Some of the best races ever at Indianapolis were won by 1,2,or even 3 laps.Originally Posted by MoparsRule
Some of the best races ever at Indianapolis were won by 1,2,or even 3 laps.
"You just don't know what Indy Means" Al Unser Jr.
How is domination exciting?
I understand now why you are such a big F1 fan..
You must be a pretty disappointed race fan Chris. I've been watching racing many more years than you and the number of times a race is decided on the final lap is far and few between. Short of putting the drivers into the same kind of cars, ala the old IROC series, attempting to get a photo finish in most of the races you run is pretty near impossible.
In fact, down to the wire finishes in just about any sport you care to mention are more the rarity than the average.
Maybe you're more into a race series that's staged like WWE wrestling. Where the winner is pre-determined and the entire race, especially the finish is done completely for effect. How would that be?
It's exciting to me when it represents a reward justly won.
Sometimes, in fact usually, domination is just the result of doing the right things, and doing them right, and doing them that way for a period of time as understanding truly sets in. It's almost never easy. It requires taking risks, busting ass, doing without, losing sleep, caring more, giving a damn sight, not settling for less. Because, sometimes, even when you do all that, you still lose because of things going out of control, or somebody else making a mistake and taking you out, or some dumbass rule or interpretation thereof, so anytime you get a chance to win, you take it.
Really, that's the way almost everything worth doing in life works - the best dominate, and everyone else makes do 'til they figure it out or get a break.
Some people would rather see a more randomized result - to see things mixed up, a little chance mixed in, to see luck play a role. To see things contrived to be ultra-close, made even, leveled out. To see a surprise, to see equipment fail.
Maybe there's nothing to it. Maybe some folks have a different philosophy. Some believe in fighting for control, playing it smart, being scientific, getting rewarded for effort, brains, details, guts, calculated risk... and some people don't. Some people like a lottery. Escapism.
"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"
Brian's Wish
I will answer for Chris.
Chris likes flags. He's not really interested in talent as much as he is interested in flags.
So this is what Chris will say is lacking.
I must be in the minority then. I've loved F1 regardless if there was a Yank in it or not. The only ones that I remember that had a chance of winning were Dan Gurney, Mario and Peter Revson. But even if they didn't win, I loved it and loved seeing drivers like Jackie Stewart, Emmo, Ronnie Peterson or Senna win.
i'm all for domination.. look at jones in the turbine in '67.. amazing, then it broke. counting down the laps, will they make it? but then with the bulletproof engines that became a not factor of sort..
returning to the days of ignorant bliss..
Yeah, but there's always something. Just ask JR Hildebrand
No bulletproof engines this year, either
Hence the infamous "nascar yeller" or the contrived "Green-White-Checker". You do have to admit that they know their fanbase.
Of course, a 2 lap race decided by 1 second is a much greater margin of victory than a 79 lap race decided by 12 seconds... something the GWC crowd just can't grasp.
I think when you come of age watching that stuff, you think it is normal and how it should be.
"Maybe you're more into a race series that's staged like WWE wrestling. Where the winner is pre-determined and the entire race, especially the finish is done completely for effect. How would that be?"
What series that would be...and please provide links to support the idea that the winner is predetermined...BTW: Domination may be just the thing for some, but the 2 most exciting finishes at Indianapolis in my opinion were 1982 and 2006...but, that's just me...
If NASCAR is staged like many on this board claim wouldn't they have figured out a way to get Dale Jr. in victory lane the past few years?
One would think so...
They gave him what, 17 wins? It was probably getting too obvious or he did something to p*ss them off.
Now that's funny...
I did not want to disappoint you.Now that's funny...
You must not like Indy. In 95 runnings, there have been only two passes for the lead on the last lap.
O-Qua Tangin Wann
Qua Omsa Lagee Wann
Like they did at MIS when he won his last one without maintaining pace with the pace car?
With that said... "Staged"? No.
"Micromanaged to the point of affecting outcome"? Absolutely.
Makes sense.
There has been plenty of races since 1982 at Indy where the winner was in doubt on the final laps:
1982
1983
1985
1986
1987
1989
1991
1992
1993
1995
1996
1997
1999
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2010
2011
I learned early on that Indy was and still is generally an event...not necessarily a great race...BTW: Speaking of predetermined, I can predict the winner of an IndyCar race easier than a Cup race...Penske/Ganassi...
How'd that prediction work out for you at Indy last year ?
"I think of Indianapolis every day of the year, every
hour of the day, and when I sleep, too. Everything I
ever wanted in my life, I found inside the walls of
the Indianapolis Motor Speedway."
- Eddie Sachs.
It's a HUGE event, the biggest in North America by a landslide... and more often than not a great race breaks out.
Ooohhh, a little testy aren't we Howard? I specifically said ........ "maybe you'd like a race series staged like WWE wrestling"..... I didn't say .... "maybe you'd like a race series like (insert a race series name here) that's staged like WWE wrestling."
I guess that probably hit a little close to home ehh?
And certainly not have Jimmy Johnson win the championship 4 times in a row (or is it 5? I lost track).
I doubt the winners in a race are pre-determined but one thing is for certain, Nascar works very hard at modifying the rules of their racing, even while the race is actually happening, for the best possible effect and outcome for the fans. They've taken that form of auto racing and pushed it to the edge of a true sport vs. just another form of entertainment.
You once asked me about when the last street race was that had a last lap pass for the win as an attempt to prove them as not exciting. Using that logic you were trying to prove to me, how then can you say that Indy was exciting given that there were only two last lap passes for the lead in 95 runnings?
You are twisting my words.. How many times is a last lap pass possible on a oval track for the win compared to a road/street course?
2 last lap passes for the lead on the final lap in the Indy 500 in the last 16 years.. Now take the last 32 road/street courses.. How many? Then count how many chances of any lead change in the final 5 laps in those 32 races..
How am I twisting your words? You tried making a case that street races were not exciting because of a lack of last lap passes. I then said that you should look at the history of the 500 and using the logic, it would be boring.
Why 32? Why not all the way back to 1996, since that's how far back you're going?2 last lap passes for the lead on the final lap in the Indy 500 in the last 16 years.. Now take the last 32 road/street courses.. How many? Then count how many chances of any lead change in the final 5 laps in those 32 races..
I said lack of a chance of the race being decided in the final lap.. Most road/street races are decided after the final pit stop. You can basically stop the race right there and know the finishing order of the top 5 at the finish.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks