Sodium and water

[SVXphile]

McLaren's Ron Dennis on NASCAR...

http://sports.espn.go.com/rpm/news/story?id=1739124

First, let me say that I attended two F1 races in my life, one a British Grand Prix at Brands Hatch and the other a BGP at Silverstone. I also watched the USAC Indycars (pre CART and IRL days) with Foyt and Unser Sr. and Rick Mears etc. at Silverstone. One of my great thrills was to watch Niki Lauda drift his 312T Ferrari thru the last turn before Hanger Straight at Silverstone. Amazing car control....

Having said that, Dennis can't understand NASCAR any better than most of us can a cricket match. He says he has a better show? F1? Excuse me while I give my ribs a rest...SHOW? Sorry, we have the corner on showmanship. He's British for Pete's sake, God love 'um! American racing has always been roundy-round racing! Its a cultural thing, like which side of the car the steering wheel is on. Maybe its because Americans like to see most or all of the track when they buy a ticket. Maybe its a generation of people grew up seeing names like Foyt and Andretti and Unser going wheel to wheel lap after lap. Maybe its because on any given night, on some hometown dirt bullring, even the little guy can sneak in a win or two. Maybe its because you have more lead changes in a 50 lap Silver Crown feature than a whole season of F1.

(Let's see, we kinda invented drag racing too right? How boring....no turns at all! But you do get a new match race every few seconds)

Of course Mr. Dennis would LOVE to have the marketing success of NASCAR; so would the IRL and what's left of CART.

Personally, I love to watch them all....Solberg flying his Subaru through the snowy forests, Tony Stewart at the Chili Bowl, John Force at the Nationals, Paul Tracy at Cleveland, Jeff Gordon at Bristol, the Rolex 24 hours, LeMans, Monaco, Harry's SVX at Winchester....

Man I'm glad the racing season is back!

I'll just back out now, and enjoy the responses.

(I feel like I just dropped hamburger in a Piranha tank)

Don

[SVXphile]

Well, I thought it would generate some responses.

I guess everyone is watching their favorite stuff on Speed Channel.



I think it would be cool....just once.... if after all the work over the winter.... the new F1 cars this year....Williams, McLaren, Renault, Ferrari...with either brand of tire...would be almost identical on the track.

Then sit back and watch the DRIVERS actually duke it out this year.

At least they have gotten rid of that stupid drive thru penalty that probably cost Montoya any chance at the championship last year.
Now if they are true to form, they will figure some new way to mess up the racing.

Don

[lee]

Saw your post, just didn't know what to say - I argue one side with myself then the other.

On one hand making the cars competitive with each other (NASCAR) makes for good driver-to-driver racing. On the other it stifles the brand differences and to some extent, technology. I liked it better when Ford & Chrysler went at it with things like the Superbird.

I couldn't imagine NHRA (in the old days anyway) making a Ford have a restrictor plate and not Chevy just so the racing would be close. Of course now they give FWD cars a break, which IMHO sucks - weight vice cu. in. seems enough for me.

Maybe (not really) they should put a financial cap on the teams (like has been tried in a variety of other sports). Then Jordan, et al, would have a chance against McLaren, Ferrari, Williams.

Personally, I find big-time NASCAR boring, but love outlaw, midgets, late-model, etc. I think it must be the same genetic thing that makes me not like pro-football, but enjoy high-school football games so much.

[SVXphile]

Good points Lee. A spending cap in F1....now there is an idea. Everyone has the same budget to work with.....does that include drivers too? I'd say Michael's paycheck alone could help fund a small team!

By the way, after Christmas Jean and I visited Bald Head and Oak Island lighthouses. That completes North Carolina for us. Now we have to start working our way south back in your direction!

All the best! Don

[lee]

Michael's paycheck plus endorsements would for sure. I can't remember where, but some TV show said he was the world's highest paid athlete (w/endorsements), pulling down an estimated $3M per week last year.

