I'm already sick of the chase and it hasn't started yet.

Acs said:
The wave around only pays off when there are frequent enough cautions and fast enough tire wear to get the lapped cars back on cycle. It is by no means a systemic problem.
Click to expand...

Near the end of races, you can all but guarantee frequent cautions. There are times where it can be a risk, but it seems that it lets way too many cars back on the lead lap far too often. I've said it here before: I used to be on the edge of my seat, hoping for a caution when my driver was about to be lapped. Now, I hardly care. I know that the Lucky Dogs and wave arounds will get him back in contention before too long. I've no problem with going back to the old system of the lapped down cars lining up ahead of the leaders if they fail to pit. It was rarely an issue.
 
Yes, the first iteration of the Chase was the least awful. It's kinda like someone whacking you in the leg with a baseball bat and breaking your leg, and then you remember that fondly compared to the next three times they did it, and especially when they shoved it through a wood chipper. If only they had left it alone after that first clean simple break.

What I'm tired of is all the fans who still buy into and make the excuse that Brian France and NASCAR are doing what they have to do to attract a wider audience. There is zero evidence that the gimmicks of the Brian France era have had any positive impact on viewership, attendance, anything. In fact the evidence would point in exactly the opposite direction, though correlation is not necessarily causation. The Richmond Chase cutoff race just attracted the lowest TV ratings of the season, some of the lowest numbers on record for a Cup race, and 44% off what it was two years ago. Why do people persist in believing there is a mythical audience out there eating this elimination crap up?

Even if you don't blame Brian France and the current system directly for the hideous numbers we are seeing and NASCAR's incredible shrinking fanbase, there is nothing to suggest that he and those currently overseeing the sport have a clue how to reverse these trends.
 
Last edited:
29-4 said:
Near the end of races, you can all but guarantee frequent cautions. There are times where it can be a risk, but it seems that it lets way too many cars back on the lead lap far too often. I've said it here before: I used to be on the edge of my seat, hoping for a caution when my driver was about to be lapped. Now, I hardly care. I know that the Lucky Dogs and wave arounds will get him back in contention before too long. I've no problem with going back to the old system of the lapped down cars lining up ahead of the leaders if they fail to pit. It was rarely an issue.
Click to expand...

But , but , but the poor stupid fans couldn't figure out who the leader was . And the slow witted idiots couldn't understand why the leader was starting in 6th position . So now you want to put us through all that again?
 
29-4 said:
The Wave Around renders the first half of the race almost as meaningless as the Chase renders the regular season.
Click to expand...
Acs said:
The wave around only pays off when there are frequent enough cautions and fast enough tire wear to get the lapped cars back on cycle. It is by no means a systemic problem.
Click to expand...
What @Acs said. The typical outcome for a wave-around car is to go a lap down again, or to finish on the lead lap in about the same position as when they were a lap down. There is no payday for "P20 on the lead lap" that is not paid to "P20 and down a lap." It is rare that a car takes a wave around and then goes on to win the race. It can happen and does on occasion, just as fast cars sometimes got a lap back in prior decades before the wave around was established.

Personally, I like having the leaders of the race up front on restarts. I'm sure some people don't like that, but I'm good with it.
 
All NASCAR ever needed to do was fix their points system to more suitably reward winning races, and to less incentivize the safe consistent approach of racking up top-10s and top-15s while never excelling. That's it. Most people were in agreement on that. There are other forms of motorsports that do that to one degree or another, there was no wheel in need of reinvention.

Instead of fixing the points, they made them even worse with the idiot-proof 43-1 concept. Like Ted says above, the fans can't cope with anything more complex. But they still hated the way their own points system, always the basis for determining a championship throughout auto racing, worked. So they just decided to ignore what the points say. We'll qualify people for the "postseason" (forget how ridiculous that is in a sport that doesn't actually whittle down the field of competitors) based on winning races, then we'll use the points in the only way they should never be used -- in short three-race mini-seasons that make no sense whatsoever and eliminate drivers based on one mishap. It's asinine, and I'm just amused at watching anyone defend it at this point, because I know the train already left the station long ago and it's never going back. It's just funny to me now.
 
Maybe make fall NASCAR races Tuesday avoid NFL. At this point it can't get much worse. Monday Pocono was full.
 
That's actually not the craziest idea. Only problem is Loudon, Dover, Martinsville, and Dega don't have lights to my knowledge. That and you're still competing with baseball playoffs but nobody watches baseball anymore so it's ok.
 
gnomesayin said:
All NASCAR ever needed to do was fix their points system to more suitably reward winning races, and to less incentivize the safe consistent approach of racking up top-10s and top-15s while never excelling. That's it.
Click to expand...
This is correct. The flat points scale has *always* been the problem. But that horse is out of the barn, and won't be back for the foreseeable future.
 
