Longer NASCAR Races Can Make Early Mistakes Less Costly

So I was listening to the NASCAR race this weekend at Pocono. First off, I am a huge racing fan, not only do I follow the sport everyday, I write about it all the time. I follow stats and I write notes throughout the race, things to look for in future events and listen to the drivers and the crew what they are doing to stay one lap ahead of the car.

I like long races.

Many people will say, "well you're not in the drivers' seat for four hours," but I like them anyway. I know the argument that shorter races mean more chances for teams to use strategy to win a race.

But I still feel like longer races give drivers who have issues early on a chance to be a contender. Racing is about endurance and 95% of these drivers are pretty good shape and are able to deal with the physical aspect of sitting in the car.

But longer races allow these drivers to try different setups in a car going in that maybe they couldn't do if the race was 100 laps instead of 267 like Chicagoland. It also allows drivers to look more at conditions and not length of the race.

So many times we are racing against the track condtions and how they will change throughout the day that makes the race interesting. If you only had 150 laps to learn about how the tracks change from night to day, or when the sun comes out versus the clouds, or the temperature whether the track is cooling down or heating up, what could you possibly pull from that?

Look at Kevin Harvick Sunday—early on he was involved with Joe Nemechek and was forced way back in the field. The cautions fell when he needed them to and he finished with a top-five. had the race only been 150 laps or shorter, he might not have had a real shot at winning.

Look at Jeff Gordon at Richmond. He qualified poorly, had to start at the rear of the field due to a ignition problem, and he worked his way up through the field even after he fell a lap down—he was as high third at one point, and he finished ninth, but still—in a shorter race he might never had a shot.

I know at short track 500 laps is long race, but it allows strategy to come into play. Track position is key, especially with these new boxier cars that punch a big hole, passing is tough.

I love seeing drivers gamble early on in a race trying two tires, or no tires—it gives them a shot to see if that plan will work at the end of the race.

Now granted, the track could have lost grip or gained grip or your strategy cost you track position. Your setup could be way off early on and you get right. 500 laps gives you a shot to make a tough day better than it would it been had the race only been 250 laps or 300 laps.

Now there are few tracks that carry multiple races that NASCAR could go without and a couple tracks that could be put in their place that consistenly sell out, but that's a whole new article.

If I had the chance to sit through everyone of these races in a season, I would. I envy the guy who travels to all the tracks and tailgates with the fans, or the writer who gets a chance to experience something new every week.

I get the argument that shorter races are less taxing on the driver the fans aren't sitting in the stands to watch the final 50 laps be the most exciting.

But I love the strategy that starts from the green flag. I love watching crew chiefs pace back and forth when a caution comes out while they are on pit road or just after they pit. Racing to me is racing whether it be in 12-lap heats or 500 laps around Bristol. I am gonna watch or listen either way.