[Quality88]

1. Corporate Sponsorship ruling & ruining competition
2. The media focusin on the damn chase and not the race.
3.The Chase(nothin wrong with the old system).

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by Joe#16

This is my first post so let me know if it is posted correctly.

First, I’ve been following or been involved in racing since the ‘60’s, NHRA, SCCA, CART, NASCAR either as a participant or tech official or fire crew. I worked NASCAR Riverside in the ‘70’s for the Winston West Series and at a local Friday/Saturday night track.

First, the top 35. It wasn’t NASCAR or the drivers or owners that came up with this rule as I understand it. It was the sponsors when a majority of the races began being televised. Bud, Dupont, et al, said, “If I’m spending $X millions of dollars to sponsor a car then I’m going to make darn sure my car gets on TV”. Advertising. And like most of you, I’d like to see it thrown out the window and let the fastest race.

Rule books, I’d can’t speak for now but I still have my copy of my 1971 NASCAR rule book. It may not be easy for the general public to get but you can bet every owner, crew chief and driver have a copy. Although, there is always room for interpretation in any rule book.

Finally, cheating. I remember one incident when an illegal carburetor was confiscated and the owner and crew chief was fined. The crew chief said, “It cost me over $500 (1971 dollars) to have that carb built but you’ll never know how much I have made off of it.” Everybody is going to be looking for that “Competitive Edge” and it’s up to the officials to catch as much as they can. I would like to see some of the habitual “Creative” types suspended, and that would mean NO CONTACT with the team during the term of the suspension. And monetary fines will not become a deterrent until they are up in the millions of dollars with the budgets that these teams currently have. As the Senior Tech Official said, “I lay awake at night trying to figure out how they are ****ing me, but the one thing that gives me peace is knowing that they are laying awake at night trying to figure out how to **** me.”


Well, that’s more that enough for one post but I had to throw it out there.

GO #16!

Joe, you did a great job with your post. Welcome to GoTeamsGo and the NASCAR Forums. I hope to see your posts on a regular basis .. it's always a pleasure to have some "real world experience" scattered throughout our threads.

I too had a NASCAR rule book back in '71 .. for the "Sportsman" series. but before my brother and I could get the car built he got a ride in "Grand National" (Clarence Lovell #61 '72-'73).... dunno what happened to the rulebook...

again, welcome and be sure to stop by the "predictions" thread and post yours for the upcoming race.

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by racingwin

If races would only start at 1pm.

Hey, racingwin, welcome to GoTeamsGo and the NASCAR Forums.

That's 1, ya got 2 more to go.

I see by your website you're a Dale Jr. fan. You're in good company, there's quite a few around here, though lately they've been laying low .. don't know why....

be sure to stop by the "predictions" thread and post yours for the upcoming race. (I guess your #1 will be Jr., but am interested to see who you pick for runner-up )

again, welcome.

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Duck, with your permission I'll put this one under the heading "making decisions affecting compewtition based on sponsor, team owner desires?

permission granted.

though, I do feel this one is so blatantly foul smelling it really deserves it's own "deodorizer"...

[LSC9901]

Got lots of things I do not like but not sure they will ever see the light of "change".

Like many others I think the top 35 rule has outlived its usefulness. It is time to actually race for a place in the race. When drivers run fast enough to get in but cannot get in because of the top 35 rule, then there is something terribly wrong with the rule.

Another major issue/hot button for me is cup drivers in Busch. I believe there are several very easy solutions to this "problem" First off it isn't a problem for everyone ... that I understand, so I reiterate that this is my issue so I believe it isn't something NASCAR would be willing to listen to, but I do see it as a problem. Our "minor" league drivers are left sitting on the curb and drivers from other series just slide right in. I don't post thgis statement to start conversation on that topic, only to voice my view of a NASCAR problem.

Lastly since I only get three issues to complain about, I'll go with the point system. I'm not sure that I like it the way it is. I'm also not sure how I'd like it but as good as it might be I find that it could use adjustments.

[drnascar48]

I hate it all. Just because they are getting away from their roots...

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by drnascar48

I hate it all. Just because they are getting away from their roots...

change is always hard and so is holding on to tradition. and doubly hard when you try to manage change while holding on to tradition...

unfortunately, it appears the recent administrations at Daytona Beach have closed the door on tradition, unless it was accompanied by a large wallet.

[PenelopePitStop]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

change is always hard and so is holding on to tradition. and doubly hard when you try to manage change while holding on to tradition...

I can't tell if I agree or disagree with you here, RD. Change is not always hard when it's for the better. But in the case of NASCAR, what makes the sport better by implementing The Chosen and/or The Chase?

The so-called "Lucky Dog". I don't have a problem with that. The "green-white-checkers". I don't have a problem with that either. Actually, I like it. Both break "tradition". Speed limit on Pit Lane/Road ... ?

I'd prefer "evolution" (growth and development) over "change" for change itself.

Just thinking ...








http://www.smileycentral.com/sig.jsp?pc=ZSzeb097&pp=ZN

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by PenelopePitStop

I can't tell if I agree or disagree with you here, RD. Change is not always hard when it's for the better. But in the case of NASCAR, what makes the sport better by implementing The Chosen and/or The Chase?

The so-called "Lucky Dog". I don't have a problem with that. The "green-white-checkers". I don't have a problem with that either. Actually, I like it. Both break "tradition". Speed limit on Pit Lane/Road ... ?

I'd prefer "evolution" (growth and development) over "change" for change itself.

Just thinking ...








http://www.smileycentral.com/sig.jsp?pc=ZSzeb097&pp=ZN

sorry Penny, I wasn't speaking of specific changes .. just that it's a human problem .. we resist change, even when it's good. as such, we (humans) have a natural tendency to cling to what's "comfortable & safe" no matter how bad "comfortable & safe" really is. some people are able to let go and move on, but for some it's a struggle.

change for change's sake is better labeled "boredom induced"...never wise.

the Chase and Chosen aren't good, I agree. I also like the GWC. and I like the single file restart with less than 10 to go. and I like the field frozen at the last scoring loop on a caution .. which gives an opening for the Lucky Dog, though I have mixed feelings about it (I think to be fair it needs to be the first car on the track behind the leader who's not on the lead lap, rather than the first car behind the leader a lap down - there's a big difference!)

[PenelopePitStop]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

sorry Penny, I wasn't speaking of specific changes .. just that it's a human problem .. we resist change, even when it's good. as such, we (humans) have a natural tendency to cling to what's "comfortable & safe" no matter how bad "comfortable & safe" really is. some people are able to let go and move on, but for some it's a struggle.

Very true ... in all aspects of life.

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

... I like the single file restart with less than 10 to go. and I like the field frozen at the last scoring loop on a caution ...

I agree with that as well.

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

which gives an opening for the Lucky Dog...though I have mixed feelings about it (I think to be fair it needs to be the first car on the track behind the leader who's not on the lead lap, rather than the first car behind the leader a lap down - there's a big difference!)

Now there you go! I could be confused, but that doesn't make any sense. So if I'm 37 laps down, but first behind the leader, I get all my laps back? Or just one of them? If I'm one lap down and behind the leader, and behind the car that is 37 laps down, I don't get my one lap back?

I know I must be missing something!







http://www.smileycentral.com/sig.jsp?pc=ZSzeb112&pp=ZN

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by PenelopePitStop

Now there you go! I could be confused, but that doesn't make any sense. So if I'm 37 laps down, but first behind the leader, I get all my laps back? Or just one of them? If I'm one lap down and behind the leader, and behind the car that is 37 laps down, I don't get my one lap back?

I know I must be missing something!

yep .. has to do with that dang tradition word.

before the "yellow freezes the field" rule, the rule was "race to the flag", and the leader would "traditionally" slow and allow as many lap down cars as could make it to "unlap" themselves - didn't matter how many laps you were down, as long as you could beat the leader to the flag, you got a lap back.

roll forward to "yellow freezes the field" .. big reduction in "unfortunate incidents", aka wrecks caused by the mad scramble to beat the leader to the flag, but lots of squawking by racers 'cause now they couldn't get their lap back (without passing the leader under green ). enter the "Lucky Dog" .. now the first car a lap down, no matter where they were on the track (as long as they were on the track and didn't cause the caution) got the automatic "free pass to go" .. now the poor racer who was 2 or 37 or 75 laps down but was on the leader's rear bumper had no chance to get his/her lap back - in the past they would have... a perfect example of "those that have, get."

"why should that guy get it and not the guy on the leader's front bumper?" you ask. I say "tradition."

now there's a whole 'nother strategy in NASCAR now of racing for the Lucky Dog. there's no racing to win or place as well as ya can, it's points racing, get the Lucky Dog, don't take a chance... bunch of pansies .. that's not racin' it's showing up for roll call....

[wingkey1]

1. Track configuration diversity - not enough of it. Too many 1.5 mi and longer "droners". Build tracks of notably distinct configurations and performance requirements say for instance one like the long gone Trenton, NJ track with distinctly different turns (1 & 2 decreasing radius, 3 & 4 wide radius sweeper) and a dog leg in the back stretch that required a right turn. If it's a twice a year venue, build it with the ability to bypass the dogleg for one of the two events.

2. Communications - lack thereof. Folks (fans) are losing interest as a result of "near anger" reaction to decisions that cannot/are not reasonably explained/justified

3. Revenue and/or opportunity sharing plan - vis a vis other professional sports that move to ensure (within reason) an opportunity to succeed exists for upstart/new teams, manufacturers, venues, sponsors

[Quality88]

Originally Posted by wingkey1

3. Revenue and/or opportunity sharing plan - vis a vis other professional sports that move to ensure (within reason) an opportunity to succeed exists for upstart/new teams, manufacturers, venues, sponsors

Great point. That is big thing with me right now. They claim to be tryin to make it more competitive for the small team, yet they are doin everything they can to kill them. Look at Hall of Fame racing. They had their a$$es handed to them(being a new team at the time) at the Daytona 500. Last year when Jimmie won and he didn't have points taken nor Hendrick. Then new venues.... Kentucky is a hotbed for the sport yet they don't get a cup race when California can't sellout a race or provide a good one at that.

Good call Wing

[PenelopePitStop]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

yep .. has to do with that dang tradition word.

before the "yellow freezes the field" rule, the rule was "race to the flag", and the leader would "traditionally" slow and allow as many lap down cars as could make it to "unlap" themselves - didn't matter how many laps you were down, as long as you could beat the leader to the flag, you got a lap back.

Yup. That I remember and get. However, I don't remember many leaders slowing to let others unlap (1 lap down) themselves. If an Earnhardt or Gordon was 1 lap down, the leader wanted to keep them there.

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

roll forward to "yellow freezes the field" .. big reduction in "unfortunate incidents", aka wrecks caused by the mad scramble to beat the leader to the flag, but lots of squawking by racers 'cause now they couldn't get their lap back (without passing the leader under green ). enter the "Lucky Dog" .. now the first car a lap down, no matter where they were on the track (as long as they were on the track and didn't cause the caution) got the automatic "free pass to go" .. now the poor racer who was 2 or 37 or 75 laps down but was on the leader's rear bumper had no chance to get his/her lap back - in the past they would have... a perfect example of "those that have, get."

"why should that guy get it and not the guy on the leader's front bumper?" you ask. I say "tradition."

I see. "A" lap. So your issue isn't so much the one "Lucky Dog" as it is the rest of the lapped cars not having a chance to beat the leader to the caution and regain a lap, correct? 1 or 2 laps down, I can see, but not 37.

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by PenelopePitStop

Yup. That I remember and get. However, I don't remember many leaders slowing to let others unlap (1 lap down) themselves. If an Earnhardt or Gordon was 1 lap down, the leader wanted to keep them there.

yes, but they did .. it was called "respect" and was a "gentleman's agreement" between drivers, not a NASCAR rule .. and everyone understood that maybe next time they would be a lap down and "what goes round, comes round." in fact, there have been several times bitter words were uttered when the leader didn't provide that opportunity for the lap-downer to regain a lap (and there was always "payback!") now, understand that the leader only slowed to about "caution" speed, so depending where the leader was when the caution came out there may have been lots of time or very little time for the lap-downers to regain a lap .. once the leader crossed the start/finish line you were where you were and everyone fell into line preserving their track order (the unlapped lap-downers at the end of the pack but having regained a lap.)

Originally Posted by PenelopePitStop

I see. "A" lap. So your issue isn't so much the one "Lucky Dog" as it is the rest of the lapped cars not having a chance to beat the leader to the caution and regain a lap, correct? 1 or 2 laps down, I can see, but not 37.

no, my issue is that it should be by running position on the track, not on the scoreboard. why should any driver be given preference just because he/she is higher on the scoreboard than another driver? they currently re-align the field so the lap-downers are behind the lead lap cars for any restart with 10 or less laps to go, but not at other times, so it makes sense, to me anyway, that the Lucky Dog ought to be given to the lap-downer closest to the leader's rear bumper. then it's the luck of the draw, not manipulated because of preference.