I'd love to have you visit again. Getting on the Cape is getting interesting these days. One day last week took me 30 minutes to get thru the gate. If things get worse it will be like entering an nuke facility or an embassy overseas, mirror scans underneath, etc.

They did have a drawing on base a month or two ago and let 50 employees climb the lighthouse. One of those who did told me how impressed she was with the view. Kinda felt sorry for her (admin type, never gets out of the office), the launch complex towers are considerably higher - she should have been looking in, not out (but what do I know?).

[Mr. Pockets]

I'm going to start off by saying that I am a huge F1 fan. If my fandom was somehow suddenly added to my weight, I wouldn't be able to get out of the house.

And I can't stand NASCAR. Nearly everything about it bothers the hell out of me. If it keeps going the way it's going, in less than ten years' time we'll be talking about NASCAR like we do the WWE.

"Oh, come on - you know those races aren't real."

I try to read about NASCAR because I don't want to hate it any more - I want to be able to hold a conversation with a NASCAR fan without cringing. But I can't. The more I read about it the less I like it.

Okay, so that went on much longer than I intended. Don, I don't see a problem with Ron's quotes. Yeah, he says F1 has a better show (and I agree), but what you conveniently ignored is that he also said "If something is as successful as that then you are a fool if you don't go and try and understand what the ingredients are."

I don't like the way the article is presented with that headline. It's intentionally flammatory, and NASCAR fans everywhere are no doubt echoing your comments, despite Ron's balanced argument.

As I've said, I'm a huge F1 fan. Ron Dennis, like Jacques Villeneuve and several others, are on my list of people who need to 'shut the hell up.' But he has a point. Maybe they should take a look at NASCAR and figure out if anything could apply to F1's marketing and presentation. I think the two species are incompatible.

As for the show being more 'interesting' to begin with, I already find it interesting - and so do millions upon millions of people around the world. This article makes it look like nobody in the world cares about F1, but NASCAR has 75 million fans.

I haven't seen viewership figures for a recent year, but if I recall correctly, in 2001 or 2002 some 50 billion total viewers watched the F1 season on TV. Even if you divide that crazy number (roughly nine times the Earth's population) by the number of races those years (assuming that the same people watched all those races), you find that there are at least 312 million F1 fans in the world. I imagine there are way more than that.

The truth is that F1 isn't popular in the US, but it's the friggin' Super Bowl in every other country it visits. Do they want to somehow increase interest in the US? Of ocurse they do - we've got money. But unless they decide to run on oval tracsk, with hardware to make the Ferraris run as slowly as the Jordans (calling Minardi dead last is soooo 2003 - Jordan's the one to pick on these days), it's not going to happen.

Back to improving the show, the FIA is trying to do that. I think they're doing about as well as can be expected. The problem is that these guys are so bleeding dge, so fast, that even the slightest difference in their level of performance results in a huge difference in lap times. The only way you're going to change that is by cutting their rocket-ship technology down to Formula-Vee speeds.

Ferrari have dominated F1 for the past several years. As a fan of all the teams, I've enjoyed it thoroughly. I don't want the FIA to do something to hinder their dominance - I want the other teams to step up to the friggin' plate and do it themselves. Now that would be something.

Those other teams did a lot better last year. Let's see how they do this year.

As for budget caps, it'll never happen and it'll never work. My two-part argument goes like this:

1. The teams will never agree to it.

2. Even if somehow it was imposed on them, the fight would immediatelybe over how much spending over the imposed budgets each team is doing. Because they'd all do it. All of them. They'd have to overspend just to keep up with everybody else's overspending.

The only way costs are going to come down is if teams do it themselves, voluntarily. Or their sponsors all cut back, one by one. Maybe it will happen. But hte only way they're going to spend less is if they have less to spend to begin with.

Okay, so those of you who are still with me, here's my one recent thought on 'balancing' the teams this year:

Ballast.

I hate ballast. I hate watching a sports car series and knowing that the guy in the lad is probably there because the guy behind him hhas 80kg more balast in his car. Horse puckey. But in F1, the cars aren't balanced evnly. F1 is not a spec series. So maybe balast would help even them out a little.

To tell you the truth, I htink if Ferrari had 100kg more ballast in their car by the end of the season, they'd still be winning. Michael would amputate his legs to partially compensate. They're that good and they're that determined. Until some team is equally good and determined, they're not going to compare.

Okay, I'm done. I really am.

[Andy]

Originally posted by Mr. Pockets
I'm going to start off by saying that I am a huge F1 fan. If my fandom was somehow suddenly added to my weight, I wouldn't be able to get out of the house.

And I can't stand NASCAR. Nearly everything about it bothers the hell out of me. If it keeps going the way it's going, in less than ten years' time we'll be talking about NASCAR like we do the WWE.

"Oh, come on - you know those races aren't real."

I try to read about NASCAR because I don't want to hate it any more - I want to be able to hold a conversation with a NASCAR fan without cringing. But I can't. The more I read about it the less I like it.

Okay, so that went on much longer than I intended. Don, I don't see a problem with Ron's quotes. Yeah, he says F1 has a better show (and I agree), but what you conveniently ignored is that he also said "If something is as successful as that then you are a fool if you don't go and try and understand what the ingredients are."

I don't like the way the article is presented with that headline. It's intentionally flammatory, and NASCAR fans everywhere are no doubt echoing your comments, despite Ron's balanced argument.

As I've said, I'm a huge F1 fan. Ron Dennis, like Jacques Villeneuve and several others, are on my list of people who need to 'shut the hell up.' But he has a point. Maybe they should take a look at NASCAR and figure out if anything could apply to F1's marketing and presentation. I think the two species are incompatible.

As for the show being more 'interesting' to begin with, I already find it interesting - and so do millions upon millions of people around the world. This article makes it look like nobody in the world cares about F1, but NASCAR has 75 million fans.

I haven't seen viewership figures for a recent year, but if I recall correctly, in 2001 or 2002 some 50 billion total viewers watched the F1 season on TV. Even if you divide that crazy number (roughly nine times the Earth's population) by the number of races those years (assuming that the same people watched all those races), you find that there are at least 312 million F1 fans in the world. I imagine there are way more than that.

The truth is that F1 isn't popular in the US, but it's the friggin' Super Bowl in every other country it visits. Do they want to somehow increase interest in the US? Of ocurse they do - we've got money. But unless they decide to run on oval tracsk, with hardware to make the Ferraris run as slowly as the Jordans (calling Minardi dead last is soooo 2003 - Jordan's the one to pick on these days), it's not going to happen.

Back to improving the show, the FIA is trying to do that. I think they're doing about as well as can be expected. The problem is that these guys are so bleeding dge, so fast, that even the slightest difference in their level of performance results in a huge difference in lap times. The only way you're going to change that is by cutting their rocket-ship technology down to Formula-Vee speeds.

Ferrari have dominated F1 for the past several years. As a fan of all the teams, I've enjoyed it thoroughly. I don't want the FIA to do something to hinder their dominance - I want the other teams to step up to the friggin' plate and do it themselves. Now that would be something.

Those other teams did a lot better last year. Let's see how they do this year.

As for budget caps, it'll never happen and it'll never work. My two-part argument goes like this:

1. The teams will never agree to it.

2. Even if somehow it was imposed on them, the fight would immediatelybe over how much spending over the imposed budgets each team is doing. Because they'd all do it. All of them. They'd have to overspend just to keep up with everybody else's overspending.

The only way costs are going to come down is if teams do it themselves, voluntarily. Or their sponsors all cut back, one by one. Maybe it will happen. But hte only way they're going to spend less is if they have less to spend to begin with.

Okay, so those of you who are still with me, here's my one recent thought on 'balancing' the teams this year:

Ballast.

I hate ballast. I hate watching a sports car series and knowing that the guy in the lad is probably there because the guy behind him hhas 80kg more balast in his car. Horse puckey. But in F1, the cars aren't balanced evnly. F1 is not a spec series. So maybe balast would help even them out a little.

To tell you the truth, I htink if Ferrari had 100kg more ballast in their car by the end of the season, they'd still be winning. Michael would amputate his legs to partially compensate. They're that good and they're that determined. Until some team is equally good and determined, they're not going to compare.

Okay, I'm done. I really am.

yes

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally posted by Andy



yes

A man of many words.

It occurred to me, in the shower, that I was a decimal point off and that 50 billion viewers divided by 16 races should have resulted in over 3 billion viewers per race. Even if you said that there are two televised days of events on each race weekend (qualifying Saturday, race Sunday), that's still 1.5 billion people, assuming each person watches both days. Which I doubt.

Conservatively, 1.5 billion F1 fans who get it, compared to 75 million NASCAR fans. Because nobody else in the world gets NASCAR.

It doesn't seem to me that F1 needs to increase the spectacle.

Some nascar races like bristol are alright, because theres lots of wrecks and a bigger chance of someone getting hurt

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally posted by SVX26517
Some nascar races like bristol are alright, because theres lots of wrecks and a bigger chance of someone getting hurt

That's what I can't take about NASCAR - the focus on the wrecks. I actually did catch about fifteen minutes of the first NASCAR truck race, because I knew the Toyota teams qualified really well. Almost immediately there was a huge accident, involving about 20 cars.

They milked the hell out of that accident, showing it from every friggin' angle possible.

And that's where I left it, because for the rest of the time I was watching, they were busy cleaning it all up, replaying the crash twenty or thirty times, analyzing who hit who and such.

NASCAR cultivates wrecks intentionally. I know NASCAR fans like it, but I don't. If the trade-off for so many lead changes is such a focus, you can have it. When somebody passes for the lead in F1, it friggin' means something, man. It's not just because the rules make sure that nobody has an advantage over anybody else.

I will say that I thought it was cool seeing the teams trying to resurrect some of those mangled cars. Although, while all those cars are slowly turning laps under yellow (which still only took them, what, 30 seconds a lap?), how many laps down were those guys in the pits?

[SVXphile]

I had forgotten, when I posted the article, that the greatest living NASCAR hater out there was Mr. Pockets! I seem to remember a similar outpouring of intense feeling on this subject a year or so back....good to hear your views!

I don't have much to add....everyone is entitled to an opinion....and the best ones are ones that are backed with facts.
Of course one man's fact is another's opinion.

<It doesn't seem to me that F1 needs to increase the spectacle>

Ron Dennis seems to think so. Either that or he is just envious of any money that Bernie hasn't already taken control of!

I love F1 too....enough to have bought tickets a couple of times. I watch or tape as many races as I can. Each time I hope for some excitement, and I am not disappointed.....all 10 or 15 seconds of it....usually a blotched pit stop or two. That's OK....it is a different kind of racing, and as you so well pointed out, is the summit of racing technology. The engines turn rpms that only electric motors can keep up with. The G-forces approach a fighter pilots, and the carbon and titanium would make the space shuttle envious. And if you have deep pockets, like Ferrari, you can hire and keep the best drivers, engineers, and crew....sort of the Yankees of F1. My problem with it is that after a few laps, everyone is strung out and most of the action ceases.
I have honestly gone out and done yardwork and come in and found no change in the top 10 short of time gained or lost in pit stops. Passing is almost an unknown science in F1; the drivers get so little practice at it. It is little wonder that the one big opportunity to pass is at the start.....everyone knowing that it is "now or never" and there are parts flying everywhere before, and at, the first turn. Good grief....Juan Pablo DARES rub against Reubens and gets a penalty for rough driving! (take those officials and strap them into a sprint car and let them learn about rough driving).

