Good discussion about what makes "good racing"

Revman said:
Gluck's poll raises the question, "What is good racing?"
Click to expand...
I have no idea what you are trying to get at, I voted a 7 out of ten which would be 70%. Over 6 thousand people voted in Gluck's pole and it came out 68% I would say I was pretty close. This race on an academic grading scale would be a
D at 68% or a C at 70. Not using that scale here but yeah a C for me.:rolleyes::D
 
TexasRaceLady said:
What each fan thinks. Everyone will have a different opinion of what makes good racing.
There is NO single answer.
Click to expand...

Then what is NASCAR chasing with rule changes, etc.? Think about the significance of your very valid point.
 
StandOnIt said:
I have no idea what you are trying to get at, I voted a 7 out of ten which would be 70%. Over 6 thousand people voted in Gluck's pole and it came out 68% I would say I was pretty close. This race on an academic grading scale would be a
D at 68% or a C at 70. Not using that scale here but yeah a C for me.:rolleyes::D
Click to expand...

Very interesting way of looking at things, and I promise you that not everybody sees it the same way. I saw some rather aggressive tweets to Gluck from some insiders (I guess you could call them that) that suggested that floating this kind of thing out there without any operation definitions or way of interpreting results was damaging the sport. Not sure I agree, but an interesting take.
 
OldTimer said:
That is a valid question, would like to hear the responses.
Click to expand...

I feel like when the networks chase the drama and personal interest stories, it leaves this issue uncovered. Crucial mistake. IMO, most of us are talking about something completely different when we talk about "great racing," and NASCAR is responding to all of those voices at once leaving nobody happy. This is a concern.
 
Revman said:
Very interesting way of looking at things, and I promise you that not everybody sees it the same way. I saw some rather aggressive tweets to Gluck from some insiders (I guess you could call them that) that suggested that floating this kind of thing out there without any operation definitions or way of interpreting results was damaging the sport. Not sure I agree, but an interesting take.
Click to expand...
I never saw anything like that and I follow Gluck pretty closely, interesting. He is they only fan funded reporter who is not sucking on the Nascar/network teat so to speak. I don't agree with everything he says but surveying around 6 thousand racing fans is significant IMO.
 
Revman said:
NASCAR is responding to all of those voices at once leaving nobody happy.
Click to expand...
That's just it. They are trying to please everyone and that isn't going to happen.... so, those that squeak the loudest will get the grease.
Again, voice your opinion to NASCAR --- emails, letters, phone calls.
 
TexasRaceLady said:
I can't answer for NASCAR. I can only answer for me.
Click to expand...
I understand that, but unless this becomes a point of discussion, I do think this sport will be in trouble. I have to be honest TLR, after each race, I have no idea at all what I will see on this board. None. How could that be? For me, the mere fact that a race occurred is basis for discussion, and in this provides enjoyment--I have stopped rating races because I kind of felt like I was being a jerk to rate everything a 10 (or above if MY TRD Toyotas win ;)). I don't even know who the hell thinks like that. This is a discussion board. How could this be so uncertain, and more importantly, is NASCAR responding to this?
StandOnIt said:
I never saw anything like that and I follow Gluck pretty closely, interesting. He is they only fan funded reporter who is not sucking on the Nascar/network teat so to speak. I don't agree with everything he says but surveying around 6 thousand racing fans is significant IMO.
Click to expand...
I love Gluck, and I have discussed this. He is steadfast in making sure that a great race (or lack thereof) is defined by the poll respondent. I get that, but then what is the poll showing?
TexasRaceLady said:
That's just it. They are trying to please everyone and that isn't going to happen.... so, those that squeak the loudest will get the grease.
Again, voice your opinion to NASCAR --- emails, letters, phone calls.
Click to expand...
I have voiced my opinion to NASCAR, but I believe that the problem isn't there. It's out here in NASCAR Nation. Collectively, what we want from the sport is absolutely messed up. Arguably, we have had the best month in this sport in quite some time. The bitching persists. WE are destroying this sport. NASCAR is just too stupid to realize that they cannot respond to everything. It is a shame.
 
