It’s not that I have a personal vendetta against Formula 1.
It’s that F1 is full of itself.
The “pinnacle” of auto racing on Planet Earth was once again shown up by the good ol’ boys of NASCAR this past Sunday when all 43 competitors who started engines at the Brickyard 400 actually took the green flag and raced off into the unknown.
It wasn’t pretty, mind you, but compared to the 2005 U.S. Formula 1 Grand Prix, the men were separated from the boys.
NASCAR knew there were wear issues with the new cars and tire compound brought by Goodyear. F1 teams knew there were wear issues with the tires brought by Michelin in 2005.
The difference? NASCAR found a way to deal with it and put on a race.
Formula 1 watched as the majority of the field pulled the ejection handles and bailed out before the green flag flew.
Mind you, the drivers in Sunday’s Brickyard weren’t able to push their vehicles to the limits—or wisely chose not to. Several suffered tire failures that effectively took them out of the running, and may have dampened their chances of making the 12-man Chase for the Sprint Cup.
But as Freddie Mercury once sang, “The show must go on.”
NASCAR found a way to make it go on. They threw competition cautions every dozen laps to slow the field and allow the teams to pit for fresh rubber prior to complete failure.
I’ll say this. After the first four or six, perhaps even eight, times I had the distinct impression that the most you were going to get from a new set of sticker Goodyears was a dozen laps—30 miles.
“Canada, where is it?” Our cover story this month in Duh! Magazine.
I got it, they got it, and so NASCAR could have let them figure it out from there. But they put safety first, and really can’t be faulted for that.
Formula 1 was presented with the idea of creating a chicane to break up what is the longest full-power run on the schedule…er, was on the schedule.
Smell dead horse, anyone?
Regardless, I find it amusing that NASCAR can sit its drivers down and give them the “Shut up and drive!” but F1 can’t get half as many in line.
For the Formula 1 lemmings who may counter with, “They only ran 12 laps under green at a time!” I have this to offer: they still ran.
Run, Forrest, run!
It was effectively a series of sprint races from caution to caution, but NASCAR made it happen. Everyone was able to walk away with, at most, some crumpled sheet metal from the couple of failures that occurred (and Matt Kenseth’s crew got him back in the race after the right rear was torn apart on his car).
Heck, last place paid over $140,000. That’s what the winner makes on some weekends.
Wait! Is that a rumor of another IndyCar driver wanting to come to NASCAR I hear?
But I digress.
Formula 1 watched the masses parade out the gates, and six cars ran the Ferrari Show starring Michael Schumacher.
Can you say, “Refund, please”?
Again I laugh at the superiority complex that Formula 1 proudly bears. A few weeks ago it was oil on the track that the world’s best couldn’t avoid and the champagne sippers couldn’t figure out how to manage before someone wrecked.
Lucky for us NASCAR actually got something right. And I for one applaud the Indianapolis Motor Speedway for standing up and saying, “Not my problem!”
NASCAR has screwed the pooch from day one on how testing should be conducted with the new car. Regardless of what the teams said or requested, every team should have tested at all the tracks that the COT didn’t run on last year. Period, paragraph, end of story.
Goodyear would have known of the wear issue prior to race weekend, and had the opportunity to adjust the tire compound accordingly.
Mr. Helton, Eddie Gossage on line 1. He’s offering up Texas Motor Speedway for testing before the race there...We’re not interested? Oh, thanks anyway, Eddie.
NASCAR’s new cars are right-side heavy, and this showed through like the cords did as rubber came off of cars following a dozen laps at Indy this past Sunday.
I would suggest at times the management of both NASCAR and Formula 1 are top-heavy…though that could be seen as a favorable position by Max Mosely.
But NASCAR found a way to make a race happen, and the distance between first and second (third and forth, fifth and sixth), mere car lengths, gave the fans their money’s worth at The Brickyard.
Ultimately the best car on the weekend won the race. Congrats, Jimmie!
Formula 1 really needs to find a way to take notes and show that they’re capable of making decisions that are worthy of the “pinnacle” moniker.
Otherwise? Here’s rubber in your eye, F1.
Somebody please ‘splain that to me.
comments (64) write a comment »
write a new comment
2 months ago
I agree with you when the the 2005 Indianapolis Grand Prix was a farce, the FIA could have and should have responded better. As for the fans they should have been given a refund, or at least a partial one. I watched the NASCAR race you are talking about live and yes credit when credits due they found a good solution to a potentially difficult problem. Could this however be because they have learnt from F1's mistakes?
Also you need to see things from the other side, if an F1 driver smashed into that wall at the speeds they travel someone would have been seriosuly injured, Ralf Schumacher was lucky to escape his crash in one piece. The blame is really down to Michelin for providing dud tires.
At the same time however I think the American market needs to open up to F1, I have driven both single seat open wheelers and a stock car and while it is true they are completely different skills I found the stock car much easier to get to grips with. Also NASCAR races are often dull and laclustre, I'm sorry but watching a car turn left for 3, 4 or even 5 hundred laps is not entertainment and I question how skilled the drivers really are in comparison to F1 drivers.
from 2 months ago
James, thanks for your input.
I would assume that F1 can't learn from NASCAR when it comes to an engine blowing oil all over a track, and not taking action until a car crashes at high speed? Sorry, I don't think NASCAR is paying much attention to F1 in making racing-related decisions.
So Ralf Schumacher crashed into the wall (or was it the SAFER barrier—something that was a NASCAR-mandated safety improvement?) in a car that's designed to protect the driver and disintegrate, absorbing the impact energy. Schumacher wasn't going any faster than the Cup cars go.
The designs are two entirely different animals, and both are designed to maximize driver safety.
I agree the story boils down to the rubber provided... But the difference was in how NASCAR and F1 handled the issue.
The American market IS open to F1. It's Bernie Ecclestone who's got an issue to the "American Market".
I'll alse cede that there are times NASCAR races can be boring, but we race 400-500 miles. F1 doesn't. And when the numbers clearly show that the winner of a F1 race will come from the first two rows, I will debate which is a more entertaining race to watch. F1 is all about qualifying—you start up front, your chances of winning increase exponentially. They're even greater if you driver a red or silver car.
Finally, I think we can pass on the debate over who are more skilled drivers. That's a no-win scenario, and I'd just as soon keep this discussion to the ability for the managers to make a decision and conduct a race. Just remember how close Jeff Gordon was to pace when he swapped cars with Juan Pablo Montoya a few years ago at Indy.
from 2 months ago
So put some rain tires on a nascar and throw them on the track during a down pour if they are such gods among men. Consider the fact that a F1 car will nearly match the speed of a nascar in only 1/3 of the track whereas a nascar needs 2 yes 2 full laps to reach terminal velocity. Maybe just maybe you might be able to open your eyes just far enough to see a little past nascar and its continuing "dumbing of America" racing.
2 months ago
Yeah I take your arguement into account actually, I would love to see the lead in F1 change more times, the problem in that respect is that all of the cars are so different in terms of performance. In NASCAR an owner can own 3 or 4 cars, maybe more I'm not too knowledgeable on it, its not documented at all in England. Something should be done to make F1 cars more evenly matched.
And true, Ralf wasn't going any faster but I think due to the shape of the car he would have hit it at a greater rate of G- force, I'm not a scientist however so I can not personally prove this. And yes, the FIA handled the 2005 Indianapolis Grand Prix awfully.
2 months ago
You can't compare NASCAR and F1 at all. From what i saw at NASCAR races is that you will never know who will win. So, that was intresting to watch. The battle until last lap. We don't see that in F1 and maybe it's ok to stay like that.
But, American market really didn't open to Formula 1. It's not everything in Bernie's hands, i never heard that Americans themselfs want to put money like some middle-east countries do to bring F1 to their country.
from 2 months ago
True, there is little to compare NASCAR to F1. Its almost like trying to compare baseball to football... Yeah, they're both sports played with a ball on a field, but...
But the American market IS open to F1. How many people showed up at each race? 100,000+
Still, that number pales in comparison to 250,000+ for NASCAR at Indy, and numbers from 300,000 to half a million for the Indy 500 (historically).
In part it's that there's was only three F1 races on this side of the pond (Canada, U.S., Brazil). So I think in part that would be something that would exclude gaining numbers here. Fox has been carrying the last four races (Canada-Germany) so more people had access to view them (though on delay, versus live).
Another issue is the lack of an American driver to cheer for in F1.
I would suggest looking at the sides of the cars and then tell me what the U.S. market it. Microsoft, Mobil 1, Intel, among others and pretty big companies here. Also, I believe the U.S. is the best market for sales of many of the manufacturers.
But this is another topic of discussion, for someone else to write about. I'd rather stick with the topic at hand.
2 months ago
There was one important difference between the two races. The F1 had teams using two different tires Michelin, Bridgestone. The French tire company had come to Indy with a cheater tire, it was using sidewall deflection to get a bigger footprint. This was designed to come into play, with very soft tires. To avoid the problems, all the Michelin teams had to do was raise the air pressure, nobody was interested in that as they would lose their advantage. So the thinner sidewall was letting go, Ralf had a nasty shunt. FB and RD used this to avoid racing, as it would brought the tire under close scrutiny. As it turns out, Ferrari presented digital photos to the FIA, showing the tire working outside the rules, the tire was banned without racing again.
Now it just so happens that I go back with NASCAR for a very long time, was given a special plaque by Richard 4th July 1984 to commemorate his 200th win. In fact I got the plaque a month or so later, was at the race though. My point is, there is a saying that those in glass houses should not throw stones. While I am a huge NASCAR fan, have been I think to every track many times, it is not a smart move to knock F1, when the problems within NASCAR are as bad. The fact is they are different styles of racing and impossible to compare, when was the last time a NASCAR race was run in the rain?
from 2 months ago
Suzuka, Japan 1997
But then I don't have to go into the details of the differences between the two types of cars, do I?
from 2 months ago
Adam your comment does not make sense
from 2 months ago
To you. But your question was answered.
2 months ago
The reason that F1 couldn't find a workable compromise in 2005 was down to one factor: a tire war, and whether by ignorance or intent, your article completely glosses over it. If the latter, shame on you.
Think back to the Goodyear vs Hoosier days, and then re-think what happened at the Brickyard in that context. NASCAR was able to mandate those 12 lap runs because doing so levels the playing field. We all know the stink that the mfgs made in the pre-COT days when one set of headlight decals and trunk badges looked to have an aero advantage over the others. Can you imagine the resulting fiasco if Goodyear went into The Hauler and said they needed 12 lap runs and Hoosier said they didn't?
from 2 months ago
The point, Stuart, is that F1 didn't do anything. Period. Just like with the oil slick at Silverstone.
The tire war is irrelevant.
2 months ago
Think you should stick to NECKCAR!
2 months ago
When that infamous incicdent occurred at Indy 2005, I did wonder why the whole field couldn't just run on bridgestone for one race and have it as a non champonship race, but of course, there was not enought o go around. Then the idea of 10 laps full throttle, one lap under safety car for pit stop and go again. Great idea, but of course no, ythat didn't help ferrari. funny how that was their only win of the season.
I actually watched NASCAR when it was at indy and I liked it, sort of. At least they have some balls in their trousers.
from 2 months ago
The Michelin runners would never have run on the Bridgestone (tires could have been at the race)it would have been a nightmare and most of the Michelins teams would have been lapped if they were shod with the Japanese tire.
2 months ago
Maybe if NASCAR had developed a car that didn't have to CrabWalk to go around the bathtubs they race in/on they could run more than 25 miles without pitting on a relatively flat (bathtub) track.
I do not feel this was such a brilliant decision by NASCAR (that F1 needs to sit up and take notice to) just a hip shoot last minute one to sell beer and popcorn to the good ole boys. Boy Howdy !!!
Can anyone say "Tire Test"
Casey Pons
2 months ago
If the '05 race had been run as this year's NASCAR Jokeyard 400, it would have meant that the six Bridgestone cars would have run full out and the rest of the field, on Michelin tires would have had to stop every few laps and change tires. What would be the point? I suppose all the cars could have stopped for a tire change every 12 laps or so but it wouldn't have been a Grand prix.
Also, NASCAR awards points down through the field. I'm not sure but they may even give points for just showing up. F1 awards 10 points for first place and 1 point for 8th place. The rest get nothing. So the 6 Bridgestone runners were almost guaranteed the first 6 positions, the rest could only reasonably expect to fight for the remaining 1 or 2 points.
Comparing F1 and NASCAR is like comparing World Cup Soccer and the NBA. The first has far fewer goals scored but each goal counts for so much more and the competition is on a world scale.
One pass in F1 must be worth at least a hundred in NASCAR.
Added to this, NASCAR is a spec series. It’s dumped down racing but those who like it think it's fun to watch the crashes.
from 2 months ago
Robert, your remarks toward NASCAR are condescending and no better than Adams toward F1.
2 months ago
I watched the whole race and enjoyed it ... Thats 2 out of 2 for me now ... I am getting too used to this ... While is was slightly boring in places they managed to keep it together and once the rubber was down the last 30 or so where pretty good ... Enjoyed it ... But dont attack F1 Adam ... Just call it a learning curve !
from 2 months ago
That was the puzzling issue of the day, Ben. The rubber wasn't working into the track surface—it was powdering up out by the wall. Thus the tire wear issue did not improve at all during the race.
from 2 months ago
Was interesting to see it and how it was dealt with ... Excellent show ... While there was a lot of boring periods the last sector of the race was intense and well done to JJ ... KB down in 6th ... Good result some would say !
2 months ago
Clearly, NASCAR handled the situation better than F1 did. The entire race was ran...and all of the cars entered ran. Sure, it was raced in 10-12 laps spurts (which isn't all that exciting)...but it was better than nothing.
All the same, NASCAR & Goodyear should be humiliated by what happened. It was their fault...and blaming the track was childish (though I was glad to see the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, and Indycar racing by association, stand up for itself...with a little fact about the lack of tire troubles Indycar has seen).
from 2 months ago
True... Which is why I threw in the little excerpt of the phone call from Eddie Gossage to NASCAR. He offered them the opportunity to come to Texas and test after Vegas, since only three of the new cars had been here to test. NASCAR didn't take him up on the offer, and instead went to Phoenix to test (where they ran 2 races with this new car last year with no tire issues)... So that was bizarre.
Now that I've heard the explanation of how tracks are selected for testing, I have a better understanding of the process. But NASCAR has exercised little common sense in the process. Why test at Phoenix when you've got to run two races at Texas and have no data for the track at large? Puzzling.
And like I said, I was happy to see IMS stand up. Goodyear brought a tire compound that was clearly substandard. It is rare, but we've seen instances of where a track wouldn't take rubber before (Charlotte following grinding a couple of years ago being an example.)
2 months ago
Do I think something needs to be done about the tires... Yes. Do I have a solution nope. I'm just lil' ol' me who doesn't have a engineering degree and can barely change the tires on my Neon (but I can my daddy showed me how thank you very much lol) :)
It's been suggested by some (Chad Knaus has said it several times, and then I heard the argument for it again today on Dialed In) That perhaps the tires should be made wider and or taller because they aren't designed to handle the bigger heavier car. Which makes sense NASCAR widened the car but left the smaller tires on.
F1 *Shrugs* eh, it's F1, I've only seen one race I have no knowledge about it at all :)
As far as the race goes with all the caution flags, I'd rather see NASCAR take a somewhat proactive approach to it. It's better to be extra cautious then to have to explain to someone's family that their loved one is dead because safety measures weren't taken. So for that I applaud NASCAR, but I really think they need to do something about the tires. I like the fact that Indy spoke up and said, not my fault! NASCAR needs to do something and don't even get me started on the testing issue..... NASCAR totally messed up with that!
Great article Adam :)
from 2 months ago
You go Nikki! Show us how it's done! :-)
I would suggest that Knaus has a point, but I'm curious how much additional weight that would add to the tire. The changers are already some serious athletes.
Hey watch some of the F1 stuff... Especially qualifying. THAT's entertaining.
And let's hear your two cents' on the testing issue Nikki! But maybe put it in a full article rather than just wasting it in a post... :-) I'd want to make sure it was available for all to see.
from 2 months ago
I'll put paper to pen, or fingers to keyboard after this weekend for my thoughts on testing :) Work is going to be crazy! I choose to change my career this year and decided to become a manager in a major retail chain. Because at the time that sounded better than the job I had for nearly 10 years.... And this weekend is Tax free weekend... What was I thinking?!?!?!?
2 months ago
great article, adam
from 2 months ago
Thanks, Alan.
2 months ago
It is all about fun. If you are a NASCAR fan great! I f you like F1 great! Why the constant put downs. Watch what you like, cheer for your favorite driver, get a life.
from 2 months ago
Hey I enjoy watching both, and do every race.
I'm simply comparing the management and decision-making of the two series. I beat up on NASCAR as well as F1 in this instance.
2 months ago
I agree Steve, I have been a fan of both all my life, they should not and cannot be compared. They are as different as cultures that they are from. It is wrong to attack one from the others viewpoint as that really is a sign of racing ignorance. F1, I love it, NASCAR I love it as much or more (have not missed a race in years). Adam you need to learn more about what makes each each one tick, what is the culture behind them.
NASCAR has grown up a lot in the last 20 years, it is now a multi social event that is accepted in main stream. It is as good a series as there is on the planet, yes it has problems, it is though a series of quality, it's drivers are as good as any. Now if you follow NASCAR, then you would know, that guys like JG, KB, RG and TS would laugh at your silly attacks on F1. You will find they also follow F1 with great intent, they are huge fans. Stop trying to make a division between two great series, they are both better than that!
2 months ago
A farce is a farce, Adam. I'm glad that NASCAR's taken more reconciliatory action, and faster, but this was the exact same situation as F1 had. I was mad at F1 and Michelin for screwing up, and I'm mad at NASCAR and Goodyear for screwing up.
But I'm just as mad at IMS, and I think that's where the real blame needs to lie. What's been the constant in these situations? The track. Tony George needs to address his holy grail's racing surface.
from 2 months ago
What will be interesting is what will MotoGP do? They have a big race coming up at Indy on the newly configured road course.
As for the oval... Since the surface hasn't been changed for several years, the failure was obviously in the tire compound on this race car. We know the new car is balanced in weight distribution, so Goodyear is going to have to develop a compound that can handle the stresses placed on it.
NASCAR has already told everyone and their brother in the garage area that "The car ain't changing."
So why should Goodyear be any different?
2 months ago
A lot of these F1 "geniuses" need to read up on their NASCAR facts. 2 full laps to reach top speed? Its not even that bad for Daytona and Talladega anymore with the gear packages they are running. read up sherlocks
2 months ago
You can guarantee, that the fault lies with NASCAR not the teams, tire company or the track.
When they first introduced the new car, it was with a roll out that was going to allow enough time to garner empirical evidences of the cause and consequences. Then after a few races and some great results, they jumped into the COT with eyes closed shut. They continue to rush to judgment and make silly mistakes. The time is approaching where NASCAR needs to stop being a law unto themselves, the teams need to have a much bigger say. NASCAR is about to go through some tough times, sponsors are going to fall by the wayside, this is a time for all to work together.
2 months ago
NASCAR does not have a reach that is far flung like in Japan or Malaysia or India etc., where F1 has a wide-reaching audience. Can we ever see a NASCAR race in India? No! Whereas we can see a F1 race in india, that too live in 2010.
2 months ago
Who cares, as an American F1 fan I had no desire to go back to whitebread heartland america for a race anyway, because Indy is about as fun and interesting as a visit to the dentist. The town is lame and the people are boring. The scene was nonexistant.
NASCAR types might revel in driving their campers around in the infield and drinking bad beer, but I'll keep going to Montreal for one of the best parties and races in North America every year and fly to Europe once every few years to catch more races in exciting places.
Go fast, turn left. Look at all the rednecks. ZZZZzzzzz
from 2 months ago
Now I know there is only one Hiz
from 2 months ago
Here's a question for you: What's the average margin of victory in NASCAR vs. F1?
Go fast, turn left and right, expect one of the top-4 starters to lead the parade...
This isn't a discussion about which series is better. It is about the management making decisions.
2 months ago
The issue here is the fact that there were multiple teams using 2 different tires. There is no point for the Michelin drivers to engage in a race and risk their 15 million dollar car and lives for what would amount to frequent pit stops, just to be bypassed by bridgestone drivers with no safety concerns.
Though the race was boring, I understand fully not wanting to get into a multi-million dollar car just to drive at speeds that could kill or injure me and not have a chance in winning the race.
from 2 months ago
So why do the guys who driver for teams other than Ferrari, McLaren, or perhaps BMW even bother?
For that matter, why does ANY racer bother?
Risk is part of the business.
The fact of the matter is F1 failed to make any decision to accommodate racing that day. They left the issue up to the teams, who made the decision for them.
2 months ago
It had nothing to do with risk for the car. Michelin had a tire that worked when running very low air pressure, the tire was a cheater. It had been designed to increase the footprint under load, outside the legal limit(that is why the car was banned not long after this event). There was not a problem, if the Michelin ran normal air pressures, only when they ran it low and the sidewall was letting go under the extreme loads of the final corner. That is the reason the FIA had told the Michelin shod teams, race or else, the tire is safe. The teams refused to drive with normal pressures as it would have negated their illegal advantage.
from 2 months ago
I watched that race. I don't readily recall Formula 1 calling out Michelin for the issue. Did they?
What car was banned, or are you referring to the tire? And was this why Michelin ultimately pulled out of F1? They're still getting their racing and development in Le Mans and ALMS.
2 months ago
It was all about Michelin and yes it was the tire that was banned. The problem started when Ralf had his huge shunt. When the FIA, discovered the pressure issue, they knew that there was not a safety issue if Michelin ran proper tire pressures. There was not one failure or problem with a tire that was inflated to proper spec.
from 2 months ago
So the FIA didn't force the teams to inflate to the proper pressure, or tell Michelin to push them to do so?
Seems under-inflation is an issue that's bitten more than Michelin. Goodyear has had this problem in Cup as well.
from 2 months ago
Michelin wanted the chicane, as it would allow them to run the lower air pressure. They were using a cheater tire and knew that with it they had a huge advantage. One more point though Adam, you attacked F1 from a NASCAR point of view and that is wrong. Unlike my friend Long J, I give the article a one star.
2 months ago
Remember the appeal that Bridgestone gave to remove the high chicane's from the track as to allow the race to go on. The Bridgestone teams refused.
2 months ago
"Remember the appeal that Bridgestone gave to remove the high chicane's from the track as to allow the race to go on. The Bridgestone teams refused."
Sorry, I meant to say:
Remember the appeal that Michelin gave to remove the high chicane's from the track as to allow the race to go on. The Bridgestone teams refused.
from 2 months ago
I thought the Michelin teams requested a chicane to be placed between the exit of the infield and the final turn, thus reducing the length of the high-speed run and removing the high-speed, high-G final turn.
Bridgestone teams refused.
2 months ago
Adam
I love controversial pieces, that are balanced - and this is surely one
lets cut through all the POTD facade, I like it - thats pretty much it
but I have a ques
is there a difference in the insurance between f-1 and nascar
because I know that was one of the predominant reasons why f-1 cars pulled back ... if some one or something of a mishap happens - the f-1 insurance is costlier than (gas) these days
wud love to know - if nascar did it, because they could afford the insurance (may be the risk insurance is lower) .... and may be f-1 could not
not taking a pot shot at your piece .... but providing another persp
cheers - liked it !
2 months ago
Michelin wanted the chicane, as it would allow them to run the lower air pressure. They were using a cheater tire and knew that with it they had a huge advantage. One more point though Adam, you attacked F1 from a NASCAR point of view and that is wrong. Unlike my friend Long J, I give the article a one star.
from 2 months ago
I attacked BOTH F1 AND NASCAR, Paul. But the fact is this: NASCAR showed the ability to make a decision. F1 choose not to make a decision. F1 screwed up then, NASCAR screwed up now, and I pointed out the issue with both. But NASCAR made a call, F1 sat on their hands.
You may not like what I write, but perhaps you'll take some time from bashing my work to go read the purpose of the star system here on BR.
2 months ago
The title of this article says it all. Don't go and try and change what was your clear intent, when you wrote the article. As for stars, I have no idea what they mean in the whole scheme of things, only what they mean to me. You attacked F1 and from all view points, NASCAR. Now I happen to be a huge NASCAR fan but give me a break, NASCAR has some huge problems, do you want me to start? People in glass houses should not throw stones.
from 2 months ago
ha ha ha - i dont even what to say Adam and Paul
but am laughing - its getting hot in the ol' kitchen
2 months ago
If so, Adam is getting his ambitions mixed up with his capabilities.
2 months ago
Adam could have easily used the problem at the Brickyard to demonstrate, the poor management of both NASCAR and the FIM. Instead he used one buffoon to attack another. My real question is what is his motive for attacking F1, could it possibly be that he wants to pander to a slightly redder necked reader.
from 2 months ago
Your F1 superiority attitude is showing, again, Paul. As is your redundant nature for ignorance in the face of enlightenment.
"NASCAR has screwed the pooch from day one on how testing should be conducted with the new car. Regardless of what the teams said or requested, every team should have tested at all the tracks that the COT didn’t run on last year. Period, paragraph, end of story.
Goodyear would have known of the wear issue prior to race weekend, and had the opportunity to adjust the tire compound accordingly.
Mr. Helton, Eddie Gossage on line 1. He’s offering up Texas Motor Speedway for testing before the race there...We’re not interested? Oh, thanks anyway, Eddie.
NASCAR’s new cars are right-side heavy, and this showed through like the cords did as rubber came off of cars following a dozen laps at Indy this past Sunday.
I would suggest at times the management of both NASCAR and Formula 1 are top-heavy…though that could be seen as a favorable position by Max Mosely."
If that's not ripping NASCAR, I don't know what is... Obviously you don't.
And just for good measure, I threw in a dig on IndyCar. But you missed that as well.
Next time, read the whole article, not just the parts you want to cherry-pick to get your rocks off on.
It's unfortunate you have "so much" to share yet waste your time beating on others.
from 2 months ago
"FLAG AS OFFENSIVE"
Well, I've found a lot that Paul has posted to be prejudiced, at minimum, and I find his not listening to what was said [or rather, posted] offensive.
If memory serves, Michelin wanted a chicane, but the F1 people would not comply, and the Bridgestone probably expressed non-support as well. Michelin was ready to bring in different tires, but again, this was not allowed. This just shows that they [the F1 honchos] are more interested in status quo rather than making sure there is good competition; or in F1's case, a full field [which is what? 19 or 20 cars?]
I think the recent comments by JP Montoya [RE: Indy] was interesting, as he said F1 looks at their series as a business, while NASCAR looks at the events as a sport. Both series are big business, of course.
NASCAR may be arrogant [see: Brian France] and while thry still think the big crowds are at the tracks [ignoring the empty seats], and the seemingly endless flow of money has not slowed [it certainly has], they still understand that fans pay the way and a poor race, with the competition yellows, is better than no race at all.
When NASCAR had it's last tire war {Hoosier/Goodyear} there was at least one race that one of the tire companies pulled out, as the tires they had at that track were not durable. Since NASCAR demanded that the companies have enough tire to supply the whole field at every race, they had a back-up plan built in. F-1 did not have that luxury, and, for whatever stubborn reason, would not allow replacement tires.
The powers-that-be in F1 don't care if they race in the US or not, as they can find plenty of money from places like Bahrain, Malaysia, and China who will build tracks and give them lots and lots of money to come "race." {F-1 almost never has any real racing anymore, what with the leader/winner almost always determined by who can lead through the first turn. }
2 months ago
You are just back out of an ugly statement, that headed this article. Your intent was to slam F1 "NASCAR at Indy: Here’s Rubber in F1’s Eye!" You said my F1 superiority attitude, is a statement that clearly shoes that you do not read the comments, you are just interested in getting more comments on the board. So I will say it is crayon, I am a huge NASCAR fan and have been for many years. Have been to countless races, my guess is a great many more than yourself. Have been on the inside of NASCAR and at no time have I attacked the series, just yourself. Face up to the truth, you started this article to attack F1, when the issue was addressed, you jumped ship. Putting this article in F1 just to get some votes is quite sad.
2 months ago
You are just trying toback out of an ugly statement, that headed this article. Your intent was to slam F1 "NASCAR at Indy: Here’s Rubber in F1’s Eye!" You said my F1 superiority attitude, is a statement that clearly showes that you do not read the comments, you are just interested in getting more comments on the board. So I will say it is crayon, I am a huge NASCAR fan and have been for many years. Have been to countless races, my guess is a great many more than yourself. Have been on the inside of NASCAR and at no time have I attacked the series, just yourself. Face up to the truth, you started this article to attack F1, when the issue was addressed, you jumped ship. Putting this article in F1 just to get some votes is quite sad.
2 months ago
In my opinion, both sports are fun and interesting but totally different. In F1, the cars and the technology really take center stage. Lets be honest, the F1 cars are amazing, and are always changing (at least in regards to aero packages). But the sacrifice for F1 is the lack of passing.
In NASCAR, the cars are quite boring (my opinion) but the race has many lead changes and multiple passes. Just ask JPM.
It saddens me that America has no F1 driver (since Scott Speed) and has not had a Champion in over 30 years (MA). I think this really hurts America's interest in the sport. Look at how Spain totally became F1 insane after Alonso got his first WC.
I like variety, so it is a good thing that they are both there for our entertainment.
2 months ago
Very well said Rob!!!!!!!!!!!!
from 2 months ago
wow - Paul, you guys did beat this ugly snake to death didnt ya ?
got your email - workin on it - thanks
2 months ago
A NASCAR fan flaming F1... Shocking. Instead of being immature, how about remembering that as a fan you represent your sport...
Driver, fan and participant safety should always be priority #1 in any motorsport. For you to criticize F1 for doing just that in 2005 is ignorant, and suggests you've never been anywhere near the track or paddock. "Shut up and drive" is a poor excuse for safety. I should think you could be a little more respectful of the people that risk their lives to entertain you.
No disrespect Adam. but our opinions differ.
write a new comment