Chris Buescher and the Chase

29-4 said:
Perhaps we should spin this off into a new thread, but, I've yet to hear a good reason why not. One part of racing is to adapt to track conditions. If it's raining, back off earlier.
Click to expand...
If you can't or unwilling to accept what a driver is telling you, per the above @DanicaFreak post, then I think your mind is made up.
 
aunty dive said:
That's from the driver's seat which affords a somewhat different view than the ones we're sititng in. Does that help?
Click to expand...

Again, drivers in other racing series deal with this. I don't see why NASCAR would be any different. The "more cars" argument only applies immediately following a restart before the cars spread out.
 
^ Very confusing. Are you referring to road courses or oval tracks?
 
ted@economy said:
Not me . I never want to see one . Well , you wouldn't really see anything anyway , just a big cloud of mist .
Click to expand...

Dunno...Senna was magic in the rain at Monaco..and on road courses cars do get strung out other than the corners for the most part...But I as a realist realize it works best if the track is damp not SOAKED.
 
29-4 said:
Ovals...we apparently already have rain tires for the road courses.
Click to expand...

No other series races ovals in the wet, so your comment about other race drivers doing it didn't make sense in that context. But, Brad was talking about rain racing on a road course. Very confusing, let's just make another thread.
 
29-4 said:
Ovals...we apparently already have rain tires for the road courses.
Click to expand...
Indy cars race in the wet on road courses, but not on ovals. With their massive amounts of downforce, they "weigh" far more than the current version of Cup cars and have far larger tire contact patches.

It will work ... at half race speeds or less. Not happening.
 
aunty dive said:
It proves that it can happen on a small track at low speed. There's some youtube video if you want too look at it.

Any thoughts on the Indy cars at Iowa?
Click to expand...

Weather can change the game. In heavy storms, you see teams (generally) use a more run-based strategy than the passing game because the ball is wet. Racing in the rain would look different, too. Yes, it would be a bit slower (I don't think it would be half speed like you suggest), but it would also add an element of finesse and strategy that I think many fans would want to see. I almost guarantee that, if you polled race fans, the majority would prefer a slower race in the rain to losing a day of work, buying an extra hotel night etc.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
The 30th place driver will make it. What other professional team allows the 30th place team to participate in the post season? Chris Buescher is not a 7-9 or 8-8 team. He is a 0-16 or generously a 1-15 team.

I do hope that Penske helps him with people and product in the chase as the young man should have the best if he is going to be part of the lottery.
Click to expand...

To me it is what it is and it's awesome for the small teams out there. I don't feel like the 31,3,1,42 or whomever he would knock is a real contender anyway so it's all good with me even though it's a "wasted" spot. But I do want to see how good he is at 1.5 tracks because at Kentucky that car was FAST compared to usual and FASTER then a lot of the people he would race around for that chase spot anyway.
 
29-4 said:
Weather can change the game. In heavy storms, you see teams (generally) use a more run-based strategy than the passing game because the ball is wet. Racing in the rain would look different, too. Yes, it would be a bit slower (I don't think it would be half speed like you suggest), but it would also add an element of finesse and strategy that I think many fans would want to see. I almost guarantee that, if you polled race fans, the majority would prefer a slower race in the rain to losing a day of work, buying an extra hotel night etc.
Click to expand...
No further comment.
 
Is the issue (with wet tires on an oval) the overall structure not holding up or just a severe lack of grip? Secondly, given an unlimited R&D budget is this something that can be fixed?
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
Seriously, we're talking about a playoff system that also allows teams that don't compete for an entire season to participate for the Championship. I think someone that has actually qualified by the rules is more legitimate than someone that has to issues a free pass waiver to circumnavigate the rules in place. If Chris makes it in, more power to him. At least he would be doing it by the rules in place.
Click to expand...

If I could fix it so Chris would win the championship I would do it in a minute and I agree that Chris has got in due to Nascar's rules which make no sense to me.
 
aunty dive said:
Asinine? You're too polite.

Indy cars don't run races on oval tracks when it's raining for the same reasons NASCAR doesn't. Heaven forbid that Brad Keselowski would be more greatly informed about this issue than some random internet keyboardists.
Click to expand...

You can never tell with old Horse Face as he thought his All Star race idea was good and got bent out of shape for others cheating and then Penske got busted shortly thereafter.
 
To me, it's a question of what I would want to see if I was at the track.

If I'm at home, I don't care if the race is run on schedule or the next day; that's what DVRs are for.

If I'm there, it's a question of whether I want to see a race run in the rain on the scheduled day, knowing it's likely to be less than competitive and chock full of cautions; or whether I want to pay for an extra night in the hotel in order to get a better race. Me, I'm opting for the hotel stay and a likely more competitive event.

Besides, I'm a sucker for going to races on 'make up' days. If race days are a different atmosphere from your daily life or other sports events, postpone days are an almost surreal experience. The crowds are usually smaller, the parking lots less crowded. The fans share a hardcore race fan, 'I see you made it back, too' attitude. Most of the vendors are gone, but so are the ushers and such; sit where you want, nobody cares. I love a 11:00 or 11:30 start time, leaving plenty of time to drive home after the race ends.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
To me, it's a question of what I would want to see if I was at the track.

If I'm at home, I don't care if the race is run on schedule or the next day; that's what DVRs are for.

If I'm there, it's a question of whether I want to see a race run in the rain on the scheduled day, knowing it's likely to be less than competitive and chock full of cautions; or whether I want to pay for an extra night in the hotel in order to get a better race. Me, I'm opting for the hotel stay and a likely more competitive event.

Besides, I'm a sucker for going to races on 'make up' days. If race days are a different atmosphere from your daily life or other sports events, postpone days are an almost surreal experience. The crowds are usually smaller, the parking lots less crowded. The fans share a hardcore race fan, 'I see you made it back, too' attitude. Most of the vendors are gone, but so are the ushers and such; sit where you want, nobody cares. I love a 11:00 or 11:30 start time, leaving plenty of time to drive home after the race ends.
Click to expand...

I have a job now where taking a day off is no big deal. But I know that many of the 'blue collar' fans that NASCAR appeals to may not have that luxury. Best seats I ever had at a race were after an Atlanta rainout, got to sit right on the start finish line as opposed to my assigned seat on the backstretch. But I'd still prefer an event on the scheduled day.
 
29-4 said:
I've yet to see good explanation for why it won't work? Wheel spray? Drivers in all sorts of other racing series deal with that. Lack of visibility? Slow down. If someone else doesn't, they will pay the penalty of wrecking. There may be something I'm missing, but I'm unconvinced by Brad's reasons. Now that races don't sell out, I wait until the week of to buy tickets so that I can check the weather. It's really annoying to have to be so concerned about forecasts. It's why I ended up not going to the Brickyard--the weather forecasts I was seeing a week before showed rain. It's so refreshing when I go to football games or baseball (in retractable roof Miller Park) to know that I am going to get to see the event regardless of weather conditions. If NASCAR could be proactive and at least find a way to race in light rain, I bet there would be a significant boost in attendance.
Click to expand...
Those other cars you talk about are designed to race in the rain and they weigh less than half of what a Cup car does. Just ask yourself," would I like to be driving 120 mph and have a 3600 lb
car going 180 mph plow into me??????" I don't think so.

When you haven't raced, don't second guess them that do.
 
Team Penske said:
When you haven't raced, don't second guess them that do.
Click to expand...

With this logic, no one can have an opinion about anything. "If you don't play in the NFL, don't comment on tackling." "If you aren't a politician, don't have policy opinions." etc
 
Your saying there is no reason why they shouldn't race in the rain.
People that race have given you reasons and you call them on it.

What evidence do you have first hand to base your opinion on????

BY the way, politicians don't have policy opinions, they just vote for the highest bidder.
People who played football in high school have many broken bones. Is there a difference in getting your neck broke in high school vs NFL???
 
Team Penske said:
Your saying there is no reason why they shouldn't race in the rain.
People that race have given you reasons and you call them on it.

What evidence do you have first hand to base your opinion on????

BY the way, politicians don't have policy opinions, they just vote for the highest bidder.
People who played football in high school have many broken bones. Is there a difference in getting your neck broke in high school vs NFL???
Click to expand...

I have the pictures/videos of NASCAR-style cars racing in the rain on an oval. I've yet to see an explanation from you guys as to how this impossibility occurred, or why it can't be replicated at least on short tracks in the Sprint Cup series.

For decades, I've heard 'we can't race in the rain,' with little elaboration. Keselowski talks about too much spray, which is a ridiculous reason.
 
29-4 said:
I have a job now where taking a day off is no big deal. But I know that many of the 'blue collar' fans that NASCAR appeals to may not have that luxury. Best seats I ever had at a race were after an Atlanta rainout, got to sit right on the start finish line as opposed to my assigned seat on the backstretch. But I'd still prefer an event on the scheduled day.
Click to expand...
I can't speak for all blue collar workers, but I've spend my 30-year IT career in two different companies' manufacturing facilities, one of them having three different corporate owners.. Both allowed hourly employees to schedule vacation days in advance, and all allowed you to show up for work instead and cancel those vacation days with no penalty. Self-employed likely have tighter schedule limitations.

About the only time I go to Atlanta anymore is on rain delay days. I've made the last two, so I was probably there with you. Yep; buy low on the back, sit high on the front.
 
29-4 said:
With this logic, no one can have an opinion about anything. "If you don't play in the NFL, don't comment on tackling." "If you aren't a politician, don't have policy opinions." etc
Click to expand...
You're extrapolating to absurdity, a debate technique that's rarely effective. What applies to racing doesn't necessarily apply to everything else.
 
29-4 said:
I have the pictures/videos of NASCAR-style cars racing in the rain on an oval. I've yet to see an explanation from you guys as to how this impossibility occurred, or why it can't be replicated at least on short tracks in the Sprint Cup series.

For decades, I've heard 'we can't race in the rain,' with little elaboration. Keselowski talks about too much spray, which is a ridiculous reason.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is a question of if they can or not, but a question of the quality of the product in addition to the risk of lightning in the area with fans in the stand.

NASCAR could certainly make rain tires and force teams to run the race, but from a physics standpoint, the cars would need to really slow down to maintain any kind of grip in the corners. And as we saw over the past weekend, spotters would have difficulty doing their job if they couldn't see the cars on the track through the rain.

It might work on the flat tracks as you have suggested, but again what would the quality of the racing be like? Would it really be worth it?
 
LouieLouie said:
I don't think it is a question of if they can or not, but a question of the quality of the product in addition to the risk of lightning in the area with fans in the stand.

NASCAR could certainly make rain tires and force teams to run the race, but from a physics standpoint, the cars would need to really slow down to maintain any kind of grip in the corners. And as we saw over the past weekend, spotters would have difficulty doing their job if they couldn't see the cars on the track through the rain.

It might work on the flat tracks as you have suggested, but again what would the quality of the racing be like? Would it really be worth it?
Click to expand...

To me, this is the reasonable debate to have. It's almost indisputable that this racing is possible, the question is whether the product suffers too much. I'm not saying they should run in lightning--we have seen the lawsuits that result from things like that. But in light rain, I think it would be quite reasonable. Ask all the fans that couldn't show up at Pocono on Monday if they would have rather 1) Seen no race at all that they paid hard-earned money for or 2) See them going 165 into the corner instead of 200. I think option 2 would win handily.

As I said before, I'd rather watch my Noles play on a bright, sunny day. But I'd gladly watch them slog it out in a hurricane with no passing possible if it meant seeing the game versus not.
 
29-4 said:
To me, this is the reasonable debate to have. It's almost indisputable that this racing is possible, the question is whether the product suffers too much. I'm not saying they should run in lightning--we have seen the lawsuits that result from things like that. But in light rain, I think it would be quite reasonable. Ask all the fans that couldn't show up at Pocono on Monday if they would have rather 1) Seen no race at all that they paid hard-earned money for or 2) See them going 165 into the corner instead of 200. I think option 2 would win handily.

As I said before, I'd rather watch my Noles play on a bright, sunny day. But I'd gladly watch them slog it out in a hurricane with no passing possible if it meant seeing the game versus not.
Click to expand...

Sure definitely worth investigating, but per your number 2 above, it wouldn't be anywhere near 165 into turn 1 at Pocono, just so you are aware of the reality of it. It would probably be closer to 100.

Another article on why they don't run ovals in the rain.
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/auto-racing/nascar/nascar-basics/nascar-rain.htm
 
Acs said:
I'd just like to point out that the most advanced rain tires in the world wouldn't have stopped the fog from rolling in Monday and handing Buescher the win.
Click to expand...
Of course not, but do you really want to start the whole 'fog tires on ovals' debate? :rolleyes:
 
29-4 said:
It's almost indisputable that this racing is possible ...
Click to expand...
Posting your opinion in the form of a declarative statement such as this one is disingenuous. A lot of people disagree, including a recent Sprint Cup champion.

If it worked in a reasonable manner, the Indycar Series, whose entrants are fully prepared for rain at every road course and street circuit they go to, would race in the rain on oval tracks. Why don't they?
 
^ Aunty, just to add to your post, which I agree with BTW, stock cars would be even more preposterous than Indycars due to their greater weight, less downforce, and less tire contact patch. Safer to crash, however, which would be important.
 
Acs said:
I'd just like to point out that the most advanced rain tires in the world wouldn't have stopped the fog from rolling in Monday and handing Buescher the win.
Click to expand...
Now, what if they had fog lights? Then they'd be okay, right? Fog lights and rain tires would be a helluva show!
 
Autonomous Sprint Cup cars could race in the fog. Leave the drivers in their motorhomes, or better yet, leave 'em in Charlotte. LOL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom