Saturday
The Worthlessness Of Road Racing
By Michael DalyThe first road race of the 2009 season arrives and the usual surge of road racing interlopers comes with it in the form of drivers such as Boris Said – who’s been flittering on the periphery of NASCAR since the mid-1990s and has basically nothing to show for it yet seems to still fancy himself a legitimate NASCAR racer – Ron Fellows, Tom Hubert, and Brian Simo. The presence of these ringers, though, has gotten noticably less play in recent years as their relevance to the outcome of the races themselves has eroded. A ringer hasn’t won a Winston Cup road race since Mark Donohue in January 1973 at Riverside and it’s been a long time since a ringer was key to the outcome of a NASCAR road race at either the BGN or Truck levels; the last one I can remember who really made a strong effort was Ron Fellows around 1999 when BGN and the Trucks raced Watkins Glen as a stand-alone double-header and Ron Fellows won the Truck race and came home second to Junior in the BGN event.
With the Sears Point run this weekend has come yet another fit of online and written verbiage about road racing and whether NASCAR should add a road race to the schedule or even shift one of the two road races to the Chase. That the Chase is still in the sport is absurd enough given the fact it has added nothing to the competition or the sport’s popularity. That some writers etc. want a road race in the Chase is foolish in and of itself, as it assigns a level of importance and competitive worth to road racing that is manifestly not there.
We hear about how different from oval races the road races are, and of course they are different. The problem lies in the fundamental nature of road racing. It simply is the least competitive form of racing there is.
Passing is the core action of racing, and in road racing there simply isn’t a lot in the way of passing. We hear a lot about the skill of the drivers and how they have to really drive their cars on a road course. This argument, though, ignores that driving a racecar and racing are not the same thing. The dearth of passing in road races is graphic illustration of this, and also illustrating this is the utter lack of success of NASCAR’s road race stringers.
When looking back at NASCAR history there have been some dramatic moments in road races – Darrell Waltrip and Neil Bonnett’s surprisingly savage duel at Riverside in 1980; Waltrip’s late charge to win there in 1981; Tim Richmond’s final NASCAR win there in 1987; Ricky Rudd’s swerving block of Rusty Wallace at Watkins Glen in 1988; Davey Allison’s controversial win after Ricky Rudd spun him out at Sears Point in 1991; Ernie Irvan’s charge from a Lap One black flag there in 1992; four lead changes in one lap between Rudd, Irvan, and Geoff Bodine at Sears Point in 1993; Bobby Hamilton and Jeff Gordon’s hard fight in 1998.
But when one looks back at the whole, moments like these may be memorable but they’re the exceptions that prove the rule. Road races generally lack the sport’s truly dramatic competitive moments; with possibility of passing so limited on a road course the events become frustrating exercises in driving technique, attrition, and fuel mileage. They may be different, but road races simply are not racing.
Adding a road race to the Chase adds nothing to the concept’s competitive value; road racing is not the display of driver skill it gets hyped up to be because it’s not about racing, it’s only about technique and track position.
The sport races road courses twice a year; that’s twice too many times. Dropping Sears Point and Watkins Glen is an option the sport should take more seriously than it does, for there isn’t anything to miss from not having road races.
————-
Views expressed by the writers are not necessarily the views of Catchfence
Article Tags: Road Racing, Winston Cup
Sorry you don’t like road racing Michael. I realize that it’s a pain to have to use both hands (and sometimes a foot!) to count all the turns on your favorite racetrack, but your argument is pretty weak, and you contradict yourself several times. “Skill” and “Technique” are synonyms—that means that the words can be interchanged, look it up in your favorite thesaurus. Your assertion that road races are a display of technique and not skill completely fails.
My favorite part of the entire NASCAR season is the qualifying sessions at the two road course events. That’s one of the few times NASCAR drivers get the chance to really drive as hard as they can to the peak of their ability. I think seeing the drivers hop over the curbing in a corner and get squirrelly under braking makes for a very exciting race. A small mistake such as turning in a bit late at a track like Daytona will cost you tenths of a second, a similar mistake at a track like Infineon or the Glen could put the driver right off the track.
Also, setup is less a factor on a road course than it is on a superspeedway. If a driver has an ideal setup and doesn’t run into trouble, their chances of victory on sunday are awfully good at an oval. The same driver with a perfectly set up car won’t stand a chance on a road course unless he’s got the skill (or technique, if you’d like to call it that…) to consistently pound out fast laps without making a mistake.
Tom Heath – Skill and technique are not synonyms. Technique is what it is, a technical exercise, not an attempt to make something happen. Skill is about making things happen. Skill and technique are not related. Thus my argument works and yours is the one that fails.
There is nothing exciting about wheel-hopping over curbing on a road course because it is NOT about passing other cars. It’s all technique, not skill. That it’s about keeping it out of the sticks means it isn’t racing.
Setup means everything on a road course – there is no such thing as a driver using his skill to overcome a bad setup. It takes the car, not special skill, to win on a road course. It takes skill to outfight other cars – it is on ovals that real racing is found, not on road courses – NEVER on road courses.
Those of us in the road racing community who actually appreciate what NASCAR has done as a sanctioning body will probably feel insulted by this article. We respect the fact that NASCAR has a stable rules package (which also allows more than two or three factory-funded teams to run up front), that it has made its drivers & teams more accessible to the fans, and that it has brought motor racing in the US to a standard of professionalism equal to that of any other form of racing anywhere else in the world.
It is interesting to read an opinion such as yours in the modern era, when NASCAR is wondering how to bring their wonderful blend of man & machine to markets outside of the US. The reality of the situation is that in the rest of the Western world (i.e., countries with racing fans who have money to spend on the sponsors’ products), it is much more difficult for the average person to obtain a license to drive on the street. They actually understand the “skill” required to drive on a road course, since they must demonstrate (at the least) a basic ability to use those skills in order to drive on public roads in the first place.
We in the road racing community in the US have attempted to meet NASCAR half way in this process. The owners of the Sears Point and Watkins Glen circuits have spent Cubic Dollars paving simplified pathways through their original layouts so that drivers with lesser ability in NASCAR might survive the event without achieving the DNF they so well deserve. We postpone your races when it rains. We do not schedule your races on road courses at night.
You claim the great NASCAR finishes on road courses (and IMO, most of the ones you mentioned were in the days before the road courses were “dumbed down” for continued NASCAR participation) are the exceptions that prove the rule. I disagree. To some of us, those races were the ones that actually showed the potential of what NASCAR could eventually become.
If “passing” is the only thing you care about, I suggest you go watch the horse or dog races instead. On the other hand, if you care about the automobile, and about those of us who race them, you should reconsider your opinion on road racing.
Ah yes, the great rules of Nascar and the true hype of that market……
Where to start. If you really want to now abou the sports of the world, F1 is the biggest sport in the world, The super rigs in eupore draw more fans then even F1 and we are talking about racing semi’s and a road way. WRC is also really huge around the world and really insane with fans. The baja 1000 in mexico is pretty much a holyday south of the border and draws huge numbers of people from everywhere to watch and race. Stateside racing that is getting popular is the SCCA speed challange, where teams run cars that are from the streets and turn left….and right.
How about this for some thought, with out the SCCA you would not have the crew needed to run your races for Nascrap as it where. They are the leading trainer for staff to put on the behind the scenes for just about any race in the world. Flag people, couner workers, safety crew, tech, timing and much more comes from road racing training for a very long time.
Here is one more thought, how about the NHRA and drag racing?
Besides, what about the tech level of Nascar? pushrod motors, and carbs? when everyone else is using tech that is now and not last centry.
How about this one, in circle track racing you dont even need to get training at all, just get a car and go bang into others on the track at the local dirt level. In any other racing series you must take care and attnd school and driver training so you dont become a hazard to everyone around you. Other wise you are just waiting to kill or hurt someone with no training at all.
That is just my 2 cents worth on this and I did not even go into other ways why Nascar is boring.
jason – F1 may be “the biggest sport in the world,” but that’s just hype. F1 has been irrelevant to racing seemingly forever – it has no competitive value, it is so expensive that even the sanctioning body realizes the need for spending caps – and it is to the eternal discredit of teams that they argued “we know better” when in fact they don’t – and it has little depth and no upside to see. It’s a crushing bore.
And your shots about circle track racing reflect your own bigotries. That SCCA trains corner workers etc. means nothing. It takes more skill to RACE other cars than it does to keep it out of the sticks on a road course. Pushrod motors and carbs work, and are more robust than “now” technology.
Jay Roberts – there is no “special skill” to driving a road course – this is why the specialists like Boris “You Can Call Me Badenov” Said and Ron Fellows have become irrelevant to NASCAR. Those road race finishes I cited ARE the exception that proves the rule, because there is no such thing as “dumbing down” a road course that is by definition competitively dumbed to irrelevance.
Those who care about the automobile want COMPETITION – competition is lead changes, passing, sidedrafting, nose-to-nose combat. It is not about just driving a car, it is about RACING other cars.
“Jay Roberts – there is no “special skill” to driving a road course – this is why the specialists like Boris “You Can Call Me Badenov” Said and Ron Fellows have become irrelevant to NASCAR.”
Have Said & Fellows ever had the benefit of a Childress chassis or an Everingham tuning it? Your comment is just as ridiculous as someone saying Dale Sr. would have been “irrelevant” to Le Mans because Porsche or Jaguar never put him in a car over there.
Not to mention, Boris & Ron are old. They’re flirting with retirement. So’s Montoya at this point…that’s why he chose NASCAR in the first place. Good money for has-beens.
“Those road race finishes I cited ARE the exception that proves” the rule, because there is no such thing as “dumbing down” a road course that is by definition competitively dumbed to irrelevance.”
Yet, dumbing down the road courses NASCAR uses *has* happened. The number of curves has been reduced, at great expense to the track owners.
Original Sears Point course:
http://www.na-motorsports.com/Tracks/CA/images/sears-point.gif
NASCAR Sears Point course:
http://tinyurl.com/q8g2bv
Original Watkins Glen course:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Watkins_Glen_International_Circuit_Map.png
NASCAR Watkins Glen course:
http://www.fanhub.com/assets/images/uploads/venues/maps/WatkinsGlen_seating.gif
“Those who care about the automobile want COMPETITION – competition is lead changes, passing, sidedrafting, nose-to-nose combat. It is not about just driving a car, it is about RACING other cars.”
Then they should watch a little Grand-Am. They had a much better finish this weekend than the crash-fest that was the end of the NASCAR race formerly known as the Firecracker 400.
http://motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=335204
Of course, if you actually like crashes, your mileage may vary.
A Childress chassis or Ray Evernham tuning it don’t make road racing anything more than what it is – the worst racing in the sport. They certainly don’t make Ron Fellows or Boris Said capable of winning at the Winston Cup level. “The number of curves has been reduced…..” It means nothing; curves make a road course worthless because they take away ability to pass. Grand-Am had nothing worth a damn; in the Firecracker they actually had racing.
No more defenses of road racing, Jay Roberts – there is no objective competitive value to racing that’s not about passing but is instead about driving technique.