Page 2 of 8
Posted: June 16, 2004 10:17 am
by bubba phan
Living in Darlington, I'll be the first to admit that, if a race track can't sell out it's tickets, I can understand the "powers-to-be" rethinking the situation. The Southeast has been somewhat oversaturated over the years (ahhhhh, the good ol' days when nobody but a redneck would waste their Sunday drinking beer and watching a race), but you gotta feel kinda sorry for a place like Rockingham, stuck with the crappiest dates on the schedule and everyone wonders why the races don't sell out. Same thing is happening in Darlington. They used to have Labor Day...hot as hell, but a great date. Then, somebody gets the bright idea to install lights so it can be held at night...mighta been another Bristol, but, no. Once the lights are in, take that away and give the fans a night race in November. Sounds brilliant to me!!
Posted: June 16, 2004 12:04 pm
by SuperTrooper
Key Lime Lee wrote:Well, they're HALF-driven by Bruton's lawsuit... that's why Rockingham is going away. But there's no doubt that NASCAR has been looking to expand into bigger markets on its own and lose what it sees are non-revenue maximizing tracks, regardless of whether the racing on those tracks is better than the "new" facilities.
Eventually between track selection, incomprehensible procedural rules and fining guys for "actions detrimental to the sport" NASCAR will turn an exciting sport into 4 bland hours of guys turning left. I think they're almost there.
The racing itself is not boring (with the exception of Michigan and the middle 300 laps of the CocaCola 600). The DRIVERS are boring. They even managed to calm down Tony Stewart. I miss the days when they would pull over into the grass after the checkered flag and duke it out.
The west expansion was inevitable and there are only so many weeks in a year. Come Novenber the crews are absolutely exhausted.
Posted: June 16, 2004 12:20 pm
by AlbatrossFlyer
having turned in a few laps on the track, racing back to the line under the yellow is flat out dangerous and stupid....
Posted: June 16, 2004 1:43 pm
by Key Lime Lee
Kenseth and Harvick fined by NASCAR
Daytona Beach, FL (Sports Network) - Matt Kenseth and Kevin Harvick were each fined $25,000 by NASCAR and placed on probation until August 11 for their parts in a bumping incident during Sunday's Pocono 500 at the Pocono Raceway.
Harvick, driver of the No. 29 Chevrolet, and Kenseth, driver of the No. 17 Ford, were involved in bumping and spinning each other out during the last caution period of the race, which extended from lap 197 to 200.
Both drivers were penalized for violating Section 12-4-A (actions detrimental to stock car racing: involved in an altercation with another competitor during a caution period) of the NASCAR Nextel Cup Series rule book.
Harvick finished 20th and Kenseth 21st in the event after both were penalized 10 places for the incident.
06/16 12:53:39 ET
Posted: June 16, 2004 5:18 pm
by prrthd1987
Key Lime Lee wrote:Kenseth and Harvick fined by NASCAR
Daytona Beach, FL (Sports Network) - Matt Kenseth and Kevin Harvick were each fined $25,000 by NASCAR and placed on probation until August 11 for their parts in a bumping incident during Sunday's Pocono 500 at the Pocono Raceway.
Harvick, driver of the No. 29 Chevrolet, and Kenseth, driver of the No. 17 Ford, were involved in bumping and spinning each other out during the last caution period of the race, which extended from lap 197 to 200.
Both drivers were penalized for violating Section 12-4-A (actions detrimental to stock car racing: involved in an altercation with another competitor during a caution period) of the NASCAR Nextel Cup Series rule book.
Harvick finished 20th and Kenseth 21st in the event after both were penalized 10 places for the incident.
06/16 12:53:39 ET
Harvick deserved it. He is just a jerk, and everytime he gets TV airtime, you can almost literally see his head get gradually larger. Maybe him and Jeff Gordon could just get together and cry to each other.
Posted: June 16, 2004 8:33 pm
by tommcat327
i enjoy watching nascar but cannot dedicate myself to it as a hardcore fan.i have been involved in motorsports driving and building for a long time and the flip flopping that nascar does just makes me have no respect for the sport.when one manufacturer comes up with a great body design and starts winning the others start whining.and then nascar changes the rules to let the other guys catch up.why even have ford,chevy,dodge then?the bodies are all going to be changed around until they can run even.and thats just one example,the rules get changed almost as often as the tires these days.
can someone explain how toyota is running?they dont even have a pushrod V8.not that a taurus comes with one,or ford even makes one anymore but at least they did in the past.toyota has never made one.
Posted: June 17, 2004 10:01 am
by rednekkPH
tommcat327 wrote:can someone explain how toyota is running?they dont even have a pushrod V8.not that a taurus comes with one,or ford even makes one anymore but at least they did in the past.toyota has never made one.
I don't agree with it, but Toyota is allowed to run because the Tundra is manufactured in the US. As for not making a pushrod V8, none of the motors currently run in NASCAR are commercially available, so I guess it really doesn't matter (does any major manufacturer still make a production pushrod motor?). Ain't much stock left in stock cars anymore
Posted: June 17, 2004 10:52 am
by tommcat327
rednekkPH wrote:I don't agree with it, but Toyota is allowed to run because the Tundra is manufactured in the US. As for not making a pushrod V8, none of the motors currently run in NASCAR are commercially available, so I guess it really doesn't matter (does any major manufacturer still make a production pushrod motor?). Ain't much stock left in stock cars anymore
i thought that there was a rule about the engine having to be available from the manufacturer in some way.i realize all the engines are the same but it just bothers me when stuff like this happens and they still call it stock car racing.i think there should just be one shape body and one engine that they all have to race.put ford or chevy sticker on it however you like,they dont even closely resemble the cars they are supposed to be anyway
Posted: June 17, 2004 11:01 am
by SuperTrooper
rednekkPH wrote:tommcat327 wrote:can someone explain how toyota is running?they dont even have a pushrod V8.not that a taurus comes with one,or ford even makes one anymore but at least they did in the past.toyota has never made one.
I don't agree with it, but Toyota is allowed to run because the Tundra is manufactured in the US. As for not making a pushrod V8, none of the motors currently run in NASCAR are commercially available, so I guess it really doesn't matter (does any major manufacturer still make a production pushrod motor?). Ain't much stock left in stock cars anymore
Nascar dropped the requirements for a "production" engine back in the late 80's because Detroit told them there would be NO V-8s in production cars by 1993. The result is an engine rule book that currently runs over 500 pages. That's how Toyota can build race engines - if it meets the specs Nascar will probably allow it. Since they do it with engines they should do it with the bodies. Set up general rules for bodies and let the car makers have at it.
Despite their public statements otherwise, Nascar is moving towards a uniform body style. Their position is that it will remove the b!tching about who has an aero advantage week to week. It also smoothes the entrance of Toyota, Honda, etc. Don't think for a minute Honda is sitting around with it's thumbs up it's butt ignoring Nascar. If toyota sales go up, and research shows ANY ties to their participation in Nascar, they will be there.
Nascar sees the new makes as a chance to improve a suddenly stagnant sposorship base. Not to mention more fans will "identify" with the sport based on what they drive.
Posted: June 17, 2004 11:27 am
by AlbatrossFlyer
firestone sales went up 70% after entering the indy car/open wheel tire fray....
Under 10 Laps
Posted: June 17, 2004 12:03 pm
by F1NZZZ
SuperTrooper wrote:The simplest solution to the problem of ending races under yellow is: under 10 laps yellows don't count. Red flagging the race for reasons other than the crash scene is impassible is rediculous. The effects of shutting down the car and stopping can affect how the car runs after the restart. I was talking to crew chief Frank Stoddard 2 years ago about this and he said that often teams HAVE to come in and change tires after a red flag because while they cool they develope flat spots that cause severe vibration. Not to mention the effects on the engine internal parts. He said that when he ran Fords if they had a midrace red flag he knew half the Fords wouldn't make it to the end.
It must be tough for the southeast Nascar fans. They are used to being the center of the Nascar universe, but the sport needs to expand into the west to keep growing. That's why tracks that don't sell out races don't keep them. Up here at NHIS we have 2 races and a waiting list with 20,000 names on it. I strongly disagree with moving the Southern 500 from Labor Day weekend. Some traditions should remain. It's all about balance.
The only problem I see here is......
If you don't count these laps you are not running the advertised mileage of the race. So if it is a 400 mile race and all of the sudden you run 5 laps under caution and the race is 405 miles now. Is that fair? 400 miles is suppose to be 400 miles. And the second problem is a result of that is......fuel mileage. If the race is 405 miles now, how many teams will be affected by fuel mileage? These teams plan fuel down to the exact lap. How would the fans feel if guys ran out of gas or had to pit with 5 laps to go beacuse NASCAR ran 4-5 laps under caution that did not count? Everyone was complaining about races being won by fuel mileage. If you don't count laps under caution at the end you could be opening up a can of worms. Not to say this will always be the outcome, but it is something that has to be considered.
Re: Under 10 Laps
Posted: June 17, 2004 12:21 pm
by SuperTrooper
F1NZZZ wrote:SuperTrooper wrote:The simplest solution to the problem of ending races under yellow is: under 10 laps yellows don't count. Red flagging the race for reasons other than the crash scene is impassible is rediculous. The effects of shutting down the car and stopping can affect how the car runs after the restart. I was talking to crew chief Frank Stoddard 2 years ago about this and he said that often teams HAVE to come in and change tires after a red flag because while they cool they develope flat spots that cause severe vibration. Not to mention the effects on the engine internal parts. He said that when he ran Fords if they had a midrace red flag he knew half the Fords wouldn't make it to the end.
It must be tough for the southeast Nascar fans. They are used to being the center of the Nascar universe, but the sport needs to expand into the west to keep growing. That's why tracks that don't sell out races don't keep them. Up here at NHIS we have 2 races and a waiting list with 20,000 names on it. I strongly disagree with moving the Southern 500 from Labor Day weekend. Some traditions should remain. It's all about balance.
The only problem I see here is......
If you don't count these laps you are not running the advertised mileage of the race. So if it is a 400 mile race and all of the sudden you run 5 laps under caution and the race is 405 miles now. Is that fair? 400 miles is suppose to be 400 miles. And the second problem is a result of that is......fuel mileage. If the race is 405 miles now, how many teams will be affected by fuel mileage? These teams plan fuel down to the exact lap. How would the fans feel if guys ran out of gas or had to pit with 5 laps to go beacuse NASCAR ran 4-5 laps under caution that did not count? Everyone was complaining about races being won by fuel mileage. If you don't count laps under caution at the end you could be opening up a can of worms. Not to say this will always be the outcome, but it is something that has to be considered.
Turning this around, ending under caution would permit a winner who would otherwise have run out of fuel. Lots of times teams are squeezing their cheeks trying to make it to the end when a late yellow bails them out. Since RACING to the checkers is the goal here, I would allow GAS ONLY pit stops WITHOUT LOSS OF POSITION once the race distance is reached. How's that???
Nascar opened this can of worms by changing the rules for the trucks. The trucks have the "Green,White,Checker" rule and I don't recall any complaints. They have races decided by fuel milage just like the cars. When the rules change people adapt. Remember that what Nascar really does is provide entertainment. When races end under caution the fans are NOT entertained (unless their driver was the winner).
Re: Under 10 Laps
Posted: June 17, 2004 12:25 pm
by rednekkPH
F1NZZZ wrote:[And the second problem is a result of that is......fuel mileage. If the race is 405 miles now, how many teams will be affected by fuel mileage? These teams plan fuel down to the exact lap.
Well, then the teams would just have to figure the possibility of a few extra laps into the equation. If they gamble on there being no caution laps and end up getting bit in the a$$, so be it.
Re: Under 10 Laps
Posted: June 17, 2004 12:52 pm
by Key Lime Lee
F1NZZZ wrote:If you don't count these laps you are not running the advertised mileage of the race. So if it is a 400 mile race and all of the sudden you run 5 laps under caution and the race is 405 miles now. Is that fair?