29-4 said:
.... I've no problem with going back to the old system of the lapped down cars lining up ahead of the leaders if they fail to pit. It was rarely an issue.
Click to expand...
My grich with the old system was that it forced leaders to pass the same cars multiple times. "Geez, I've already put this guy a lap down oncey; what the heck is his slow car doing back out in front of me again?"
 
LewTheShoe said:
How was the integrity of the Richmond race ruined by having 24 cars on the lead lap?
Click to expand...

Because 65% of the cars on the lead lap had been lapped at least once and would not have received their laps back sans Nascar largess. You have to tell me what you thought about that loose wheel on pit road that did not trigger a caution.
 
Acs said:
The wave around only pays off when there are frequent enough cautions and fast enough tire wear to get the lapped cars back on cycle. It is by no means a systemic problem.
Click to expand...

What does DW say....oh yeah....."Cautions breed cautions" and with the double wreck restart it only makes the breeding that much more fruitful. This unabated charity is just a method Nascar uses to try and show how close the competition is.
 
ted@economy said:
But , but , but the poor stupid fans couldn't figure out who the leader was . And the slow witted idiots couldn't understand why the leader was starting in 6th position . So now you want to put us through all that again?
Click to expand...

LOL and people wonder how I could have the audacity to not consider Nascar a sport.
 
LewTheShoe said:
What @Acs said. The typical outcome for a wave-around car is to go a lap down again, or to finish on the lead lap in about the same position as when they were a lap down. There is no payday for "P20 on the lead lap" that is not paid to "P20 and down a lap." It is rare that a car takes a wave around and then goes on to win the race. It can happen and does on occasion, just as fast cars sometimes got a lap back in prior decades before the wave around was established.

Personally, I like having the leaders of the race up front on restarts. I'm sure some people don't like that, but I'm good with it.
Click to expand...

I am going to have to speak with a friend of mine and get one of those Goodyear's ready for you........:D
 
Maybe they wouldn't need the "charity" if we didn't have teams 3/10ths a lap quicker from the minute they unload on Thursday? But nah, we need to open up the toolbox and stop policing the cars as much cuz that's just how we did things in the good 'ol days. JGR or whoever spends the most money in December deserves to be 7/10ths quicker from the get go and if any rule stops them from putting the field down 2 in 30 laps its "charity" to those other cars.

Skoalbandit33 said:
What does DW say....oh yeah....."Cautions breed cautions" and with the double wreck restart it only makes the breeding that much more fruitful. This unabated charity is just a method Nascar uses to try and show how close the competition is.
Click to expand...
 
LewTheShoe said:
What @Acs said. The typical outcome for a wave-around car is to go a lap down again, or to finish on the lead lap in about the same position as when they were a lap down. There is no payday for "P20 on the lead lap" that is not paid to "P20 and down a lap." .
Click to expand...

Thank you . :cheers:
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
Because 65% of the cars on the lead lap had been lapped at least once and would not have received their laps back sans Nascar largess. You have to tell me what you thought about that loose wheel on pit road that did not trigger a caution.
Click to expand...
Why the obsession with lead lap finishes? It is a statistic that is close to meaningless. Finishing a race "P20 on the lead lap" pays the same purse and points as "P20 down a lap." Also, who is to say which practice is more pure or righteous? Couldn't one argue that a car skipping a pit stop, while everyone else gets tires and fuel, deserves a dollop of track position for taking the risk? You are saying this has "ruined the integrity" of the race, but your reasons are not very persuasive. All you have demonstrated is a belief that "the old way" is automatically "the right way" and any change is bad.

I realize you probably creamed in your jeans over the loose wheel on pit road that didn't bring out a yellow. What does that have to do with me? I stand by my earlier post (from Saturday) that Nascar was stupid to be inconsistent on that. Inconsistent application of rules and policies by Nascar is a constant source of frustration to me.
 
Last edited:
Acs said:
Maybe they wouldn't need the "charity" if we didn't have teams 3/10ths a lap quicker from the minute they unload on Thursday? But nah, we need to open up the toolbox and stop policing the cars as much cuz that's just how we did things in the good 'ol days. JGR or whoever spends the most money in December deserves to be 7/10ths quicker from the get go and if any rule stops them from putting the field down 2 in 30 laps its "charity" to those other cars.
Click to expand...

