[Bob Tanner]

Ok, we' are on the eve of the yearly sojourn to Sears Point in the beautiful, dry and grape-filled Napa Valley. Let's beat this dead horse again:

NASCAR should dump it's two road courses and replace them with two race dates on track(s) of one mile in length, at the longest.

Against:
(1) Road courses enable the drivers to prove themselves adept at more than one venue of racing.
(2) Road courses offer the fan something different
(3) Road racing draws a type of race fan who otherwise has little interest in stock car racing.

For:
(1) Road courses are too narrow and not suited for larger, full-bodied stock cars. This leads to what many feel is follow-the-leader, boring racing.
(2) Road courses are not fan-friendly and offer the attendees a limited view of the track.
(3) Stock car fans feel that road racing is somehow "foreign" and "sporty car" type racing and do not care to see "their" drivers engaged in such racing.

Feelings, one way or another?

[Racer Duck]

all of the above.

but then I like all types of motorsports, so I don't have a problem with the road courses. I'd prefer fewer "cookie cutter" tracks and more "one of a kind"s...

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

all of the above.

but then I like all types of motorsports, so I don't have a problem with the road courses. I'd prefer fewer "cookie cutter" tracks and more "one of a kind"s...

My personal feeling is that ISC could do worse than (a) reconfigure the two (for now) road courses and make them both 30% wider, at ALL point on the track. Make them wide enough for stock[appearing-kind of] cars to maneuver, or (b) tear down both existing (for now) road courses and replace them with either 5/8, 3/4, or 7/8-mile tracks.

But they won't. I have this feeling that, to NASCAR, road courses mean more DIVERSITY. With more DIVERSITYyou get more new fans who have no memory of what stock car racing actually was and thus people whom NASCAR can more easily convince that this product they now produce is about as good as it gets.

[Racer Duck]

somebody (ISC?) ought to revive Trenton. now there was a track that the drivers couldn't take for granted.... and, of course, The Rock!

[oncea3fan]

I don't mind the road courses, wouldn't mind seeing another one during the year. but I'd give em all up for just 1 new shorttrack race at a new (not on current schedule)short track

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

somebody (ISC?) ought to revive Trenton. now there was a track that the drivers couldn't take for granted.... and, of course, The Rock!

How about Williams Grove? A circular dirt track? Or maybe Nazareth? There, also was a track which would jump up a bite you in a nanosecond!

Or we could go for the completely insane and have someone build a carbon copy of the old Islip Speedway, on Long Island? (Hey! There's your NYC market, NASCAR!) Just imagine, 43 COT's on a .2-mile flat asphalt??!!

[wingkey1]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

somebody (ISC?) ought to revive Trenton. now there was a track that the drivers couldn't take for granted.... and, of course, The Rock!

Count me as vote number two for that. And so very right you are re: "could not take for granted". Challenge to both driver and team. Saw many a race there from the dirt days to the final 1 1/2 mile asphalt dog-legged "oval". Many great memories and stories.

Unfortunately they'd have to relocate since the track and the NJ State Fairgronds on which it resided is now a combination of homes and shopping mall/center. Maybe at the Thunderbolt Race Park on the drawing boards for the Millville area. In any case - vote Trenton (or its clone) back.

[jks812]

I've gotten to where I like the road courses. I use to think they were boring too, but then I sat down and actually watched a whole one. When a driver can come from the back to the front on there, it's interesting to watch. I just wish they would put one of them in the chase.

[Racer Duck]

it seems to me that the most interesting races are the ones that require "something special" from the driver or the crew in order to prevail.

• Pocono: 3 turns, each different, gotta compromise somewhere
• the old Trenton, a 1.5 mile kidney bean shaped track with it's dogleg back straight
• Indy with it's 4 distinct corners
• Atlanta for sheer speed
• Talladega - take a lunch with you to be able to get around it
• Super high banks of Daytona
• Texas, a cookie cutter that isn't
• Bristol, high banked short track with mile high stands
• The Monster at Dover - "racing in a tunnel"
• Michigan with it's super wide racing surface
• Darlington - if ya ain't got a stripe, yer not racing hard enough!
• The "Rock", high banked, D-shaped and yer tires are wore out before ya get outta the pits!
• Riverside with it's esses on the front side and the long, downhill back straight into "Turn 9"
• Hickory: slightly smaller than 3/8 mile, with different banking at each end of the track
• North Wilkesboro, a 5/8 mile oval with a unique downhill-uphill straightaway design (bought and closed by Bruton Smith so he could get it's NASCAR dates for Texas & New Hampshire).
• and finally, Infineon (Sears Point) with its twists and turns and the infamous "corkscrew".

16 tracks that are nothing alike. they each have their charm and their share of "gotcha's"! These are the tracks I like to see NASCAR races on.

[Quality88]

How bout givin some love to the bluegrass oval,it's a unique track.

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by Quality88

How bout givin some love to the bluegrass oval,it's a unique track.

I don't have anything against the big KY. I like watching races there. but then I like watching races just about anywhere.

I'm not saying because a track is not on my list it's bad, just some aren't as unique as others. Aesthetics aside, what is it that makes any track tougher to compete at? Those that I believe are tougher to compete at are the ones on my list.

You might have noticed I left out Lowes, and the Glen, and a bunch of other tracks. I did it on purpose, not because they aren't unique in their own way, but because I don't see that oddity that creates extra concern in drivers and/or crews.

what I was trying to convey is there's a handful of tracks that are different enough, or maybe "peculiar" is a better word, that they require effort over and above the "normal" tracks.

I hope Kentucky gets their Cup date. It's a fine facility and I know the folks in that area are proud of it and will do a great job of supporting it. But in my eyes it's a "normal" track.

[Souporscotty]

Originally Posted by Quality88

How bout givin some love to the bluegrass oval,it's a unique track.

This one gets ALL of MY votes. As if they count.

[Quality88]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

I don't have anything against the big KY. I like watching races there. but then I like watching races just about anywhere.

I'm not saying because a track is not on my list it's bad, just some aren't as unique as others. Aesthetics aside, what is it that makes any track tougher to compete at? Those that I believe are tougher to compete at are the ones on my list.

You might have noticed I left out Lowes, and the Glen, and a bunch of other tracks. I did it on purpose, not because they aren't unique in their own way, but because I don't see that oddity that creates extra concern in drivers and/or crews.

what I was trying to convey is there's a handful of tracks that are different enough, or maybe "peculiar" is a better word, that they require effort over and above the "normal" tracks.

I hope Kentucky gets their Cup date. It's a fine facility and I know the folks in that area are proud of it and will do a great job of supporting it. But in my eyes it's a "normal" track.

I understand what you where sayin RD.... as everyone will probably tell you, I have a big chip on my shoulder about NA$CAR givin the run-around to KY.... and givin dates to a track that has yet to sell out a cup race(California) let alone a Busch race or want to build brand new tracks to have cup dates. Kentucky has sold out every Busch race they have had.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

it seems to me that the most interesting races are the ones that require "something special" from the driver or the crew in order to prevail.

• Pocono: 3 turns, each different, gotta compromise somewhere
• the old Trenton, a 1.5 mile kidney bean shaped track with it's dogleg back straight
• Indy with it's 4 distinct corners
• Atlanta for sheer speed
• Talladega - take a lunch with you to be able to get around it
• Super high banks of Daytona
• Texas, a cookie cutter that isn't
• Bristol, high banked short track with mile high stands
• The Monster at Dover - "racing in a tunnel"
• Michigan with it's super wide racing surface
• Darlington - if ya ain't got a stripe, yer not racing hard enough!
• The "Rock", high banked, D-shaped and yer tires are wore out before ya get outta the pits!
• Riverside with it's esses on the front side and the long, downhill back straight into "Turn 9"
• Hickory: slightly smaller than 3/8 mile, with different banking at each end of the track
• North Wilkesboro, a 5/8 mile oval with a unique downhill-uphill straightaway design (bought and closed by Bruton Smith so he could get it's NASCAR dates for Texas & New Hampshire).
• and finally, Infineon (Sears Point) with its twists and turns and the infamous "corkscrew".

16 tracks that are nothing alike. they each have their charm and their share of "gotcha's"! These are the tracks I like to see NASCAR races on.

I'm with you, Duck, on every choice except one. Michigan. If there is such a thing as a track being too wide, Michigan, and its silly clone out in Fontana, are it. Plus, has there EVER been a race at Michigan, within the past five years, which didn't resolve into a race where gas mileage played a part? I'd rather see them go back to TWS at College Station than I would see them run at Michigan!

When it comes to the primadonas of Cup I have one basic rule; if there is a track all the drivers rave about being a great track and the love to ace there, it's too easy. The reason they love it is probably because it tends to make them look good with little effort on their parts.

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by Quality88

I understand waht you where sayin RD.... as everyone willprobably tell you, I have a big chip on my shoulder about NA$CAR givin the run-around to KY.... and givin dates to a track that has yet to sell out a cup race(California) let alone a Busch race or want to build brand new tracks to have cup dates. Kentucky has sold out every Busch race they have had.

no problem Q. I'm with you. Maybe the problem is KY doesn't have any "star power"? Got any movie stars or such in the area that might be drafted????