That's racing. It's not any mor eor less fair than races that get called for rain.
F1NZZZ wrote: These teams plan fuel down to the exact lap. How would the fans feel if guys ran out of gas or had to pit with 5 laps to go beacuse NASCAR ran 4-5 laps under caution that did not count? Everyone was complaining about races being won by fuel mileage. If you don't count laps under caution at the end you could be opening up a can of worms.
Again, that's racing. Is it any less fair than a guy who has a 25 second lead with fifteen to go who loses it when a late caution comes out and tightens up the field? As long as, more times than not, it makes the racing interesting people will be cool with it.
Besides, I suspect any NASCAR fans who attend their local short tracks are already used to NASCAR rules that a) score cars by the last completed green flag lap and b) don't count ANY caution laps.
Frankly I think green white checkered is the way to go. Give them one shot at it.
Posted: June 17, 2004 1:00 pm
by AlbatrossFlyer
1) a 400 mile race is only 400 miles along one very specific line around the track. nobody runs the exact milage....
2) i'd bet 10 out of 10 fans would like to see a green white checker finish instead of a checker under yellow.
3) if its red, pit everyone for fuel and tires and then restart with a minimum of a green white checker
Posted: June 17, 2004 1:27 pm
by F1NZZZ
AlbatrossFlyer wrote:1) a 400 mile race is only 400 miles along one very specific line around the track. nobody runs the exact milage
True.....but 200 laps is 200 laps no matter which line you run around the track....not 205 laps. Which may cause problems. Bottom line I'm all in favor of not ending the race under caution......no matter what it takes.
Posted: June 17, 2004 1:35 pm
by Key Lime Lee
F1NZZZ wrote:AlbatrossFlyer wrote:1) a 400 mile race is only 400 miles along one very specific line around the track. nobody runs the exact milage
True.....but 200 laps is 200 laps no matter which line you run around the track....not 205 laps. Which may cause problems. Bottom line I'm all in favor of not ending the race under caution......no matter what it takes.
But sometimes 200 laps is only 105 if it rains. And what about the 2 or 3 pace laps....
So if it's not every race being EXACTLY the advertisted distance, then why split hairs?
Posted: June 17, 2004 2:26 pm
by Crazy Navy Flyer
I agree with all the above, it's all about the almighty $$$$. Make all the cars the same, take away driver personality, and race all over the country. Then what do you have? My enthusiam for the sport has dwindled alot the past year or 2. It allstarted when NASCAR went to INDY, that's sacreligious and should never have happened. It's all about $$$$$$.
Posted: June 17, 2004 3:10 pm
by SuperTrooper
Crazy Navy Flyer wrote:I agree with all the above, it's all about the almighty $$$$. Make all the cars the same, take away driver personality, and race all over the country. Then what do you have? My enthusiam for the sport has dwindled alot the past year or 2. It allstarted when NASCAR went to INDY, that's sacreligious and should never have happened. It's all about $$$$$$.
I hate to break it to you but Nascar is a business, not a hobby. They are attempting to satisfy the needs of fans across the country. They are just being smart by moving races from the oversaturated southeast. Live TV created the desire and now it must be satisfied.
Nascar has always wanted to avoid being a motorsport dominated by technology. Nascar is a DRIVER centered sport. I know, the new guys can be boring, but they are so different in background from the pioneers of the sport. They aren't hellraising moonshiners, they often have college degrees and thousands upon thousands of laps in different types of race cars. Most of them have been serious about a racing career since they were 5 or 7. It's a totally different breed of human being.
I don't see how INDY is sacreligeous. It's a race track with it's own history and a different set of challenges than anywhere else. I just don't want anymore cookie cutter 1.5 mile triovals on the schedule.
Posted: June 17, 2004 3:57 pm
by The Lost Manatee
I agree with you Super, the cookie cutters have got to go. Chicago, Las Vegas, et. al. are terrible tracks to watch a race at. I guess you could call them hybird tracks, they're not short tracks like Bristol and they aren't speedways like Daytona.