Bleacher Report - Articles by D-Boy

Is USF1 in Trouble Yet?

D-Boy — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:40:10 -0500

It's a simple question with a simple answer. Is USF1 in serious danger of not making the 2010 grid? We've seen very little from USF1. But does that mean they've got no chance?

No.

In fact, as things stand right now, it looks pretty good. What matters isn't so much what we know about USF1 on it's own, but a combination of that with what we DON'T know about USF1, AND what we know about the Acura ARX-02a.

People have pointed to the lack of a wind tunnel model as proof that USF1 is doomed. If they aren't wind tunnel testing, what hope do they have?

Well, for that we look to the aforementioned Acura ARX-02a. A car designed ENTIRELY in CFD. Wirth Research, the firm that designed and built the cars, abandoned wind tunnel testing early on after verifying the accuracy of the CFD numbers.

From then on, everything was done in computer: airflow measuring, crash testing, and even TRACK testing.

And when cars were finally built and put through their crash tests, track tests, etc., everything matched up to the computer numbers. Computer design has come so far that race car designers can build a highly competitive car solely in a computerized environment.

It's a cheaper method as well, what with there being need to produce parts only after all design phases are complete.

A German publication recently claimed that USF1 has not been crash testing—a claim which Peter Windsor has denied. Notably, Windsor did not specify whether they were doing virtual crash testing or if they had produced actual parts to test.

Either way, the fact that there is some sort of testing underway indicates that USF1 has made progress.

So what are USF1's chances of making the grid? Too early to tell for sure, so I'll give them 50/50 until the end of November. Why the end of November? Because that's when USF1 has promised a rolling chassis by.

And rightfully so—if they can't get a rolling chassis done by then, their chances of making the 2010 grid will be slim. But if they DO, their chances are almost 100 percent.

The Acura ARX-02a tells us that USF1 may be taking an approach that is new to F1. It's an approach that's proven to be capable of working right, but it seems to me that many of the F1 followers in Europe don't like the idea of a different way working.

Did you know that almost every negative story about USF1 was first published in Germany's Auto Motor und Sport? This publication really seems to have it in for USF1.

There's certainly no reason to expect USF1 will definitely make the grid next year, but there's likewise no reason to suspect they WON'T. So if you don't have a good reason to be pessimistic, then don't be spreading rumors like Auto Motor und Sport enjoys doing.

USF1 may end up dying out after only a season or two in F1, but you never know. Their radical approach just might make them the best of the new teams, at the very least.

After all, the Acura ARX-02a might not be able to beat the diesels, but it conquers everything else in the series. It appears that USF1 is doing things the same way Acura did.

And if that's true, there's only one reason why we shouldn't expect USF1 to be just as all-conquering: Acura had LMP2 information to build off of when designing the ARX-02a.

But on that note, did you know the first ARX-02a rolling chassis wasn't completed until Dec. 2008? Considering that modern LMPs are just about as complex as modern F1 cars, I'd say the Acura ARX-02a gives us a LOT of reasons to be optimistic about USF1.

Three weeks. Then we find out how good USF1's chances REALLY are.

ALMS Laguna Seca and Future Overview

D-Boy — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:03:45 -0400

The season is over and came to an end with the most exciting race since Sebring. Somehow appropriate to bookend a lackluster season with your two best rounds.

A farewell win for Gil de Ferran and possibly Adrian Fernandez make the race all the better, particularly with the two battling for the overall win right down to the last lap.

Jorg Bergmeister needs to be penalized somehow. Although Jan Magnussen bears some blame for starting the bumping, Jorg's retaliation was unacceptable. Some will note that Jorg moved to the right before the Corvette spun, but if you look closely you'll see the Corvette starts spinnig BEFORE Jorg moves right.

And the spin begins right after Jorg appears to jink lightly to the left again. It's quite clear to the attentive eye that Jorg is at fault for the spin, and were the season still going I'd certainly be giving him a qualifying penalty for the next race. But with the season done, I'll have to settle for a monetary fine.

Rant over. Back to positives.

If Laguna Seca is anything to go by, we can expect good things from the combined LMP class structure. Two LMP2s (counting the unclassified biobutanol-powered Dyson entry) topped the timing sheets in practice, and Adrian Fernandez had a real shot at the overall win, despite the lack of any equivalency applied to the cars yet.

With LMP2s still able to get close to LMP1 speed, we can expect quite a year when they've been equalized and put in one class.

Just don't expect Audi to be there. They'll be at Sebring and Petit surely, but I can't see them being interested in the combined class when Le Mans won't be run that way.

I suspect we'll have at least seven full-time LMPs next year, and if they're all in the same class that'd be quite a show.

LMP-C has gotten a lot of positive reaction and we should have a very reasonable field there, and we all know that GT-C has gotten a lot of interest.

The American Le Mans Series ended a lackluster season as best they could, and showing us a lot of potential for a good series in 2010. Mixing the open competition the series is known for with some close spec racing should be very, VERY unique, and almost certainly entertaining.

American Le Mans Series' New Class Structure: Good Idea or Bad Idea?

D-Boy — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:40:48 -0400

Prior to yesterday's great race at Road America, the American Le Mans Series announced a revised class structure for 2010.

This is a radical change that will either make for a great season, or one great, big "WTF?" moment.

In a nutshell, we'll have a single LMP class consisting of a merged LMP1 and LMP2—though they will continue to be run separately at the 12 Hours of Sebring and Petit Le Mans—one GT class consisting of the current GT2 rulebook, and two "Challenge" classes. The Challenge classes will be spec classes consisting of the current ALMS-Challenge class concept as the GT Challenge, and the implementation of the European Formula Le Mans Cup cars as the LMP Challenge class.

Now, I am cautiously optimistic about this change. Although I believe having one open and one spec class in both LMP and GT will open the ALMS to a wider audience—there are a lot of people out there who prefer spec racing, after all—I worry about what will happen if the problems that beset the ALMS field this year were to suddenly clear up.

We all know the economy played a huge factor in the problem, and it isn't likely to clear up quickly. But think about this: The ALMS has averaged a little over 20 cars since the Challenge class was implemented, and just shy of 10 of these have been LMPs. So let's shuffle those LMPs into one class, and add about the same number of LMP Challenge cars.

If we assume we'll also have about nine or 10 GT Challenge cars, our field will average about 38 cars per race. That'd be quite exciting—until you got to Lime Rock Park, when it'd be downright frightening.

But again, what if the problems keeping teams away were to lift themselves? We could suddenly end up with up to double the amount of normal LMPs, which would suddenly make both Challenge Classes look unnecessary.

Some people don't watch NASCAR, not because of any issues with the cars, tracks, or drivers, but because they feel NASCAR has way too many cars on track. The revamped class structure in ALMS could also alienate people who don't like seeing so many cars on track.

Personally, I consider too many cars to be a good problem to have, but not everyone feels that way.

Other potential problems with the revised structure include questions about the skill levels some Challenge drivers will have, as the Challenge classes are almost certainly guaranteed to be used as entries into the series for newer drivers, to concerns about rolling chicanes.

Yeah you read that last bit correctly. On the speedtv.com forum, one user actually commented, "If they wanted moving chicanes, they could have just brought over the Lavaggi."

Yeah, there are people concerned that the Challenge classes potential to be rolling chicanes.

Allow me to make an important note to you people who are concerned about this: You are talking about a form of racing that is built around the idea of putting slower cars on the track.

Le Mans-style racing is constructed around the idea of rolling chicanes. You're honestly telling me it's a concern now?

I suspect this revised structure will work out well in the short term. But when the economy beigns to recover, and proper LMP teams begin to return, I begin to worry about how the series will adapt.

Currently, there is no system set up for Formula Le Mans in America outside of its impending application as the LMP Challenge. The GT Challenge cars have places is other championships, though.

Would the FLM cars replace a class in IMSA Lites? Would IMSA form a new ladder championship to use them?

It's more what will happen when the Challenge classes become unnecessary that worries me, not anything about their implementation.

When it comes to implementation, I'm more worried about the proper LMPs. They'll have to balance the restrictions and the LMP1s and the restriction removals on the LMP2s rather carefully to make things work.

I suspect 2010 will be a very entertaining year, however. So bring it on, ALMS!

ALMS: Finally Regaining Their Form

D-Boy — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:16:14 -0400

All season long, I've had very little positive to say about the ALMS. The loss of Audi was only one detail that has contributed to a horrendous drop in car count—a drop so bad they had to make a new class to flesh out the field a bit. While I've come to enjoy the Challenge Class quite a bit, it's hard to push past this fact.

ALMS's loss of car count has resulted in a lackluster season where, in terms of on-track action, it's been consistently beaten out by the Rolex Sports Car Series—a concept many people once thought impossible. Grand-Am has been so much better this year that their TV ratings have been jumping dramatically, as well as o-track attendance. Clearly, most fans are more worried about good action than beautiful, high-tech race cars.

Of course, we already knew that since NASCAR wouldn't be the juggernaut that it has become if that was not the case.

But at Lime Rock, it would appear that things are finally starting to turn around. The LMP2 Acura has shown it can be beaten by something other than a Penske-run Porsche RS Spyder, and the series has shown again why having four classes on track at once is so exciting.

Although many aspects of Lime Rock were very follow-the-leader for most of the race, it still ended up being the most exciting race of the season, bar none. Better than Sebring, better than Le Mans, and yes, far better than ANY of the season's Grand-Am races. You have to go back to the rain race at VIR before a Grand-Am event gets anywhere close to stacking up to the Lime Rock ALMS race.

And now, things are set to get even better.

The entry list at Mid-Ohio gives us 28 cars as things stand right now. Five LMP1, five LMP2, 12 GT2, and six ALMS-C. It's all right on the money—I've always said each class needs a minimum of five cars. In addition to the much-anticipated debut of the new, lazily-renamed GT2 Corvette C6-R, we have the debut of the Cytosport Porsche RS Spyder. After his first test run of the car, team owner/driver Greg Pickett said of the experience, "This is the best race car I have ever driven."

Such a glowing review speaks volumes for the team's confidence. I'll go ahead and predict that Cytosport will make the podium at Mid-Ohio, and maybe even steal the LMP2 victory from right under the noses of the Fernandez and Dyson teams.

Lime Rock also showed us that all of the non-Acura LMP1 teams are capable of putting on a good fight for the third place spot, which give us a good fight for Best of the Rest, while the Acura domination itself has a different dynamic that makes it more intriguing than the Audi domination.

It's too bad that Rocketsports will not debut at Mid-Ohio, as they had indicated they hoped to manage. But with a little luck, we'll get to see them at Road America. At least by being a race or two later than the new Corvettes, they can size up their competition a bit.

It looks like things are finally coming together this year for the ALMS. They're definitely ready to knock Grand-Am to the side again and become the superior sports car series in EVERY way, rather than just one way.

The real excitement is about to begin, and it is GLORIOUS!

What is the Best ACTIVE Racecar?

D-Boy — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 23:14:13 -0400

As my trip to the Grand-Am race at Mid-Ohio gradually fades into a distant memory, I've found myself reflecting on the hidden brilliance of the Rolex Sports Car Series. It may not be the best racing on Earth, but underneath it's ugly facade lies racing that certainly puts up a good case to get at least an Honorable Mention if we were trying to determine what the best racing on Earth is. But that got me thinking about something else: Forget best overall racing, what's the best single RACECAR in active competition? What car combines looks that'll suck you in with competitiveness that will keep you genuinely entertained? Sadly, Rolex Sports Car Series already loses. Even the rather nice-looking Crawford DP08 is not a brilliant hook for the aesthetically-minded. But let's take a look at six cars I feel deserve Honorable Mention for their efforts, then finish up with my pick for best active racecar. The criteria: 1: Purpose-built racecars only. No production-based GT cars. Yes, this means NASCAR is eligible. 2: The cars must genuinely look good. It doesn't have to be the BEST-LOOKING car in the racing world, but if it looks alone are capable of drawing someone in, it's a viable entry. 3: They must be reasonably competitive in their series. Criteria for "reasonably competitive" obviously varies from series to series. 4: They must be active in an actual, modern series. No historic racers. 5: "Spec" series are eligible, but automatically lose points on competitiveness due to them not racing against other chassis designs. Let's hop to it!

Begin Slideshow

Motorsport RumorCAN: Porsche LMP1, Panoz IndyCar, Sportscar Unification?

D-Boy — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:41:25 -0400

Hello, folks! Well, it's been a while since I had something to publish, hasn't it? Personal and computer problems have kept me busy lately, but right now I've got something for us all: A new Motorsports Rumorcan! So let's get cracking.

Porsche LMP1 to be modified RS Spyder?

Since Penske Racing's sudden jump over to Grand-Am for the current season, it's been heavily rumored, but never confirmed nor denied, that it was a temporary matter to keep Penske's sportscar teams in shape while Porsche developed an LMP1 car for 2010.

While we still have nothing official, new rumors point to the Porsche LMP1 being little more than a modified version of the RS Spyder.

It wouldn't be the first time an LMP2 has been bumped up to LMP1—Eco Racing modified a Radical SR9 into an LMP1 car (dubbed the Radical SR10) by fitting larger fenders to fit the larger LMP1 tires.

The SR10 has ran into it's share of problems, which could mean why Porsche has been so secretive about their LMP1 project: They don't want prying eyes to reveal anything before they're ready. Simply modifying the RS Spyder will require some aerodynamic tweaks to make it work properly, and they may not be able to make it work at all.

By being secretive Porsche could drop the project at any time if it proved too serious an issue without it looking like they broke any promises to fans.

Panoz back to IndyCar?

IndyCar's Brian Barnhart recently indicated the Dallara exclusivity to a new IRL chassis is not really guaranteed - a rather welcome piece of information in and of itself, but he has also noted that there are "two designs" the IRL is looking into right now. And of course, it didn't take long for rumors to start flying.

The most intriguing of these being that Panoz is back in the game. Many believe that Panoz has presented a new, more refined version of the DP01 Champ Car that would be more suited for the future IRL formula.

It would not be the first time the DP01 was revised—the car provided by Panoz for the Superleague Formula is very heavily based on the DP01, the majority of the modifications being in regards to fitting and cooling the SF V12.

Although the original DP01 was designed with the possibility of ovals in mind, an aero package for such was never tested. But with the IRL clearly leaning towards a more CART-like schedule, the exceptional road course capability of the DP01 makes designs based on it a rather appealing concept.

It can be said with certainty that many lessons learned from the DP01 need to be applied to the next IRL car, no matter who it comes from.

Sportscar unification?

ALMS is struggling to fill it's field this year, Grand-Am is down on cars slightly, and many feel that, like IRL and Champ Car, this is a conflict that must end. So it is of no surprise that rumors about ALMS and Grand-Am merging are extremely commonplace. Some say it could never happen for various reasons, from the LMPs completely embarrassing the DPs to the ACO agreement not allowing the ALMS to have their own 24-hour race.

I have never seen anything to indicate anything forbidding the ALMS from running a 24-hour race. It seems to me they simply haven't done it because America doesn't need another one, and it'd make them look a little desperate to beat Grand-Am.

DPs being embarrassed by LMPs is also a load of crap in my mind. The DPs weren't designed to be better than, or even as good as, the LMPs in any way besides SAFETY. Their sole purpose was to be exciting and safe. And with the GT1 class of the ALMS dead for all intents and purposes, DPs would make a good class to slip in as a replacement in a merged series.

What about the Grand-Am GT cars? Any number of things could be done with them. The cars could be upped to a GT2-friendly spec(but be exempt from invites to Le Mans if they're not a perfect match), or be slipped in as a new GT class.

But I'm getting way ahead of myself. That's all IF a merger happened. This about the latest rumor regarding the mater, which states, quite simply, that Penske Racing's move to Grand-Am has nothing to do with a potential Porsche LMP1 program, but that it's purpose is to work with Grand-Am management to try and create communication between the series for purposes of an eventual merging.

Sounds a bit far-fetched to me, but if anyone's the man for the job in such matters, it's Roger Penske.

So that's all for this edition. What do we all think?

How Does a Grand-Am Event Stack Up To an ALMS Event?

D-Boy — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 12:20:56 -0400

Yesterday, I went to the Emco Gears Classic at Mid-Ohio Sports Car Course. Though I had originally planned to attend the Acura Sports Car Challenge later this year instead, I was forced to alter my plans since I'm not enough of a douchebag to blow off my best friend's wedding for a car race.

I knew I'd be entertained. I'm a very generalized type of racing fan - if it has at least two wheels, an engine, and goes insanely fast, I like it. But a lot of racing fans out there dismiss Grand-Am as dull because of slower speeds(relative to Le Mans cars) and the ugly appearance of the Daytona Prototypes.

I've always been one who feels you can get a much better feel for the nature of the series and the fans who enjoy it when you actually go to an event rather than just watching it on TV.

And fortunately, the Emco Gears Classic turned out to be a VERY exciting race, just as last year's Acura Sports Car Challenge. And so, in some key areas, let's compare the two events I've been to and see how they stack up.

I will be focusing primarily on the Prototypes due to them being he issue of most contention amongst fans. The GT classes usually aren't subject to much debate(though I will be touching on them in one category).

Atmosphere

Acura Sports Car Challenge

At this event, I never really got the feeling that most of the people around me were as generalized in their racing preferences as I was. There were indeed plenty of people who liked a wide variety of racing, but most people I spoke with were extremely critical of one form of racing or anthoer—particularly anything lower-tech than Le Mans racing.

Criticism of series like NASCAR and even IndyCar is to be expected from hardcore road-racing fans, but a lot of it went far beyond the expected.

Emco Gears Classic

The atmosphere was much more comfortable overall at this event - the majority of the fans being a lot more generalized in their tastes. Basically, most people I felt were of the opinion, "if the racing's exciting, it's all good."

What little criticism I heard bugged me a lot more than the stuff at the Acura Sports Car Challenge as it was mostly along the lines of series like the ALMS being "too snobbish" and "holier-than-thou."

I'm sure a few drivers who get to that level will tun into such people, but overall I never got that feeling, and personally I think their reasoning for disliking the ALMS is giving THEM a holier-than-thou attitude.

Hypocrisy, thy name is uber-hard-core-Grand-Am-fan.

Cars

Acura Sports Car Challenge

I have never, and will never, claim that Le Mans cars are ugly. Quite the contrary, modern Le Mans cars are some of the best-looking racecars EVER DESIGNED. Even the ugliest of LMPs are fascinating in their ugliness.

This gives the Acura Sports Car Challenge a visual edge over the Emco Gears Classic, flat out. That said, however...

Emco Gears Classic

The Riley MkXX Daytona Prototype is still the most hideous vehicle in active competition today, and the majority of the other DPs are close behind. That said, the DPs do have a somewhat fascinating air around them(I'll get to that in more detail later) when you see them with your own eyes in active competition.

I've had this opinion since watching my first Grand-Am race, but witnessing this race only convinced me more that DPs are the ultimate proof that a car doesn't have to LOOK good to be very exciting. But in addition, I must retract a previous statement regarding the new Crawford DP.

It is not pushing the boundaries of looking good, it DOES look good. Period. I will note and allow for the possibility that the black paintjob may be enhancing it, but watching it in person I could not find an angle(no, not even from the front!) that was truly UGLY.

It's no LMP, but its proof that as far as the looks go, there IS hope for DPs.

Speed

Acura Sports Car Challenge

FAST!!!!!!!!!!!! What else can be said? Le Mans Prototypes always zoom down the straight and fly through the corners. Always a beautiful sight to behold.

Emco Gears Classic

Well, sorry to say this to all the doubters, but.... FAST!!!!!!!!! Yes, the ugly, sluggish Daytona Prototype was very quick down the straight and through Turn 4 at Mid-Ohio. If you put video of them side-by-side, I'm sure the difference would be obvious, but to my naked eye with no point of reference, I could not see the difference. And I can tell if I'm looking at an LMP1 or LMP2 Lola(open OR closed cockpit) without any assisting references—my attention to detail is legendary amongst my family and friends, so not being able to discern an immediate difference is rather significant(to us, at least).

The thing is that while DPs only lap at about the same time as an LMGT1 car, they get more of their speed in the corners than the GT1 cars. The result is a car that appears infinitely more nimble than it's lap times show.

Sound

Acura Sports Car Challenge

Ah, the sweet symphony of the various different naturally aspirated and turbo-charged V8s, flat 6s, I4s, etc and the eerie silence of the Audi diesel...

The Acura Sports Car Challenge was a real treat to the ears. Whatever type of engine note you like, you got it. Unless you wanted something that sounded closer to an F1 car.

Emco Gears Classic

LOUD V8 RUMBLE!!!! While an ALMS race is a symphonic orchestra of engine notes, a Grand-Am race is a death metal concert of Corvette-like V8 rumbling. This is of course due to the stock-block nature of the engines in the Daytona Prototypes combined with the five GM-based cars(two Pontiac GXPs, one GTO, and two Corvettes), but the Emco Gears Classic had a sweet, sweet surprise mixed in: The Mazda RX-8's rotary engine, which gets wonderfully close to an F1-style exhaust note.

From where I was sitting, you hear this high-pitched scream as it approached, then a little "burp" as the driver downshifted for Turn 4, and upon hearing that burp is when the car came into view.

You always knew when an RX-8 was coming, and the sound, mixed in with all the death metal V8s, just seemed completely out of place... And yet still pure awesome. The Emco Gears Classic was several times louder than the Acura Sports Car Challenge.

In conclusion, was the Emco Gears Classic better than the Acura Sports Car Challenge? Well, based on what I wrote above, you'd think so. But in all reality, when you expect an ALMS-like experience, the Grand-Am experience has so many differences that it's hard not to be blown away.

The truth is, no: The Emco Gears Classic was NOT better than the Acura Sports Car Challenge. But nor was the Acura Sports Car Challenge better than the Emco Gears Classic.

It's all going to be down to what you really want in a race. If you like pure, unrestricted noise, go to a Grand-Am race. If you for some reason prioritize looks over anything else, go to an ALMS race. There's a million reasons to choose one or the other, but trust me when I say, plain and simple, no matter which race you choose, YOU WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED.

My Predictions for a FOTA Schedule

D-Boy — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 18:51:25 -0400

Well, FOTA's done. They've announced plans to break away from F1. And while the majority of fans out there continue their horridly inaccurate comparisons to IRL vs CART, I shall, safe in my knowledge that this will likely turn out more like CART vs USAC, optimistically look at the future and opine on what I think would make a good FOTA schedule, and why.

I will not be speculating on exactly when to race at any of these venues, only why they should go to these venues. Keep in mind that FOTA also probably won't be quite as specific about the needs of the facility as the FIA is, and would be open to other options. So let's hop to it.

1. Circuit Gilles Villeneuve

Let's get the "DUH!" venues out of the way first. Circuit Gilles villeneuve got shafted by Ecclestone and is a great racetrack. And with F1 uninvolved with Canada, securing it would not prove overly difficult.

2. Silverstone

The other "DUH!" venue. Again, got shafted by Ecclestone. It's a great track, and the fans would love to see them there. Might be a little harder to secure, depending on the FIA's dealings in the area, but who in their right mind would leave this off the schedule without making a serious attempt first?

3. Indianapolis

Again, America is a place where securing venues will pose little trouble. The Indianapolis road course produced some great races during it's time in F1, and if the ownership is willing to have FOTA, then go for it.

4. Miller Motorsports Park

Again, few headaches, and this is a course that I'm sure would suit F1 very well.

5. Daytona International Speedway

I'm predicting a total of three US races to be on the schedule due to the ease of securing them, and the desires of many teams(like Ferrari) to showcase their work in their biggest markets.

But not more than three, because FOTA won't want to spend too much time in the US. I admit I've thrown Daytona on here simply because I want to see these cars on the Daytona banking—it'd be insane. But it'd all depend on ISC. If they don't want FOTA around, there's always...

5 Alternate: Cleveland

If IRL doesn't come back, I think it'd be a great place for FOTA. NASCAR is virtually incapable of putting on a good road course show, and this track could still make them look good, so of course FOTA would put on a good show.

6. Mexico City

Yet again, few headaches. Great track, too, and if you wanted to do a massive North American swing it'd be a good idea to throw in.

7. Bugatti Circuit

Magny-Cours, to my knowledge, is still under FIA control. This is the only other circuit in France I can think of that an F1-like series could put on a good show at.

8. Twin Ring Motegi road course

The two best options in Japan, Suzuka and Fuji, both have deals with F1. And although Japan has plenty of alternates, few match up to Motegi's road course.

In addition, some fans have speculated that FOTA will, to set themselves apart from F1 a bit more, a couple of ovals will become necessary—especially with their somewhat increasing popularity in Europe. Motegi would allow for two races in Japan—either a doubleheader or on split dates—to make it easier if such a thing needed to be done.

9. Eurospeedway Lausitz

Same deal as with Motegi—and with a large number of potential track configurations, several unique visits could be arranged even without the oval should the need arise.

10. Rockingham Motor Speedway

No, not the former NASCAR track in North Carolina, the British track that's on this list for the same reasons as Lausitz and Motegi. Also a great alternative to Silverstone if it can't be secured due to some BS FIA dealings.

Side note: I do not believe FOTA will need any ovals. But since many fans do, I'm throwing such things out there for consideration. I didn't speculate on the ovals for Daytona or Indy because it doesn't take a genius to figure neither ownership would be keen on the idea.

11. Zolder

It'd take a miracle for FOTA to get a date at Spa, and if they can't, this should be their alternate.

12. TT Circuit Assen

It was designed for motorcycles, but Champ Car showed in 2007 that formula cars which can run close together can put on a damn good show here. Few circuits really express the speed of the cars the way Assen was able to do with Champ Car.

13. Imola

Like Spa, it'd take a miracle to secure a date at Monza. While Imola still has some safety concerns, FOTA will need a race in Ferrari territory.

14. Surfer's Paradise

Abandoned by IndyCar, potential opportunity for FOTA.

This is all I've got. So I'd like to see what you have to say. Comment on my choices, or add your own suggestion. We can't always focus on the doom and gloom, we need to think positive. There's plenty of reason to suspect things will turn out well, so let's get positive.

FOTA Splitting From F1?...Sounds Familiar

D-Boy — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 22:50:53 -0400

Recent rumors of an aborted boycott of the Turkish GP and that FOTA have been in touch with people who may be willing to spearhead a breakaway have underlined how big the problems between FOTA and the FIA are. Things have gotten so bad that many fans feel a breakaway series is inevitable if the FIA doesn't agree to FOTA's demands.

FOTA remains strongly unitied with only two dissenting teams, only one of them, Williams, considered to be a "big name."

When people think of a breakaway series, thoughts immediately turn to the disaster of the CART/IRL war which, no matter which side of that war you're on, you have to admit ultimately turned US open-wheel racing into a shadow of it's former self.

But hang on, let's think about things here...I haven't been able to find a single similarity between this situation, and that of the CART/IRL war.

The CART/IRL war resulted from one man thinking IndyCars should be run a specific way, and didn't care that the way it was being run had made it the most popular form of racing in US history. I honestly believe that if both sides had worked together and done things right, it was possible that CART and IRL could have co-existed, but egos on both sides destroyed any hope of that.

The problems in F1 are the result of a governing body running things a certain way and planning to apply rules that the majority of teams aren't happy about, and as a result they're threatening to break away and form their own series.

That's not the CART/IRL war, but it certainly sounds familiar, doesn't it?

That's right. F1's not about to repeat the CART/IRL war. If anything, they're about to repeat the USAC/CART war. Which, as we know, lasted all of one season.

CART won the war with USAC because they had the support of the big names(save one: AJ Foyt - much like the current F1 issue has big name Williams ready to stick with F1), and as a result the fans. Teams and drivers finally got the treatment they felt they were entitled, and the USAC championship collapsed shortly thereafter.

CART had it's problems, but it was genuinely entertaining and the majority of it's teams and drivers were happy to be a part of it.

The history of IndyCar racing tells us that a split can be either a complete disaster, or a brilliant move. History also tells us that a FOTA Grand Prix World Championship(or whatever it'd be called) could be the key for the hellish political dramas currently playing out in Formula One.

FOTA may just become what CART was in 1979.

Face Facts, IRL Crazies: Tony George Is a Moron

D-Boy — Thu, 28 May 2009 16:25:33 -0400

I apologize in advance for the some of slightly more colorful language this article contains near the end. If you are easily offended, do not read this. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

The recent newsbreak and subsequent official denial of Tony George being ousted as CEO of IMS has opened up a lot of old wounds from the all-too-recent US open-wheel war. And those of us who have taken a wiser approach in analyzing history based on facts—rather than opinion—have gotten a good look at just how crazy and fanatical both sides of the argument can be.

But it's the people who were on the IRL's side of the conflict who have clearly deluded themselves the most. It's not too late for some of these people—many are simply people who were misled by other fans upon their exposure to US open-wheel racing. Others are simply those who refuse to consider the possibility that their opinion is nothing more than an opinion.

But today I am here to provide a reality check to anyone who is actually willing to listen to FACTS instead of opinion.

The fact is that Tony George is a moron. No, that's not an opinion, it's fact backed up by the following facts:

1. Prior to the split, CART was the most popular racing series, not only in the history of US open-wheel racing, BUT IN THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF AMERICAN MOTORSPORTS. It had sellout crowds at every event, the best TV ratings any series had ever had, and it even attracted enough international attention to make Bernie Ecclestone feel threatened. It's also worth noting that prior to CART's rise to the top, the IMSA GT Championship was No. 1 in the US.

2. Not one original IRL principle exists in the current series. AJ Foyt called the current IRL "CART Lite." And that's what it is. It's CART with more ovals, crappy cars, and next to zero fans.

And most importantly, 3. THE INDY RACING LEAGUE HAS NOT TURNED A PROFIT SINCE IT'S INCEPTION (I'm talking about the SERIES, not the TEAMS). Unlike CART, which continued to turn a profit until around 2000.

You're going to look at this and tell me that, solely because they came out on top, the IRL had it right? I might buy into that if they won while at least one of their original principles was still intact, and if they had turned a profit, but I'm sorry, this merger has only gone to prove that the IRL did everything wrong.

The only reason a merger happened is because Tony George made a desperate bid for unity and made the Champ Car ownership an offer that they couldn't refuse.

I fully expect IRL fan hate comments from this, but if you aren't willing to face facts, that's not my problem. The sad thing is, fans who aren't willing to face the truth of things are doing more to slow—or even stop—a return to glory for US open-wheel racing.

Let me put it this way—Those three facts I presented earlier? No. 1 is the most important of them all. CART was popular for a reason—No matter whether it was on an oval, road course, or the crappiest of street circuits, the racing was ALWAYS excellent. The IRL can't make a street circuit exciting (with the sole exception of St. Pete)—they're racing mostly on road courses that don't suit open-wheelers, making it difficult for them to put on the best show there, and they can't even produce a good OVAL race half the time. Even this year's Indy 500 was horribly boring—if it wasn't for the big story surrounding Helio Castroneves, there would have been nothing worth seeing.

The IRL is only capable of putting on a good show at Iowa, Richmond, Texas, Watkins Glen, Chicagoland, Motegi, and St. Petersburg. Only THREE of those events (Watkins Glen, St. Petersburg, and Texas) are GUARANTEED to put on a good show. Everywhere else they go is a guaranteed bore.

The IRL can't put on a better show than GRAND-AM most of the time. This is the brilliant vision of the great Tony George? You have got to stop gobbling up Tony George's crap. No matter how you dress it up, it's still just a big turd. Tony George must be removed from a position of power over anything other than Vision Racing—immediately. It is the only way US open-wheel racing can recover.

I'll end this by reminding everyone that I am a post-unification IRL fan. I complain because I care. The only way to effect change is to accentuate the negative—make it clear what must be fixed. That's what I am doing here. If you don't like it, then don't come whining to me if nothing gets fixed because nobody complained.

How To Improve The Daytona Prototype

D-Boy — Sat, 23 May 2009 14:02:40 -0400

In the debate of ALMS vs Grand-Am, each side has a big point going for it: ALMS has the sexy high-tech machines, but Grand-Am is guaranteed to put on a good show.

ALMS has been hit-or-miss on the overall action this year. Sebring was good, but St. Pete and Long Beach was lacking. Salt Lake was a huge step in the right direction, but Sebringis still the only ALMS race of the season that gave us more action than any given Grand-Am race thus far in 2009.

Good action is what I want most in a race, but the sexy technologically advanced cars of the ALMS helps keep them on top when it comes to which I prefer. Despite it's shortcomings this season, ALMS still has enough potential for action to keep the lack of it thus far from harming it's position over Grand-Am.

For one thing, the Acura LMP1 domination is not the same as the Audi LMP1 domination. IT's not two cars racing for the same team, one willing to let the other scream ahead when they achieve a championship advantage.

They're two different teams fighting to be the top Acura team, and once they stop worrying about breaking their cars they're sure to give us some good battles for the LMP1 win.

Salt Lake gave us some intrigue over the LMP2 class win, which shows the Acura LMP2 program is not as indestructible as it seemed without any LMP2 Porsches.

And of course, GT2 is ALWAYS exciting.

Mid-Ohio promises to bring a lot of brilliant stuff to the ALMS, enough to hopefully pull their racing actions head-and-shoulder above Grand-am once again.

Grand-Am's problem is, in the end, the Daytona Prototype. Not in concept, but in execution.

The DPs were designed to be safe, cheap, and exciting to watch. The problem is that to see the excitement, you have to force yourself to look past the predominantly-ugly DP designs and focus on the actual battle.

If you can do that, Grand-Am provides nothing short of excellence every time they hit the track. They may not be very fast, but if speed was everything then NHRA top fuel dragsters and the Red Bull Air Race World Series would be the top two forms of motorsport in the world, not to mention that nobody would care about LMGT2.

In the end, the ugly designs of the DPs were the result of an overly strong focus on safety, which was compounded by a driver's death as the DPs approached their deployment.

Noble intentions, but here's the thing: Every aspect of the DPs design was based on the fact that Grand-Am ran mostly ROVALS at the time. The high-speed oval sections are unacceptably dangerous to the high-speed, high-tech open-cockpit LMP-style prototypes used at the time.

But now Grand-Am has but two rovals left -Daytona and Homstead- both of which are equipped with SAFER barriers. The extremes are no longer as big a necessity as before. Some will argue that they never had to go to extremes to begin with, but that's not the point.

The point is that RIGHT NOW the need isn't as strong as it clearly was back then. Safety has improved, so certain aspects can be backed off of.

I will go so far as to state that I believe a closed-cockpit LMP would be just as safe to run at Daytona as the current DP chassis.

But Grand-Am also wanted to set themselves apart from ALMS with the DPs, so let's assume the DPs are here to stay. How do we improve them? How to we make them eye-catching enough to make people pay attention?

Well, in terms of speed capping, just having stock-block engines should be sufficient. All that needs to be done is to open up the bodywork and aero regulations.

Look at the picture I have attached to this article. It's a nearly-complete (just some smoothing to do in some areas plus some paint touch-ups) kitbashing project I like to call "what a Daytona Prototype SHOULD look like." It's a diecast Ferrari F50 toy modded front and rear to apply some DP-based stylings.

Looks like a DP, doesn't it? Only a million times better. Just allowing a longer front end would allow some much more stylish AND aerodynamically-effective, and allowing a slimmer cockpit area would do the same.

Plus more front bodywork means less potential for injury in a front-end collision.

The current overly-restrictive regulations on DPs have still produced some notably interesting designs—the chassis makers have really started to figure out how to work through the limitations.

The new Crawford DP08 looks better than a Dallara IRL car so long as you don't view it straight-on from the front, and the Proto-Auto Lola when viewed from the side looks like something you'd have seen in the old IMSA GT Lights class.

If they're coming THAT close to making some stylish cars even with the restrictions, imagine what could happen if they backed off a bit.

If the DPs were tweaked in a way like I've noted, their speeds would increase significantly, but with the limitations of the stock-block engines they wouldn't increase to a dangerous level.

Grand-Am and ALMS function on two different philosophies, but unlike the CART/IRL split, the differing philosophies apply SOLELY to the chassis, and I believe that because of this the two series CAN co-exist. But Grand-Am needs to tweak it's DPs in order to be able to get enough of a fanbase to do it.

Grand-Am will attract the people who want to be guaranteed a good show every time they flip on a race. ALMS will attract the fans who want the technology. There's plenty of both fans, and the two series could survive easily by splitting the casual fans between them. But if Grand-Am wants to get a share of the casual fans, they do need the better-looking cars.

I'm not one to prioritize improving the looks of a car over competition or safety, but I believe that in this case, tweaking the looks will actually INCREASE the already-excellent quality of competition, and do it WITHOUT compromising safety. And without a doubt Grand-Am needs it to attract some casual viewers.

Is Cleveland About To Get The Coolest Weekend Ever?

D-Boy — Sun, 17 May 2009 23:15:38 -0400

SpeedTV's Robin Miller reported today talks are in the works to run Cleveland as an oval and a road course during the same weekend.

The best news? Everyone involved seems to like the idea.

It came about when Mike Lanigan rightly pushed back against the IRL's request that a return to Cleveland be on an oval layout. The road course has for decades provided some of the best action in all of racing, and changing it to an oval just makes no sense.

But to change it to an oval in order to make for a double-header with the classic road course just might be the most brilliant idea ever.

This idea could easily be applied at any existing "roval," but these tracks tend to have poor infield road courses. Cleveland, however, requires no real effort to make it into a completely flat, asymmetrical oval. The Cleveland oval would be as unique as it's road course, and while it wouldn't be worth losing the road course for it, it could very well be an excellent supplement to the road course.

The return of Cleveland to the ranks of top-level, open-wheel racing could very well be the greatest racing weekend ever.

The only thing that bothers me is that we're talking about a completely flat oval with some sharp corners and long straights. Do you use speedway wings to maximize speeds on the straights, or road course wings to avoid issues in the corners?

To make it a better weekend, maybe the teams should have to make their own decision regarding the wings.

What Do YOU Think the Next IndyCar Should Look Like?

D-Boy — Tue, 12 May 2009 15:02:25 -0400

(photo courtesy of an OOOOLD entry on motorsport.com)

This is just a little idea I had for some friendly discussion. Anyone who really knows a lot about racing knows that looks are the last thing that designers should worry about when designing a new racecar. Safety first, then performance, then looks IF your design will allow for some stylistic tweaks without compromising one of the previous.

But looks of a racecar are always an intriguing discussion because of the vastly differing opinions on what looks good and what doesn't.

F1 cars are a great example. Many thought all of odd protrusions on the old cars were hideous. Others, like myself, quite liked them. I think last year's BMW was one of the coolest F1 designs EVER.

Likewise, this year's designs have brought up some interesting discussions. Many despise the looks of all of the new cars, some(like me) think they all look pretty good while racing for honors. Most of us have a car or two in the new designs that we at least think is reasonable in the looks department, though, and that's where things get interesting.

Every F1 car this year has a unique aesthetic about it, which is why opinions are so diverse.

On the IndyCar side, we're currently saddled with but one car: The Dallara. Popular opinion is that it's hideous, but there is a small sect who think it's quite good-looking. I'm of a small sect that hate the oval trim (it made my Top 10 Ugliest Open-Wheelers list), but think the road course/short oval trim isn't half-bad.

At the same time, many praise the Panoz DP01 as one of the best-looking open-wheelers of all time. God knows I'm one of them.

But there's also the Panoz G-Force—the better—looking IRL car that sadly just couldn't keep up with the Dallara. The Panoz losing to the Dallara underlines the lack of importance of the looks when it comes to competition.

As I've said in the past, the new IRL car will need to perform well on ovals AND road courses, as well as be extremely safe.

We have to cross our fingers and hope the result will also look good, but most of us will agree it won't take much to make it look better than the Dallara. I not long ago opined that chopping off the airbox would make the Dallara a lot better-looking.

But what do YOU want to see in the new IRL's cars looks? Turbos are almost guaranteed to be the engine, so some will certainly push to have the airbox removed, but that's not really a necessity.

Formula Palmer Audi and the new Formula Two cars are turbocharged, but maintain an airbox in order to increase the cooling of the engine and turbo. It's certainly a more aesthetically-pleasing design than those offset air intakes that Formula Three cars use.

To kick things off, take a look the above picture. Recognize that car? No? Well, I'm not surprised. it's the Falcon 01-A, and it was a new IRL chassis that was made available for the 2003 season.

So why haven't you heard of it? Because it never raced. The Dallara and G-Force chassis were well-proven, so even though they got a serious overhaul that year (2003 was when the Dallara became what it currently is), all the teams were keen to stick with them.

As you can see, the Falcon is radically different from not only the G-Force and the Dallara, but from ANY open-wheeler that has ever seen an oval.

It's a shame it never got the chance, because it certainly looks like it's capable of going quite fast. And it is, without a doubt, FAR more stylish than the Dallara and the G-Force. In fact...I'd say it's better-looking than any other open-wheeler.

The fact that it never raced is the only thing that kept it off of my Top 10 Coolest Open-Wheelers list.

Why does it look so good? Even though it was designed well before the Panoz DP01, it looks like the best details of the DP01 were combined with the best details of the Dallara, and then smoothed out into a perfect shape.

And that thing is shown in speedway trim. Imagine it in a short oval/road course trim. Personally, it may be a longshot, but I'd love it if the new IRL car came out looking something like that.

But more realistically, we'll probably get something closer in appearance to the Swift FN09. Which wouldn't necessarily be a BAD thing.

Now come on, spill it out. What do YOU want the new IRL car to look like?

How To Make an F1 Budget Cap WORK

D-Boy — Mon, 11 May 2009 22:46:58 -0400

Cost cutting in F1? Few people currently doubt the need for this—after all, the fact that it needs to be done is pretty much the only thing that FOTA and the FIA are in complete agreement on.

But obviously the FIA's proposed two-tier system, with teams who agree to limit themselves to a $60 million budget getting greater technical freedom, has generated a lot of controversy. But one thing has been obvious through it all—just about everyone hates the idea. In fact, Spanky and the Troll appear to be the only people who think it's a good idea.

Reasons for opposing it range from claims that a budget cap would be unenforceable, which is a load of crap, to the planned cap being far too low, which is the "DUH" statement of the year.

The problem isn't the idea of budget caps, nor is it anti-F1 as many fans claim. Many people like to point out that F1 is for the elite, the best of the best, the Gods among drivers and engineers.

The above is true, but where in there is it written that to be the best you have to spend monstrous amounts of money?

Some will note that it takes monstrous amounts of money to become the best, but we need only look at Toyota to know this is no guarantee, and old teams like Jordan to know it's not a necessity.

The fact is, the BEST engineers will get it done with as little money as possible. Limitations only force them to become more creative.

An analogy I like to use is the Console Wars of the early 1990s. The Sega Genesis versus the Super Nintendo. The SNES had better games and superior capability, but the more limited Genesis required designers to get more creative with their games, resulting in more enjoyable games. Additionally, the Genesis' limits were pushed more regularly than the SNES's, and when you pushed the limits of the genesis, it really showed. Not so with the SNES.

Capped teams would be like the Sega Genesis—they have to use creative techniques to do the best they can with limited resources. They're given greater technical freedom to make up for it, while the uncapped teams have their wide-open SNES non-restrictions, but will have to make basically the same cars we're seeing right now.

It certainly has the potential to make the future of F1 more interesting.

But there is an inherent flaw in the proposed system—a serious flaw.

The system is based around the fact that, budget cap or not, the economic downfall is going to make it possible for F1 teams to be started on the cheap for a few years. The FIA's proposed cap is based on the estimated amount a startup team would need to run competitively right now.

That's all well and good, but...what about when the economy starts to recover? No matter how many technical freedoms you give the capped teams, eventually they'll fall behind due to not having the resources to make significant strides.

Additionally, applying the cap to the whole team will, in the short term, destroy many jobs on these teams. That's unacceptable in this economy.

A budget cap should be applied to one thing, and one thing only—The development of the car. Importantly, engineer salaries should not be included there.

Even then, a $60 million cap may work for now, but the FIA will either have to rewrite the rules every year as the economy increases, or they're dooming anyone who accepts the budget cap. And under a two-tier system, nobody would willingly be capped anymore, thus making the system redundant.

The cap needs to be reasonable so that teams would be willing to accept the terms of the budget cap long-term.

It needs to be around twice as higher than it is, assuming it only applies to the development of the car. $100 million allowable on the car each year would not only be an acceptable drop in costs (almost 50% in regards to most front-running teams' annual car development costs), but it's high enough to encourage teams to take the cap in order to get the greater technical freedom.

And then we'd be seeing a lot more true innovation come out of the teams' shops from the best and brightest engineers.

Isn't that what F1 is supposed to be?

Has Grand-Am Become More Entertaining Than ALMS?

D-Boy — Sat, 02 May 2009 10:43:45 -0400

ALMS has gotten weak

The 12 Hours of Sebring was quite an exciting race this year, but sadly the ALMS has since then not provided us with the excellent racing action it had for the past few years. The economic crisis and withdrawal of several manufacturers has left the Prototype classes almost nonexistent.

The GT2 class still gives us good action as always, but shouldn't we be getting the same from all the classes?

The LMP1 class will be gaining a fifth entry at the next round—the Corsa Motorsports Ginetta-Zytek 09HS. It's nice to see them on the grid since not long ago there was concern about whether the car would be ready.

The entry brings the LMP1 class up to five entries—which I've always felt was the minimum amount of cars you needed per class to make for good racing.

When you have two cars almost guaranteed to win every race, you need a good fight for that final podium place, and a three car minimum is very good for that since it allows for some fighting to continue if one of the cars has to retire.

An LMP1 Pescarolo 01 run by Team Mundill is supposed to join around Mid-Ohio. Hopefully they can make things more interesting.

LMP2 is soldiering on with just three cars. One of which is pretty much guaranteed to win if it doesn't break. Yawn. LMP2 is where the privateers are supposed to be, and even though the winner is pretty much a forgone conclusion, there are TWO podium spots open to it's other entrants. That nobody else has taken a stab at this class boggles the mind.

Well, the Pescarolo 01 was designed to be able to run LMP1 or LMP2 depending on the team's choice. Is it just possible that Team Mundill will decide to set up their chassis for LMP2 rather than LMP1? Don't get your hopes up—there's been no such indication.

There's nothing wrong with the LMGT2 class, but if that's the ALMS's only draw, then they have a serious problem.

Grand-Am Running Strong

Meanwhile, two races into the Grand American Rolex Sports Cars Car Series, the on-track action has been obvious and excellent. Full fields with no sign of significant shrinking anytime soon, and excellent battles that make you forget how ugly the Daytona Prototypes really are.

And that's how racing should be—so mind-blowingly awesome that you forget about what the cars look like, or whether or not there's a technological issue with them.

The Daytona Prototypes may only be as fast as an LMGT1 car, but it's certainly not for lack of grip. These thing corner like LMPs, but just don't have the top speed to get better lap times out of it. But that combination is part of what has allowed them to produce such good racing.

Some people have compared ALMS/Grand-Am to the CART/IRL war, but I don't see it. It seems like both sides are willing to just let he other be and do their own thing. Plus, unlike IRL, the Grand-Am philosophy works to a certain extent.

As a result, both series are completely different, but they're both just as good as long as they have strong fields. Grand-Am's benefit is that it's cheap to run and the field is much closer, but more importantly it's not a spec series.

Some complain about the series owners trying too hard to "equalize" the field, but better that than "spec" the field, wouldn't you say? We've seen it in Champ Car, and we've seen it in IRL: If you don't put some effort into equalizing things, you'll end up with a spec series when the weaker manufacturers decide to leave.

They way things stand right now, Grand-Am's got the kind of action that ALMS needs. The action's going on throughout the field, not just in a single class. Perhaps if Grand-Am altered the DP rulebook a bit we could get some good-looking DP designs in there.

Or, perhaps, good-looking DPs are already here...? That new Crawford (pictured above) is no Lola LMP coupe, but it ain't no Riley MkXX, either.

Motorsports RumorCAN: Acura ARX-01c/d, New IndyCar Delayed, LMP3 Class?

D-Boy — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 00:47:41 -0400

A strange lack of submissions has slowed the production of Volume II of the Motorsports RumorCAN, but at long last we have three new, not overly-talked-about but intriguing rumors to discuss. So let's hop to it!

Acura ARX-01c/d?

With the withdrawal of Audi from significant ALMS activity for the foreseeable future, Acura is believed to be looknig for other methods to bolster it's sportscar program, and one interesting rumor puts focus back on their LMP2 entry.

It is believed that Acura are hard at work at an aerodynamic overhaul of the ARX-01b. The new version, the ARX-01c, is rumored to be a full customer chassis/engine package to be unveiled for the 2010 ALMS season. Supposedly the package will be cheap and appealing to privateer entries which could make for a very competitive LMP2 class.

In addition, it is believed here will also be an 01d version, designed to be old as a rolling chassis only, for teams who would like to experiment with other engines.

The only differences between the two would be that the 01d would be designed, much like a Lola chassis, to house a wide variety of LMP2-spec powerplants.

The 01c/01d is also believed to be the first chassis Acura will sell to teams comepeting in Europe in the Le Mans Series.

New IndyCar delayed?

For months we've been hearing talks about the negotiations for the new IRL powerplant to be deployed in 2011. It has always been expected to coincide with the debut of a new chassis much more suitable for a combined oval/road course schedule.

But with time running out on when Dallara could be reasonably expected to have time to develop a new chassis and construct enough for the 2011 IRL season, not a single detail has been granted to us as to what to expect from the new chassis.

Dallara could just be keeping a tight lid on things, but at the same time the sudden silence in news regarding the engine negotiations is making some folks worry that the economic crisis has caused the delay or even the cancellation of the new IRL car.

LMP3 Class?

In Europe, certain types of lower-tier sports racers that utilize LMP-style aerodynamics are often referred to as LMP3s. One such chassis—built by British manufacturer Chiron—is specifically named such. And it's quite a good little car—My boss has acquired one which I expect to be racing this summer.

But there is rumor that IMSA has plans to create an official LMP3 class to be run in the American Le Mans Series in order to bolster low participation numbers that, even at their highest, rarely hold a candle to European LMS grids.

Believed to based on the ACO's new Formula Le Mans series, the ALMS version will supposedly feature baby prototypes like my Chiron modified with slightly more powerful engines.

The new class is expected to be geared towards lap times close to those of the soon-to-be-defunct GT1 class, and will only run at short-distance races—IE, every aLMS race except for Sebring and the Petit Le Mans.

There is no word as to when exactly this class will supposedly debut.

There's our three rumors for today. What do we all think?

Formula One, Lewis Hamilton and Liegate: D-Boy's Take

D-Boy — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 21:04:07 -0400

Generally, I don't like to stick my hand in the pot of boiling oil that incidents like this generate. But once in a while I see things so annoyingly moronic that I just can't stand away. I feel a burning need to slap someone upside the head for making such statements.

Jenson Button Won...Get Over It

D-Boy — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 13:04:35 -0400

F1 is a series that's extremely capable of providing many a shocking moment. And the pace of of the Brawn GP cars has provided us with no less than three in the space of a few weeks: First by dominating testing, then by sweeping the front row, then by finishing 1-2.

And of course there are a lot of people around crying foul, complaining about everything from the diffuser being illegal despite the stewards' decision, to Button being a "third tier" driver and that the car is the only reason he won.

To all these people I have but one thing to say: SHUT THE FRAK UP.

Seriously, I've seen some stupid things spoken about the talent levels of F1 drivers, legality of cars and all that junk in the past, but this time around its just gotten pathetic. Lets take a look at why every complaint of a load of pure BS.

"The diffusers are illegal!!!" No, they're not. The stewards say they're legal, so they're legal until the FIA Court of Appeals says otherwise.

The issue is very similar to the mass damper issue with Renault a few years back, so even if the court of appeals does find them to be circumventing the rules, it's very likely they won't take away Bran GP's results. The team did things better than the others, and that's how F1 works. Get over it.

"The stewards aren't qualified to determine the legality of the diffusers!" YES THEY ARE. That's EXACTLY what their job is, so he FIA is going to make damn sure they're qualified. Of all the complaints I've heard, this was clearly the most moronic.

"Jenson Button is a crap driver who could only win because he had a good car!" Key detail here: Nobody's complained about Barrichello. Seems people hold his skill in much higher regard...

Then how come, in clearly equal equipment, did he FAIL to outrun Jenson? Even if we discount Button's previous victory on account of Alonso crashing out (even though Jenson had been running faster at the time), the fact still remains that it doesn't matter HOW good the car is, if the driver can't handle that level of performance he WILL NOT WIN.

I have personal experience to back this up, in fact. I used to run in vintage formula races, using a couple of old CART cars(a 1993 Lola-Chevrolet and later a 1999 Swift-Cosworth).

I ran 10 races, won only once(on my final race). During this time, I was often outrun by Indy Lights and Atlantic cars - vehicles with far less power and grip, but infinitely better talent driving them.

On occasion, I even saw these same vehicles outrun mid-'90s FORMULA ONE CARS. In fact, in the race I won I had a really good fight with a guy running a 1996 Tyrrell(I believe that was the year, anyway. It WAS a Tyrrell, I know that much).

The car was far beyond his ability to handle, especially under braking. He ultimately finished sixth due to its performance but he was outrun by two Atlantic cars, an Indy Lights car, and two CART cars (including me).

Some will note that if Jenson is so good he shouldn't have done so poorly since his win. That means nothing as well, because while it takes talent and skill to handle a front-running car well enough to win, a bad car is still a bad car.

If you put Michael Schumacher in the previous two Hondas, I doubt he'd do much better than Button and Barrichello, assuming the car was even CAPABLE of more than they did.

The simple fact is that Button won, and he deserves this win. He kept up with and outran a driver who is generally considered to be far more skilled and talented, and it's how a person runs compared to his teammate that speaks the loudest.

In short: BUTTON WON, GET OVER IT.

Honda must be kicking themselves over the decision to withdraw from F1 right now.

Final Thoughts On '09 F1 Style

D-Boy — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 18:21:12 -0400

The new F1 season is upon us.

Before long, millions of people around the world will bear witnesses to the multicolored almost-blurs of carbon-fiber and noise zoom past the cameras into the new era of F1.

And my God does it look beautiful.

As cars were unveiled, one word was used to describe each one: "Ugly."

Although some, such as the McLaren MP4-24, shined as a beacon of hope, none of them truly raised themselves into the good-looking category. One could at best argue that at least they all looked better than the Dallara IndyCar.

Those of us more aware of the importance of performance kept our opinions to a minimum, waiting to see the new machines on the track in Melbourne. Hoping they looked better on the track than they do in still photos.

Do they look better on track? Well, after watching Friday practice, I believe the answer is a resounding YES.

I appear to be a rarity amongst F1 fans: I liked the winglets on the old cars. Even when they were ugly, I liked how obviously they showed off the insane amounts of effort put into the designs of these cars. That effort is one thing that will likely never be obvious in these new cars.

But does it matter? Despite the reduction in downforce, that effort combined with the return of slicks has provided the teams with cars that appear just as nimble as the vehicles we watched last year. And because of that, it feels like F1.

Several times watching practice, I felt like I was watching a practice session from the late 1990s. Before the winglets began popping up. Everything just looked so....right!

On a scale of one to 10, I ranked the Renault R29 as a three. It's just hideous. Worst-looking car of the 2009 challengers. By comparison, all the cars on my top ten ugliest open-wheelers rate a two or lower. But when I saw it running around the Albert Park circuit, my rating jumped up to an eight. It was the best-looking car on the track—appropriate as it looks the most like a late '90s car.

I'm sure everyone has their own opinion about which car looked the best out there, and by how much their appearances jump up in quality when seen in action, but I think we can all agree on two things:

1. The only time anything truly looks WRONG is when we see the back of a car from another car's onboard camera. It looks like someone vertically stretched the image. But by the end of this weekend's race, I'm sure we wont even notice it anymore.

2. The 2009 season of F1 is looking a LOT better than it did just a month ago.

With luck, by Monaco, the current diffuser debacle will be a mere unpleasant memory no worse than that of the '06 Renault mass damper issue.

We no longer have to worry about whether looking at this year's F1 races will make us physically ill. Lets bring on the new season and see what kind of drama it brings us. Hopefully all that drama will be on-track and not the result of moronic management.

GO BOURDAIS AND HAMILTON!

Motorsport RumorCAN: Grandstanding Prosecutor and Deceitful Team?

D-Boy — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 20:48:36 -0400

Hello, all. This is just a random idea I came up with after two interesting rumors reached me earlier today...

Why call this the rumorCAN? To make it a palce for us to take a proverbial dump all over some of the most interesting rumors circling in motorsport.

What I'm thinking is of starting a series for discussing rumors that have been floating around the world of motorsport.

What kind of rumors will be discussed here? Any that have reached the ears of more people than just me (through someone OTHER than me), and which have the potential to completely change the face of the subject matter if they happen to be true.

Discuss the rumors in the article comments and don't be afraid to speak your mind. But I want this to be civil, so I'll be reporting any insulting comments made toward anyone involved in the discussion.

But don't be afraid to really trash the rumor itself, or even foundations on which the rumor may be based. This is the RumorCAN, after all.

I also won't be giving my take on an issue in the actual entry; I'll save that for responses to any commentary that pops up.

If this idea takes off, updates won't necessarily be consistent. They'll come when I feel I have enough to make plenty of good discussion material; no entry will have fewer than three rumors to discuss after this. I chose to go ahead and do this, despite only having two to do since I had to fill this out with an explanation of what I want to do.

So, let's get moving.

Grandstanding prosecutor?

News from the Castroneves trial is slow to come, but apparently some observers have been willing to leak some interesting info.

Despite my attempts to trace sources, I have not been able to find such, but the rumor is that that prosecutor in Helio Castroneves's tax evasion trial has been doing a lot of grandstanding: putting on a big show without providing much substance to back it up.

Having family in the legal system, I've heard enough stories to know that this sort of thing, if true, is the sign of a weak case, and that the prosecutor is desperate to hide that fact.

But this information does not appear to be coming from any reliable source, and thus should probably not be taken at face value. We have no way of ascertaining if these claims are true.

One thing that we DO know is that what little reliable information has come through is making many within the tax preparation world skeptical as to the strength of the case. Could this be an indication that Helio's not in very deep water at all?

Deceitful team?

The struggles of McLaren with their new MP4-24 has been very public, to the point where even Norbert Haug has had to admit the car is not where they need it to be.

The lack of commentary from others close to the team, however, has caused a notable group of fans to put forth the possibility that McLaren are taking a dangerous risk and sandbagging to trick other teams into believing they will not be a threat.

The potential benefits from such a risk are unknown, as not doing full proper testing when available is sure to cause them problems with the ban on testing during the active season.

What possible reason could there be for McLaren to do such a thing? Or is it more likely that this rumor is just hardcore McLaren fans being overly hopeful?

Indy 500 To Honor Tuskegee Airmen

D-Boy — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:37:44 -0400

The Indy 500 has always been praised for honoring America's servicemen of past and present as part of their prerace festivities. It's a tradition considered by many to be more important than the race itself.

In 2009, the prerace festivities will be honoring, among others, one of the most important groups in the history of not only America's armed forces, but our country as a whole: The Tuskegee Airmen.

You don't have to have been around during World War II to understand the significance of the Tuskegee Airmen. America's first all-black fighter group went on to record some of the most historic battles of the war, including holding the best record for fighter escort ever. All of this despite expectations of failure from military commanders.

There isn't much more that needs to be said about the Tuskegee Airmen. Their exploits assisted not only in advancing racial acceptance in the military, but in the US as whole.

Fittingly, in addition to the honors in the prerace festivities, the Tuskegee Airmen are to be honored with an entry in the 500 from Top Cover Racing—which will paint their car with the distinctive red tail that the Tuskegee Airmen's P-51 Mustangs were known for.

Yeah, this entry's a bit short, but it doesn't need to be very long. As I noted, there isn't much that really needs to be said. We all know the importance of that group and that they more than deserve this honor. If you didn't yet have a good reason to support this year's Indy 500, you have one now.

Helio Castroneves: Dancing with the IRS

D-Boy — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:28:07 -0500

Jury selection was conducted in the tax evasion trial of IndyCar star Helio Castroneves, and tomorrow the trial will begin in earnest.

A lot of IndyCar fans are watching this trial closely and hoping for the best possible outcome: Acquittal.

But what are the chances of an acquittal? We've heard a lot of doom and gloom from tax experts lately about how more than 90 percent of cases that go this far result in conviction. Not exactly filling all of us with confidence.

But after talking to a tax expert I know personally (namely, my brother), it seems the chances of acquittal are higher than we've been led to believe.

It's true that in tax evasion cases, the IRS wins more than 90 percent of the time. But let's narrow things down a bit—every case has their own unique details, so lumping them all together doesn't really give us a proper look at his chances.

What are the most significant details of Helio's case?

1: He has been very clear since day one that he is willing to pay all owed taxes and penalties without question solely on the condition of no jail time.

2: His tax attorney is on trial as well.

Point No. 1 is a very good thing in Helio's favor—it shows that he's not some money-grubbing prick who's trying to defraud the US government. It is strong evidence that he was not aware that what he was doing was illegal.

It will make the jury wonder why instead of settling, the IRS decided to spend money prosecuting the case.

Point No. 2, however, is the more significant point. If we limit our look at tax evasion trials to cases where the defendant's tax attorney is on trial as well, the conviction rate drops sharply. To somewhere between 50 and 40 percent.

The thing is, the tax laws of the United States of America are insanely complex. Less than half the people born and raised in this country understand them, so why should we expect an immigrant to know?

The simple fact is, we shouldn't. And the fact that Helio depends on a tax attorney only proves that he doesn't know the laws either.

This is why cases like him often end in acquittal for the defendant, but not always the tax attorney. It may be an honest mistake on the attorney's part, or an overt act of greed to try and screw over his client, but its usually the fault of the attorney.

Some will say that the mere act of indicting someone is proof of wrongdoing, because the government wouldn't bring it that far is they didn't have strong evidence. This is not true: I have family involved in almost every level of the US legal system.

The government brings lawsuits against innocent people ALL THE TIME.

Often times it's to pry information out of them using the threat of jail time, but sometimes there's no rhyme or reason for it. Martha Stewart is a good example.

As much as I dislike her, the type of insider trading she engaged in IS NOT ILLEGAL. She was only convicted because there had been several cases of celebrities being acquitted in the news leading up to that trial, and the jury probably didn't like the idea of adding to those headlines.

Another thing to remember is that a grand jury indictment is based solely on the prosecution's case. The defense does not get to present an argument to refute any of the prosecutor's evidence.

Helio's got about a 50-50 chance of winning this case. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

And if someone automatically assumes he's guilty before such a verdict is delivered, smack them upside the head for me.

What Was The Biggest Mistake in Racing History?

D-Boy — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 15:29:46 -0500

What was the biggest mistake ever made in racing? Quite a question, with a large number of answers.

The US open-wheel split comes to mind almost immediately. But no, it's not the split. Ultimately, the split showed us there was a market for oval racing that we had to makes sure we don't forget.

So, perhaps it was the length of the open-wheel war that was the mistake? Again, no. Because while the oval audience was made obvious by the split, too many people, even now, think the road course audience does not exist.

Ending the war before both sides had a reasonable shot at what they needed was foolish. Note that the war ended not long after Tony George began acknowledging the road course audience.

Now, I know what you're thinking, "You're really stretching things, D-Boy." And I am, but that's the thing—even if it's a stretch, it's a reasonable justification for both the split, and how long the war went on. Despite the damage it did, it isnot damage that cannot be recovered from, especially with NASCAR's popularity beginning to decrease.

Perhaps the biggest mistake is a car. NASCAR's CoT? Once again, no. Because for all its problems as it began, look at it now. Teams have worked it out and the racing is no longer being harmed by its presence. Some would say it has made things better now that the teams are working out the kinks.

How about the Mercedes-Benz CLR? Oh, I heard you all flinch at THAT memory. A flaw in its aerodynamics resulted in not one, but two spectacular backflips at Le Mans—the second and more spectacular of which was caught on camera.

As bad as it was, it was very much luck that the drivers survived. But yet again, no. Racecars can never have the perfect aerodynamic profile, no matter how hard they try. Errors will always occur, and this time it was just bigger than they usually end up being. What's more, Mercedes wisely withdrew the car from all competition after the incidents, so they clearly weren't blind to the dangers.

The biggest mistake in racing history is one that can have absolutely no justification, no redeeming factor, and most importantly, not even look on the surface like an intelligent decision.

And there is only one moment in racing that fits the profile. A decision that indirectly led to the fall of not one, buttwo forms of racing.

The 3.5-liter Group C formula.

Group C and its American derivative, IMSA GTP, was one of the greatest forms of racing ever devised. The action was good, the cars were (usually) beautiful, and there was obvious relevancy in the series. Focusing on endurance rather than outright speed allowed greater understanding of how to build reliable roadcar engines, traction control was experimented with, and as with all form of racing, crash safety understanding was advanced by it.

But in 1991, the FIA decided the Group C's rising popularity amongst fans and manufacturers was harming Formula One. Instead of doing the wise thing and letting things be, they decided to make it so Group C was become a "two-seater Grand Prix" series. Putting F1-derived engines in the back of the cars, costs skyrocketed and by 1993, Group C was dead.

There was no benefit from the change whatsoever. F1's popularity never declined despite Group C's rise, so there was no need for any changes to begin with. F1 had always revolved around privateers with minimal manufacturer involvement, so there was no need to increase such involvement in F1.

The decision also contributed to the demise of IMSA's GTP cars, as sourcing new GTP chassis became painfully expensive. When added to the issue of IMSA allowing the Toyota and Nissan teams to dominate the privateers, it sealed the demise of the GTP class.

Although the subsequent WSC/LMP classes have provided good racing, with recent seasons on par with the old days in terms of racing quality, one can only imagine how much better things would be had this mistake not been made.

If you want to put things into perspective, think about this: The Allard J2X-C was the last dedicated Group C chassis ever built. It produced the same amount of downforce as the current LMP1s, and under the old formula it would have been easy to source an engine powerful enough to overcome the drag and potentially become successful enough to force everyone to rethink their designs.

Instead, the expense of the 3.5-liter F1derived engines forced them to run an underpowered Cosworth engine, and the car never got a chance to have an impact. In 1993, it ran its only race at Laguna Seca. Imagine if Group C has continued as normal, and this car had been able to make a proper impression. Imagine how crazy awesome today's sports prototypes would be.

Sebring Entry List: A Little Worrying

D-Boy — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 21:44:47 -0500

The American Le Mans Series has published the Sebring entry list as things stand right now, and it's more than a little worrying.

If you're interested in running the American Le Mans Series, 2009 is the season to try. Acura's LMP1 program has no guarantee of immediate success, and with Audi gone a privateer team can really make a splash.

The same goes for LMP2, with only one Acura left and all the Porsches gone.

If you want to win the LMGT1 championship, you'd basically just need to enter and survive every race.

And of course, LMGT2 is always wide open.

And yet, the Sebring Entry list shows an LMP2 field that more closely resembles 2008's usual LMP1 field in size. What's more, only three of the LMP1 competitors can reliably be expected to field full-season entries—the Acura teams, and Intersport.

We've heard that Creation Autosportif plans to move the ALMS, but where are they on the Sebring list? Are they waiting until St. Pete? Are they just unwilling to go up against Audi and Peugeot? We have a new LMP1 entry coming in late season, but its not exactly helpful to the field as things stand now.

The action is sure to be good in both LMP classes this year, but the lack of entries may cheapen even the best racing.

Even with the financial crisis, I'm struggling to comprehend why nobody seems willing to try and take advantage of the openness of the ALMS championships this year.

Perhaps I'm overreacting, and some teams that just don't wish to compete with the diesels will be popping up for St. Petersburg, but as someone who recently switched his favorite race series from IndyCar to ALMS, this is more than a little disheartening.

Good luck to the American Le Mans Series in 2009.

The Dallara IndyCar: What Exactly Is Wrong with It?

D-Boy — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 17:45:07 -0500

With all the hoopla surrounding the quickly-approaching Daytona 500, I feel something completely different is needed to help break things up a bit. And thankfully, I recently stumbled across the perfect such thing. It's still winter here in Ohio. Not much opportunity for me to so any racing or testing(especially since we're still awaiting delivery of the new car), so for now I spend my time away from work engaging in my other hobby: Kitbashing. I enjoy building custom replicas of racecars that don't have proper replicas available(or which have extremely rare replicas). The project I was working on was a 1/64 scale Dallara IRL car made by Greenlight Collectibles. What was I doing to it? The obvious: Converting it to road course trim so I won't vomit upon looking at it. While working on it, I noticed something... Something that made me risk completely ruining the project to see if I was right. Low and behold, I was. I had discovered what is wrong with the Dallara IRL car's appearance: Its the airbox. Nothing else. Not convinced? Follow me along...

Begin Slideshow

Milka Duno to Newman/Haas/Lanigan?

D-Boy — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 19:17:18 -0500

Speedtv.com's Robin Miller has reported that in addition to 2007 Champ Car Rookie of the Year Robert Doornbos, Newman/Haas/Lanigan racing has made the surprise choice to expand to three cars, with the third being piloted by Milka Duno.

A shocker to be sure, but quite possibly a very good thing.

Not long ago, I wrote a small piece about why I believe Duno deserves one more shot at IndyCars. Obviously, N/H/L agrees, as I do not see them being lured solely by Milka's sponsorship.

If they were, they would almost certainly not be signing Doornbos, or they'd find a way to get rid of Rahal. They must think that in addition to the extra cash, she has something going for her as a driver.

A season with N/H/L will either doom Duno's IRL career or show us just how good she can be. Signing with one of the best teams in the paddock, Duno will have far better support than she's ever had in the past. She will either blow us all away, or be proven to be hopeless. If she proves to be hopeless, we'll never see her in an IndyCar again.

The people who don't believe she can further improve can take solace in that. N/H/L may be doing your cause a favor by signing her.

Five Manufacturers Still in IRL Engine Talks

D-Boy — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 12:42:33 -0500

Today, I shall, for the first time ever, simply relay actual news instead of write an opinion piece.

IndyCar.com is reporting that five manufacturers—Honda, Audi, Fiat, Volkswagen, and Porsche—are still involved in talks over being involved as future IRL engine suppliers. The site reports that they are in a refinement stage, stating that they will be deciding on the following specifications:

● 4-stroke engines with reciprocating pistons
● Engine capacity not to exceed 2.0 liters
● Dual-overhead cam shaft with 4 valves per cylinder
● Single turbo charger systems will be permitted
● Direct injection systems will be permitted
● Continue the league's leadership position with the use of alternative fuels
● Engine life between rebuilds of 3,750 miles
● Five-year sealed engine homologation process that will define areas with possible annual updates
● Cost containment engine lease ceiling that is applicable to all participants

OK. I lied, I've got a few opinionated things to say about this:

First off, the article as-written appears to imply that all of these manufacturers have agreed in principle to supply engines to a specification at least close to the above, should financial circumstances in 2011 allow it.

If nothing else, this means there's a 90 percent chance we'll have at least two suppliers come 2011, probably more. I can't see both Audi and Volkswagen in the show at the same time for obvious reasons, but I see no reason they can't all come into the picture.

The manufacturer I see as least likely to come through in 2011 is Fiat, as I'm not convinced they're as dedicated to the U.S. market as they've indicated. They've been saying for ten years that Alfa was coming back to the U.S., but they kept delaying it. Unless the engines are to be Ferrari badged, I can't see Fiat bothering.

Secondly, as a mechanic who's worked on many different engines, let me assure you that the specs provided are EXCEPTIONALLY good. Two-liter engine capacity is right on the money for a good turbo engine—it's not too big, it's not too small, and it'll hold together under the pressure plenty well enough.

Although there's no agreement indicated on number of pistons, a two-liter engine will work great for either four or six-cylinder, and I get the feeling that they may be planning to leave this aspect open for each manufacturer.

This is good for Audi, as it's believed they want to bring diesel into the picture and a four-cylinder turbo-diesel might be a little weak for a racing engine.

All in all, things are looking much brighter for the 2011 IndyCar specs. Good news like this is what will generate interest in the series leading up to 2011, and hopefully keep the series alive until then.

You can read the full article on IndyCar.com at this link.

Could The Financial Crisis Be Beneficial To The IndyCar Series?

D-Boy — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:57:58 -0500

As everyone in the world knows by now, there's been a rather serious financial crisis going on for several months now. Racing series are especially feeling the pinch—companies are dropping their sponsorships from F1, NASCAR, and even IndyCar almost daily.

So why, despite the recent loss of sponsors, do I feel the IndyCar Series could benefit from the crisis?

Well, its rather simple: Over the past few years, the Indy Racing League (IRL) has been in NASCAR's shadow, forced to make do with mostly small-time sponsors to make ends meet. In this economy, the small-time sponsors often cannot afford an IRL sponsorship anymore.

But an IRL sponsorship for a front-running team is still a mere fraction of the sponsorship costs for a 20th place car in NASCAR.

Even despite the financial recession, there are plenty of big sponsors out there who have had to drop their NASCAR sponsorships, but which still have money to burn on advertising.

And in many cases, its enough to afford an IRL sponsorship.

So why haven't they jumped over to the IRL yet? Again, its rather simple: The IRL still hasn't regained its original position on the racing radar map. The sponsors aren't quite aware that the IRL could be a good investment of their sponsorship dollars.

And why should they? There've been concerns about the new TV package, and the taint of the split is still visible in some aspects. On the surface, it doesn't seem all that great.

But what they fail to realize is that where the racing's good, the fans will go. And the IndyCar Series put on some very good shows in its first unified season.

If the IRL and Versus promote the hell out of the series on other channels, it will gain enough attention to get back on the sponsor's radars. And once that happens, the sponsors will come, and the IRL will weather the crisis at least as good as any other series.

It seems that everything comes down to the new Versus TV package. Versus has already made it clear they'll give the races the coverage they deserve, and the channel isn't as inaccessible as many believe.

In fact, the IRL coming to Versus has increased interest in the channel to such an extent that services are adding it on an almost daily basis, and other services which had it as an expanded channel are moving it to their basic lineups.

The Versus deal is poised to be as strong as the ALMS's arrangement with SPEED Channel. And if we look at how ALMS has prospered under its deal, we can see how the Versus deal can benefit the IRL.

As best I can tell, we should start seeing an upturn in IRL sponsorships by mid-season.

But only time will tell.

Does Milka Duno Deserve Another Season in IndyCars?

D-Boy — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 01:14:57 -0500

"She was 13 seconds off the pace in Detroit!"

This means what, exactly? Even the best racers in the business have a bad day, and perfection almost certainly shouldn't be expected of a driver who was still learning the ropes in IRL.

Make no mistake, Milka Duno is far from the best driver on Earth. To think so would be just as foolish as it would be to dismiss her 2008 IRL season completely.

But she was 13 seconds off the pace at a single race. If she had been that bad at every race, I'd be singing a different tune right now.

The fact is, Milka Duno showed a marked improvement in 2008 over 2007...an improvement on a level that shows she just might have what it takes to run with the big boys.

In 2007, Duno ran seven races, failing to finish four of them. In 2008, she ran 11, failing to finish five. More importantly, she was far closer to the leader's pace in almost all of her races than in 2007.

Dismissing Milka's improvements in 2008 would be like dismissing AJ Allmendinger's 2008 NASCAR season as showing no improvement, solely because he once again failed to make every race.

The simple answer is: Yes, Duno deserves another shot at IRL. Only another part-time program, and if she does not show further improvement, she should get booted out the same way Marty Roth did.

In addition to the potential she showed sparks of this past season, she also showed that she's not going to put up with Danica Patrick's crap. And anyone willing to stand up to Patrick is fine by me. As long as they can drive reasonably well, of course.

Observations on '09 F1 Style

D-Boy — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:53:51 -0500

Three 2009-spec F1 have broken cover in the past few days. BMW, Honda, and Williams gave us the first look at the future of F1 cars with their interim aero packages, and now Ferrari, Toyota, and McLaren have given us the first look at what cars designed specifically for the new rules will look like.

Though the BMW wasn't too bad, the Williams and Honda gave us some reasonable concern over the looks. Most apprehension centered around the look of the rear wing. Some concerns were voiced about the front wing being a higher collision risk, but applying some deeper thought makes it clear this is not going to be a real concern.

But now we've seen properly designed cars, and one thing has been made clear: The future of F1 style is not nearly as bleak as we initially thought.

The first car to break cover, the Ferrari F60, was a sexy machine ruined only by its rear wing. Then we saw the Toyota TF109—not as nice as the Ferrari, but it looked better than the interim cars. Some have said the Toyota looks a little old school.

Now we have the McLaren MP4-24. And I cannot find an angle from which this car looks wrong. Even the rear wing looks good on this machine. Granted, it's not as good-looking as SOME older cars, but it is a shining beacon of hope in these times of concern.

Of course, we really shouldn't be worrying about the design of the cars as much as we should about their safety and performance. But since we can't see them in action until the first race of the season, and we don't have any testing numbers to measure by, there really isn't much more we can discuss.

The McLaren MP4-24 is making the future of F1 design look a lot brighter than it looked just a few short weeks ago. Let's hope the other teams can keep this spark alive.