I must have snuck in
Complete and totally relevant examples - there is nothing else closer to the model you push, and here are two with decidedly similar results over the long haul.
Not knocking them, they are what they are, and I appreciate them - but they're not as popular as IndyCar, they're far, far less popular and successful than the unSplit IndyCar was, and certainly not representative of the one true path to popularity in the United States. It doesn't exist.
More than enough damage. Not just you, but all the "my way or highway" zealots on every side. You're toxic. You'd have to being a thousand fans to break even.I am bringing 4 people to Indy this year, 2 are rookies. I am doing more then enough.
I went to TMS to see the IndyCar race. I heard so many "fans" whining and crying about this and that old split issue and the on-track product to make me wonder why any newbie or marginally uninformed or under-experienced fan would ever come back. Even though we had just watched the fastest, most exciting and competitive open wheel racing anywhere on earth, the best man / team / car won, and nobody got hurt bad.
"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"
Otherwise, it isn't really increased risk.
Greater speed = increased risk. Open wheels = increased risk. Open cockpit = increased risk. Stupid driving = increased risk.
Of course, there are measures to counter that risk - safety features in the tubs, etc., but the biggest deal is the increased mass*energy, and the increased incidence of contact due to proximity.
Originally Posted by Tim Paffymond
You think there might have been another reason or two that the oval fans stopped attending? Or did they all leave because they felt that IndyCar was creating a "hostile oval environment" (my words, paraphrasing you)?
Maybe D can shed some light:
BTW, the part above that I didn't cut out: That is the single most astute thing you have ever typed.
-The We've Been Saying The Same *&$% To You For Years, Why Did You, er, Defend It So Vigorously?, Wonders speedgeek
Who's got next?
Question to the thread: What Owners or drivers actually assisted in removing oval races from the schedule?
I seem to remember Chip whining about oval-crash repair bills, and the Great Oval Savior, Mikey Andretti, put pressure on IC's former ruler-king to pick up Toronto and tried for a few more, but which owner cancelled an oval?
edited Followup question: Which message board typists were fans of the CART/ChampCar side of the split, and absolutely Hate or do not want oval races? I know most of the other guys, and they like ovals just fine, when the on-track product is any good (in their opinion).
That is not even close to a paraphrase. What I typed was: 'Road racers have a different mentality than oval racers. Great oval racers are calculated, patient and seize opportunities to advance where and when they come along. The jets get turned up at the end, after they have spent the first ¾ of the race setting up the last ¼. Rick Mears and the Al side of the Unser family were masters of this (one reason that family has so many wins at Indy and the entire Andretti family has one). Road racers are consistently more aggressive (often needlessly and/or stupidly so), and although an unwritten code of conduct is generally observed mostly in terms of where and how to ‘overtake’ their style rarely translates well to ovals. That, I believe, is one reason why road racers cause so many oval problems. When the product gets as homogenized as it was, what we have seen was predictable.'Originally Posted by speedgeek
What you have clumsily attempted is the most cheesy type of stereotype possible. If we're going to debate, let's do so in a realistic manner.
First, IndyCar has not failed. Despite frequent criticism I firmly believe the leadership is trying to do the right thing despite the catty politics that have always characterized the sport. My primary criticism is about the current approach. The trend for ovals is fewer every year, and legacy ovals are being dropped at an alarming rate. This is backed up by actual statistics.Originally Posted by speedgeek
Second, the micromanagement to which I referred may well have become dormant. The favorite whipping boy of the critics, Brian Barnhart, got bumped upstairs. We have new cars, new motors and next year, new aero kits. I am giving that a chance. But I remain seriously pissed that great, convenient ovals like Kentucky are off the schedule for mostly invalid reasons.
I disagree with that assessment. Eddie Gossage has deep roots in Indy Car that predates his involvement at Texas. He has been a huge fan, not to mention insider, over the years. If you brought Indy Car its second biggest crowds year in and year out and then had to face rate increases almost every year, having the schedule get jacked around annually, and no real vote of confidence from Indy Car management, not to mention what has become really boorish behavior by many of its participants, how would you feel? Granted, Eddie is in the business of promotion and is a master of stirring things up, but if you listen to what he says and not how he says it, there is a strong message.Originally Posted by Bob_Marley
And, as rrrr eloquently pointed out, there is NO compelling evidence to justify 'safety concerns' expressed by some. If Texas is not on the schedule in 2013 I firmly believe it is because IndyCar does not want it there. As a matter of fact I think they would let it go in favor of a street festival o' speed in Houston. That is just inexcusable.
-The Using Reality As Basis For Opinion Disciple of INDYCAR
Eddie wants an IndyCar race at TMS. It brings in decent revenue, it exposes a different demographic to racing, it shows off his jewel of a Speedway. Eddie wants TMS to host some sort of motor sport or automotive enthusiast event every day that they can. If Texas is not on the 2013 schedule it will be due to poor judgement on the part of IndyCar PERIOD.
...Always follow the money
While there will always be differences of opinion, the effectiveness and safety of the catch fencing is only being questioned by "select" drivers and internet experts. Could there be improvement? Possibly, maybe even likely. However, to just change the fence design because Bob_Marley and Davey Hamilton want to see it changed is not the answer. I deeply respect Davey Hamilton in many ways, but his opinion is just that, an opinion. It is formulated by his experience with the fencing at TMS. It is also biased by that same experience. I imagine Stan Fox could say the same thing about the fence at IMS.
My point is that if we need to make changes to safety fences, it needs to be based on data.
Shiny new fencing between turns 3 and 4; many of the lower seats have been removed, and they have added SAFER to inside walls.
I wish they'd add a little more apron in the turns though.
-The Always in Awe There Disciple of INDYCAR
I can be FAR more cheesy and clumsy, but I dare say that it would be impossible for you to be any more pompous.
BTW, the part I cut out really didn't pertain to the series' homogeneousness comment. Not sure what the purpose was. I thought I might remove it to spare you some embarrassment. Trying to be helpful, is all.
But, more importantly, when did you decide to try to debate realistically? That would be refreshing!
I still would like to know, that with all of the faults of IndyCar, why were you such a staunch defender of it even when presented with evidence of the faults? You seem to now agree with many long-time critics of the IRL. When did you finally realize that they were right?Originally Posted by disciple
Oh,You don't need no fancy statisticals, you could just use an abacus. Or perhaps an Etch-a-Sketch.and legacy ovals are being dropped at an alarming rate. This is backed up by actual statistics.
Being Split was a bad idea. Adding fans was good. Finding ways to remain ovalcentric and appealing to the grassroots base seemed like a reasonable strategy for relevance and security. I always hoped the powers-that-be would find ways to at least mutually cooperate, if not re-merge successfully somehow, keeping the larger fanbase intact - one that reflected more what it was, demographically, during it's height of popularity in the 1960 and 1970's.
Of course, things change over time, and hopefully we learn Most of the faults were "start-up" issues and things that could have been improved over time. Except for the really big, deep fault - the one of the division, and the qualification rules.
You might notice a similar fate for true road courses- nice, storied ones of USAC fame.Originally Posted by Disciple
The reason for that is the same reason we don't get our choice of oval venues - a lack of popularity. So, we have to have subsidized street races. Or foreign-shore subsidies.
The one big upside is, those urban and foreign events expose the series en masse to new fans, and they help pay the bills. And it's not like there's nothing to appreciate about them.
You just gotta get your head right. And keep shaking that tree, dammit
That which doesn't destroy us, makes us stronger It's a choice, and I choose to make it. Knowing that reduces some of the victim-angst that seems to rile some of you guys.
That's an excuse. They did not come by a lack of popularity by accident. Most were neglected into that state. That is why I am excited about what Michael Andretti is attempting. The neglect of quality ovals is one of the most significant tragedies of the current direction. NASCAR does not neglect ovals (then again they have a vested interest in most) and it would not be hard for IndyCar to surpass what passes for presentation over there. Most of what they do was lifted from IndyCar anyway.Originally Posted by Turn13
We don't HAVE to have....we are merely TOLD we have to have. It's a lot easier to Barnum and Bailey your way into a city and take their money than nurture long term relationships at proper tracks. There is no reason as much effort that goes into a Baltimore or St. Pete can't go into a Kentucky or Chicagoland or Richmond.Originally Posted by Turn13
They also usually end up screwing local governments and fail far more often than they succeed. The tawdry Baltimore headlines over the past year turn my stomach and is a textbook cae for why these abominations should be limited.Originally Posted by Turn13
Oh, I will. And I ain't drinking no sugared water.Originally Posted by Turn13
Once they drop the flag any perceived angst will probably dissipate slightly.Originally Posted by Turn13
Why? do you actually think that what you say could change things?Perhaps I could use a change of tactic.
Thoughts become words, words become deeds, deeds become habits, habits become destiny, destinies become legacies, legacies become thoughts of the coming generations
"The series may be hesitant to say it, but the day is here for everybody that loves IndyCar racing to link arms and help each other out. Anybody who doesn’t want to do that needs to find something else to do with their time.”
-- Eddie Gossage, President, Texas Motor Speedway, ICONIC Advisory Committee & TrackForum member
I'm beginning to wonder if you like stepping in it.Originally Posted by Disciple, using reality, and not making sweeping Generalizations at all. No sir, not at all.
Originally Posted by DiscipleOriginally Posted by Disciple, who usually waits a few posts (at least) before writing statements that undermine himself
Seriously J., I hope you are well.
Maybe see you at Milwaukee. Is your brother's photography hobby coming along nicely?