[DOF_power]

MILLER: A Brief History of CART
Robin Miller

04/16/2008 - 03:30 AM
Indianapolis, Ind.

At its peak - arguably 1993, when then-F1 world champion Nigel Mansell came stateside - CART had it all: big crowds, top sponsors and a global following. (LAT Photo) » More Photos

It began as a common sense plan to take control of open wheel racing and ended 29 years later in bankruptcy.



In between, there were 452 races, 451 marketing directors, 12 presidents, 12 champions, two title sponsors and one really good idea.



Among its highlights: bringing races to the streets of major cities, creating the most diverse series in the world and taking safety to a new plateau.



Among its failures: the staggering lack of leadership, the greed of going public, the many conflicts of interest and the total ineptness of supposed smart businessmen to manage a company.
In many ways, Championship Auto Racing Teams/Champ Car represented the best and worst of motorsports in North America.
When it makes its last laps Sunday at Long Beach, we’ll look back on what it was, what it almost became and what it turned into.


Thirty years after Dan Gurney crafted his “White Paper” and called out his fellow owners to take control of their destiny, CART/Champ Car is history. Twelve years after Tony George created the Indy Racing League, the car owners threw in the towel and made him King.



Now there’s finally one series again but it’s so far behind NASCAR you can’t even see Kyle Petty’s bumper.


“It’s sad, no doubt, but Indy-car racing had more potential in 1979 than NASCAR and had open wheel been given equal leadership, IndyCar would still be bigger today than NASCAR,” said Gurney, whose contributions as a driver and constructor are second to none in this country.

Gurney's famous "white paper" triggered the birth of CART in 1979, but years of mismanagement meant his vision for the sport never fully materialized. (LAT Photo) » More Photos

“Now it’s just limping along and that’s one of the great crimes of the ages.”
Gurney took time out from building Eagles and chasing races to write a seven-page manifesto in late 1978 on what was wrong with Indy-car racing and what it desperately needed.



Under the United States Auto Club’s reign, Indy cars were controlled by a board of directors that either had no skin in the game, no clue about the costs, no vision for the future or all three.

Purses were small, costs were escalating, television money was paltry, sanction fees were laughable and there was no marketing, per se, of the series.



Gurney advocated staying under USAC’s banner but only if it endorsed letting the owners renegotiate the TV contract with the Indianapolis Motor Speedway in addition to asking for the purse (a ridiculous $1 million at the time) to be doubled. He also wanted to ramp up the advertising/marketing department, be allowed access to the books at all tracks and be involved in all negotiations.

He suggested tracks, promoters, teams and the sanctioning body worked together instead of carving each other up.
Naturally, this fell on deaf ears so CART was born in March of 1979 at Phoenix (Gordon Johncock was the winner). It had the old USAC blue bloods like Pat Patrick, Roger Penske, Bob Fletcher, Jim Hall, Jerry O’Connell and Gurney before eventually picking up sports car mavens like Carl Haas, Paul Newman, Jim Trueman, Rick Galles and Doug Shierson.



Much like the CART/IRL war in 1996, CART sported most of the big names (USAC was called A.J. & the Seven Dwarfs) in 1979 and when PPG Industries came aboard as the title sponsor, the car owners suddenly had a foothold. (PPG was also referred to as Patrick, Penske and God, by the way).



There was a brief truce in 1980 when the first five races were run together under the CRL (Championship Racing League) banner with Patrick and Penske on the board. But when then IMS boss John Cooper threatened to shop around for a new sanctioning body, USAC dumped Patrick and Penske and the war resumed.



It was all over by 1982 as USAC was left with only Indianapolis, while CART ran the rest of the races. It was always an uneasy truce during May.
The first flaw in CART’s way of life also turned out to be the one that proved fatal. Not only could rich car owners seldom agree on anything, they usually opted to hire a president who they could manipulate or one who knew nothing about racing (or both).

By 1988, CART's team owners were bickering as stubbornly as ever, but the Andrettis were national household names. (LAT Photo) » More Photos

Save Jim Melvin and Dick Eidswick, it’s been a litany of lawyers and leeches leading the show, but controlled by Patrick and Penske early on and Kevin Kalkhoven and Gerry Forsythe lately since they spent the money and made most of the big decisions.


The classic CART president template was John Frasco. A reputed Michigan lawyer who had successfully represented the six CART teams initially banned from the 1979 Indy 500, Frasco made USAC and the Speedway look foolish in Federal Court before playing his old employers like a fiddle. Besides the golden parachute he wrote into his contract, ‘ol John also secured the rights to the diamond vision screens at a few tracks. He cared so little about the product he was usually at the airport before the
race hit the halfway point.

Another CART trademark became the revolving door in the marketing office.
“Our first marketing manager quit before he ever set foot in the office,” recalled Michael Knight, CART’s first public relations director from 1979-83. “The second one showed up on Monday morning, read the files, went to lunch and never came back. The third one wasn’t around long either, so you get the picture. It didn’t change much in 30 years.”


And while the front office follies never ceased, CART did make a name for itself in a good way during the 1980s. Led by former driver Wally Dallenbach, Dr. Steve Olvey and surgeon Terry Trammell, CART formed the first full-time safety team in racing. It made cars and tracks safer in addition to advancing the technology.


Still, by 1988 CART was more divided than ever before between the haves and have nots. Certain owners controlled chassis and engines, costs were insane and there was universal distrust throughout the paddock. It was anything but a happy family. Had TGeorge started the IRL in 1988, it might have worked.


But, despite all the mismanagement and ill will, in 1993 we looked up and CART had Nigel Mansell, 25-27 cars, monstrous crowds and mainstream media. The novelty of taking the race to a big city was a hit in Miami, Toronto, Vancouver, Cleveland, Surfer’s Paradise, Australia and Long Beach.

Tony George: the eventual "civil war" winner has won control over a prize much less relevant in the national landscape than it was back in the 90s. (LAT Photo) » More Photos

It raced 20 times on road courses, small ovals, street circuits and superspeedways. It was the toughest challenge on four wheels and it had Bernie Ecclestone’s attention because more people were watching CART than F1 in many F1 bastions.


Bill France Jr. also had his eye on CART because it was neck and neck with his circuit in terms of TV ratings, sponsorships and attendance.
Tony George, whose offer to buy CART in 1991 had been way too low and poorly presented (his words), didn’t take kindly to his rude rejection or the fact nobody in CART seemed to value his opinion. His eye was on power.


By 1996, when the IRL sputtered to life, CART sported four engine manufacturers, four chassis manufacturers, two tire companies, record attendance, 28 cars (mostly fully funded) and 10 talented American drivers who were hired on their ability.


We know what happened next. CART refused to bury the IRL (instead selling it used cars), compete at Indy or take it seriously. In 1998, the owners went public and made lots of money but hoarded it instead of re-investing in their future. Honda and Toyota made everybody rich before bailing to the IRL earlier this decade—led by none other than Mr. Penske. Followed closely by Mr. Ganassi, Mr. Rahal, Mr. Andretti…


CART collapsed into bankruptcy after the 2003 season where it was rescued by Kalkhoven and Forsythe to become Champ Car. Michael Andretti said at the time he wished those two would just have let TGeorge take control and, as it turns out, open wheel would have been much further ahead had the IRL founder not lost in bankruptcy court.


Champ Car gave us standing starts, the optional tire, an honorable man in Dick Eidswick and a thinking man in race control with Tony Cotman but that was offset by buffoons in the front office, nothing approaching a business plan, lack of an American presence behind the wheel, a laughable Far East strategy and Paul Gentilozzi.


After spending millions for four years and then supposedly catching a couple of his “allies” with their hands in the cookie jar, Kalkhoven told Forsythe he was done last winter. And so, mercifully, was Champ Car.


Of course the irony is that the IRL’s original concepts all failed (American short trackers, USA cottage industry, U.S. manufacturers, no engine leases, all ovals) and has subsequently adopted CART’s philosophy almost to the letter. Oh yeah, and it’s dominant teams belong to all those guys TG didn’t like back in the ‘90s.


Yet, for all its shortcomings, there was a time standing amidst the 12-deep all the way around Elkhart Lake or driving into Phoenix before 7 a.m. to beat the traffic or trying to get a ticket to Indy, that CART was poised to be everything Gurney had hoped and France had feared.


A popular, self-sufficient, revenue-generating, sponsor-friendly, TV staple that was a money-maker for just about everyone concerned.
Instead, it dissolved into a sea of red ink after being scuttled by bone-headed decisions and self-serving agendas.


In the final analysis, CART gave us some memorable races and racers. The Andrettis, Fittipaldi, Rahal, Mears, Mansell, Montoya, Sullivan, Tracy, the Unsers and Zanardi made race fans and then made them care.


But the on-track product was doomed because car owners can’t run the store. Never have, never will.

[Bob Tanner]

Sorry Robin. You took approximately 2000 words to write something which could have been explained in simpler form.

A select group of CART team owners wanted to control the entire series. They had visions in their heads of an "American F1" Series, a kind of open-wheeled, high speed series with an improved SCCA mentality.

This was not what a large percentage of the American open-wheeled racing fans wanted; they like oval racing.

Tony George understood this last and broke with CART, taking his Indy 500 with him. George's IRL had the track and the historical tradition and Gurney's CART had the big names. George put on exciting racing with drivers only a few had heard of. CART put on less than exciting races with famous drivers.

It took both sides twenty years to figure out that a successful series needs both name drivers and exciting, action-filled racing to succeed. During this twenty year period of open wheeled confusion, NASCAR got a foothold and <poof!>. Here we are today.

[DOF_power]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Sorry Robin. You took approximately 2000 words to write something which could have been explained in simpler form.

A select group of CART team owners wanted to control the entire series. They had visions in their heads of an "American F1" Series, a kind of open-wheeled, high speed series with an improved SCCA mentality.

This was not what a large percentage of the American open-wheeled racing fans wanted; they like oval racing.

Tony George understood this last and broke with CART, taking his Indy 500 with him. George's IRL had the track and the historical tradition and Gurney's CART had the big names. George put on exciting racing with drivers only a few had heard of. CART put on less than exciting races with famous drivers.

It took both sides twenty years to figure out that a successful series needs both name drivers and exciting, action-filled racing to succeed. During this twenty year period of open wheeled confusion, NASCAR got a foothold and <poof!>. Here we are today.

Except that I don't think I entirely agree.
Reading an old Indycar magazine a survey as to what type of tracks (american) fans wanted to see more results were: 50% more ovals, 47% road courses 3% more street circuits.
And guess what, the money came from street circuits (municipal funds).
As to the history stuff, the National Championship in its early days had in facts all types of tracks.
So there goes the history arguments too.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

Except that I don't think I entirely agree.
Reading an old Indycar magazine a survey as to what type of tracks (american) fans wanted to see more results were: 50% more ovals, 47% road courses 3% more street circuits.
And guess what, the money came from street circuits (municipal funds).
As to the history stuff, the National Championship in its early days had in facts all types of tracks.
So there goes the history arguments too.

People who care for auto racing, as you and I do, are bound to have differing opinions. That is good. I have never, in my life, ever learned anything of substance, from anyone I agreed with.

The one thing Robin left out was the almost undeniable fact that USAC would never have split into factions if Tony Hulman hadn't have died and Ray Marquette and Frankie Delroy hadn't have died in the plane crash. They were the glue that held things together, even in the face of Gurney, Penske and the rest.

I would like to know the date of your Indycar mag. "Old" is such a relative term. I'd bet it was circa 1970, or later.

I have a problem with street races paid by municipal funds. That smells too much like tax money and as much as I love racing, I'd rain all over some bureaucrat's parade if I found out he had subsidized a race with MY tax money. (The same goes for the city, county and State governments subsidizing a proposed oval tracks, also. I'm non-partisan on the subject.)

You are correct. The early National Championship did have all types of tracks. That was mostly because, in the teens and twenties, enclosed race tracks were in short supply. There were fairgrounds tracks across the country but the people who race horses fought the autos tooth and nail because of the damage the autos did to the tracks. Pavement wasn't as refined as it is today and wasn't practical in most places. They tried board tracks but they also proved to be impractical. So, street and road courses like Laconia, Watkins Glen, Pikes Peak, and Daytona Beach were a necessity.

But you know all this. You're an even bigger historian than I.

I have nothing to go on except perception but I just don't think 47% of the stock car and Indy car fans of the 50's and 60's preferred a road course over an oval. The only people I can remember from those days who followed road courses were either Grand Prix fans and/or SCCA types. I just don't recall folks here getting involved in road racing until A.J. won Le Mans and Mario won the World Championship.

[DOF_power]

Trans-AM, Can-AM, FIA WMSC (Daytona 24h + Sebring 12h), Formula 5000, IMSA GTP, GTO-GTU, besides the mentioned USAC and F1.
The magazine was from the early 90s, 92 or 93 or 94.
And all the early 1990s fans were guys from 1950 and 1960s ?!
The good figures of audience CART Indycar had in the USA (as well as teams) came also due to the downfall of Can-AM and IMSA GTP.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

Trans-AM, Can-AM, FIA WMSC (Daytona 24h + Sebring 12h), Formula 5000, IMSA GTP, GTO-GTU, besides the mentioned USAC and F1.
The magazine was from the early 90s, 92 or 93 or 94.
And all the early 1990s fans were guys from 1950 and 1960s ?!
The good figures of audience CART Indycar had in the USA (as well as teams) came also due to the downfall of Can-AM and IMSA GTP.

Hmmm...??? 47% in the 90's. I am surprised and have learned something today. But then, I'll presume that the mag you reference was devoted to Indy Cars primarily. WoO, sprint car, midgets and Silver Crown fans probably didn't read that publication much. Those are the groups I associate major open wheel US racing with. I just don't see 47% of these folks chosing road courses.

Good info. Thanks.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Hmmm...??? 47% in the 90's. I am surprised and have learned something today. But then, I'll presume that the mag you reference was devoted to Indy Cars primarily. WoO, sprint car, midgets and Silver Crown fans probably didn't read that publication much. Those are the groups I associate major open wheel US racing with. I just don't see 47% of these folks choosing road courses.

Good info. Thanks.

Please let me rephrase that a bit. I meant to have stated that the ones I mentioned are the ones I associate the most common and currently popular open wheeled US racing with. Yeah...That makes a bit more sense.

[DOF_power]

>
^ Well CART Indycar back then was in a situation where it had to joggle between american oval fans vs. road course fans (some were refugees as mentioned) on one hand and american vs. non-american fans on the other.
If any particular group was to be favored there were gonna be loses/backslash. The only thing to do was to please and displease all equally.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

>
^ Well CART Indycar back then was in a situation where it had to joggle between american oval fans vs. road course fans (some were refugees as mentioned) on one hand and american vs. non-american fans on the other.
If any particular group was to be favored there were gonna be loses/backslash. The only thing to do was to please and displease all equally.

Excellent points. Very good! I totally agree. "Please and displease all equally." CART and USAC never did that. They, instead, did what all good politicians do; they catered to special interest groups.

Your verbalization as to oval vs. road and American vs. non-American... It would seem to me that any organization which apparently designs to pit one faction of its following against another faction is setting itself up for an almost automatic failure because of inevitable fractures within its fan base.

NA__AR is kind of doing the same thing today. They have, by implication and ignorance, by so rapidly changing the sport itself with generic cars, biased and arbitrary rules, capricious enforcement of said rules, mega-teams and high-dollar sponsors, and big-bucks TV contracts; by so rapidly diving into these pools they have effectively pitted the "Old" fans vs. the "New" fan. The "Old" fan has the NASCAR of yesterday to compare this new thing to while the "New" fan has only NA__AR and automatically just thinks this is the way it should be.

I'm content to be an "Old" fan. I would not want to be running the NA__AR Show. I'd probably be either impeached or assassinated.

[DOF_power]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Excellent points. Very good! I totally agree. "Please and displease all equally." CART and USAC never did that. They, instead, did what all good politicians do; they catered to special interest groups.

Your verbalization as to oval vs. road and American vs. non-American... It would seem to me that any organization which apparently designs to pit one faction of its following against another faction is setting itself up for an almost automatic failure because of inevitable fractures within its fan base.

NA__AR is kind of doing the same thing today. They have, by implication and ignorance, by so rapidly changing the sport itself with generic cars, biased and arbitrary rules, capricious enforcement of said rules, mega-teams and high-dollar sponsors, and big-bucks TV contracts; by so rapidly diving into these pools they have effectively pitted the "Old" fans vs. the "New" fan. The "Old" fan has the NASCAR of yesterday to compare this new thing to while the "New" fan has only NA__AR and automatically just thinks this is the way it should be.

I'm content to be an "Old" fan. I would not want to be running the NA__AR Show. I'd probably be either impeached or assassinated.

I don't consider myself stuck in the past, but this
generic/spec/cookie-cutter cars-tracks-drivers formula just doesn't do it for me. I find it as downright madness.
Motor-sport for me has to have (some) diversity in terms of cars, innovation/solutions, tracks, driver behaviour/personality, some relevance to production cars (especially if it's a stock car series).

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

I don't consider myself stuck in the past, but this
generic/spec/cookie-cutter cars-tracks-drivers formula just doesn't do it for me. I find it as downright madness.
Motor-sport for me has to have (some) diversity in terms of cars, innovation/solutions, tracks, driver behaviour/personality, some relevance to production cars (especially if it's a stock car series).

Agreed!

While I can tolerate the IROC-type of race where luck and driver skill are the only determining factor, I prefer seeing the less talented, less-funded or technology-challenged teams racing side by side with the "haves".

I like drivers with "personality" and eschew the "company line" parrots. I want the driver to go for it, rather than protect his/her points position, or even worse, win a gas mileage race. I am a fan of the old saying "go slow enough to win", which means don't tear up your equipment, but doesn't mean coast around the track in hopes of outlasting everyone else! Unfortunately there are still drivers/teams whose only motivation is to qualify for the race and park it as soon as they've completed a lap or two.

That's why guys like Boris Said and Robby Gordon are so high on my list. I know they're giving all they have and will take a chance on winning rather than protecting a 2nd or 3rd place finish. And that's why I like that other Gordon: he will find a way to be at or near the front at the end of the race.

And each of these are fully at home on diverse tracks and venues. Being a "Front Row Joe" is great if all you race are super speedways, but I want to see the same results from that driver on short tracks and road courses too!

I want to see cars that look similar to what the dealer has on their showroom, or be flat out racing machines that don't pretend to be anything but what they are.

I like it that the Monster Trucks have added something other than flat out racing and/or car crushing to their competitions called free style! I like seeing multiple series on the track at once - it gives a very good indication of the differences in speed and cornering capabilities between the classes and promotes tolerance.

Any race is better than no race, but all races are not created equal; neither should the cars nor the drivers be.