Show Posts
1
Racing Discussion / TALLADEGA!!!
« on: November 02, 2009, 03:28:17 AM »
No, there weren't any drivers killed in today's race but I wanted to get people used to seeing that headline because it's going to happen sooner rather than later.
I apologize for the shock I may have caused for anyone. Today's race was a disgrace for many reasons. I know there is another topic already for Talladega. I was going to post this there but I wanted to drive home the points about the wrecks, because I really think it's time for a change and I hope NASCAR can see that after today.
That "race" was horrible!!! Where do I even begin.
Well I could probably keep going on at my disappointment of today's race, but what's the point? It'll be more of the same come February. As always these are just my opinions.
I apologize for the shock I may have caused for anyone. Today's race was a disgrace for many reasons. I know there is another topic already for Talladega. I was going to post this there but I wanted to drive home the points about the wrecks, because I really think it's time for a change and I hope NASCAR can see that after today.
That "race" was horrible!!! Where do I even begin.
- Wrecks
Several years ago Jeff Burton became very vocal in regards to restrictor plate races and the "big one" that always seems to happen. It really got me thinking and ever since then I've hated them. It's great that we've got soft walls and the cars are safer then they've ever been, but sooner or later someone is going to get killed. I don't care how "safe" the cars or walls are, when you have 20 cars playing ping pong down the frontstretch at almost 200mph, someone will eventually die....again!!! Remember we lost Dale Sr. in a restictor plate race, oh but that was because we didn't have head & neck restraints. Hmmm.. I wonder what they'll pin the blame for the next one on?
This is something that needs to be addressed. I realize racing is inherently dangerous, but why do we implement soft walls and safer cars "in the event of a crash", and then create 4 races at the two fastest tracks in the world where a "major crash is likely to happen"? How about really showing that we are for making racing safer and eliminating the situation that makes restrictor plate racing so dangerous?
If you knew there was a 50% chance that you were going to be involved in a major crash at work tomorrow, would you still go in?
Jimmy Spencer said earlier this week that 99% of the wrecks at Talladega are due to driver error and not mechanical failure. I'd agree with that, but when you create a situation for the drivers via restrictor plates where they have to run inches from each other all day long, dashing back and forth trying to stay ahead of the wind, you're going to have driver errors.
Then you tell your drivers that we want to see daylight between the cars in the turns. If you ask me backing off with 40 guys behind you is probably more dangerous then tapping the guy ahead of you.
I hated to see Ryan Newman's wreck and I love his interview afterwards. But in all honesty it's probably a good thing that wreck happened when it did. A lap or two later and some of the leaders would have ran out of gas and probably would have caused a much larger wreck. - Riding... not racing
You can't blame these guys for riding around for 150 laps and then trying to race in just the last 30 laps or so. I applaud the drivers for what they did. It was almost like they were making a collective statement to NASCAR, saying be careful what you wish for!
From the in-car radios...
Tony Stewart... "Someone tell me something interesting to keep me awake."
Jimmy Johnson... "Chad is it ok if I run this car at half throttle for this long?"
Kevin Harvick... "It's be easier if I had cruise control."
.... all of this while coasting along at 180 mph.
If they want to keep this format, they should make the race 30 laps. They'll still get their wrecking in to please the TV ratings God's, but at least we'd see some racing. - 4,000 Lead Changes... YAY!!!!
Who really cares how many lead changes there are when a guy could go from 1st to 20th in a lap and then back to the lead in 2 more laps?
I laugh when I see the Dale Jr. nation roaring when he gets to the lead 20 laps into the race... WHY? He's not gonna stay there, no one could.
The damned TV announcers make such a huge deal out of lead changes, at a regular race and at a regular track - that would be interesting, but at restrictor plate races it's just another useless statistic. - Speaking of useless statistics
My favorite useless statistic today was the Crash Probability chart that showed Jimmy Johnson had an 85% chance of wrecking (or something like that). What the f..k is that supposed to mean? I'm no Einstein, but it's like the old coin toss probability question. If a coin is tossed 100 times and landed on heads all of those times, what is the probability of landing on tails in the next toss?
50% - the same as it was the 1st toss, the 20th toss, for all the tosses.
Just because Jimmy Johnson has been involved in wrecks before has no bearing on whether he would be involved in one today. You'd think the networks would require more than a GED for their stats guys! - Hasta La Vista... Restrictor Plates - Let the boys race!
It seems to me the only solution is to get rid of the restrictor plates. Now I realize you can't do that because the cars would be flying off the track, but how about coming up with a different engine for Talladega and Daytona?
I've mentioned that before and people have told me it would cost too much. I counter with how much does it cost to junk a car 4 times a year?
Maybe they could go to a six-cylinder, or a smaller v-8, or God forbid a crate engine - just something to get the control back in the drivers foot. Maybe make the cars so aero-dirty for these races that they don't need restrictor plates.
I would much rather see these guys actually race for position at a slower speed, than what goes on now. Hiding at the back to avoid the "big one", getting pushed to the front by another car for the win, putting it into the catch fence because "you had to block", or losing the race because the guy pushing you actually thought he might pull out and try to win.
This is not racing!!!!
Mark Martin nailed it when he calls restrictor plate racing "the lottery". Is Brad Kesolowski that good to beat the other 42 guys in the spring race? Is Jamie MacMurray who hasn't won it 80+ races one helluva driver (by the way I didn't even know Jamie MacMurray was still racing because I don't think I've heard his name mentioned all year)? How about Michael Waltrip with his impressive 4 wins in 756 starts - "all" of them at restrictor plate races.
I don't mean any disrespect to these guys, but I think this just proves Martins' theory that restrictor plate races are won on pure luck, not talent.
Let's put the talent back in racing. Do what you need to do to slow the cars down and shitcan the restictor plates, and let the boys have at it.
Otherwise give the drivers a week off and pick 43 wingnuts out of the crowd and let them have it - you'd see about the same thing. Ok, well maybe there'd be another wreck or two... hey what a great idea, could you imagine the ratings... Mr. Helton. - One thing they got right
As much as I hate to say it, they actually did get one thing right during this race. The TV coverage was phenomenal. You could actually see more than one car at a time. And you could see passes as they were happening, not as the they were being completed or in a replay to show the actual pass took place!
One of my biggest gripes with NASCAR racing and how it has changed in my viewing lifetime is that you don't actually see much racing anymore. You used to, but now they often zoom in on only one car for several laps, and then on to the next car. When they show a pass the cars are generally already side-by-side. You rarely get to see a pass develop, or watch a group of cars and see who is closing in on who, or who is making up ground.
Back in the 90's at least the camera angles were much wider, like what they show now at restrictor plate races. The reason they do it now is because they have to pan back to show 30 cars in a cluster, but they used to have those camera angles all the time. It was much more entertaining to watch as you could see things develop. Now at most tracks they're so focused on putting you in the drivers seat with a massive zoom that you are literally watching cars go in circles instead of actually racing. If they would just leave the camera's backed off like they do at races like Talladega it would be more exciting.
While I'm talking about camera angles, here's another one that really bother me. No, it's not Digger... although that is the most uselss camera they have. It's on starts and restarts. Every start they have the furthest camera zoom in and then zoom out as the cars get on the gas. This gives you absolutely no feeling of these cars coming up to speed. In fact it often is hard to tell when they actually do get on the gas because the camera is pulling away faster than the cars are coming up to speed.
What I think they should do is have a stationary camera set to a specific zoom. This camera should be at the end of the front straight and would be able to show the cars coming off turn 4. Then just leave it locked in, as the cars gain speed they'll approach the camera quicker and we can finally "feel" these cars on the restarts!!!
Well I could probably keep going on at my disappointment of today's race, but what's the point? It'll be more of the same come February. As always these are just my opinions.