Comments on: Good News/Bad News

By: Leigh O'Gorman

Leigh O'Gorman — Sun, 13 Mar 2011 03:06:01 +0000

…and now NBC is pulling the live streaming from indycar.com ?? Bad move… again.

By: Tarod

Tarod — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 15:17:50 +0000

The double line restart put all the lapped cars at the tail, so it’s way harder to get a lap back…
They should allow the “waive around” cars to pit after getting their lap back thats all !

By: Mike Silver

Mike Silver — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 13:49:12 +0000

Well put, Cowboy. I personally would bnot close the pits and if you are right there when the yellow comes out, duck in. That’s racing , also. Any car getting the free pass would likely be lapped again anyway. I’m glad it won’t be applied on every yellow. I hope that is made more clear or communicated to the fans when it will or won’t be applied.

By: The Lapper

The Lapper — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 05:56:32 +0000

Well said.

By: Cowboy Racer

Cowboy Racer — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 17:14:02 +0000

I do not understand why IndyCar has to screw up a race with their plan for Lucky Dog B.S. on lapped cars and double file restarts. Why not just let everyone pit when the pits are open and let them race out of the pit and back onto the track. Every lapped car that beats the race leader out of the pits and those that did not pit get a wave around to rejoin the tail of the pack. This is excitement for the fans leave it alone. If somebody running 2nd or further back does not pit, then they assume the lead and any lapped cars behind the new leader gets stuck a lapped down. Then line the cars up two abreast as they are in line. If lapped cars are between the first and second place cars so be it. It gives these guys a chance to race back onto the lead lap and it gives the leader a buffer that he deserves by lapping cars. One exception, with less than 10 laps left, all lapped cars go to the back of the field. These are professional drivers and they can handle the restarts. If they can’t, then the owners will not be so quick to hire them because they tear up equipment and the officials will not be so quick to give them a license to drive. It really is pretty simple! Just do it!

By: Br!an McKay

Br!an McKay — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 16:33:30 +0000

I’m glad when someone considers fan feedback!

By: The Speedgeek

The Speedgeek — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 16:19:19 +0000

I’d submit to you, though, SkipinSC, that the way that they’re proposing doing starts and restarts is basically the same way that they did them from basically the beginning of the sport until at least the mid- to late-’90s. The only wheelspin related accident that I can think of off the start of the race is that one “Damn Coooogin” incident, which may or may not have been caused by a broken halfshaft (I’ve watched that accident dozens of times now, and just can’t rule out mechanical failure, even given Cogan’s mediocre skills). And given the fact that the current cars have 200-300 less horsepower than the cars of the ’80s and ’90s had, I think wheelspin will be even less of a problem than it was then. Besides, like George points out, we’ve seen plenty of first lap crashes in the past few years, and still had to suffer through strung out starts. Why not ensure that the starts are good and close?

You and I do see exactly eye to eye on the Lucky Dog, though. I just posted this at Pressdog’s site, so forgive the same sentiments here, but getting a lap back has always taken great tactics, skill and a little luck. That’s why a lap down car getting a lap back was a “once in a blue moon” event, and why Jacques getting 2 back in one Indy 500 and then going on to win the race was like lightning striking the same tree 6 times in a row. Now, a car getting a lap back will happen every 20 or 30 laps. Yawn.

By: SkipinSC

SkipinSC — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:55:06 +0000

I am all for slowing the starts down and keeping the cars in formation until 200 or so yards from the line. My problem with that, however, is that you’re going to have a BUNCH of cars, packed more tightly, and all trying to work up through the gears. Given the propensity for wheel spin in these cars, I think this is an invitation to a low-speed, multi-car pileup. And, lets face it, any significant contact whether it’s at 60 mph or 150 mph means several “someones” are going to be watching the next 499 miles of racing. If you move the start speed up to, say 150, I think you lessen the chance of that.

Indy used to advertise its green flag as “The World’s Fastest Flying Start.” (Check some of your old souvenir programs.) Bring the cars to the line at 60 mph, and it might become the world’s slowest.

If you hit the cone 200 yards from the start finish line at 60, this means cars are going to be tightly packed and accelerating steadily through 1 and 2 before hitting “full song” somewhere on the backstretch. Each driver will be trying to find his own racing space and driving up through the top 3 gears at the same time. We’ve had “issues” with the start even with the field spread out and everyone (almost) at speed going through 1 and 2. This will make for exciting starts, but also “unintended consequences” if a couple of cars get out of shape. (Does the name Kevin Cogan ring a bell? I guarantee it does with George’s hero and mine, A. J. Foyt.)

Very seldom do you see any or many comments attached to Curt Cavin’s column, but there were quite a few when I read this last evening, almost universally devrying the “lucky dog.” Not only is this one of the less popular things with NASCAR “purists,” (and believe me, living in South Carolina I hear all about it. SOme even go so far as to call it the “Dale Jr. second chance” rule.) But, if applied to INDYCAR, I think it goes a long way toward taking pit strategy right out of the game, particularly on the shorter tracks (Iowa for example.)

As I pointed out in my comment thereon, Jacques Villeneuve came from 2 laps down, and Rick Mears came from 1 down to win the 500. Those two wins required skill, not LUCK. I just don’t want INDYCAR to become “WWE light.”

By: billytheskink

billytheskink — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 14:56:51 +0000

For this post I’m going to refer to the “lucky dog” rule by it’s non-Aaron’s sponsored name, the “free pass”.

The free pass rarely has any effect of the outcome of a NASCAR race. It’s primary aim is to give fans whose interest in watching a race is tied to one or two drivers a reason to continue watching when those drivers wind up off the lead lap. This “moves the needle” at least a little in NASCAR because several drivers have fanbases who watch the race only to see them.
In IndyCar, Danica is probably the only driver with many fans like that, maybe Castroneves. And aside from those two, you’d likely have to go back to Al Unser Jr., Michael Andretti, and Bobby Rahal to find other IndyCar examples.
For the free pass to have any effect on attendence and ratings, IndyCar needs a lot more fans who watch races because of a couple of favorite drivers.

The free pass is a silly contrivance (not as silly as artificial rain, but…) that serves a purpose in NASCAR. I really doubt it will attract more casual fans to IndyCar than the racing “purists” it will drive away; and neither group will be numerous.

By: JohnMc

JohnMc — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 14:32:29 +0000

I agree! The waffling is not good. Make a desicion and stick with it and if it doesn’t work out then change it next year.