Yeah I don't care if Toyota, Kia, Chevy or Ford are the fastest providing everything is on the up and up and with respect to Toyota I suspect they are outworking and outspending everyone which is their prerogative. I would rather see 3 cars on the lead lap as opposed to 33 due to all the BS used to make it that way.
 
LewTheShoe said:
Why the obsession with lead lap finishes? It is a statistic that is close to meaningless. Finishing a race "P20 on the lead lap" pays the same purse and points as "P20 down a lap." Also, who is to say which practice is more pure or righteous? Couldn't one argue that a car skipping a pit stop, while everyone else gets tires and fuel, deserves a dollop of track position for taking the risk? You are saying this has "ruined the integrity" of the race, but your reasons are not very persuasive. All you have demonstrated is a belief that "the old way" is automatically "the right way" and any change is bad.

I realize you probably creamed in your jeans over the loose wheel on pit road that didn't bring out a yellow. What does that have to do with me? I stand by my earlier post (from Saturday) that Nascar was stupid to be inconsistent on that. Inconsistent application of rules and policies by Nascar is a constant source of frustration to me.
Click to expand...

I will light the fire, bring the marshmallows and we can interlock arms singing Kumbaya followed by reading selected passages of Pollyanna before retiring to the virtuous couch!!!

I apologize for not reading or remembering your post regarding the errant tire on Sat as I didn't watch the race until Sunday. It was a knee slapper regardless.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
I apologize for not reading or remembering your post regarding the errant tire on Sat as I didn't watch the race until Sunday. It was a knee slapper regardless.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure there has been non-stop prattling about that tire since the moment it happened on Friday. Sure seems like it anyway. You're supposed to call a doctor after 4 hours, not 5 days... :oops:
 
LewTheShoe said:
I'm pretty sure there has been non-stop prattling about that tire since the moment it happened on Friday. Sure seems like it anyway. You're supposed to call a doctor after 4 hours, not 5 days... :oops:
Click to expand...

IMO if there ever was a time to call a caution it was for the tire incident on Friday as it could have been disastrous if the tire had turned into a ping pong ball. In a fast moving series like Nascar things are going to be missed and I don't think a reasonable person would take issue with that at all. However if an official(s) can't see a tire bouncing around at the entrance to pit road what else can't they see? The only thing worse is if they saw the tire and didn't think it warranted a caution.

There was another incident this weekend in college football where one team lost because the other team was awarded 1 play at the end of the game that they should not have as the game was officially over. On that last play the team that was behind threw a hail mary that was caught then lateraled to another player who ran in for the winning score. Mistakes happen.
 
Cut out the ball talk.I couldn't care less if the pitcher gets a grand slam from knocking a pig skin over the goal line when clearly he was offside.
 
TexasRaceLady said:
I agree with the majority about the Chase --- I don't like it. It's artificial and contrived.
So, the way I deal with it, I just don't pay any attention to it.
I watch each race as just that --- a race. I enjoy watching the race. I pay no attention
to "who's in, who's out", or "who's on the bubble." I just watch the race.

I don't worry about something I can't change --- but I don't let that take away my pleasure at
watching the races.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, and that is also my mentality, but like I said in the opening, they've made it impossible to ignore. Half of the broadcast the commentary is chase related, or the cameras are back in the pack on (insert random chase driver here).

DaBiff1618 said:
The chase makes NASCAR worth talking about this time of year, end of story.
Click to expand...

Who is talking about Nascar or the chase? Certainly not anybody I know, anybody at work, the news sites I check daily....

Charlie Spencer said:
C'mon, NASCAR's goal obviously isn't to turn the sport into a farce. I see the big mistake as not accepting that the sport won't compete with football. The smaller mistake is not acknowledging that the crowds of the late '90s and early '00s were an anomoly, similar to the tennis craze of the '70s and '80s. Stop trying to compete with the 800-lb gorilla, accept that the sport has returned to the early '90s audience size, and most of the 'problems' go away. The sport will continue just fine, but at a lower level on the scale of US sports awareness.
Click to expand...

A slow and steady increase year after year for over two decades is not an anomoly. The personalities, the competition, and TV exposure created a damn solid fan base that only a third generation hack with a marketing degree could alienate.

Michfan said:
The 10 competitor/10 race chase was actually pretty cool and a reasonable compromise.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree less. I would never compromise on a system that would allow a driver to dominate for an entire season and have one mechanical failure in the final 10 races to lose the title. They should have added bonus points for winning, plain and simple.
 
So , now that we are into the chase , how many fans believe there are only 16 drivers who care about getting a win?
 
A win is a guarantee to advance to the next round however all the top teams will be pointing their way into the next round ( as shown by the 31 the first year) and will take any win offered to them. I doubt any top team will race with the mentality of "win at all cost".
 
RowdyBusch said:
Who is talking about Nascar or the chase? Certainly not anybody I know, anybody at work, the news sites I check daily....
Click to expand...

I was at a function last evening and there was plenty of talk about stick and ball goings on but not a word about Nascar. The age group of the attendees would have been about 25 to 75 so it was a good mix but I am sure if I had asked the room what the thought of this year chase competition I would have received blank stares. It is great to be spoken of in glowing terms and not so great when much of the talk is critical but at least you are still relevant. When no one speaks of you it means trouble.
 
ted@economy said:
So , now that we are into the chase , how many fans believe there are only 16 drivers who care about getting a win?
Click to expand...

I bet if Clint Bowyer could get a horse underneath him he would care about winning so that makes 17.......:D
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
I was at a function last evening and there was plenty of talk about stick and ball goings on but not a word about Nascar. The age group of the attendees would have been about 25 to 75 so it was a good mix but I am sure if I had asked the room what the thought of this year chase competition I would have received blank stares. It is great to be spoken of in glowing terms and not so great when much of the talk is critical but at least you are still relevant. When no one speaks of you it means trouble.
Click to expand...


"NASCAR Sprint Cup racing from Richmond earned a 1.5 overnight rating on NBCSN Saturday night, down 12% from last year (1.7) and down 44% from 2014 on broadcast network ABC (2.7). The 1.5 is the lowest of the season for a Sprint Cup race. Denny Hamlin's win ranks as the lowest rated and least-watched Sprint Cup race from Richmond since at least 2001, falling below the previous marks set last year. Moreover, the 1.6 rating is tied as the lowest for any Sprint Cup race in at least eight years (excluding rainouts), matching the mark set by Kansas on Fox Sports 1 last year. "

Nobody is watching, that's for sure.
 
RowdyBusch said:
"NASCAR Sprint Cup racing from Richmond earned a 1.5 overnight rating on NBCSN Saturday night, down 12% from last year (1.7) and down 44% from 2014 on broadcast network ABC (2.7). The 1.5 is the lowest of the season for a Sprint Cup race. Denny Hamlin's win ranks as the lowest rated and least-watched Sprint Cup race from Richmond since at least 2001, falling below the previous marks set last year. Moreover, the 1.6 rating is tied as the lowest for any Sprint Cup race in at least eight years (excluding rainouts), matching the mark set by Kansas on Fox Sports 1 last year. "

Nobody is watching, that's for sure.
Click to expand...
If no one was watching, the ratings would of been 0.0, not mention that there were at least few people at the track watching the race, oh, yeah, I was watching the race too.
 
jws926 said:
If no one was watching, the ratings would of been 0.0, not mention that there were at least few people at the track watching the race, oh, yeah, I was watching the race too.
Click to expand...
translation , not as many as there were before. even this once die hard fan doesn't care much anymore.
 
Fact ... Saturday night's Richmond broadcast had 2.7 million viewers.
 
29-4 said:
The Wave Around renders the first half of the race almost as meaningless as the Chase renders the regular season.
Click to expand...
Have no problem with the wave around. Before the driver in the lead would sometimes almost stop to let the one he wanted get around to pass. This way it is just another piece of the strategy.
 
Hi guys, been a lurker on the forum for a few years now, and a NASCAR fan since the early 90s. I'm not a fan of the current chase format, I thought the original version of the chase was ok, not great but I understand why it was done to a degree. Under the pre-chase system the main complaint as we all know was that winning a race didn't provide a large enough reward compared to finishing 2nd and on back. All that had to be done was keep the old format but give 2nd place 175 pts for example but give the race winner say 250 pts. Winning a race would give you a gain of at least 75 pts on every other driver in the field. But that would of been too easy I guess.
 
Welcome. Don't expect logic from Nascar. The points system was done on a napkin while waiting for another round. The system has gone down hill since.
 
Johnny G said:
Hi guys, been a lurker on the forum for a few years now, and a NASCAR fan since the early 90s. I'm not a fan of the current chase format, I thought the original version of the chase was ok, not great but I understand why it was done to a degree. Under the pre-chase system the main complaint as we all know was that winning a race didn't provide a large enough reward compared to finishing 2nd and on back. All that had to be done was keep the old format but give 2nd place 175 pts for example but give the race winner say 250 pts. Winning a race would give you a gain of at least 75 pts on every other driver in the field. But that would of been too easy I guess.
Click to expand...
Welcome aboard Johnny G!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom