NASCAR rant: Not drinking the Daytona 500 Kool-Aid

Not so much.

2007 Rolex 24 at Daytona: 24-hour race (668 laps completed this year) among 69 teams in two classes. At the end the top two teams overall were separated by ... oh, less than 15 seconds. Had three teams on the lead lap and battling nose-to-tail at mid-morning before one had a brake problem and ended up two laps back while making repairs. Back in the GT class, the top two teams (one running a 911, the other a Pontiac GXP.R) were separated by just over 7 seconds.

F1? May the best engineer win.

 

One thought in general: The hatred some of you have for NASCAR is very similar to the hatred that some have for the NBA.

Or the NHL.

Or MLB.

Or the NFL.

Or soccer.

Or Republicans.

Or George Bush.

Or Hillary Clinton.

Or liberals.

Or toilet paper over, not under.

Whatever.

 

Congrats. You found one example of the opposite.

I didn't say it never happens, but it's rare.

Go back to 2006 at Daytona and both classes had nearly a one minute gap at the front.

 

I don't like any of that when it comes off as contrived as NASCAR races increasingly seem to be.

If the Christian Laettner shot happened every game, wouldn't it get old? What made that special is it doesn't happen everyday. There is nothing special about a bunched-up NASCAR field at the end of the race, it happens all the time whether by the incompetence of the drivers to not control themselves when the chips are down or the cynical decisions of the race officials to throw a yellow flag if there's so much as a freaking washer on the course. You'd think NASCAR fans would see through this shit, and increasingly, many long-time NASCAR fans -- and I am one -- are seeing through it.

It's not quite pro wrestling on wheels, but it's dangerously close.

 

A bunched-up field may happen often..but a pass like that? Not so much. Sorry Bubs.

 

A pass like that? Are you kidding? Did anything Harvick did Sunday take 1/100th the amount of skill and courage that Sam Hornish Jr. used to pass Marco Andretti at the end of last year's Indianapolis 500? Hornish turned a final lap at 219 mph to pass Andretti with 150 yards to go through a hole on the track not much wider than his car. That was more sensational than any show NASCAR puts on.

And here's the thing: NASCAR knows it. I couldn't agree more with what Bubbler wrote in his original thread. I strongly believe NASCAR knows (and actually is frightened) that it has crested a wave. The things it does to foster, or ensure, competition would laughable if used in other sports. Imagine the Lucky Dog rule in the NFL: "You're behind, 28-14, but let's just give you, oh, 10 points, to make it closer." The points system is a travesty, and the Chase was only devised to keep people from drifting off to the NFL (and don't let them tell you otherwise).

But the problem is much more basic (and something Alma touched on): the races are terrible to watch. I'm willing to give NASCAR more of the benefit of the doubt than someone who says they run around in circles, but there's really not much going on out there -- unless someone bumps into someone else. Because the cars are so close, that creates bigger smoky wrecks. I know it's hard to drive a racecar, but I don't think the skill these drivers have conveys to compelling television. Watching a race in person is even worse. I actually think NASCAR plays to the drivers' personalities because it covers up the fact that the competition is not so good.

It's all so tricked up. The finish of Sunday's race was a perfect example. They should have thrown the yellow before Harvick beat Martin to the line, but they didn't, because a close finish is like a money shot in porn. (Later, they said the race was over before the end, and that Harvick was ahead of Martin at the time on that spot on the track, but I didn't see a whole lot of evidence supporting it. Harvick never saw a yellow.) It's so perfect NASCAR calls it a "show," because that's what it is: a high-speed driving exhibition, not necessarily a contest. To have 25 cars (or whatever) within two seconds of each other at the end of 500 miles tells me something about how contrived and manipulated all of it is.

 

So what's your perfect world? You want quarter-laps between cars? There's a reason I watch the race, but not the qualifying, y'know?

 

I love how the open-wheel guys continue to look down their noses at NASCAR...right about the same time open-wheel drivers are trying NASCAR. Even my buddy Bubbler -- come on, man!

Yes. Did you see Harvick's pass on the outside, where he kept it floored despite Kyle Busch trying to come up and block?

 

I'll take the finish of last year's Indianapolis 500, the greatest finish in the history of that race, over this year's Daytona 500.
I'll take the finish of the 1976 Daytona 500 over 1979 or this year -- the one exception to the "freeze at yellow" rule NASCAR finally adopted, lest someone get killed.
I'll take non-plate racing over plate racing -- go to 4 cylinders if necessary to avoid the bunching.
I'll take non-aero stock cars (see 1985 and prior) over what we have now, which will also decrease the bunching.
I'll take the current restart at yellows, if only because Bobby Unser figured out how to beat the pacer lights, though I'd prefer all the cars in one line, and, while we're at it, no more lucky dog.
I'll also take Ken Squier and David Hobbs in the booth, thank you.
And I'll probably get nothing and not like it.

 

Ike, I was talking strictly NASCAR. Hornish's move was amazing. But it's different styles of racing, passes are different.

Bubbler is bitching about NASCAR bunching the field. Has nothing to do with Hornish-Andretti.

 

So you like the mystery "debris" cautions with 20 laps left that bunch up the fields -- or the wrecks way behind the leaders (with no impact on the front of the field) that bring out cautions with 10 laps left? You think that makes this a more exciting and legitimate sport? Or the Lucky Dog rule, which vaults a driver who is out of the race right back into it? Or a points system that rewards "consistency" over "excellence?"

What I'd like to see at a NASCAR race is two cars, maybe three or four (not 25), racing to the finish. That's kind of what happened in the old days. I think it's techologically possible, but, no, NASCAR has to tout the fact that 36 cars were on the lead lap at the end of a race with 36 lead changes (most of them in the pits) -- and, hey, doesn't that make it a great race?

As Bubbler pointed out, these finishes feel artificial and orchestrated. The whole series feels artificial and orchestrated -- carefully marketed entertainment in the guise of sport. Harvick won the race, in large part, because he had drafting help from other cars, and Martin lost his. I guess what I'd like to see is a race determined by skill and horsepower, not by aerodynamics and a rule book that NASCAR tinkers with every other week to keep the competition close.

 

Nobody likes the debris cautions, don't be stupid. And wrecks behind the leaders with 10 laps left sure as shit will have an impact when the leaders are back around there in 20 seconds or so.

You guys all are taking a black and white look at this. Are there finishes that are orchestrated? I can't say yes, because I'm not on NASCAR's payroll to know how things go. However, to say all you want is ONE race with 3 or 4 cars racing to the finish is obscenely overgeneralized.