Put An End To Foot To The Floor Racing

[Chamoo]

If there was ever a prominent example of why we should get rid of foot to the floor racing, the Kansas race is as good as you'll get.

How can anyone be expected to pass when every car around you runs the same speed everywhere on the track, in the high lane, the bottom lane, the middle lane, the corners, the straights?

This type of racing has to go.

[TURN3]

If there was ever a prominent example of why we should get rid of foot to the floor racing, the Kansas race is as good as you'll get.

How can anyone be expected to pass when every car around you runs the same speed everywhere on the track, in the high lane, the bottom lane, the middle lane, the corners, the straights?

This type of racing has to go.

+1. Need multiple engines, multiple chassis, with more hp and less downforce. Hard to blame the track singularly althought as discussed before we need tracks with character (i.e. Milwaukee, Phoenix, etc.).

[Lousada]

When all the engines, chassis and tires are the same, passing will always be difficult, on every track. I don't think it would be much better if they had to brake for corners.

[Chamoo]

When all the engines, chassis and tires are the same, passing will always be difficult, on every track. I don't think it would be much better if they had to brake for corners.

Or course it would, you would be adding the variable of talent to the event. That would be the biggest variable of all the chassis', engines, or tires.

[Scotty G.]

Get rid of the entire series and start over from scratch.

The whole series is a complete bore, no matter what type of track they are on.


BTW, for those of us who were actually watching the IRL (when it was actually the IRL), places like Texas, Kentucky, Chicago and Kansas used to have kick-ass races. It was a spec series then. It was foot-to-the-floor racing then.

Some of us can remember how great those races used to be. Much like the rest of AOW, they are all just distant memories.

[Lousada]

Or course it would, you would be adding the variable of talent to the event. That would be the biggest variable of all the chassis', engines, or tires.

This is not true here. Or else how do you explain RHR not getting past Alex Lloyd for 5 laps at Long Beach?? There were plenty of examples at Long Beach and Barber were slower cars easily blocked off the faster cars.

[Lousada]

Get rid of the entire series and start over from scratch.

The whole series is a complete bore, no matter what type of track they are on.


BTW, for those of us who were actually watching the IRL (when it was actually the IRL), places like Texas, Kentucky, Chicago and Kansas used to have kick-ass races. It was a spec series then. It was foot-to-the-floor racing then.

Some of us can remember how great those races used to be. Much like the rest of AOW, they are all just distant memories.

The IRL was never spec until the current formula. It was better then because everybody was on the same playing field. Now Penske and Ganassi outspent and outsmart everybody to the point no one even cares anymore. Drop these two teams and the excitement goes up.

[ICWS]

+1. Need multiple engines, multiple chassis, with more hp and less downforce. Hard to blame the track singularly althought as discussed before we need tracks with character (i.e. Milwaukee, Phoenix, etc.).

I agree. The combination of having more horsepower and less downforce along with flatter tracks would improve oval racing. It just seems that "cookie cutter" tracks like Kansas and Homestead force the series to really struggle with putting on competitive and entertaining races. Short flat ovals and super-speedways are more desirable in this case. Milwaukee, Phoenix and New Hampshire are flat tracks that need to return and hopefully IndyCars can find their way back to super-speedways like Fontana and Michigan.

[Scotty G.]

Milwaukee, Phoenix and New Hampshire are flat tracks that need to return and hopefully IndyCars can find their way back to super-speedways like Fontana and Michigan.


Milwaukee's IRL races in recent years have been boring. New Hampshire mostly had boring races too.

The racing was really good in the early 2000's, at most of these tracks some are complaining about. It was balls-to-the-wall racing, that had the crowd on its feet and people interested for 200 laps. Today? Not even close.

Something has changed it and changed it for the worse.

If Indy Cars can't put on good shows on ovals (and most road/street circuits are too narrow and small to put on good shows for Indy Cars), then what do they do? Put on boring-ass races all year, that's what.

[ICWS]

One of the purposes of my post was to point out that ovals like Milwaukee, Phoenix, New Hampshire, Michigan and Fontana are more unique than the "cookie cutters" that IndyCar has been accustomed to as of late (Homestead, Kansas, Chicagoland, Texas, Kentucky, Motegi, etc.). I also meant to point out how having more horsepower and less downforce would improve the racing at oval tracks. Some of those "cookie cutters" can stay on the schedule for (Texas for good attendance, Motegi as an obilgation to Honda, etc.) but the goal should be to have more unique oval tracks on the schedule rather than racing on essentially the same oval track but with a different name attached to it.

The racing displayed on the road/street courses is similar, but you don't see these tracks having the same layout; even though they typically have close to the same amount of turns, for the most part there is always something unique that these tracks have (Laguna Seca's "corkscrew", Long Beach's hairpin into a long and curved straightaway, Elkhart Lake's "kink", etc.).

[Jag_Warrior]

Probably a question more suited for Hoop98, but does anyone know if the 1st generation IRL cars (after they developed their own formula) had as much downforce as these cars do? I'm assuming the old Chevys and Nissans had about the same horsepower as the Honda does now. But I have to agree with some of the posts above: even though I watched VERY few IRL races back then, I do recall that they didn't *seem* to be as foot-to-the-floor as these races do. A buddy sent me a tape of one of the early Texas races and I had to (grudgingly) admit that it was pretty good.

[NickFalzone]

Probably a question more suited for Hoop98, but does anyone know if the 1st generation IRL cars (after they developed their own formula) had as much downforce as these cars do? I'm assuming the old Chevys and Nissans had about the same horsepower as the Honda does now. But I have to agree with some of the posts above: even though I watched VERY few IRL races back then, I do recall that they didn't *seem* to be as foot-to-the-floor as these races do. A buddy sent me a tape of one of the early Texas races and I had to (grudgingly) admit that it was pretty good.

I don't think those cars had nearly as much downforce, but beyond that I'm not sure what the specific differences were. I agree that the oval racing in the late 90s/early 00's in the IRL was MUCH better than it is today. Even as recently as 2006-7 there was some decent oval racing. Now, other than Kentucky last year, it's been extremely dull.

[Mark in Oshawa]

These cars now are more dialed in, they have a greater amount of development and there has been no allowance for evolution. So everyone is running pretty much the same settings and the like. The reason the Penske and Ganassi guys are so dominent is because they are just consistently faster due to the cars dialed in that last little bit that the lesser teams haven't found the money or engineers to do.

Road courses? More variables, the tracks change more and road racing requires a lot more driving.....

I don't want to see all ovals abolished, but I would like them to be varied, and harder to driver. At the cookie cutters, I would love to see the IRL mandate a lot less wing...change the dynamic, change the way the cars drive, and force guys to drive these cars with some throttle rather than just flat out.

[e2mtt]

Short-term solution: super-speedway wings everywhere

[bzcam]

If there was ever a prominent example of why we should get rid of foot to the floor racing, the Kansas race is as good as you'll get.

How can anyone be expected to pass when every car around you runs the same speed everywhere on the track, in the high lane, the bottom lane, the middle lane, the corners, the straights?

This type of racing has to go.

Simple solution: get rid of the ovals altogether. On road courses driver talent trumps raw speed every day of the week. Let the professional wrestling of autosport (NASCAR) drive around in circles for two hours - open wheel cars belong on the road. You would get a more diverse set of winners, better racing and a much higher brow sport.

Just say no to ovals.

BZ

[drewdawg727]

What is this "cookie-cutter" crap I keep seeing? I think we need to pick a different adjective to use, because I'm not seeing the resemblance.

[ICWS]

What is this "cookie-cutter" crap I keep seeing? I think we need to pick a different adjective to use, because I'm not seeing the resemblance.

"Cookie cutter" describes oval tracks that are usually 1.5 miles long with usually about 20-25 degree banking in the corners and mostly shaped as tri-ovals or quad-ovals. They're called "cookie-cutters" because they represent the most common configuration for oval tracks seen today and usually result in the same type of racing. NASCAR's schedule is mostly made up of these tracks (Las Vegas, Atlanta, Texas, Dover, Charlotte, Chicagoland, Kansas, Homestead). It is also the most common type of oval that IndyCar races at; 6 of the 8 ovals on IndyCar's schedule are made of cookie cutters. (Indianapolis and Iowa are the only 2 ovals that have different layouts).

[Chris R]

There is no audience in the US for a road course only series. Period. At least not one that will support this level of series. It's been proven time after time.

There is not a much better audience for an oval only series either.

It takes both, along with Indy, to survive.