I have no idea how to improve the racing. Perhaps some spending limit is not the answer. I don't like the ballast idea either. You say the teams wouldn't stand for some changes...perhaps not. But most would welcome some way to be at the cutting edge and cut costs at the same time. When I was overseas watching the races, the vast majority of the teams....and they had a BUNCH of teams back then...were running with Cosworth power. Lots of different chassis, but other than Ferrari and later Renault, mostly the same engines. The competition was fierce for a short time. The creativity was amazing....the six-wheeled Tyrell, the Brabham fan-car, the Lotus ground effects and wings....wings located in places you could never imagine. Without going to some spec formula, (no) I don't know if that level of competition will ever be seen again.

And maybe that is the heart of the matter....everyones definition of competition. Is it nearly identical cars in a circle, or very different cars on a road course? Is it rally cars racing against the clock....or trying to coax out that last fractional mph at Bonneville? Is it lasting....man and machine....for 24 hours? Is it on dirt....gravel....asphalt....concrete....or snow? Is it side-by-side at 320mph on a quarter mile.....or miles of geology in the Dakar?

The Grand Prix circuit is a world circuit....and with it a world audience and one of the best television packages money can buy.
Just ask Bernie.
For NASCAR to have a much more limited viewing area....basically the U.S....and to be as popular as it is....well, THAT'S what torques Ron's jaws! I disagree Pockets... I don't see any balanced arguement....just a nose-in-the-air "we're better than you"...."WE put on the best show"...coming from one side of his mouth, and "man I covet your marketing success!" out of the other. He can't stomach the fact that the success might be coming from the PRODUCT...the one he can't stand? A product that is no longer a "good 'ol boys" sport, but one racing, and followed, from coast to coast....from south to north?

The beauty of racing is that there is so much to choose from, and if you don't like a particular kind of racing....that's fine. I would just say to people.... don't trash it like Ron Dennis. It may not be your particular cup of high octane, but if it has fans....lots of fans...it must be doing SOMETHING right.


Don

[Landshark]

NASCAR = big long boring left turn. <yawn>

[SVXphile]

I just caught another post and felt I had to add my two coppers worth here. I think this came up the last time this was discussed, so its only fair to mention it again.

<NASCAR cultivates wrecks intentionally. I know NASCAR fans like it, but I don't. If the trade-off for so many lead changes is such a focus, you can have it>

I live in NASCAR country. I grew up so close to the Bristol track that I could hear the cars run from the front porch. I have had friends that were as much of fan of NASCAR as you are Pockets, of F1. I have never met a fan that went to a race wanting to see a wreck. "Hot damn Billy Bob, I sure hopes old Dale slams Terry into the wall again tonight! Want a beer?" Sorry....put that stereotype right in there with mountain people still using outhouses with a picture of Devil Anse Hatfield on the wall. Look, if you race in a circle that means lots of traffic and lots of chances to make a mistake. ANY KIND OF OVAL RACING. (check midgets & sprints) Sometimes its not even a mistake, you deliberately bounce or bump your way to the next position (especially if you have fenders) simply because you can. Tight racing= wrecks. Simple isn't it? Don't get near each other= no wrecks. (there will be a quiz) If there is going to be wrecks, build you cars as strong as you can to keep the drivers safe. Build strong safe cars? Maybe they can bang a little harder on each other. (Well, they could in the old days anyway. Now, a bent fender can rub a tire and cost someone a race. Bump someone with the nose of your car? On fast tracks that changes the aero package, and with it the handling of the car. Bump and bang at your own risk)
With the COST of the cars these days, and the SPEEDS attained on even small tracks....NO ONE IS CULTIVATING WRECKS OK? THEY JUST HAPPEN! IT IS THE NATURE OF THE BEAST! Big E and Adam Petty did not die in a soap opera. All it would take would be one driver going to the press and saying "You know, I thought the guys in the trailer were gonna chew me out for rough driving....instead they said for me to put him in the wall next time!" and it would be the hottest thing thing in the news since Martha Stewart dumped cancer drug stock.
It hasn't happened.

<"Oh, come on - you know those races aren't real." >
Oh, you mean not as real as Michael pulling over for Reubens?
Staged finishes?
Not as real as "team orders"? Uh huh...

This is not a wrestler taking a fall on orders. Drivers are COMPETITORS not ACTORS. (well, they didn't USE to be. With all these commercials today, I don't know... )
Has there ever been cheating? Duh....Do birds fly?
Have you read about the history of cheating in F1?

An injured driver costs the team EVERYTHING. Example: Sterling Marlin's injury.....cost the team the championship. Yes the networks probably spend too much time looking at them....they just might want to show the fans that their favorite driver is OK and how well the safety system worked, but it is also human nature for some folks to be attracted to accidents....that doesn't need explaining. NASCAR doesn't own the store on that you know....do you remember how long they aimed a camera at the scene of Ayrton Senna's wreck? Or replay the first lap wrecks in F1 over and over? Yes there is a fraction of ALL racing fans that perhaps live for the wrecks....but they are the minority. Hopefully in ALL racing....a minority. People take that "gladiator in the arena" thing a bit too far...

Sorry Pockets....nothing personal here. You can take Nascar or leave it....that's certainly your choice. But this "intentional wrecking" thing (and I have heard it before) pisses me off almost as much as Nascar does you.

Don

[SVXphile]

I'm not going to argue with someone about what's boring. If 35 cars wheel to wheel for a couple of hours is boring, fine. As I said, to each his own. I don't find every Nascar race on the tube a "must see" by any means. But...

Boring might also be sitting on a turn of a road course, watching the lead pack come by every minute and a half or so, and getting to say to your wife "Oh look....Niki's in the lead! I wonder where he passed Hunt? Speaking of Hunt....where is he? What happened? Oh.... the announcer just said he blew up on the other side of the course. Darn....would you hand me a sandwich dear?"

Or waiting for the next rally car to FLASH by?

(at least we TELEVISION viewers get in-car cameras, helicopter cams, and lots of roadside views. The spectator along the road is not so fortunate. However they DO have one advantage....getting hit in the head by a rock from Solberg's Impreza! Or...Remember the crewman who found a finger stuck in a spoiler in Portugal? Now THAT is getting close to your racing! )

As you see, boring comes in many flavors. Don

[lee]

Originally posted by SVXphile
...snip......Remember the crewman who found a finger stuck in a spoiler in Portugal? Now THAT is getting close to your racing! )

...snip...

Don,

I didn't see/read about that, which finger was it? I mean this could be "close" to racing, or it could be a political protest of the polluting effects of automobiles (noise & air, etc).

Sorry, that wasn't called for, just popped into my head & I couldn't help myself - see sig below.

I'm sticking to my own sense of what's fun (as everybody else will too, duh!) I don't watch college or pro-football. See the recent college coach in the news & on probation - making $1.6M/year, while profs at the same school are probably making $60K. I seriously doubt a front-running/funded NASCAR team would have a driver with a speech impediment because of the impact to sponsor PR. Michael in F-1 won't interview on Speed because of an exclusive German TV contract....

Last big pro-event I went to was in the late 70s, 12 Hours of Sebring. I have driven sports cars or coupes for a lot of years, but man that thing was boring. Last roundy-round race I got real excited at was when my brother-in-law was still driving bottom-tier late-model stock cars.

I admire the technology in top fuel, F-1, WRC, etc, but there's just too much money at stake for it to be real for me - I know in my heart the drivers do their best, but it does ALL feel like there's a bit of WWF in it.

WOW! what a great rant thread. I feel better already