2019 IndyCar Miscellaneous

I don't know whether good old Robin is just hearing voices in his head at this point or if there is anything to this, but would be very cool.

 
FLRacingFan said:
The idea of Kyle running either a Honda or a Chevy is amusing to me...I think someone's head here might pop. :)
Click to expand...

Man, I would love to see Toyota get back into IndyCar. The engine wars was so much fun to see back in the CART days. Ford, Mercedes, Toyota, and Honda. Or at least use the Lexus branding or something.
 
@FLRacingFan
z953qsi0tyr21.jpg

A GOAT and his kid.:p
 
This is predictable but kinda pathetic if you ask me. All these years of hoping for real bumping, and now this. Wasn't this a central issue in the CART / IRL split that damn near killed the sport, with them on the other side of the whole 25/8 fiasco?

Of course Penske and Ganassi want to use their weight to lock themselves in. Racing media should at least report on this with appropriate skepticism.

Indy 500: Chip Ganassi stands with Roger Penske on guaranteed entries for full-timers

https://www.indystar.com/story/spor...teed-entries-full-timers-bump-day/3472899002/
 
Last edited:
gnomesayin said:
This is predictable but kinda pathetic if you ask me. All these years of hoping for real bumping, and now this. Wasn't this a central issue in the CART / IRL split that damn near killed the sport, with them on the other side of the whole 25/8 fiasco?

Of course Penske and Ganassi want to use their weight to lock themselves in. Racing media should at least report on this with appropriate skepticism.

Indy 500: Chip Ganassi stands with Roger Penske on guaranteed entries for full-timers

https://www.indystar.com/story/spor...teed-entries-full-timers-bump-day/3472899002/
Click to expand...

Wow, just wow! SMDH This article pulls no punches about it......
 
gnomesayin said:
This is predictable but kinda pathetic if you ask me. All these years of hoping for real bumping, and now this. Wasn't this a central issue in the CART / IRL split that damn near killed the sport, with them on the other side of the whole 25/8 fiasco?

Of course Penske and Ganassi want to use their weight to lock themselves in. Racing media should at least report on this with appropriate skepticism.

Indy 500: Chip Ganassi stands with Roger Penske on guaranteed entries for full-timers

https://www.indystar.com/story/spor...teed-entries-full-timers-bump-day/3472899002/
Click to expand...
There are strong arguments on both sides of the issue. It is a kissing cousin to pros and cons of the charter system in Nascar. Tradition favors completely open competition... especially appealing to fans with no skin in the game who want maximum entertainment right now. OTOH, teams who have accepted the challenge of showing up at every race to put on the show have legitimate concerns about 'cherry pickers' who show up only when the richest prize is on the line. There won't be any IndyCar racing (or Nascar racing) unless these full-time teams can amass sufficient funding (including purses and sponsors), and the marquee races are crucial in doing that.

I don't follow IndyCar closely enough to know how lucrative team ownership is for the full-timers. In Nascar, I *know* it is very challenging... the business model of the Nascar industry is tilted toward the sanctioning body and the track operators. The team owners are borderline non-viable, with substantial risks and thin profit margins. Is it really better for IndyCar full-timers?
 
I can't think of another convincing parallel in major auto racing to how the Indianapolis 500 relates to the rest of a racing series. It is highly debatable whether the rest of IndyCar could persist without it, which isn't true of a single race elsewhere that I'm aware of. Perhaps there is an example in disciplines I don't follow, I don't know.

In the bluntest commercial terms, the Indy 500 is a very popular and lucrative event with millions of viewers and hundreds of thousands of attendees, and everyone from IMS to the TV network that airs it to the teams make out financially well on it. The IndyCar Series in this century is a niche passion project propped up by devoted team owners and a passionate but relatively small community that supports it. This isn't unlike other niche auto racing series all over the world, but the prominence of the 500 and the legacy of premier open wheel racing elevate it.

On the surface, that scenario would seem to support the argument that full-time teams deserve a guaranteed entry. However, this stems from a view of the 500 existing to serve the remainder of the season.

This ignores the reality that for much of the country and the world, the Indy 500 has more recognition as a singular event than as part of a year-around schedule. That is due to history and tradition more than any other factor. One significant aspect of that tradition has been the unique and prolonged qualifying process for the event. Historically, it's not a race on Sunday of Memorial Day weekend. It's a month of racing and preparing that culminates that Sunday.

Various changes have occurred voluntarily and involuntarily over the past 25 years to chip away at the magnitude of the weeks-long buildup. However, the industry's move toward much lower costs has created a surplus of entries for the 500 again, a welcome development for many fans and the race's prestige.

It is understandable why Penske and other series mainstay owners feel the way they do and argue in their own self-interest. However, it is important to recognize that's what it is, self-interest.

I would rather see two provisional spots guaranteed to the previous season's top points finishers who don't qualify. If that is spots #32 and #33 or an added #34 and #35, I wouldn't quibble too much either way. This would practically eliminate the possibility of an elite, series-supporting entry missing the race without locking out 2/3 of the grid and losing much of the tension and intensity of qualifying. I think that's a much better concept to serve both sides of this.
 
It's a microcosm example of the way most things are today. The "haves" by hook or crook will do their best to have it their way and rig the playing field to their advantage. They have reduced the costs of the car for their benefits, but the backlash is that small single car teams have the opportunity for a big payday and a chance for better things to come in the future with a good showing in the 500.
 
gnomesayin said:
I can't think of another convincing parallel in major auto racing to how the Indianapolis 500 relates to the rest of a racing series. It is highly debatable whether the rest of IndyCar could persist without it, which isn't true of a single race elsewhere that I'm aware of. Perhaps there is an example in disciplines I don't follow, I don't know.
Click to expand...

Le Mans.
 
24 years since Penske had cars bumped. Ganassi has never had a full-time car bumped. After six years of bumping Michel Jourdain Jr. and the Buddy Lazier IMS house car we're suddenly spooked when a borderline "star" (not really) got bumped last year? It took bad weather and a comedy of errors for that to happen. And spare me the idea that Penske and Ganassi are looking out for Bobby Rahal and Sam Schmidt. We get 36-38 entries for the first time in eight years and now the two biggest teams are afraid of losing to Ben Hanley and Pippa Mann...come on now.
 
Kiante said:
@FLRacingFan I told you driving the sports car was a part of the process:

Penske is already on it.
Click to expand...

I am hesitant to be excited about this because Michael Andretti is absolutely right when he recently made comments that he puts more into the sport than anyone else. From the Lights program to five and six cars at the 500 no other owner invests in this sport like he does and to see a budding star just be poached has to be brutal to take. I think it's better for the series anyways that Newgarden and Rossi be on different teams - I can guarantee a lot of people will tire of a decade-long stretch of Newgarden/Rossi Team Penske domination. I hope Honda puts up some big money to keep Rossi in their camp.

That said, I definitely believe Pagenaud is out regardless. Some of the other Silly Season items mentioned in there (Pagenaud back to ASPM, McLaren meeting with O'Ward) are very interesting.
 
FLRacingFan said:
I am hesitant to be excited about this because Michael Andretti is absolutely right when he recently made comments that he puts more into the sport than anyone else. From the Lights program to five and six cars at the 500 no other owner invests in this sport like he does and to see a budding star just be poached has to be brutal to take. I think it's better for the series anyways that Newgarden and Rossi be on different teams - I can guarantee a lot of people will tire of a decade-long stretch of Newgarden/Rossi Team Penske domination. I hope Honda puts up some big money to keep Rossi in their camp.

That said, I definitely believe Pagenaud is out regardless. Some of the other Silly Season items mentioned in there (Pagenaud back to ASPM, McLaren meeting with O'Ward) are very interesting.
Click to expand...

Michael is the type of owner needed for the sport. I wish Penske and Ganassi were willing to extend themselves like Micahel has in IndyCar. Multiple entries in Lights and damn near six cars in IndyCar. His dedication is something fierce.
 
Scratching my head over this, then why guaranteed starting spots ?
Jim Ayello IndyStar reporter Q/A with Chip before Long Beach:
Q: With the Indianapolis 500 car count expected to be at 36, how do you prepare for that portion of it?

A: It’s a hell of a lot easier to prepare for 36 than it was when I was a driver and it was 70. Hell of a lot easier. Thirty-six is child’s play compared to 70.
 
Yeah, while drivers should be free to move as they see fit, I agree that the prospect of Penske snatching Rossi isn't encouraging from a competitive balance standpoint.

FLRacingFan said:
How
Click to expand...

The difference between the overnight and the final? I'm not sure, other than to guess that quick estimates may be less reliable at the lower end of the viewership spectrum?
 
rd45usa said:
Scratching my head over this, then why guaranteed starting spots ?
Jim Ayello IndyStar reporter Q/A with Chip before Long Beach:
Q: With the Indianapolis 500 car count expected to be at 36, how do you prepare for that portion of it?

A: It’s a hell of a lot easier to prepare for 36 than it was when I was a driver and it was 70. Hell of a lot easier. Thirty-six is child’s play compared to 70.
Click to expand...
I'm at a loss to understand it myself. Once the final entry list comes out you could probably pick out nine or so cars from which six will make up the final two rows and the rest will be bumped.

gnomesayin said:
Yeah, while drivers should be free to move as they see fit, I agree that the prospect of Penske snatching Rossi isn't encouraging from a competitive balance standpoint.



The difference between the overnight and the final? I'm not sure, other than to guess that quick estimates may be less reliable at the lower end of the viewership spectrum?
Click to expand...
I'm just surprised at that big of a bump after a lackluster previous two races. 65k is a significant YOY gain for an IndyCar race on cable TV.
 
Kiante said:
@FLRacingFan I told you driving the sports car was a part of the process:

Penske is already on it.
Click to expand...

This flew under the radar but the fact that Penske are using Ohlins instead of their own, once-unbeatable in-house dampers is shocking! Sounds like it might just be for the street courses which is where damping has to make the biggest difference. It shows a good degree of humility to try something different but considering how everyone has said for years that's where Penske has the biggest advantage I wonder what happened?
 
gnomesayin said:
On the surface, that scenario would seem to support the argument that full-time teams deserve a guaranteed entry. However, this stems from a view of the 500 existing to serve the remainder of the season.
Click to expand...
@gnomesayin, an excellent analysis of the stature of the 500 relative to the full IndyCar season. I agree with most of it. But the bolded quote does not describe my point of view. Rather, I believe the IndyCar season exists mainly to serve and support the Indy 500. Without the series, the 500 would be a much diminished event as a stand-alone one-off, if it survived at all, IMO. And I suspect almost all full-time teams count heavily on the 500 to make the season viable.

FLRacingFan said:
24 years since Penske had cars bumped. Ganassi has never had a full-time car bumped. After six years of bumping Michel Jourdain Jr. and the Buddy Lazier IMS house car we're suddenly spooked when a borderline "star" (not really) got bumped last year? It took bad weather and a comedy of errors for that to happen. And spare me the idea that Penske and Ganassi are looking out for Bobby Rahal and Sam Schmidt. We get 36-38 entries for the first time in eight years and now the two biggest teams are afraid of losing to Ben Hanley and Pippa Mann...come on now.
Click to expand...
FL, I just heard about this "issue" yesterday, and I admit my initial thoughts are heavily informed by the debates of the Nascar charter system from a few years ago. In Nascar, I believe the greatest risk to the long-term future of the sport is the uncertain supply of quality race teams ready and able to show up every week to put on the show. I believe this risk is greater than declines in TV ratings or live attendance.

The Nascar charter system is one important step - and other steps are needed - toward making team ownership economically viable. IDK as much about the economics of full-time team ownership in IndyCar. The significant role of pay drivers on the IndyCar grid makes me think team ownership is very challenging.

But let me ask you, how many full-time teams feature the 500 prominently in proposals to sponsors? My guess... all of 'em. Prospective sponsors would favor guarantees over risks, IMO, in a world with 36-38 entries. Also, many teams relish the fat 500 payday to make the numbers work, so guarantees are valuable there also.

OTOH, I tend to be a racing purist... and I clearly recall George Snider climbing in AJ's backup car and trying to put that thing in The Show. Great drama... as a fan I love it... but can we afford it?
 
I too suspect that IndyCar owners essentially use the high purse money and greater sponsorship revenue from the Indy 500 to essentially help subsidize the remainder of the season. Not to mention that I bet the majority of the TV rights fee is being paid for the 500 alone. I understand why they would want to ensure they make the race, as it is probably an irrevocable blow to a yearly budget to miss it.

However, in terms of the overall health of the sport, I think reversing course and sinking into protectionist mode with who or how many can show up and make the 500 is shortsighted and should be a last resort. Of course, this has already happened before with the power struggle in the '90s. When Fernando Alonso or one of the much bandied about NASCAR stars race in the 500, it raises the event's profile and benefits everyone ultimately. When up-and-comers from grass roots racing or overseas land rides and make the show, that's what separates the 500 and makes it special. When qualifying is truly an open competition with high stakes, it greatly increases the potential interest.

Anything that signals full-time owners wish to guard against those factors does more harm than good for the sport as a whole IMO.
 
LewTheShoe said:
@gnomesayin, an excellent analysis of the stature of the 500 relative to the full IndyCar season. I agree with most of it. But the bolded quote does not describe my point of view. Rather, I believe the IndyCar season exists mainly to serve and support the Indy 500. Without the series, the 500 would be a much diminished event as a stand-alone one-off, if it survived at all, IMO. And I suspect almost all full-time teams count heavily on the 500 to make the season viable.
Click to expand...
This is a good take. I think the early years of the IRL, which was hardly a series at all for probably five or so years, show this pretty well. It wasn't just that the CART stars were elsewhere but the series surrounding the 500 was pretty terrible itself - and proved the CART folks right that the 500 was not the be-all, end-all. It's unlike the 24 Hours of Le Mans in that regard, which has gone through umpteen different championships and will run under whatever the ACO happens to decide upon at any given time.
LewTheShoe said:

FL, I just heard about this "issue" yesterday, and I admit my initial thoughts are heavily informed by the debates of the Nascar charter system from a few years ago. In Nascar, I believe the greatest risk to the long-term future of the sport is the uncertain supply of quality race teams ready and able to show up every week to put on the show. I believe this risk is greater than declines in TV ratings or live attendance.

The Nascar charter system is one important step - and other steps are needed - toward making team ownership economically viable. IDK as much about the economics of full-time team ownership in IndyCar. The significant role of pay drivers on the IndyCar grid makes me think team ownership is very challenging.

But let me ask you, how many full-time teams feature the 500 prominently in proposals to sponsors? My guess... all of 'em. Prospective sponsors would favor guarantees over risks, IMO, in a world with 36-38 entries. Also, many teams relish the fat 500 payday to make the numbers work, so guarantees are valuable there also.

OTOH, I tend to be a racing purist... and I clearly recall George Snider climbing in AJ's backup car and trying to put that thing in The Show. Great drama... as a fan I love it... but can we afford it?
Click to expand...

I will nitpick a bit here but I think the number of pay drivers in IndyCar is very low at the moment - depending upon your definition it could range from one to maybe four or five (doing this off of the top of my head, sorry) but a majority of the full-time entries seem to be well-funded, so it must be viable to a degree (although it can certainly always improve). The real wankers are really long gone at this point. The purses, however, are very low - think $30k to win - but the real payoff for the full-time teams comes from the Leaders Circle program. It was my understanding that Frye and Miles wanted to wean teams off of this over time, but it's still in place - although it has reportedly dropped from the $1.25M per car per year in 2015 to reportedly $900K per car per year the last few seasons. ASPM still received that money for Hinch's car last year, as far as I can tell.

The 500 is absolutely key for sponsors though, you are right. Great networking opportunity in addition to the obvious fact that it's the only true IndyCar race on a national stage - if you add up viewership for all cable races this year you MIGHT reach the 500's total audience, and the other OTA races might just crack seven figures. I am sure the team owners would love that assurance for their sponsors, but I do find it odd that only Penske and Ganassi have voiced concerns over this thus far. Perhaps because their sponsors tend to be larger corporations, but then again, it would take a true catastrophe for either of them to have a full-time car on the outside looking in on Bump Day.
 
I don't know how I messed up the formatting on that post.

Anyways, in regards to the costs of the 500...do we need 26 hours of pre-qualifying practice across four days of track activity? Another three hours of practice immediately after the Last Row Shootout? Another two hours of practice the day after that...before another hour and a half of practice on Carb Day? Daytona used to be the same way until they just recently trimmed the fat. If there is anything 'traditional' about the 500 that could use some attention it's the inordinate amount of time spent on track.
 
This has been a good discussion IMO, an example of what a racing discussion forum should be all about. Lots of good points raised on a complex issue. Muy bueno.

^ Hey SOI, I think I predicted that fan vote when I posted this...
LewTheShoe said:
Tradition favors completely open competition... especially appealing to fans with no skin in the game who want maximum entertainment right now.
Click to expand...
That doesn't make it right, nor wrong... just predictable..:idunno:
 
The question then is some of the less funded teams in trouble and they are getting out in front of it before it gets out in the public.
 
rd45usa said:
The question then is some of the less funded teams in trouble and they are getting out in front of it before it gets out in the public.
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, the smaller teams are silent thus far, and it's the Big 3 preaching about how the survival of the sport demands it.

Again, I think they avoid a lot of the blowback and achieve a similar net effect if they just tack a couple of series provisionals on to the end of the grid. Sure, absolute purists will still object. But a couple of those doesn't change the dynamic of qualifying as radically, and there would still appear to be much more uncertainty and drama for the audience.
 
Last edited:
Reading Andretti's comments, he went right to sponsorship. My hunch is that this is about season-long sponsorship agreements that are either explicitly written with outs and financial make-goods if the team doesn't make the 500, or they recognize that practically a relationship with a sponsor is severely damaged by missing the race.

Either way, it's both a revealing and honest admission, and a tad disingenuous the day he framed it. It's a protective, defensive move with little potential for 'growth'. The irony is that the teams that show up with new sponsors that could potentially grow the pool are the one-offs and independent efforts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom