We want to relate to Americana. I went to the Indy 500 and that was Americana. I sat in various turns and I didn’t see any champagne drinkers, but I saw a lot of beer drinkers. We appeal to the wine and cheese crowd, but we also appeal to the masses – the beer drinkers.” Randy Bernard
Indy 500, no question.
"Each day well lived makes every yesterday a dream of happiness and every tomorrow a vision of hope. Look well therefore to this one day for it, and it alone, is life"
~ Sanskrit poem attributed to Kalidasa, "Salutation to the Dawn"
"Try some of these before or after your statements if you are not presenting them as facts. Things like - "In my opinion", or "I think that", JHMO, IMHO, IMO, JMO... Your opinions are not (necessarily) fact. That would clear things up some." - Seadog 03/25/2010 11:40am So the above is JMO.
Don't argue with idiots, it only makes you look stupid and infuriates the idiots.
I don't buy the "dilution" argument or whatever you call the "more choices" excuse for the downward spiral of IndyCar. Football and baseball and NASCAR and hot dogs and apple pie and Chevrolet all existed as "diversions" back when IndyCar was much more popular than it is today. Nobody is watching F1 or drag racing or WRC on cable INSTEAD of watching IndyCar, so the existence of more niche sports on cable to watch is NOT drawing viewers away who would otherwise "settle" for watching IndyCar on TV.
I don't go to Indy just because I can - I go because I want to, and it means a lot to me.
Super Bowl, not so much. Plus, what is there to "being there" that I can't get on TV?
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be misquoted and used against you.
For example, there was a time when I could or would be willing to attend an NHL game. But as prices escalated, not just for tickets, but for parking and for concessions I didn't find I was getting the same value that I once did and I stopped going. I didn't stop going cause I had the Internet, I didn't stop going cause I have more channels on the TV to watch now, I stopped going because the value just wasn't there. The game itself hasn't much change although I do have my complaints but that isn't what prevents me from going, I just don't get enough return in enjoyment for what I am spending.
Likewise with the movie theater. I am a movie afficiando. Love the movies. Used to go all the time. I haven't stopped going because the world is a changing place, I've stopped going because it's just to freaking expensive and I don't get enough value. Can I download movies and watch them at home? Yes, but twenty years ago I could also get a cable "descrambler" and watch movies free that way also, that never stopped me from going to the movies. I don't go now cause the "experience" hasn't changed one iota but the cost of that same experience keeps going up and up. It's no longer worth it.
Same is true of Indy Car. Was a time I would drive to the ends of the earth and sleep in my car just to attend. Now I won't even make a two hour trip to see them. In this case prices haven't much changed, if anything they might even be somewhat cheaper then what I had paid years past, but I don't think it's as entertaining as it once was. Again, has nothing to do with more channels, more restaurants, more Internet, or more anything, it has to do with what I earn and what I am willing to spend and I don't find I get enough of an entertainment return for what it costs me to go see a race, or more importantly the time I need to invest. A good example is last year, Watkins Glen is less then two hours from where I live. It's an easy peasy drive. But the race happened during one of the best weekends last summer and I wasn't willing to trade a weekend at the cottage for a weekend at the track. I've always had the cottage and in years past I was willing to make that trade because seeing guys like Zanardi (not at Watkins), or Unser Jr., was "worth" it. Now I don't find that to be the case.
I find greater value in other things that were always there and always competed for my time and money with Indy Car, in the past they always lost to my Indy Cars, now more and more they are winning because I don't get the same value that I once did.
Indycar stopped being Indycar a long time ago, no reason to name a date anymore.
Indy isn't just about racing at IMS. It isn't just about going 500 miles. It is about building and showcasing the fastest cars on the track.
Spec cars from that are set up differently isn't Indycar. High drag, low power "pack racing" that the IRL made its trademark isn't Indycar. Whiny drivers isn't Indycar. Idiotic, staged winning circle celebrations where sissys click their heals getting off the car in front of a crowd of tens isn't Indycar. Engines with minimum lifetimes before upgrade and grid penalties isn't Indycar. Aero Kits for pretend car differences isn't Indycar either. Closed pit lanes under cautions to create passing under yellow isn't Indycar. Sweeping the track for 20 minutes when the cars should be doing 17 second laps isn't Indycar.
Other than racing at the same track, this sport is half a world away from its roots.
Tickets: 2 @ $10 each isn't hard to get at 11:00am. What's a superbowl ticket go for?
Parking: $10 all day, all month.
Food and drink: $20 bucks with ice in the cooler, just buy the beer before Sunday.
An all expenses paid trip to an event that doesn't sell out isn't a prize.
It's still INDYCAR, but it is no longer 'open-wheel' racing:
To me, speed and safety are more important than open wheels or cockpits.
Open wheels and cockpits were originally adopted to acquire more speed. So were skinny tires. They didn't stop being IndyCars when they lost the skinny tires, or the "mechanist's" seats.
There's nothing in my appreciation of the sport that says it depends on having 6 square inches of the drivers' foreheads exposed to random debris at 240 mph. You can also incorporate designs that discourage wheel-to-wheel contact without the illogical drag penalty of exposed giant slicks, or the random risk they precipitate.
The DW-12 is the only style permitted, so it is the only INDYCAR that is current.Open wheels and cockpits were originally adopted to acquire more speed. So were skinny tires. They didn't stop being IndyCars when they lost the skinny tires, or the "mechanist's" seats.
Agreed. Nothing says that safety and logic shouldn't be incorporated into the sport. But there is a line out there somewhere that, when crossed, makes it hard to differentiate an INDYCAR from other race machinery. How far is the sport willing to go?There's nothing in my appreciation of the sport that says it depends on having 6 square inches of the drivers' foreheads exposed to random debris at 240 mph. You can also incorporate designs that discourage wheel-to-wheel contact without the illogical drag penalty of exposed giant slicks, or the random risk they precipitate.
You could retire the entire air force fleet and reproduce thousands of B-29's and F82's to put in service.... you wouldn't end up with the most potent US Air Force fleet on the planet. That would be somewhere in the desert near Tuscon.
Back in the nineties, I could go to an Indycar race every year. It was ten miles from my home. I went every third year or so. Many people would say that the mid-nineties were the good old days of Indycar. There were a couple of reasons I didn't go every year. One was that I had seen several previous Indycar races, and the novelty was gone. Another was that I had seen several IMSA GTP races, which I liked even better than Indycar. Another was that I was racing in an SCCA midengine sports racer, and almost completely lost interest in spectating. Another was that I had other interests and obligations.
What if Indycar came to my home track next year? I would probably go, but maybe only one year. It's been over a decade since I last attended. I would spend Saturday in the pits checking out the technology that the teams are using. I would buy some lemon chicken and yakisoba noodles. I would play with my new camera. I would not go because of the DW12. It is a competent race car, but it is not an exciting race car, IMO. I would not go because of the drivers (well, maybe Sato).
Maybe it is not just the sport that has changed; maybe it is both the sport and you and me. If that is the case, then it would not be fair to judge the sport too harshly.
Last edited by Motie; 07-22-2012 at 11:54 PM.
NASCAR's talent pool is amazingly deep and wide... for what NASCAR requires. No one in NASCAR lands a full-time spot because of their ability to turn right.
In much the same way, IndyCar's talent pool is unique from NASCAR's, and incomparable. The guys in NASCAR are in NASCAR because they're best at driving NASCARs.
The guys in IndyCar are in IndyCar because they're the best at driving IndyCars, with some exceptions. IndyCar's talent pool isn't comparable to NASCAR, but it is comparable to Formula One.
"Young enough not to care too much about the way things used to be.
I'm young enough to remember the future. The past has no claim on me.
I'm old enough not to care too much about what you think of me.
But I'm young enough to remember the future. The way things ought to be."