TexasRaceLady said:
That's just it. They are trying to please everyone and that isn't going to happen.... so, those that squeak the loudest will get the grease.
Again, voice your opinion to NASCAR --- emails, letters, phone calls.
Click to expand...
I don't swallow that whole thing hook line and sinker. I think it is pretty naive to think that is the only outlet that Nascar is looking at for feedback. Probably one of the more important ones though. I know they monitor social media and this place falls in that category
Revman said:
I love Gluck, and I have discussed this. He is steadfast in making sure that a great race (or lack thereof) is defined by the poll respondent. I get that, but then what is the poll showing?
Click to expand...
pretty telling if you study the percentages. It is three year's worth of surveys, not the end all of end all's but a good tool to look at about the state of the state with a certain fan base.
 
That's the crux of the situation -- collectively, I'm not sure the majority of fans really know what they want. Those who have been fans for years/decades may want one thing, while newer fans want something completely different. How NASCAR is going to solve that problem is beyond me.

Personally, "good racing" is a race where most of the teams are competitive. Who wins is really immaterial to me.
 
I know that I am a little off topic here, but allow me to make this point....I watched the WRC over the weekend. I follow the sport on social media, and through a forum. I have not seen one reference to whether or not the rally was good. Not freakin' one. I have seen tons of discussion over performances, technical developments, fan enthusiasm, and a general excitement over the sport. Think about this. Not one reference to a general assessment over the quality of the event.....I think that the response to rally is similar to stick and ball. Do we assess the event, or respond to the quality of the event relative to the performance of our preferred participant(s)? Why the hell does this live in NASCAR?....and again, MOST IMPORTANTLY, why is NASCAR chasing its ass over this?
 
StandOnIt said:
pretty telling if you study the percentages. It is three year's worth of surveys, not the end all of end all's but a good tool to look at about the state of the state with a certain fan base.
Click to expand...
Wait a minute though....I like your analysis....70% is average.....To some, 70% is MOST of the people thought the race was good. Are these interpretations the same thing?
TexasRaceLady said:
That's the crux of the situation -- collectively, I'm not sure the majority of fans really know what they want. Those who have been fans for years/decades may want one thing, while newer fans want something completely different. How NASCAR is going to solve that problem is beyond me.
Personally, "good racing" is a race where most of the teams are competitive. Who wins is really immaterial to me.
Click to expand...

That is well said. Out of respect for @Charlie Spencer very valid point, would you mind starting a new thread on this topic, and including these responses? Or, I could start the thread if you wouldn't mind moving these responses. Let me know.
 
Revman said:
Wait a minute though....I like your analysis....70% is average.....To some, 70% is MOST of the people thought the race was good. Are these interpretations the same thing?
Click to expand...

68% of over 6 thousand polled thought it was a good race. ToyYoda's survey is much more accurate than a black or white, but most of the time his survey ratings numbers are really close to Gluck's much larger survey.
 
StandOnIt said:
68% of over 6 thousand polled thought it was a good race. ToyYoda's survey is much more accurate than a black or white, but most of the time his survey ratings numbers are really close to Gluck's much larger survey.
Click to expand...

Of the 6 grand, we have no idea what NASCAR should address to keep them happy. To me, this means nothing in terms of data that can help the sport....In fact, if spun the way social media likes to spin, an argument could be made that over a quarter of the fans who WANT to consume the sport are walking away unsatisfied. How should we see that? Is that okay? Average? I don't freaking know, so what the hell are these surveys for? Again, if we do not define great racing, and we have no expectation for the results of surveys, how the hell do we know if what we are getting is good or bad?
 
Glad Gluck as this poll every week, but it’s nowhere near a reference to base what the entire fan base thinks. I’ll paste this from another thread on this topic. Theres no context so it loses some clarity, but it’ll suffice.

—-

60k people attended the Daytona race, even more watched on TV. If you surveyed 13% of the attending audience, it would be viewed as innacurate based on the same size.

Now take the number of TV viewers on the 2017 Homestead race of 4.6 million, which could be argued is a healthy estimate of the number of hardcore NASCAR fans total due to it being the championship deciding race.

The average number of people surveyed in the Twitter poll per race (8k) is .17% of the said total fanbase.

.17% is not a sample size reliable enough to conclude a final result.
 
Revman said:
Of the 6 grand, we have no idea what NASCAR should address to keep them happy. To me, this means nothing in terms of data that can help the sport....In fact, if spun the way social media likes to spin, an argument could be made that over a quarter of the fans who WANT to consume the sport are walking away unsatisfied. How should we see that? Is that okay? Average? I don't freaking know, so what the hell are these surveys for? Again, if we do not define great racing, and we have no expectation for the results of surveys, how the hell do we know if what we are getting is good or bad?
Click to expand...
That is simple in my world, but knowing you I know it isn't. I want to see side by side racing, lead changes in the 20's instead of 6, 8, 11, and that is with two stage cautions and a couple real cautions. I want to see more competition than two cars as it has been for the last two years.
ChexOrWrex said:
Glad Gluck as this poll every week, but it’s nowhere near a reference to base what the entire fan base thinks. I’ll paste this from another thread on this topic. Theres no context so it loses some clarity, but it’ll suffice.

—-

60k people attended the Daytona race, even more watched on TV. If you surveyed 13% of the attending audience, it would be viewed as innacurate based on the same size.

Now take the number of TV viewers on the 2017 Homestead race of 4.6 million, which could be argued is a healthy estimate of the number of hardcore NASCAR fans total due to it being the championship deciding race.

The average number of people surveyed in the Twitter poll per race (8k) is .17% of the said total fanbase.

.17% is not a sample size reliable enough to conclude a final result.
Click to expand...
the TV ratings people seem to do a pretty good job with those percentages.They had about 40,000 sets nationwide they were using to rate the shows for years with around a 300 million population.
 
I never did, I'm not real nostalgic especially looking at the stats. But the races that are rated high in the surveys for the most part have close finishes or action, not follow the leader.
 
For the last 15 years, I think NASCAR has been trying to appease the "casual fan" in an attempt to convert them into hardcore fans. Meanwhile, they have pissed off a lot of the hardcore fans with their constant changes.

They need to quit catering to the casual fan and listen to the fans who are invested in the sport for the long haul.
 
If there was a large enough poll for “good racing” eras I’d venture to say that between 1994-2007 was peak “good racing” that drew fans in.
 
Since I am babbling about all of this, it is only fair of me to give my take...... I don't look at a race as a one day event. I look at all three days (or two days) with the Practice sessions and Qualifying. I absolutely love looking at lap averages and qualifying positions to determine who the favorites are. I really love listening to NASCAR Radio on race mornings as the Crew Chiefs start to show their hands in terms of what they have through their interviews. When the race finally rolls around, I am absolutely 100% captivated by how it all plays out. When KB, Martin, Kevin, or whoever dominate, I am not disappointed. I love a race that goes according to plan for a team. Equally, I love the battle to the line for the win....and NASCAR separates itself from other forms of motorsport IMO when a Crew Chief can work with a driver to take a car that hasn't shown much, and bring it to Victory Lane. It doesn't matter to me. All of those scenarios are fascinating to me. So, I like a blowout, but I also like a fight to the end. I don't care who is racing for 15th. I just don't. They can get strung out for all I care. So, at the end of the day, there doesn't appear to be much that will piss me off about a race because there isn't. I hate the term "storyline" used in reference to racing. Racing doesn't need storylines or storytellers. The race tells its own story. I will say this....The only time I have left a track unhappy---and keep in mind, MY TRD powered Toyotas have not won every race I have attended unfortunately nor have they won every race I have watched unfortunately--is a rain shortened race. Why? Because I feel screwed out of laps. I want the whole thing. Every time. Yeah, maybe I am NASCAR uncultured. Like a guy tasting wine who cannot tell the difference between the $3.50 bottle and the $3,000 bottle. The $3,000 bottle guys scoff at my lack of insight and depth. Oh well. I pay money just like they do to consume the sport, and I don't think I am that far off. Let each race tell a story. Maybe you don't like the story. That's fine, but get to the end first.
 
TexasRaceLady said:
But --- in the "Good Old Days", a single car would win by LAPS, not seconds. Yet, most consider those days as great racing.
Big conundrum.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I think that the way things are playing out this year is really relevant to your point. Many feel that three cars dominating is not good. If Richard Petty didn't dominate, would he be who he is to the sport?
 
2 Sweet said:
For the last 15 years, I think NASCAR has been trying to appease the "casual fan" in an attempt to convert them into hardcore fans. Meanwhile, they have pissed off a lot of the hardcore fans with their constant changes.

They need to quit catering to the casual fan and listen to the fans who are invested in the sport for the long haul.
Click to expand...

What about the long term fans, do they love the 1.5's and the racing they produce? Do they love the single file racing? The predictability of who is going to win the race? Being around here for a while I think not.
 
2 Sweet said:
For the last 15 years, I think NASCAR has been trying to appease the "casual fan" in an attempt to convert them into hardcore fans. Meanwhile, they have pissed off a lot of the hardcore fans with their constant changes.

They need to quit catering to the casual fan and listen to the fans who are invested in the sport for the long haul.
Click to expand...
Only problem with that is the Hardcore fan is getting older and dying off. Couple that with kids no longer interested in stuff unless its on their phone or laptop and all sports not just NASCAR will see a decline.
 
StandOnIt said:
What about the long term fans, do they love the 1.5's and the racing they produce? Do they love the single file racing? The predictability of who is going to win the race? Being around here for a while I think not.
Click to expand...
I love a race --- it doesn't matter to me what size track.
Revman said:
I hate the term "storyline" used in reference to racing. Racing doesn't need storylines or storytellers. The race tells its own story.
Click to expand...
AMEN! !
 
StandOnIt said:
What about the long term fans, do they love the 1.5's and the racing they produce? Do they love the single file racing? The predictability of who is going to win the race? Being around here for a while I think not.
Click to expand...
NASCAR lost five of the thirty winningest drivers over the last three years. An adjustment period should be expected.
 
FLRacingFan said:
NASCAR lost five of the thirty winningest drivers over the last three years. An adjustment period should be expected.
Click to expand...
That's just it --- things come and go. We remember the old days(even if those days are last year) and wish for their return --- but that isn't going to happen.
We can't bring back the great racers of old, or their style of racing.
 
TexasRaceLady said:
That's just it --- things come and go. We remember the old days(even if those days are last year) and wish for their return --- but that isn't going to happen.
We can't bring back the great racers of old, or their style of racing.
Click to expand...
Ive adjusted along with the sport since 1970 and I still find joy and excitement in it
 
I have followed NASCAR since the early 60s. Seen a lot of "good racing" and a lot that you would like to snooze through. But as a fan, I have come to realize that it's probably no real formula to make "good racing". It's like any other sport, you might go to one game and it would seem to be the best you every saw and the next be a complete rout. But I do think that NASCAR today (as far as competition) is as good as it has ever been. Some may not like segment racing, but I think it has created more of an environment like the Saturday night races at local tracks where you'll most likely see the best racing you'll possibly see. I feel it also has caused the Crew Chiefs and Pit Crews to factor more into the competitive equation. I agree with TRL that the old 500 milers without segments led to cars finishing one or more laps ahead of their completion and often made very boring racing. I even remember seeing King Richard blow the field away at Charolette during a 600 miler. That was pretty painful considering it was about 95 degrees that day.

But IMO, I think the best thing for NASCAR to do is to try to make the competition as fair as possible and less costly. That seems to be working pretty good with the modern inspections they have implemented. Maybe it's just me, but it seems it also has allowed some of the more underfunded teams to run a little more competitive with the "Super Teams".
But I think NASCAR has made a sincere effort to improve the racing, but I often wonder if they have done enough to improve things for the fans. It seems like they would put more effort in fan support. For example, the high cost of attending races, the "rain dates" that if you can't be their the next 2 or 3 days after the race you are screwed. I've noticed several races that the stands were half empty because of weather which means many fans paid good money for empty seats. Heck, even local tracks will at least give you rain checks if the race is rained out. But those are things that NASCAR alone will have to show a concern to address if anything is done about that.

But back to what I consider "good racing", I guess I would say it would be one that keeps your attention, great racing is one that gets you up off your sear or sofa and has you cheering on the guy you want to see win. But for anyone to expect every race to meet their definition of "good racing" I think they will often be disappointed.
 
TexasRaceLady said:
in the "Good Old Days", a single car would win by LAPS, not seconds. Yet, most consider those days as great racing.
Click to expand...
Like me...never had any problem with someone hitting on the absolutely correct set up and either running away with it or getting lucky in specific circumstances.

Usually there were at least 43 cars in the field (in my younger days, even more), all were bent on making the most out of the race. Running the ragged edge, sometimes well over the capacity of the vehicle. Whether the driver overran his ability or the car failed...both were expected sometime in the 500 miles or so.

Loved the bias tires too...total inconsistency...loved it. Loved it when a car had more power than the aerodynamics could handle...whether it was Dale Earnhardt Sr. winning a race with his fenders ripped off or Fred Lorenzen tying his gear shift lever to the roll bar while the car was spewing smoke and oil with a rod laying in the bottom of the oil pan. Loved it...the never quit attitude...if I cannot beat him with speed, I can beat him into the wall...
 
What was it Justice Potter Stewart said about pornography?

"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced but ... I know it when I see it."
 
I don't normally holler at the TV but when I do..it's a good one
upload_2018-7-31_13-35-51.jpeg
 
StandOnIt said:
What about the long term fans, do they love the 1.5's and the racing they produce? Do they love the single file racing? The predictability of who is going to win the race? Being around here for a while I think not.
Click to expand...
The same long term fans who speak longingly of the days when Petty would lap the field? Am I right?
Charlie Spencer said:
What was it Justice Potter Stewart said about pornography?

"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced but ... I know it when I see it."
Click to expand...
Problem is that everybody sees it differently. So, to further the metaphor, if you are NASCAR, what do you do? Turtlenecks all around, or 100% nudity, or something in between?
TexasRaceLady said:
I know what you mean. There have been races when I'm sure my neighbors thought I was being murdered.
Click to expand...
Love this. There have been races where my voice was gone for 3 days over 45 seconds of yelling and screaming. Just awesome.
 
Revman said:
Problem is that everybody sees it differently. So, to further the metaphor, if you are NASCAR, what do you do? Turtlenecks all around, or 100% nudity, or something in between?
Click to expand...
Ya know, when you approach the question from that angle, it becomes a lot more interesting.

Right now, NASCAR is serves up the same basic approach across all of its national and regional touring series. It would be interesting if they broke the three national series up into four to six radically different ones. A restrictor plate series, a road course series, a V-6 series, an IROC-esque series; there must be a couple of other variations.

Each would run a schedule shorter than any of the current national three; maybe 15 or 20 races each. Mix and match at least two at the same track every weekend. Heck, have a full schedule at two different tracks most of the weekends. Say, the plate series at Daytona on Saturday, and the R/C guys run the infield on Sunday. Run the R/Cs on the Ponoco infield and the V-6s around the triangle. Run the V-6 and IROC at M'ville. Each would be a single-day show, with P, Q, and race all on the same day.

It won't happen, but since there are so many definitions of great racing, why use three basically similar series to try to meet the all of the expectations?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom