Holding A Pretty Wheel: Stage Racing Changes the Game In a Good Way

Objectively, it has been notable how the stage racing concept overwhelmingly has been favorably reviewed by the media. Going beyond the "forced put approvals" from nascar.com and SiriusXM and the TV partners, most commentaries on the stages that I've seen have been fairly positive in their endorsement.

Subjectively, I like it more than I thought I would. I'm not a guy that complained about the races being boring in the middle, but I know those complaints have been pervasive. Having something significant to race for at two interim points does add some action, some strategy decisions, and some rewards. It is interesting now, and will be more interesting later in the year as the importance of points ramps up. Unlike my initial expectation, the two interim stages don't feel artificial to me as I watch a race.

Yes, the event is different, but to me, not in a bad way. I'd be much more unhappy if all the races were shortened by half to cut out the "boring middle section." Part of what makes Nascar different from other racing series is that the races are long, endurance events. I'm glad that has been preserved. Adding interim stages with smaller rewards doesn't really change that, IMO. I'm still reserving judgement until the season concludes, but so far I'm more positive than I thought I'd be. Just my $0.02.
 
Personally, I am enjoying the stage formats. Im not someone who complained about he races being boring with the exception of Pocono, but I think it is intriguing to see the different strategies and the harder racing. Not only are we seeing guys run harder in the end of stages, but we are seeing guys run harder at the beginning in attempts to not have to take chances to get stage points. I'm still unsure how it will ultimately effect the chase and the points when the playoffs come around. I'm all for making the regular season mean something, but I do not want someone who completely craps the bed in the first round of the chase to be saved completely by playoff points from stage wins. I worry a little about that. Other then that I find it enjoyable, I like the break, the ability to get up and not miss a whole lot and the ability for the teams to continue to adjust on the cars.
 
I am enjoying this stage racing more than anything Nascar has offered in the last 6 years.
I actually saw KK trying to get into the top 10 early in a race. Just look at the points and you see
who the racers are now.
 
So far I LOVED the stage racing at Daytona, liked it at Martinsville, but haven't been a fan of it at the other tracks. If there is a rule change next year to run the stage format at only restrictor plate and short tracks, I will be completely fine with that.
 
I got to go with supporting and liking the stages...but I had previously suggested awarding points at the end of each lap, so it's a start.
 
Like others I was not sure if I'd like the segment changes but I like it so far. The segments provide an incentive to race like the last laps three times during the race. So far a number of different strategies have been tried. Race teams are cleaver and I wonder how they will try to exploit the system for maximum points. I suspect they will find different strategies work at different types of track and race situations.

I believe good point days are important over a long season. We have big rewards for winning and we have have rewards for doing well week in and week out. I think we have the best of both worlds.
 
Lead changes have always been the best way to measure competitiveness. Setting aside Daytona where we are very beholden to the current rules package, lead changes are down this season:

Atlanta: 28 in 2016, 9 in 2017 -19
Las Vegas: 20 in 2016, 14 in 2017 -6
Phoenix: 7 in 2016, 15 in 2017 +8
Fontana: 26 in 2016, 17 in 2017 -9
Martinsville: 11 in 2016, 18 in 2017 +7
Net: -19

It's a small sample, but it is clear that the stages aren't really effecting competitiveness contrary to the conventional wisdom.
 
29-4 said:
Lead changes have always been the best way to measure competitiveness.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with this. It is an over-simplification of an inherently complex dynamic. Be careful what you wish for...

29-4 said:
It's a small sample, but it is clear that the stages aren't really effecting competitiveness contrary to the conventional wisdom.
Click to expand...
I also don't agree with this conclusion. The structure of the race has been changed this year, and one effect of that is fewer opportunities for green flag pit stops... which bloat the # of lead changes statistic. It is apples to oranges in a very predictable way that has nothing to do with the quality of competition.
 
29-4 said:
Lead changes have always been the best way to measure competitiveness. Setting aside Daytona where we are very beholden to the current rules package, lead changes are down this season:

Atlanta: 28 in 2016, 9 in 2017 -19
Las Vegas: 20 in 2016, 14 in 2017 -6
Phoenix: 7 in 2016, 15 in 2017 +8
Fontana: 26 in 2016, 17 in 2017 -9
Martinsville: 11 in 2016, 18 in 2017 +7
Net: -19

It's a small sample, but it is clear that the stages aren't really effecting competitiveness contrary to the conventional wisdom.
Click to expand...
Flawed reasoning. The stages make them race entirely different.
 
Much like the chase, it creates drama/excitement but its manufactured drama/excitement. I much prefer organic racing emotions.

Rather than focus on the reason for poor ontrack issues such as the failure of the gen 6 car, the overload of cookie cutter aero dependent tracks, and family friendly corporate sponsors leading to a vanilla personality in the sport, nascar has blamed the points format for over a decade. Now the race format has come under fire. Nascar's resolutions are wrong and the ratings/attendance show it.

For this reason, no matter how much drama stage racing creates, I do not agree with it.
 
The stages make a kind of sense if you are using a points system to determine the championship.

But they are still on the chase + final race format.

So... it makes them race different, ummmm ok.
 
TwoZero said:
The stages make a kind of sense if you are using a points system to determine the championship.

But they are still on the chase + final race format.

So... it makes them race different, ummmm ok.
Click to expand...
Instead of nascar wiping the slate clean & admitting the experiment didnt work, they are creating new rules to put bandaids on wounds in an attempt to cover their incompetence.

You cannot lift a bucket while standing in it.
 
SpeedPagan said:
https://www.frontstretch.com/2017/0...-stage-racing-changes-the-game-in-a-good-way/

I dunno if I actually agree with this article TBH. I mean yea, they are racing more and there's more fight to win a stage and the race, but it just feels so artificial to me. Not to mention that the whole thing just makes the points system more convoluted.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...


'artificial" is a good description .. I enjoy watching a long race play out without any bell, whistles or bs
If the racing doesn't sell itself, nothing else will
 
I feel like this is as close as we have been to the way things are supposed to be, in a long time.
 
29-4 said:
Lead changes have always been the best way to measure competitiveness. Setting aside Daytona where we are very beholden to the current rules package, lead changes are down this season:

Atlanta: 28 in 2016, 9 in 2017 -19
Las Vegas: 20 in 2016, 14 in 2017 -6
Phoenix: 7 in 2016, 15 in 2017 +8
Fontana: 26 in 2016, 17 in 2017 -9
Martinsville: 11 in 2016, 18 in 2017 +7
Net: -19

It's a small sample, but it is clear that the stages aren't really effecting competitiveness contrary to the conventional wisdom.
Click to expand...

And the balance is thrown way to the minus side because of that awful Atlanta race.

The other thing to consider with lead changes is that the state racing reduces the number of green flag pit stops. A lot of these races with long runs see almost all of their lead changes take place during green flag pit stops where they have five or six random guys lead a random lap.

I don't know why lead changes are the barometer for a "good race" anyway. If there are 90 lead changes, fans will complain and say they were meaningless.
 
RacerrecaR said:
So far I LOVED the stage racing at Daytona, liked it at Martinsville, but haven't been a fan of it at the other tracks. If there is a rule change next year to run the stage format at only restrictor plate and short tracks, I will be completely fine with that.
Click to expand...

I would prefer reconfiguring the intermediate tracks into half mile short tracks.
 
29-4 said:
Lead changes have always been the best way to measure competitiveness. Setting aside Daytona where we are very beholden to the current rules package, lead changes are down this season:

Atlanta: 28 in 2016, 9 in 2017 -19
Las Vegas: 20 in 2016, 14 in 2017 -6
Phoenix: 7 in 2016, 15 in 2017 +8
Fontana: 26 in 2016, 17 in 2017 -9
Martinsville: 11 in 2016, 18 in 2017 +7
Net: -19

It's a small sample, but it is clear that the stages aren't really effecting competitiveness contrary to the conventional wisdom.
Click to expand...
Lead changes have never been the barometer for competitive racing. See 1984. Beyond that, weren't the reduced downforce rules supposed to fix this perceived "problem"?

And what about the complete loss of any fuel, tire or other strategy moves by teams racing in the stage environment? How did that prediction work out? No matter the facts, you will find a way to complain.

I think you should quit the sport. Again.
 
Part of me wants to dislike how non-leading drivers can earn points before the end of the race.

However, since the championship is meaningless (to me, anyway) because of our ridiculous playoff format, I'm okay with the added excitement here.

I'm not a huge fan of stage cautions, but it seems like there are fewer debris cautions this year.

At least it's a lot less frequent than last year's Truck Series caution clock.
 
LewTheShoe said:
[SNIP] I also don't agree with this conclusion. The structure of the race has been changed this year, and one effect of that is fewer opportunities for green flag pit stops... which bloat the # of lead changes statistic. It is apples to oranges in a very predictable way that has nothing to do with the quality of competition.
Click to expand...

Actually, it seems like there have been more green flag pit stops so far this year, partially due to fewer debris cautions.

Stages have been longer than fuel runs at most tracks so far.
 
The best thing about stage racing is that it has got Nascar to stop calling bogus cautions. I would still rather see a race play out normally without stages, fake cautions, wave arounds, free passes and other BS that crept into the series.
 
PeopleAreStrange said:
I'm not a huge fan of stage cautions, but it seems like there are fewer debris cautions this year.
Click to expand...
Maybe they shouldn't have a caution for the segments. I'd prefer making the teams compete with green flag pit stops. Although racing for bonus points might cause cautions.
 
More gimmicks are needed. Don’t wanna bore the young demo they’re makin’ gains with.

I favor inverting the top 10 ‘n puttin’ ‘em at the tail end of the lead lap cars.
 
I'm not sure how I feel about the stage racing yet. IMO last weeks races at Martinsville were the only time so far I think I have seen it make much of a difference at the end of a stage. It seems the leader is so far away IMO that no one really can get there and race for the win. AGAIN it was just a single stage last week that I think I've seen it happen. Maybe it will work out the way the media is saying it is happening, time will tell.
 
We already had umpteen cautions per race, many of them questionable, so scheduling them so teams can plan strategy around them is a plus for me. On the other hand, at places like Phoenix and Martinsville it's kinda sucked to not see green flag pit stops become a factor.

I'm not quite sure on awarding stage points yet. It's very possible that they may be awarding too many right now. I'm fine with stage wins counting towards the playoffs and race wins being worth more, and I'm also glad that those playoff points will carry through to the penultimate race.

I don't think the racing has changed that much on the intermediates. So far it looks like the sense of urgency has been upped the most at the tracks where the cars are naturally in close proximity to one another - Daytona, Phoenix, and Martinsville.

Overall, I don't think it's the disaster many thought it would be when it was first announced. NASCAR has implemented much more drastic changes before. It's not necessarily the most ideal or the perfect race format but I don't mind it right now.
 
Didn't think I would like it at first but I'm all for it at this point. Has produced some good racing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom