[Phils20]

Almost any race has tha potential to get boring. When one car just dominates, or a yellow gets most of the field a lap down, it can put you to sleep.

Daytona and Talledega can get downright dull. True, they used to be all stuck together, but you could watch the beginning and the end and be happy!

Bristol and Martinsville can get dull due to the fact that most of the feild gets lapped before the first round of pit stops.

The biggest snoozer has to be Dover. It is 9 miles from my house, but it just puts on some of the most dull racing known to motorsports!

[PenelopePitStop]

Originally Posted by Phils20

Almost any race has tha potential to get boring. When one car just dominates, or a yellow gets most of the field a lap down, it can put you to sleep.

Daytona and Talledega can get downright dull. True, they used to be all stuck together, but you could watch the beginning and the end and be happy!

Bristol and Martinsville can get dull due to the fact that most of the feild gets lapped before the first round of pit stops.

The biggest snoozer has to be Dover. It is 9 miles from my house, but it just puts on some of the most dull racing known to motorsports!

That's so funny!

My very first Cup race was at Dover! Our seats were between turns 1 and 2 ... those stands are so steep! This was back in the 80s. Don't remember what year, but it was Petty's last year.

While I was excited to see the cars "for real" ... I have to admit ... I was bored!

[wingkey1]

Originally Posted by PenelopePitStop

That's so funny!

My very first Cup race was at Dover! Our seats were between turns 1 and 2 ... those stands are so steep! This was back in the 80s. Don't remember what year, but it was Petty's last year.

While I was excited to see the cars "for real" ... I have to admit ... I was bored!

Indeed Dover in the "back then" could really drone on and on. This was in the day of 500 mile and asphalt (rather than the current concrete). A real wreckfest with race average speeds at times not a whole bunch over 100 mph. Yeah - near approaching 5 hours. Could well have been voted amongst those that deserved consideration for some level of boredom.

Even the drivers admitted to reaching a point where they would seperate for something in the range of 150 - 175 laps to stay safe and simply get the laps over with. Was in attendance for many of these. I'd even venture the guess that there may have been some who were helped to lose interest completely as a result of these early years.

The move to 400 miles and a cured and smoothed racing surface has changed this track dramatically. Multiple workable grooves through both turns are the norm. Huge and improved difference.

[Tuck4Bama]

My two least favorite tracks are 1) Pocano 2) Martinsville

[Nevadastars]

The most boring tracks for me are Pocono, Michigan and its clone California. We need more Richmonds IMHO! To me the 3/4-1 mile tracks are the best for great racing. These looooong 1 1/2-2 mile tracks just drag on and on.

[SpaceCadet]

Pocono. Although I must say that Hamlin's spin across the grass and right into the pits was pretty cool last year. And while Jeff Gordon's crash was spectacular as far as the "holy cow!" factor goes, it was mighty scary. Even the less than avid Gordo fans were pretty quiet until he answered LeTarte. But who's the dummy here? That would be me, because I biotch about it being boring, but do I go every year? Yup. Duh. It's pretty bad when they're so far away in turn 2 that you can bearly even hear them anymore, let alone see them! Already have my tickets and a pair of mega binoc's so I'll quit complaining now.

[PenelopePitStop]

I didn't even think of Pocono! I agree, one of the most boring tracks. I guess it was SO boring, I didn't even think to mention it!

[jks812]

About the only track that I can take or leave is California.

[Bob Tanner]

All the tracks are capable of having boring races, exciting races and races which fall in between. There are so many qualifiers to this question that it's impossible for me to make a definitive statement.

A lot depends on the time of the season ( will they be racing to win, or points racing?), Goodyear (i.e.; the 2nd race at Charlotte in 2005 was terrible because Goodyear brought waaay too soft a tire and they had a record number of cautions because tires kept blowing out), and length of the race (the World 600 used to have about 400 miles of prime snooze time, but when they changed the start time to late and caused the race to finish under the light, it brought a bit more excitement to the endurance run)

Very generally speaking, from my perspective, I'd vote immediately for California. But as the track matures that may change.

New Hampshire used to be terrible but when Bahre widen the turns in...? 2002? the racing improved. It still isn't a race I'd sell my soul to attend but it is capable of having its moments.

Bristol and Martinsville used to be pretty good but when they increased the field from 32 cars to 43 it ruined the actual racing. Now bot races are rolling accidents during which periodic spells of actual racing break out. Bristol will do away with the concrete surface after this next race and when they return in August they'll be running on graduated banked asphalt. That might make things a bit interesting, but we shall see.

Pocono'd be a better race if they shortened the length to 350 or 400 miles. The three distinct different turns make the chassis men earn their keep, for a change.

My hometown* track (Indy) is the most historic and possibly the classiest track on the circuit but it is undoubted the absolute worse track to attend to actually see the race.

The best track on the circuit is, hands down, Richmond. Big enough to race on, yet small enough for every seat to have a good view of the entire track. NASCAR needs more tracks like, but not clones of, Richmond, IMNSVHO.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

You know, it's funny... I'm fairly newly back to NASCAR, but I thought yesterday's race was actually pretty darn exciting. Yeah, Johnson pulled away at the end so there was no chase for 1st place, but there were some good battles elsewhere in the top 10. It was the first time in a long time that I watched a race from start to finish.

Haven't formulated an opinion on the most boring tracks yet, but I'm sure looking forward to reading everyone else's thoughts on the topic!

I agree with your assessment of last Sunday's race, Oh Southpawed One.

It was the first time I can remember seeing regular side-by-side racing and passing on the outside at Vegas.

True. There were some bumps down in T1 and T2 but, what the heck, they have bumps at Daytona, Pocono and Darlington isn't the smoothest thing on the circuit. I believe a lot of the negative comments from some of NASCAR's most vocal stars came from the hard tires. My immediate thought on that one is: El toro ca-ca!

These primadonas are used to running on soft tires which give the track the adhesive quality of fly paper! Running tires like this make the cars easier to handle in the turns and thus makes the drivers and the chassis mechanics look good. This week those hard tires made the mechanics work and the drivers stay on top of their game for the entire race. I, personally, believe this week we got a small view of who the drivers are who can adapt to any situation were and who the drivers were who, to one degree or another, may be in need of some type of crutch?

It looked to me as though they all ran on the same track and used the same tire.

It wasn't a great race, but I think it was a decent race, on a track showing a lot of promise.

[Jeffrey4318]

I've seen great races at every track and I've seen boring races at every track. I don't think the problem is with the track I think the problem today are with the cars. I really can't wait to see what the COT brings to racing. I really hope it levels the playing field. That is what we need, we need every team to be competitive. That is what will bring back good races. We need to put the racing back into the drivers hands.


Also I don't want to call anyone out, but if you don't like/understand road course racing then I think I need to question you as a fan. Road course racing is some of the best, closest racing we have today. I think we need atleast two more road courses added to the schedule. We definitely need one in the chase. How can we crown a true champion if they don't have to race on all types of tracks?

[wingkey1]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey4318

I've seen great races at every track and I've seen boring races at every track. I don't think the problem is with the track I think the problem today are with the cars. I really can't wait to see what the COT brings to racing. I really hope it levels the playing field. That is what we need, we need every team to be competitive. That is what will bring back good races. We need to put the racing back into the drivers hands.


Also I don't want to call anyone out, but if you don't like/understand road course racing then I think I need to question you as a fan. Road course racing is some of the best, closest racing we have today. I think we need atleast two more road courses added to the schedule. We definitely need one in the chase. How can we crown a true champion if they don't have to race on all types of tracks?

Good post.

"I don't think the problem is with the track" - Yup, and track owners are not going to let their track be the issue. As for the "cars" - I've got this "thing" that hangs most of the cause/reason/road to COT on the manufacturers. COT, while quite controversial, may become / be seen as one of the more beneficial elements in NASCAR.

"Also I don't want to call anyone out, but if you don't like/understand road course racing then I think I need to question you as a fan" - Wow. Duck you head. Look out now. Ooooo Wheee. As for me, I like the road course thing in NASCAR. I do, however prefer it "limited" as far as the overall percentage of races. These are not just a driver test, they are a MAJOR set up test (when compared to "turn left"). Then again, if one is a true, true, true, gimme another true, fan of the "original" sport - we gotta get more beach time.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey4318

I've seen great races at every track and I've seen boring races at every track. I don't think the problem is with the track I think the problem today are with the cars. I really can't wait to see what the COT brings to racing. I really hope it levels the playing field. That is what we need, we need every team to be competitive. That is what will bring back good races. We need to put the racing back into the drivers hands.


Also I don't want to call anyone out, but if you don't like/understand road course racing then I think I need to question you as a fan. Road course racing is some of the best, closest racing we have today. I think we need atleast two more road courses added to the schedule. We definitely need one in the chase. How can we crown a true champion if they don't have to race on all types of tracks?

Good post, Jeffery.

I don't mind road racing. In fact, one of the most interesting races I ever saw was a European semi race (running the tractors only, of course) on the Brands Hatch course in England.

That aside, the major thing I dislike about road races in NASCAR is the tracks themselves. They just aren't set up, nor wide enough, throughout the length of the course, for full-bodied NASCARmobiles.

Although, from what I saw of the Mexico race, J.P. may change my thinking on that. He passed several car where almost everyone thought making a successful pass was impossible.

[BringBackWilkesboro]

I just want to know what people expect to see in a race? I've heard people say the finish was the only interesting part of this year's Daytona 500. If that's the case, these people are out of luck for the season. It's not often the you get a finish with as much happening as that one, and it isn't going to happen every lap.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by BringBackWilkesboro

I just want to know what people expect to see in a race? I've heard people say the finish was the only interesting part of this year's Daytona 500. If that's the case, these people are out of luck for the season. It's not often the you get a finish with as much happening as that one, and it isn't going to happen every lap.

Good question, BBW. I wonder what, exactly, people look for in a race?

A lot of the new fans keep wanting to equate stock car racing to stick & ball sports; i.e., the "team" concept, the championship being more important than any actual race, the officials calling "fouls" for "rough driving," out of bounds (the yellow line at Talladega). Now, as you point out above, the comparison to the NBA ( don't waste your time with the first three quarters, just tune in to the list three or four minutes; everything else is basically superficial).

In answer to your question, I just want to see a field of cars where the majority of the drivers are trying to win the damn race. Period. Screw the superficial drama NA$CAR creates. The Hell with the pit and fuel strategy. Damn the concept of points racing and hearing some weenie saying in the post race interviews, "We had a good points day, today." I, personally, don't even care if only one car finishes on the lead lap and he's 3-4 laps ahead of everyone else. If he was fast enough to lap the field, then that's just the way that particular race happened to end.

I just want to see hard racing that isn't manipulated by the sanctioning body by bogus "debris cautions," Lucky Dogs, a "Chosen 35 Rule," and the like. I want to see drivers who honestly believe that if you win the races, the championship'll take care of itself. And, above all, in the National Assoc of S-T-O-C-K C-A-R Auto Racing I would like to see cars which at the least resemble the cars I see on the street.

Does that answer your question? I'd bet that you feel practically the same.