

:lol: :blush:   Well, I forgot to mention the "points per mile" format.  Corrected.  The winner of a 500-mile race got 5x the points of the winner of a 100-mile race. So, a lot more than "double points"
 
When was this "gimmick" created? How about 1920...30 years before "F1" :D
 
While there were five different point systems used from 1916 to 1981, the 5x difference for race winners at those distances remained the same save for between 1930-35 when it was weighted even more heavily, with 600 for a 500-mile win to 120 for a 100-mile win.
 
The fifth of those five point systems was also the one used the longest, from 1946 (again, before "F1") through 1980.

Points per mile works fine for me, which is why I think Indycar got WE DOUBLE POINTS NOW more or less just right. To be honest, I think most series would be well off basing their points system on the shortest race of the year and then adjusting points for other races relative to that one. I know that's probably rather confusing, but at least then you get out what you put in; I had it in my head it'd be best for endurance-based series. :p

#273 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 1,599 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 03 July 2014 - 21:26

Will Jim hate me even more if I now point out that 600/120 =5?!

I think points per mile was too extreme - I've said before that Bryan really should have beaten Sweikert, based on results.

Double points for the 500 milers is perfect though.

#274 Jim Thurman

Jim Thurman
  • Member

  • 4,087 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 03 July 2014 - 21:34

Will Jim hate me even more if I now point out that 600/120 =5?!

I think points per mile was too extreme - I've said before that Bryan really should have beaten Sweikert, based on results.

Double points for the 500 milers is perfect though.

 

No, not at all :lol:  I meant weighted more in terms of numbers.  You see, 600 is greater than 500...  :D  (ah, that's what I get for rushing, even more for rushing while tired)

 

The error in the original post wasn't one of math, at least not as claimed, it was in failing to point out the points per mile.  I never wrote that a 500-mile race was 10x the distance of a 100-mile race, just that the points were (erm, they weren't...they were only 5x). That was the error.



#275 Jim Thurman

Jim Thurman
  • Member

  • 4,087 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 03 July 2014 - 21:36

I think points per mile was too extreme - I've said before that Bryan really should have beaten Sweikert, based on results.
 

 

What's amazing, and downright bizarre, is how many times drivers that won the '500' failed to win the points championships.  After Indianapolis (which usually opened the season), the winner had a huge advantage...and yet...



#276 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 1,599 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 03 July 2014 - 21:50

How many times did the Indy winner complete the full season though? They often seemed to get busted up ( eg Wallard, Ruttman, Flaherty) or just voluntarily not go for the title (eg Vukie, Hanks, Bryan).

#277 loki

loki
  • Member

  • 1,946 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 03 July 2014 - 21:54

How many times did the Indy winner complete the full season though? They often seemed to get busted up ( eg Wallard, Ruttman, Flaherty) or just voluntarily not go for the title (eg Vukie, Hanks, Bryan).


Back then it was about the race with the series almost being a curiosity. It wasn't until CART that the series started to garner interest.

#278 Jim Thurman

Jim Thurman
  • Member

  • 4,087 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 05 July 2014 - 17:27

How many times did the Indy winner complete the full season though? They often seemed to get busted up ( eg Wallard, Ruttman, Flaherty) or just voluntarily not go for the title (eg Vukie, Hanks, Bryan).

 

I was counting all the times they got busted up, since they planned on running the whole series.  I guess it leaves only Johnnie Parsons in 1950 as the sole '500' winner to make it through the entire schedule and still lose the championship.

 

The 1952 championship was just insane.  Full of twists and turns.  Someone should have talked to those guys when they were still around.  It would make a great story.  Ruttman misses the last 2/3 of the season and still almost won the championship.  Seemingly every time someone would challenge, they'd get hurt or DNQ for a race (or two).



#279 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 1,599 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 05 July 2014 - 19:23

And you can say that Parsons only failed in 1950 because the 500 was rain shortened and so he didn't get anywhere near the 1000 points normally on offer.