This is 100% correct. Those who decry either the ovals or the road/street courses are missing the point that each of these events help the other.... The excitement of knowing the car racing on your city streets can and does do 250 on an oval bring excitement and interest to the event. Knowing the car that is doing 250 at Indy could come to your hometown and some body will jockey it through the concrete jungle adds a "relevance" that driving around in circles cannot bring....

For what it is worth - there have been plenty of both boring and exciting races in streets/road and on ovals.... They do need to tweak the rules to improve the racing - but it does not mean getting rid of on style of racing....

Dave Despain brought up a good point last night regarding the ovals - just line up the re-starts differently and you improve "the show". More than a few people have noted that the next engine should include a way to easily & cheaply boost the horsepower for street/road courses....

The key to success is improving the ability of the cars to run on a variety of tracks - not eliminating any of the types of tracks (as much as I hate cookie cutter style ovals they do have a place in American motorsports...)

[Chris R]

"Cookie cutter" describes oval tracks that are usually 1.5 miles long with usually about 20-25 degree banking in the corners and mostly shaped as tri-ovals or quad-ovals. They're called "cookie-cutters" because they represent the most common configuration for oval tracks seen today and usually result in the same type of racing. NASCAR's schedule is mostly made up of these tracks (Las Vegas, Atlanta, Texas, Dover, Charlotte, Chicagoland, Kansas, Homestead). It is also the most common type of oval that IndyCar races at; 6 of the 8 ovals on IndyCar's schedule are made of cookie cutters. (Indianapolis and Iowa are the only 2 ovals that have different layouts).

Dover is definitely not a cookie cutter track (not that I am a fan of watching cars go in a tight circle for 5+hours when NASCAR races there.....) otherwise spot on with the assessment...

To add further to the discussion examples of non-cookie-cutter ovals would be:

Darlington
Dover
Phoenix
Milwaukee
New Hampshire
California
Pocono

[Mark in Oshawa]

"Cookie cutter" describes oval tracks that are usually 1.5 miles long with usually about 20-25 degree banking in the corners and mostly shaped as tri-ovals or quad-ovals. They're called "cookie-cutters" because they represent the most common configuration for oval tracks seen today and usually result in the same type of racing. NASCAR's schedule is mostly made up of these tracks (Las Vegas, Atlanta, Texas, Dover, Charlotte, Chicagoland, Kansas, Homestead). It is also the most common type of oval that IndyCar races at; 6 of the 8 ovals on IndyCar's schedule are made of cookie cutters. (Indianapolis and Iowa are the only 2 ovals that have different layouts).

Dover and Homestead are not "cookie cutters". Dover is a mile only and is a concrete pure oval. It is tough to drive and really unsuitable for Indycar. Homestead isnt like the others either......

The Cookies are the tracks owned bu Bruton Smith for the most part, plus Chicago and Kansas are a like with Kentucky....

[garyshell]

Dave Despain brought up a good point last night regarding the ovals - just line up the re-starts differently and you improve "the show". More than a few people have noted that the next engine should include a way to easily & cheaply boost the horsepower for street/road courses....

I agree, it is ridiculous for backmarkers to give such a huge advantage to the leader on restarts. Anyone a lap down starts on the outside. Pretty simple.

Gary

[Mark in Oshawa]

The idea that Miller has is perfect for ovals and considering most of the "lost" fans from Indycars are now watching NASCAR, it isn't like you will be alienating those with this.

Some needs to think outside the box in this sport, and when you have Bernard talking to people like Miller and learning the history from him and others who have covered the sport for years like Curt Cavin, you realize that management now is trying to balance the old fans with the need for new fans. I think we are about to see a lot of subtle shifts and changes...

[Scotty G.]

The people in Indy Car couldn't sell lemonade in the Mojave Desert.

Get the lapped cars the hell out of the way on restarts. This sport needs excitement and action. Give the fans a show. Maybe keep Milka jammed in there, since her driving actually helps bring more action and excitement. In fact, I think a new rule should be on every restart, the #18 sled goes to the head of the line, whether she is on the lead lap or 100 laps down. :p

And can somebody teach these moron drivers how to properly start and restart a race? That looked like amatuer hour the other day and the starts at most places (including Indy) are a complete joke.

And yes, I know Barnhart is part of the problem. But the drivers are too.

[ICWS]

Dover and Homestead are not "cookie cutters". Dover is a mile only and is a concrete pure oval. It is tough to drive and really unsuitable for Indycar. Homestead isnt like the others either......

The Cookies are the tracks owned bu Bruton Smith for the most part, plus Chicago and Kansas are a like with Kentucky....

I know Dover has a different surface and is 1 mile long instead of 1.5 miles. However, that track has a similar shape and the banking is roughly the same. For the untrained eye, it looks similar to the other cookie cutters. Homestead ceased being unlike the others when it added more banking in its corners.

[Mark in Oshawa]

I know Dover has a different surface and is 1 mile long instead of 1.5 miles. However, that track has a similar shape and the banking is roughly the same. For the untrained eye, it looks similar to the other cookie cutters. Homestead ceased being unlike the others when it added more banking in its corners.

I guess you haven't been paying attention. Dover is Unlike ANY other track other than maybe Bristol TN. IT is Concrete, and isn't like any of the others in any fashion. It is banked higher than the cookie's, and has no quad oval. All the "cookie" cutter ovals are with a tri or quad style bowed out main stretch with no banking. Even the straights at Dover are banked.....so it is like Bristol on steroids...

[ICWS]

I guess you haven't been paying attention. Dover is Unlike ANY other track other than maybe Bristol TN. IT is Concrete, and isn't like any of the others in any fashion. It is banked higher than the cookie's, and has no quad oval. All the "cookie" cutter ovals are with a tri or quad style bowed out main stretch with no banking. Even the straights at Dover are banked.....so it is like Bristol on steroids...

I'll agree with you on Dover being different from the other cookie cutters. But I ask you what makes Homestead different from the cookie cutters? The only difference I see with Homestead is that its similar to Dover in that both tracks are neither tri-ovals or a quad-ovals, but other than that Homestead seems too similar to the other cookie cutters that it would seem fair to consider that track to be one of them.

[nigelred5]

Milwaukee's IRL races in recent years have been boring. New Hampshire mostly had boring races too.

The racing was really good in the early 2000's, at most of these tracks some are complaining about. It was balls-to-the-wall racing, that had the crowd on its feet and people interested for 200 laps. Today? Not even close.

Something has changed it and changed it for the worse.

If Indy Cars can't put on good shows on ovals (and most road/street circuits are too narrow and small to put on good shows for Indy Cars), then what do they do? Put on boring-ass races all year, that's what.

Yeah, for the first 6 or so years, the IRL was basically bush league with shop built engine packages and two similar chassis and lesser drivers, then Ganassi and Penske joined the show and the ante was tripled.

[nigelred5]

I know Dover has a different surface and is 1 mile long instead of 1.5 miles. However, that track has a similar shape and the banking is roughly the same. For the untrained eye, it looks similar to the other cookie cutters. Homestead ceased being unlike the others when it added more banking in its corners.

The additional banking certainly changed Homestead, but rounding off the 4 corners really changed it for me.

You aren't proposing they attempt to run Indycars at Dover again are you?? Good lord man, did you see what happened the last time they tried that? Fiasco isn't even close to being an understatement. I can' think of a track less suited to open wheel cars. Gateway is actually a good oval for open wheel cars that no one really ever considers any more.

[ICWS]

Don't worry; I agree IndyCars shouldn't race at tracks like Dover and Nashville Superspeedway. Any track that isn't surfaced with asphalt is to be avoided by IndyCar.

[Mark in Oshawa]

The people in Indy Car couldn't sell lemonade in the Mojave Desert.

Get the lapped cars the hell out of the way on restarts. This sport needs excitement and action. Give the fans a show. Maybe keep Milka jammed in there, since her driving actually helps bring more action and excitement. In fact, I think a new rule should be on every restart, the #18 sled goes to the head of the line, whether she is on the lead lap or 100 laps down. :p

And can somebody teach these moron drivers how to properly start and restart a race? That looked like amatuer hour the other day and the starts at most places (including Indy) are a complete joke.

And yes, I know Barnhart is part of the problem. But the drivers are too.

I am going to go out on a limb here and agree with you for a change Scotty....except that you can never depend on drivers to make a "fair" start...because they all see "Fair" as them taking advantage of the situation.

The officials need to start cracking the whip...

[BobbyC]

Now if I'm Honda, I'd want Florence (Darlington). Honda has an ATV plant in the area. Honda even admitted Motegi was inspired by Darlington, and Gateway (St. Louis) does too.

Shop built engines sometimes are better than factory. Let some guy outsmart the opposition for the win. But Kansas had that paltry crowd (15,000) and that was not a good day to choose. They would have had more if they ran the IRL-NASCAR doubleheader on Sunday together. After seeing Sunday's truck race that was a highlight reel moment. Those two guys were just racing. Imagine the IRL having to start their race just moments after the Truck finish and having to top that battle.

The toughest racing in the world is the IRL -- the pencil-smooth tracks aren't there and each track has its own character -- Sao Paulo's concrete start-finish, Long Beach's Shoreline Drive, the sweeps of Barber, the canyon at Indy, the wild and crazy Texas battles that should start 30 minutes before sundown and have track conditions change through the transition, and the Loop-Chute of Watkins Glen, and character. No Tilkerings.

[ICWS]

Now if I'm Honda, I'd want Florence (Darlington). Honda has an ATV plant in the area. Honda even admitted Motegi was inspired by Darlington, and Gateway (St. Louis) does too.

Shop built engines sometimes are better than factory. Let some guy outsmart the opposition for the win. But Kansas had that paltry crowd (15,000) and that was not a good day to choose. They would have had more if they ran the IRL-NASCAR doubleheader on Sunday together. After seeing Sunday's truck race that was a highlight reel moment. Those two guys were just racing. Imagine the IRL having to start their race just moments after the Truck finish and having to top that battle.

The toughest racing in the world is the IRL -- the pencil-smooth tracks aren't there and each track has its own character -- Sao Paulo's concrete start-finish, Long Beach's Shoreline Drive, the sweeps of Barber, the canyon at Indy, the wild and crazy Texas battles that should start 30 minutes before sundown and have track conditions change through the transition, and the Loop-Chute of Watkins Glen, and character. No Tilkerings.

Darlington is a cool track but I see two potential problems: It is a NASCAR territory (allowing an IndyCar race there would be like allowing a NASCAR race on the streets of Long Beach) and owned by ISC, which has been known to do an almost deliberate poor job of promoting IndyCar races (Fontana, Michigan and Phoenix are examples) and seem to sabotage attendance in order to make the IndyCar series appear to be "bush league".

[Scotty G.]

Yeah, for the first 6 or so years, the IRL was basically bush league with shop built engine packages and two similar chassis and lesser drivers, then Ganassi and Penske joined the show and the ante was tripled.


And now the IRL is continuing to be bush league, with spec crate engines, one chassis that is almost 10 years old with drivers nobody gives a flying youknowwhat about with costs that are asinine.

Back in those years that were so "terrible", more people were watching on TV, more teams were competing at Indy, more American drivers were competing, all the races were on ABC/ESPN and costs were more in line with the level of popularity. And the racing action was IONS better then the crap we see today.

And Penske's 2 cars couldn't beat Panther Racing's one car when they first came over to the IRL. Today, you could put a monkey in a Penske car and finish in the top 5 in points. And Penske isn't even sponsored anymore.

[TURN3]

Today, you could put a monkey in a Penske car and finish in the top 5 in points.

C'mon a monkey? I don't know about that, lol.

[garyshell]

And now the IRL is continuing to be bush league, with spec crate engines, one chassis that is almost 10 years old with drivers nobody gives a flying youknowwhat about with costs that are asinine.

Back in those years that were so "terrible", more people were watching on TV, more teams were competing at Indy, more American drivers were competing, all the races were on ABC/ESPN and costs were more in line with the level of popularity. And the racing action was IONS better then the crap we see today.

And Penske's 2 cars couldn't beat Panther Racing's one car when they first came over to the IRL. Today, you could put a monkey in a Penske car and finish in the top 5 in points. And Penske isn't even sponsored anymore.


If it is all so bad, then why do you continue to torture yourself? :dozey:

Gary

[Easy Drifter]

Instead of his mother's milk I think Scotty G has been sucking lemons his entire life.
Nothing suits him. It is just one sour post after another.
I have never known such a negative person. :(

[call_me_andrew]

Darlington is a cool track but I see two potential problems: It is a NASCAR territory (allowing an IndyCar race there would be like allowing a NASCAR race on the streets of Long Beach) and owned by ISC, which has been known to do an almost deliberate poor job of promoting IndyCar races (Fontana, Michigan and Phoenix are examples) and seem to sabotage attendance in order to make the IndyCar series appear to be "bush league".

Yes, being in NASCAR territory is why no one showed up at Barber.


Don't worry; I agree IndyCars shouldn't race at tracks like Dover and Nashville Superspeedway. Any track that isn't surfaced with asphalt is to be avoided by IndyCar.

What's wrong with concrete?

[ICWS]

Yes, being in NASCAR territory is why no one showed up at Barber.

What I meant was Darlington Raceway is a NASCAR territory similar to how Long Beach is an IndyCar territory. My post had nothing to do with demographics and fan base. Barber on the other hand is a track that doesn't dedicate itself to one series and will support whatever series chooses to go there (IndyCar, Grand-Am, AMA Superbike, etc.). If IndyCar can convince the owners of Darlington Raceway that their cars are suitable for a race, then that's a plus for IndyCar. But IndyCar would have an easier time lining up oval races that are not established as NASCAR territory, such as New Hampshire, Las Vegas, Fontana, Michigan, Phoenix, etc. I don't think IndyCar can get to tracks like Darlington, Bristol, Martinsville, Daytona, Talladega, etc. since those are considered to be NASCAR's properties.



What's wrong with concrete?

IndyCar's history on concrete hasn't been that great. They had a couple miserable races at Dover and Nashville struggled to provide shows. With Nashville, the track seemed to provide just one groove so the races were more like parades.

[call_me_andrew]

With Nashville, the track seemed to provide just one groove so the races were more like parades.

When a concrete track is green the bottom line is always fastest. Once the bottom line starts to accumulate rubber it becomes very rough (unlike asphalt, rubber just builds up ontop of concrete) and drivers start moving up the track to find grip.

The only oval where the cars aren't so nimble that they must wash out to the wall is Indy. That's the first issue to adress before you have multiple grooves in the turns.

[px400r]

It is a NASCAR territory (allowing an IndyCar race there would be like allowing a NASCAR race on the streets of Long Beach)

Or allowing a NASCAR race at Road America?

[ICWS]

Or allowing a NASCAR race at Road America?

Road America has actually had a variety of racing series come to race there (SCCA, NASCAR Cup Series, CanAm, Trans-Am, IMSA, AMA, Formula 5000, Grand-Am and ALMS) so IndyCar wasn't the only series to race there, even though it was regarded as the main event. Darlington, however, has pretty much had only NASCAR races through its entire history (although USAC raced there in 1956 and the Silver Crown series has been racing there for the past 3 years).

[ICWS]

When a concrete track is green the bottom line is always fastest. Once the bottom line starts to accumulate rubber it becomes very rough (unlike asphalt, rubber just builds up ontop of concrete) and drivers start moving up the track to find grip.

The only oval where the cars aren't so nimble that they must wash out to the wall is Indy. That's the first issue to adress before you have multiple grooves in the turns.

Nashville, like Dover, would be good tracks for IndyCar to race for the purpose of having diverse ovals, but I hope IndyCar's new car can overcome 100% throttle racing and Firestone could work on their tires to prevent single-groove racing. These two things should happen before they consider going back to those tracks. Dover is interesting because while NASCAR is the only series there, Delaware isn't considered to be a NASCAR state so an improved IndyCar series could bring fans there and the track is independently owned instead of being owned by ISC or SMI (although SMI has been rumored to be purchasing it).

[ICWS]

"Yes, being in NASCAR territory is why no one showed up at Barber." - call_me_andrew


What I meant was Darlington Raceway is a track that dedicates itself to running NASCAR races similar to how Long Beach dedicates itself to the IndyCar race. My post had nothing to do with demographics and fan base. Barber on the other hand is a track that doesn't dedicate itself to one series and will support whatever series chooses to go there (IndyCar, Grand-Am, AMA Superbike, etc.). If IndyCar can convince the owners of Darlington Raceway that their cars are suitable for a race, then that's a plus for IndyCar. But IndyCar would have an easier time lining up oval races that are not established as NASCAR territory, such as New Hampshire, Las Vegas, Fontana, Michigan, Phoenix, etc. I don't think IndyCar can get to tracks like Darlington, Bristol, Martinsville, Daytona, Talladega, etc. since those tracks seem 100% committed to NASCAR races (Daytona could be a possibility if IndyCar ran the road course, but an oval race there would be pushing it).

[Mark in Oshawa]

And now the IRL is continuing to be bush league, with spec crate engines, one chassis that is almost 10 years old with drivers nobody gives a flying youknowwhat about with costs that are asinine. Ummm Tony George brought us to this point. You pointed to him a few months back as being right with the formation of the IRL....


Back in those years that were so "terrible", more people were watching on TV, more teams were competing at Indy, more American drivers were competing, all the races were on ABC/ESPN and costs were more in line with the level of popularity. And the racing action was IONS better then the crap we see today.

No...it was less than the series CART put on TV every year with GROWING ratings right up until 1995..mmmmmm what happened THEN???


And Penske's 2 cars couldn't beat Panther Racing's one car when they first came over to the IRL. Today, you could put a monkey in a Penske car and finish in the top 5 in points. And Penske isn't even sponsored anymore.

Penske has owned the series with Ganassi pretty much since they showed up. Nice try Scott...Penske on occasion has an off year historically...but how many Indy 500 championship's does Penske have? How many for Ganassi? Then...how many did Panther have once the top guys started coming back to the Speedway from CART?

[px400r]

Road America has actually had a variety of racing series come to race there (SCCA, NASCAR Cup Series, CanAm, Trans-Am, IMSA, AMA, Formula 5000, Grand-Am and ALMS) so IndyCar wasn't the only series to race there, even though it was regarded as the main event.

NASCAR ran one race, way back in 1956. All the others you named are road racing series, so it's not unusual to find them at RA.

[V12]

When you have standardised circuits, standardised cars, engines, tyres, you get standardised racing, and the only way around it is with stupid add-ons like push-to-pass, mandatory use of different compound tyres, reverse grids, success ballast, all that BS.

It's all very nice to have the cars very close in speed in a spec-formula, but generally speaking, for a pass to be performed, the car behind has to be going fast enough to go around the car in front of it. Yes you can mandate a brick of a car that punches enough of a hole in the air to allow slipstreaming to have a significant effect, but to me constant passing and repassing at will is just as predictable as a follow-the-leader parade, because the bulk of the race is totally insignificant as it's all about placing your car and being in the right place at the right time on the last lap. And I'm not saying that doesn't take skill because it does, but it's a different skill to what it should be about, driving your car quicker than everyone else.

People talk about a "level playing field" but to me a level playing field should simply mean the same rules for everyone, rather than everyone being completely equalised because then there is less competition. And it's not like a spec car has stopped Penske & Ganassi from dominating anyway.

To be fair though it's hardly an IndyCar-specific problem, I could quite easily cross-post this in the F1 forum and swap "spec car" for "equalized engines and control tyres" and Penske and Ganassi for Ferrari, McLaren, Red Bull.

[Mark in Oshawa]

When you have standardised circuits, standardised cars, engines, tyres, you get standardised racing, and the only way around it is with stupid add-ons like push-to-pass, mandatory use of different compound tyres, reverse grids, success ballast, all that BS.

It's all very nice to have the cars very close in speed in a spec-formula, but generally speaking, for a pass to be performed, the car behind has to be going fast enough to go around the car in front of it. Yes you can mandate a brick of a car that punches enough of a hole in the air to allow slipstreaming to have a significant effect, but to me constant passing and repassing at will is just as predictable as a follow-the-leader parade, because the bulk of the race is totally insignificant as it's all about placing your car and being in the right place at the right time on the last lap. And I'm not saying that doesn't take skill because it does, but it's a different skill to what it should be about, driving your car quicker than everyone else.

People talk about a "level playing field" but to me a level playing field should simply mean the same rules for everyone, rather than everyone being completely equalised because then there is less competition. And it's not like a spec car has stopped Penske & Ganassi from dominating anyway.

To be fair though it's hardly an IndyCar-specific problem, I could quite easily cross-post this in the F1 forum and swap "spec car" for "equalized engines and control tyres" and Penske and Ganassi for Ferrari, McLaren, Red Bull.

Quit making sense!!!! WE cant have that!

[ICWS]

NASCAR ran one race, way back in 1956. All the others you named are road racing series, so it's not unusual to find them at RA.

My point was Road America isn't as established as IndyCar's property while Darlington is 99.9% NASCAR's property. Road America, like I pointed out, has had a variety of racing series come there so it doesn't dedicate itself full-time to American open-wheel racing. Even if the track had just one Cup race at Road America, that's still more flexible than having zero non-NASCAR/USAC Silver Crown races at Darlington.

NASCAR wouldn't be having Busch/Truck races at Road America this year if The Milwaukee Mile didn't have the problems they had. I wish IndyCar was smart enough to have done that, but hopefully they could add both Milwaukee and Elkhart Lake to a future schedule.